Linux has its flaws, but so does Windows. And for me, the flaws in Windows became much more annoying than the ones in Linux. Game compatibility was the main factor that kept me backt from using it on a desktop, and that's a non issue nowadays.
Hell, I can get a 30 year old HP LaserJet 4 printer working just fine on almost any version of Linux with the official HPLIP CLI software provided by (shockingly) HP, which was updated 2 months ago with support for over 50 new printers and the following OSes:
LinuxMint 21.1
MxLinux 21.3
Elementary OS 7
Ubuntu 22.10
RHEL 8.6
RHEL 8.7
RHEL 9.1
Fedora 37
I HATE HP and their printers (PC LOAD LETTER WTF FOR LIFE) but I will admit that this is impressive support.
Same… The principal engineer on this project also referred to me learning C# as my first exposure to a “real programming language”
After already being advanced in Python
And familiar with C, C++, JavaScript.
I think what he meant by “real” is it comes out of the box with proprietary windows components that aren’t going to work anywhere else and don’t have human readable code.
This is honestly quite interesting. I might get one, if only to play around with and see what cool stuff I can think of to do with it.
Also, their laptops look pretty sweet - I think it strikes a much better long-term balance between framework’s “plug-and-play” approach (which necessarily leads to a slightly clunkier and less sleek design) and Apple’s “inscrutable slab of electronics” approach.
Star’s approach requires more (dis)assembly time and care, but I think that’s fine. You can open up a Framework way more trivially, but well… how often do you honestly plan on disassembling your laptop? For me, it’s:
when I get it, to upgrade the RAM and SSD
if I want to upgrade later, but that typically happens years down the road, and sometimes not ever if it can do what I need it to do without issues
if something breaks and needs replacement… but that also typically happens years down the road
So, while I appreciate Framework’s approach… I’m honestly not going to crack the thing open more than 3 or 4 times, and hopefully only once or twice, so I am absolutely fine sacrificing super easy maintenance for an overall sleeker and more robust-feeling design.
The important bit not mentioned here is that FW machines are both user serviceable and user upgradable. No need to eat the cost or create the waste of replacing a perfectly good chassis and display, and then sell off the replaced mainboard on the market.
This might be the first time I’ve ever seen something productive happen in the Phoronix forums. I love that place. Go to any topic with more than about a dozen posts and it’s almost guaranteed to be a flame war. Genuinely one of the funniest places on the Internet.
The phoronix forums are insanely toxic. Everything is bad. Gnome = kid’s toy. systemd = written by Satan himself. Every programming language = too slow. Anything vaguely interested in fostering a diversity, equity, and inclusion = true colors come out in full force.
It’s so toxic yet I subject myself to it every now and again. There’s absolutely no moderation going on and it shows.
Wasn’t Manjaro supposed to be the stable version of Arch? That’s what I’ve heard.
The few years I had with Arch was pretty nice, but when something broke, it was pain to get it back working because downgrading wasn’t (isn’t?) supported. I guess I should have used snapshots of my whole system back then.
I know you're making a joke but I was convinced recently to try out Arch. I'm running it right now. I was told it's a DIY distro for advanced users and you really have to know what you're doing, etc etc. I had the system up and running in 20 minutes, and about an hour to copy my backup to /home and configure a few things. I coped the various pacman commands to a text file to use as a cheat sheet until muscle memory kicked in.
..and that was it. What is so advanced about Arch? It's literally the same as every other distro. "pacman -Syu" is no different from "zypper dup" in Tumbleweed. I don't get the hype. I mean it's fine. I don't have any overwhelming desire to use something else at the moment because it's annoying to change distros. It's working and everything is fine. As I would expect it to be. But people talk about Arch like its something to be proud of? I guess the relentless "arch btw" attitude made me think it would be something special.
I guess the install is hard for some people? But you just create some partitions, install a boot loader, and then an automated system installs your DE. That's DIY? You want DIY go install NixOS or Void, or hell, go OG with Slackware. Arch is way overrated. That doesn't mean it's bad, but it's just Linux and it's no different from anything else. KDE is KDE no matter who packages it.
Ubuntu: They break shit, it’s half baked, snaps, and Canonical is really into vendor lock in.
Arch: I really have better things to do then baby sit my install.
RHEL: Containers were created for reasons, and one of them was RHEL.
Any Linux without systemd or glibc: Mistakes were made, and then different mistakes were made trying to prove systemd made mistakes. Musl based Linux distros are going to have compatibility problems, so I might as well run a different OS. The BSDs are *nix-like systems without glibc with a history and larger communities.
Having gone through the Arch install myself, what part dod you find you had to babysit? Boot the install media, format the drive, mount the mounts, install system, configure the system, and done. Maybe it’s just a more involved process than you’d like?
linux
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.