388
Why is Linux so frustrating for some people?
(lemmy.ml)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2023
388 points (100.0% liked)
Linux
48073 readers
645 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I'm a devops engineer, so I understand Linux well. I actually used exclusively Linux all throughout university.
Linux works just as good as windows for 98% of my uses cases. And for the 2% that it doesnt, I can probably figure out how to get it to work or an alternative.
But honestly, I usually just don't want to anymore. After working 8 hours, I'm very seldom in the mood to do more debugging, so I switch to Windows more and more frequently.
If this is my experience as someone who understands it, most normies will just fuck off the moment the first program they want to run doesn't.
That's exactly my experience.
I've been doing Linux since the early days when Slackware fitted a "few" floppy disks and you had to configure the low level CRT display timings on a text file to get X-windows to work, and through my career have used Linux abundantly, at some point even designing distributed high performance software systems on top of it for Investment Banks.
Nowadays I just don't have the patience to solve stupid problems that are only there because some moron decided that THEY are the ones that after 2 bloody decades of it working fine trully have the perfect way (the kind of dunning-krugger level software design expertise which is "oh so common" at the mid-point of one's software development career and regularly produces amongst others "yet another programming language were all the old lessons about efficiency of the whole software development cycle and maintenability have been forgotten") for something that's been done well enough for years, and decided to reinvent it, so now instead of one well integrated, well documented solution there are these pieces of masturbatory-"brilliance" barelly fitting together with documentation that doesn't even match it properly.
Just recently I got a ton of headaches merely getting language and keyboard configuration working properly in Armbian because there was zero explanation associated with the choices and their implications, thousands of combinations (99.99% of which are not used or even exists) of keyboard configurations were ordered alphabetically on almost-arbitrary names across 2 tables, with no emphasis on "commonly used" (clearly every user is supposed to be an expert on the ins and outs of keyboard layouts) and there were multiple tools, most of which didn't work (some immediatelly due to missing directories, others failing after a couple of minutes, others only affecting X) and whatever documentation was there (online and offline) didn't actually match.
(It's funny how the "genious" never seems to extend to creating good documentation or even proper integration testing)
Don't get me wrong: I see Software Architecture-level rookie mistakes all the time in the design of software systems, frameworks and libraries in the for-profit sector ("Hi Google!!!"), but they seem to actually more frequent in Open Source because the barrier for entry for reinventing the wheel (again!) is often just convincing a handful of people with an equally low level of expertise.
(anyways, rant over)
I think I am more than happy with the os. The bummer is that many of the alternative softwares do not have feature parity. The more you try to mimic the Windows workflow, the more you'll burnout with minimal results. I've come to terms with it and just run a vm in gnome boxes for ms office and tableau and other stuff. However, many a times if I want something that could be done programmatically I'd definitely try a cli solution, so that cant be the same pro for everyone.
I work in devops as well and while Windows is easier and more convenient for many things, some processing-heavy tasks are better left to Linux. Doing generative AI stuff, for example, I don't want to be loading a bulky OS on top of the task at hand.
I thought about dual booting, but it would make multitasking nearly impossible. So, instead, I'm using Linux whenever possible and I have a Windows VM I can enter at a moment's notice or hibernate if I need the resources. And then there's the MacBook, but we don't talk about the MacBook.
That's part of why I don't use Linux, outside of my steamdeck which I rarely go out of game mode so doesn't even count, I just want my shit to work and not worry about compatibility or "figuring it out" I feel like had I used it at a younger age I'd be more fine with it but I just can't be bothered tbh.
My experience is the opposite but the same. I have been a sysadmin for 15 years in mostly Windows and Microsoft only. All my work tools are in Windows.
I actually boot to Linux when I'm not supposed to work since otherwise I just have anxiety or dread and then I'll open teams, outlook, ncentral, prtg...
Also why I enjoy my switch. Can't really do projects on it like I can on Linux, but I also am switched off from work.