Re: GrapheneOS feel attacked
I like Graphene, but it's developers really do appear to be quite prickly.
123 publicly visible posts • joined 3 Mar 2023
I think you're correctly highlighting the unproven thing about immutable distros. There are clear advantages in some areas, but is reliability really one of them? If it's not, you end up with the Apple approach of "take it back to the shop"... which would be a bit difficult with Linux!
You have to remember, though, that for most users, almost everything about every operating system is pretty opaque. A lot of people want a system which requires zero tinkering, because they want to do things with their computer rather than do things *to* the computer.
If immutable distros meet the needs of people who just want something that works reliably without tinkering, great! The world is big enough for many different approaches.
When using Ubuntu -- which is most of the time these days -- I generally prefer using Snap packages. The launch speed issues are mostly gone, and I have fast-enough hardware that it's not really an issue for me anyway.
But boy oh boy 25.10 has some issues in that regard. Case in point: the Snap version of Tuba (the excellent Mastodon version) simply won't launch. The Flatpak is fine. That seems... odd.
"It Just Works..."
For you. That's the important caveat.
And you know what, that's fine! But it's not true for everyone. Any time you have to reach for the command line – it's not "just works" for most people. Any time you have to do any kind of config in a text file - not "just works" for most people.
Part of the problem is that Linux users are perpetually stuck in the 1990s. Consider the sheer volume of comments on any article here which strays into Windows claiming that the peak of user interface design was Windows 97. And Linux "just works" to the same degree, largely, that Windows 97 "just worked". Mostly, it's fine. Run into something which requires tweaking - which you will do every now and then - and you're going to have to get a knowledgeable friend in. Or try and Google it, which will lead you down a rabbit hole of bad advice and waste a lot of time, if you're not careful.
None of this is *bad*. And for a couple of non-technical friends of mine, Linux works fine. But for a few months they needed hand-holding through it, and I would welcome any effort to make that handholding less.
Most modern operating systems – macOS, Windows 11, ChromeOS -- are fairly forgiving. Users can fumble around and find workarounds for doing things, even if they're not the optimal way of doing it. Linux is not forgiving, not at all. Try the same approach and it's still remarkably easy to break things in a way which will cost you a long time (I know, I've done it).
All of which is to say: I agree with a lot of the points that are being made here. If all the effort that's spread across a bazillion distros went into two or three of them, Linux as a whole would be in a better place. There are HUGE blind spots (accessibility being the biggest). The response you get when you point out Linux's failings tends to be a thousand different variants of "well it works for me, why you can't be more like me I don't know, you must be stupid".
Linux is *remarkable*. But it's not the one true operating system, and it won't be until we stop thinking that the peak of operating systems was nearly thirty years ago.
"Windows 95 was a design classic. There was only a single thing wrong with it: it was single-threaded."
Begging your pardon, guvnor' but I don't think that's right. Sort of. Windows 95 was multithreaded -- but only for Win32 applications, and only when specifically written to be so.
"I have about 20 different email addresses for different purposes, and a good email client (or even "Legacy" Outlook) allows me to see them all in one place."
Good webmail services let you do this now, too. For example, Fastmail can effectively act as an IMAP client to any account which supports it. Nothing wrong with preferring a proper application, of course, but the days when webmail services were one-account only are gone.
> And anyway I can't drive PhotoShop, which I find even more baffling than the GIMP, frankly. Which is why I do not accept claims that Photoshop has a better UI.
It's not designed for *you*, Liam. You're not, and never will be, a professional graphic designer.
Good UI in a professional tool is about serving its professional users, not people who, well, aren't.
I love that people here are downvoting you, an experienced Photoshop user pointing out the challenges with Gimp because they refuse to believe you're correct.
And you are, 100%, correct. Your point about shortcuts being different *matters* because people who use Photoshop everyday have memorised every single one they use and don't want to spend a long time unlearning that.
The obvious approach would be for Gimp to adopt, as far as possible, the same shortcuts. But NO, it cannot, because the kind of people who cheerlead for it would rather it's a tool that is less useful to professionals and more "their thing".
Way back in the day, when I used to work for the illustrious Mr Proven, I tried getting some of our graphic designers who had the keyboard shortcuts for Photoshop into their DNA to have a look at Gimp and give me their opinion. They disliked it, immensely.
There were two reasons for this. First, it couldn't do RGB to CMYK transformations at the time, and that was required for anyone who worked with print.
Second, though: the name. "It sounds like a f-ing joke by a teenager with spots" was uttered by one.
So yes, names matter. Especially for tools used by professionals.
The fact that it wasn't used as an ableist slur - which wasn't what the person you're criticising said anyway - doesn't mean it isn't one.
Words are wonderful things, and if you lack the imagination to use different ones if someone points out something is offensive, that's very much a "you" problem.
No idea why your post is being downvoted given that it's entirely factually accurate and a lot of the people complaining about what you're saying and getting quite upset are of the "facts don't care about your feelings" variety.
But when they say that, what they really mean is, of course, "I don't care about your feelings (but I'll sure as hell complain if you do anything hurt mine)".
I don't *entirely* agree with you, as it's clear that at the time of the backronym coming about, it's unlikely the original creators thought of it as derogatory. It was just a funny thing from a movie. But we're long past that now, and the fact that some people want to cling on to the past is their problem.
At this point it doesn't make any sense to repurpose even a base M1 to Linux, unless you just want to play around with Linux on a very good ARM machine. The performance Is still excellent. I have an M1 Mac mini bought when it was first released, and it works really well and runs all the latest macOS stuff. Four years old it might be, but boy the performance is still good.
"Monopolies are usually short lived..."
Bell Telephone was effectively a monopoly for over 70 years, and regulated as such from the Kingsbury Commitment in 1913 to the break-up of AT&T in 1984. Monopolies are only short-lived if there is the political will to act against them because there are few economic forces which will knock a monopoly off its perch in any kind of short order.
I've probably told this story before, but back in 1982 I had a job working at an electrical retailer on Saturdays. I was, of course, the only one there who knew anything about computers which were the hottest thing to buy that Christmas.
Every parent wanted a Spectrum -- or at least that's what their kids told them they wanted. Only thing was there weren't enough of them around. There were, though, lots of Oric-1's. We had crates of them and just before Christmas sold a tonne of them.
Then came the day after Boxing Day... and there was literally a queue outside waiting to return them. I had the job of testing them to see if they were faulty, and the first one was. As was the second. And the third... and so on. Every single one we sold was faulty. After testing about ten of them and all of them failing, my boss told me not to bother and just to give people their money back.
Happy Christmas kids!
The tiling in PopOS is pretty great if you fall into the same category as me: someone who wants occasional, keyboard-drivable tiling but a more conventional window manager most of the time.
I've test driven the alpha on both the PopOS release and using Fedora and while it's not ready for me to use all the time, it's promising. It also felt VERY responsive, much more so than either GNOME or KDE. Lots of rough edges, of course, but almost at the point where I could use it 90% of the time.
I worked for a German company in the UK for several years, and it was notable that their attitude towards apprenticeships was VERY different to every British business I have worked in. Not only did they encourage them at entry level: they encouraged them for existing employees, too (British apprenticeships go all the way up to level 7, which is Master’s degree equivalent - I did one in leadership when I was pretty senior, and it was hugely rewarding).
For once, I think this is only *partly* the government's fault. Every larger business pays the apprenticeship levy, and can draw that money back from HMRC if it sends its employees on certified apprenticeship schemes. Remarkably few actually bother, perhaps because they would rather not commit to allowing 20% of time for a period of training (even though that training can be on the job, and in fact, to satisfy the requirements of the apprenticeship actually has to be beneficial to the business).
British businesses just seem to want to devolve all training to universities, subsidised heavily by government.
Of course, you can still install 20.04 if you want – it's an LTS release, so it's got another year or so of security releases (and up to 2030 iirc if you sign your friends up for the free personal Ubuntu Pro thingy).
At that point their hardware will be 20 years old, so probably time for a replacement :)
Some good digging there, thank you! I'm not sure whether this is just bad packaging on Mozilla's part, or an inevitable trade off from using a sandboxed system like Snap (or Flatpak?) – I'm sure someone can enlighten me ;)
If it's the former then shame on Mozilla. If it's the latter, though… well, I'll take that trade-off. My Linux machine isn't exactly short of storage, thanks to a 2Tb SSD upgrade.
"You cannot assume everyone is going to be willing to port everything to a new target architecture."
I mean, that's exactly what Apple has done, and I think what Microsoft would love everyone to do with ARM when/if Qualcomm pulls its finger out. So it's possible, but the way Intel approached it was not ideal.
Most of the Linux world may not use Fedora, but I would put money on most of the desktop Linux world* using a distribution which is either already or on the way to using Wayland as the default.
(* And while I know it's fashionable to insist that ChromeOS is Linux, I disagree with this slant)