Nil said:
... he is exaggerating in order to create a false impression.
I wish, to remain balanced, that Todd quoted examples of how
Linux has flaws.
One example, is the operation of command line utilities, such as
"grep". Anyone who has used Unix or Linux boxes for a while,
recognizes the importance of maintaining utilities so that
they function properly. Scripts are built on top of those
utilities, so it's important they function properly.
Even on computers 20 years ago, I could use grep on any file
which fit within the bounds of the file system. If I had a 40GB
disk, with a single 39.99GB file on it, I could use the command
line utilities to process that file. At least, the parameters
of the operation of the utility, were not limited by available
system RAM.
The grep that has been shipping for the last couple of years,
has an "optimization" switched on. It prevents the utility
from opening any file which is larger than system memory. Now,
when I compare the computer from 20 years ago, instead of being
able to process a 40GB file, I'm limited to a 2GB file (if 2GB
was the amount of physical RAM present in the computer).
They also managed to break the semantics of pipes. Time was,
when you piped one program to another, such as
ls | grep "My Documents"
the "ls" program would fill a FIFO buffer of small fixed size
between the two programs. The output of the first program would
be stopped, whenever the second program was too slow to keep
up with the data flow.
They broke that model too, and now I see more error messages
come from simple shell operations, such as the kind of example
above.
As a result, I don't think of Linux as being "pure as the
driven snow" either. It has plenty of rough edges, plenty
of just plain stupid design decisions (like putting web
cam drivers in the kernel, leading to kernel crashes).
You can throw just as many stones at Linux, as you can at
Windows, if you put some time and effort into it.
Ever tried to find documentation for some feature which is
not popular with the "Linux elite" ? It certainly makes it
harder to set up traditional stuff you may have used in the
past. If I want to enable Telnet or use rcp for ten minutes,
I should be able to - it's my machine.
And how often must a Linux user, fiddle with their XWindows
graphics system. I've been using XWindows since X11R4, compiling
my own copies when needed. Thankfully, we no longer have to
do that, so that's a big win. Package managers have taken
a lot of pain out of Linux. But XWindows continues to suck,
as it traditionally has, and nobody has attempted to improve it.
To give an example from just yesterday, I insert a Ubuntu 10.10
LiveCD into my computer, for some network testing I want to
do. I have a 1280x1024 monitor on a proper Nvidia video card
(not integrated motherboard graphics). The monitor supports
Plug and Play and has EDID. When the CD boots, Ubuntu 10.10
sets the screen resolution to 1024x768, offers no resolution
above that, and refuses to be adjusted by XRandR type programs.
I can certainly fix that with enough effort, but who wants to
do that, every time they boot a LiveCD ?
Now, the second computer I was using for a networking test,
it has a 1440x900 type monitor, and for some reason, the
very same LiveCD boots that, and the monitor runs at full
resolution.
Or take the distros, that when you fire up XWindows, the screen
is shifted several pixels to the right, and you can't see
the last digit of the Date and Time clock. If a user takes
the time and effort, to install the "nv" driver from Nvidia,
the alignment is always perfect, to the last pixel.
Yes, Linux is wonderful as it's free. But the praise stops
there.
I could also write a whole book on Linux audio - to sum
up, "what has five letters and stinks ?". That's Linux audio
architecture.
I don't like Windows 7 that much either, mainly because
I can't tell, by looking at the interface design, just
what they were thinking. I can't tell, that the OS was
designed to make *my* life easier. And that is what should
be evident from one release to the next. The last search
function, that came close to my performance expectations,
was the search function in Win2K. I'm kinda sick of looking
at a piece of candy floss sliding across the screen, while
I'm waiting for my search result
I want my results,
without my intelligence being insulted.
Maybe in Windows 8, they'll bring back that "dancing paper clip",
and animate Clippy while my search is running for the
next two minutes
That oughta make my life easier.
That's what the boss pays me for, to watch a dancing paper clip.
That, and for me to update my Facebook page.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/db/Clippy-letter.PNG
Paul
