![]() ![]() ![]() , why is 90% of userland work/attention/focus seemingly put into constantly reinventing desktop environments? In the end 99% of us are running all of these systems on closed hardware so complete "Freedom" is an illusion anyway.įor me in the end it's coming down to tolerance for daily bullshit brought to me by whatever particular computer frontend I'm using and sorry to say currently it ain't Windows bringing the complexity, it does what I ask and rarely complains. I'm sorry but Canonical is quickly becoming equally if not more invasive than present day Microsoft. I'm sorry but I just don't see it, perhaps 15 years ago but not in the current era. But this talk of somehow being indentured servants to Microsoft if you use Windows. Vendor Lock in with commercial software is always a potential problem but I'm using plenty of commercial Linux software so not immune to it on either OS. I was introduced to FLOSS by Windows, it's also been a choice there all along. I can understand not liking it's closed source and therefore difficult to customize nature and I can understand preferring the open collaborative nature of FLOSS software choices (most of these FLOSS choices are now available for Windows BTW, it seems even many Linux developers even see it as a market worth pursuing). Windows is far from perfect but I used Win10 free for 2 years before registering it and I had the option of turning off at least some of the telemetry. self-contained in the User's home folder but of course it's the one getting quietly phased out, why.? Probably because Canonical couldn't get their hooks into it. Flatpaks now pull in all their support dependencies and essentially behave on the system like APT/DPKG always did except much less efficiently. wheel re-invention brought to new heights. ![]() ![]() eliminate separate Packaging formats is one of the last coffin nails for me. The whole having three separate Packaging formats to err. It's cool that there is snap and appimage and flatpak to solve some perceived (imaginary imho) problems with repos, but does it matter if there's almost nothing interesting to to everything you said brother! Why don't massive corps like Red Hat or Canonical think: We must dedicate some small percentage of our staff to the creation of a stunning office suite and the tools required to create amazing A/V content! We'll promote FOSS and make (even more) bank on support packages to schools and businesses! Instead they keep f*ing around with sound servers and building (or re-building) DEs over and over just to get back to where they already were. These are the kinds of things 98% of folks ask about if you suggest Linux as an alternative on the desktop. OpenOffice/LibreOffice still pale compared to MS Office if you need advanced functions. GIMP and Inkscape are no more competitive with Photoshop and Illustrator than they were 15+ years ago. What's missing is the same amount of effort on applications regular people use for work and play. Like, they already worked flawlessly years ago. But I've had a long-standing bewilderment about one thing: Aside from work on the kernel, why is 90% of userland work/attention/focus seemingly put into constantly reinventing desktop environments? I didn't switch to Linux til 2006 and I'm just a desktop user who doesn't understand the development world, so take my comments with a grain of salt. I can't imagine how thwarted you must feel with the relentless chaos. LADSPA,LV2,VST,VST3,CLAP and on and on and on. Plasma, Gnome, Cinnamon, XFCE4, LXQT, Enlightenment, Budgie (that's the surface only.) PulseAudio/PipeWire.Snap/Flatpak/Appimage. Then I look at Debian Bookworm Sysvinit, systemd, runit, GTK2, GTK3, and (shudder) GTK4/libadwaita. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |