A KDE Developers Response Videos To LTT's Linux Challenge

[Radium_Angel]

7 hours ago, LAwLz said:

GNU/Linux you have to use the CLI.

There used to be a very nice GUI frontend to join an Ubuntu OS to a Windows domain.

It was simple, and quick.

It died off in favour of this CLI nightmare

https://computingforgeeks.com/join-ubuntu-debian-to-active-directory-ad-domain/

 

*nix is 90% there for daily use, but it's that 10% that keeps it from being truly successful

[Lightwreather]

6 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

*nix is 90% there for daily use, but it's that 10% that keeps it from being truly successful

It's often the case in a lot of things for the last 10 or 1% that's the hardest to push through

[RejZoR]

3 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Maybe if you are inexperienced then it sucks, but so does all troubleshooting. Also, the same can be said about Windows so I don't really get your point. How often do you see people recommend "reinstall Windows" as a solution to a problem? I see it all the time. 

 

 

So...

Choice = bad?

Also, how often do people actually run a distro and use something other than the default DE? Those users are the advanced users, not something a novice Linux user should use. This is a non-issue. Might as well say troubleshooting Windows is hard because people can install skins on it, making it look different.

 

 

So? Most people will be more than fine with the software that's in the Ubuntu Software Centre by default. No need to use things like AppImages or add support for it.

 

 

If you are an average user and choose a beginner friendly distro then it is a myth.

 

 

 

What kind of problems do you think the average user would run into?

Also, it's not CLI's fault you don't understand what it does. Most people don't understand how GUIs work either. I have lost count of how many times I have had to teach my grandpa to transfer pictures from their camera to their computer. Would you say it's Windows' fault that my grandpa can't remember how to transfer pictures from his camera, and would you say it's "GUIs fault" that he thinks it is complicated? Let's not just Windows' GUI. Let's blame the concept of GUIs for my grandpa's lack of understanding how to drag and drop pictures between two folders!

See how ridiculous you sound when you blame "CLI" for your lack of understanding what is happening when someone helps you fix an issue?

 

 

What's wrong with googling something when you are unsure about how to do it? I do that all the time for all OSes. I think it's pretty natural to search for "how to do X" in Google before you start opening random menus in the OS hoping that the developer (be it a developer at Microsoft, Apple or let's say Canonical) happened to think that the "logical place to put this setting" is the same as the place you would have put it.

I find that you very often go "my way of thinking is the only correct way and everyone who disagrees is stupid and bad", and your way of thinking is often "what I am used to".

There is no such thing as user friendly distro. All of them are shit and Ubuntu, the "would be" of most consumer friendly, most widely used distros is one of the worst I've ever used. It's not user friendly, it's straight up idiotically clumsy and annoying. And I'd say I'm pretty novice as far as Linux goes. Been fiddling with it since early days when i chugged Knoppix around on CD's and had Slax on mini-CD's, but it was nothing serious or daily driving. And sooner or later you'll have to download something outside of app repository and then it's all fucked up when you get the binary and you double click it and OS goes like "wtf is that". I don't know, you're the fucking OS, you're here to run this shit for me. When on Windows, EXE is EXE. There is nothing questionable about it.

 

As for the "choice", yeah, it's not always bad even when people try to portray having more choice is better. There is a fine line to that and Linux has gone past that line, I don't know, 15 years ago and keeps on going. Everyone has their idea of choice and no one thinks of actual serious standardization so everyone just runs with their shit. And that's exactly why it's still so unpopular. Literally because of this. Present 6 options to a consumer and they'll quickly pick their jam. Present them 50 options and they'll never figure out their shit.

[LAwLz]

24 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

There used to be a very nice GUI frontend to join an Ubuntu OS to a Windows domain.

It was simple, and quick.

It died off in favour of this CLI nightmare

https://computingforgeeks.com/join-ubuntu-debian-to-active-directory-ad-domain/

 

*nix is 90% there for daily use, but it's that 10% that keeps it from being truly successful

Not sure what that's suppose to prove. 

1) A lot of the things (most? All?) in that article can be done through the GUI. Just because a guide says "use the CLI" does not mean it's the only way. 

 

2) Not sure about you, but I don't have an AD at home, and I don't think most people do. So I'm not sure why you think it being "complicated" to join an AD is relevant. I dont think my grandpa is going to join his computer to a domain. 

 

3) If you're setting up a domain then you most likely want to use an automation tool like scripting it in a CLI. So needing the use of a CLI on Ubuntu is kind of irrelevant. You should probably do that on Windows too. Welcome to the world of IT. Doing things manually in a GUI is really outdated. 

[Radium_Angel]

10 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Not sure what that's suppose to prove. 

1) A lot of the things (most? All?) in that article can be done through the GUI. Just because a guide says "use the CLI" does not mean it's the only way. 

If you can find a nice GUI to connect ubuntu to a Windows domain, please point it out, because I haven't found one.

That was the only "point" I was making.

 

[justpoet]

6 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

If you can find a nice GUI to connect ubuntu to a Windows domain, please point it out, because I haven't found one.

That was the only "point" I was making.

 

I would argue that this happens an unfortunately large amount of time under linux.  With different desktop environments and underlying libraries, and constant change to them that isn't always backwards compatible, and worse when distros switch which one they're using by default...gui apps break...often.  If the person who wrote it isn't making that same transition...it probably won't ever get fixed.

 

In the enthusiast targeted linux mindset...that's fine, and GOOD...now you adopt/fork/update it as you want it to work.  But not everybody codes, not even all computer professionals, and that CERTAINLY doesn't help average end users who just think they broke something and get frustrated.

[Master Disaster]

3 hours ago, Spindel said:

And that product exists. Given it’s not Linux kernel it is Darwin (so BSD related) and the OS is MacOS. 
 

I’ve said it before and I say it again, for Linux desktop to be a thing it needs the backing of a dedicated company and to some degree being locked down so the environment becomes a bit ”controlled”. Preferably a company that also ships the hardware so compability is guaranteed. But then we basically have a Mac. 
 

For the time being Linux is great for embeded systems like routers, NAS, fridges etc but not on the desktop. 

See the recent controversy with Gnome and downstream developers. The Gnome team have basically said they intend to do exactly this with Gnome, it will operate like Windows to a certain extent with everything running on GTK, following the Gnome design philosophy and certain features (most mostably themeing) will be removed (or at least extremely hidden). The intended goal is to make Gnome a platform rather than a DE where everything looks the same, acts the same and follows the same rules.

 

They recieved a fair bit on flack for it with (the same) people (that say they're for free choice but users cannot use the GUI to move files around) saying it goes against the philosophy of Linux however I disagree with that take. Someone has to bite the bullet and say "the end user is likely an idiot therefore we will dictate design and operation rules to make everything cohearant and consistent". Once that happens the user friendly just works distros can all ship Gnome by default and suddenly Linux desktop is standard for normal users. Power users can and will always be able to change anything they like.

 

The only downside to it is the fact it relies on the just works distros to all ship Gnome by default and I doubt thats gonna happen.

[Radium_Angel]

10 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

See the recent controversy with Gnome and downstream developers. The Gnome team have basically said they intend to do exactly this with Gnome, it will operate like Windows to a certain extent with everything running on GTK, following the Gnome design philosophy and certain features (most mostably themeing) will be removed (or at least extremely hidden). The intended goal is to make Gnome a platform rather than a DE where everything looks the same, acts the same and follows the same rules.

 

They recieved a fair bit on flack for it with (the same) people (that say they're for free choice but users cannot use the GUI to move files around) saying it goes against the philosophy of Linux however I disagree with that take. Someone has to bite the bullet and say "the end user is likely an idiot therefore we will dictate design and operation rules to make everything cohearant and consistent". Once that happens the user friendly just works distros can all ship Gnome by default and suddenly Linux desktop is standard for normal users. Power users can and will always be able to change anything they like.

 

The only downside to it is the fact it relies on the just works distros to all ship Gnome by default and I doubt thats gonna happen.

That's a bold and risky move to start dictating (even if the are right) how things will be done.

I get their point, at some point in time, Linux needs to stop with the 3 million DE and distro-of-the-week, and start concentrating on actual UI usability and software, but I"m not sure this is how to go about it. It's liable to blow up in their faces.

[D-reaper]

<removed by staff>

BTW, they are not just trying Linux; they are actually using it. For years in fact, they have been using it.

 

<removed by staff>

Edited December 9, 2021 by SansVarnic
Removed content.

[Master Disaster]

9 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

That's a bold and risky move to start dictating (even if the are right) how things will be done.

I get their point, at some point in time, Linux needs to stop with the 3 million DE and distro-of-the-week, and start concentrating on actual UI usability and software, but I"m not sure this is how to go about it. It's liable to blow up in their faces.

Oh 100% yes its risky but its also kind of necessary. The problem is that the freedom of user choice philosophy of Linux means that Gnome can do whatever they want, if everyone moves to something else then its totally irrelevant.

 

As for blowing up, well we've already heard System 76 will be dropping Gnome and writing Cosmic from the ground up in Rust however Gnome is default in a lot of really popular distros, RHEL and Ubuntu being the really big ones.

 

Personally I think Gnome are correct in their approach, a team of focused devs working towards a structured and clearly outlined goal is the thing that newcomers want and need, even if most of them don't realise it.

 

Full disclosure, I cannot use Plasma for more than 10 minutes without screaming, the entire thing is a mess of mangled C and Python that's been glued together. Here's just a few triggers, the Plasma X compositor simply cannot work without tearing, switching to Wayland fixes that but then right click doesn't work. Sometimes themes just break for no reason and you end up with multicoloured windows. Every app looks different. Different pages in KSettings look and act totally different. Dolphin is dogshit. There are menus that make no sense, windows move around randomly and are in different places every time you open them.....

 

^This is why Desktop Linux sucks as an experience. Personally I use mostly I3 but keep Gnome around for gaming.

[D-reaper]

8 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Oh 100% yes its risky but its also kind of necessary. The problem is that the freedom of user choice philosophy of Linux means that Gnome can do whatever they want, if everyone moves to something else then its totally irrelevant.

 

As for blowing up, well we've already heard System 76 will be dropping Gnome and writing Cosmic from the ground up in Rust however Gnome is default in a lot of really popular distros, RHEL and Ubuntu being the really big ones.

 

Personally I think Gnome are correct in their approach, a team of focused devs working towards a structured and clearly outlined goal is the thing that newcomers want and need, even if most of them don't realise it.

 

Full disclosure, I cannot use Plasma for more than 10 minutes without screaming, the entire thing is a mess of mangled C and Python that's been glued together. Here's just a few triggers, the Plasma X compositor simply cannot work without tearing, switching to Wayland fixes that but then right click doesn't work. Sometimes themes just break for no reason and you end up with multicoloured windows. Every app looks different. Different pages in KSettings look and act totally different. Dolphin is dogshit. There are menus that make no sense, windows move around randomly and are in different places every time you open them.....

 

^This is why Desktop Linux sucks as an experience. Personally I use mostly I3 but keep Gnome around for gaming.

For me, KDE Plasma is what got me off Windows 6 years ago. I don't see what's so bad about it. And I am not experiencing any tearing since I use a AMD GPU. That's a fault of Nvidia because they got a stick up their ass. Former Nvidia user here. So I know. That isn't Linux's fault.

[Master Disaster]

11 minutes ago, D-reaper said:

For me, KDE Plasma is what got me off Windows 6 years ago. I don't see what's so bad about it. And I am not experiencing any tearing since I use a AMD GPU. That's a fault of Nvidia because they got a stick up their ass. Former Nvidia user here. So I know. That isn't Linux's fault.

5700XT.... Plus it happens in VMs too, maybe there's a setting I'm missing somewhere?

[D-reaper]

Just now, Master Disaster said:

5700XT.... Plus it happens in VMs too, maybe there's a setting I'm missing somewhere?

Did you install the card and went with the idea that you need the proprietary drivers? Because AMD GPUs are essentially plug and play as the drivers are integrated in the kernel. Thanks to Mesa. Any AMD system or GPU I got has been like that.

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, Radium_Angel said:

If you can find a nice GUI to connect ubuntu to a Windows domain, please point it out, because I haven't found one.

That was the only "point" I was making.

1) There are GUIs for making some of the changes required to join an AD in Ubuntu. Sadly, I couldn't find GUIs for all of it, but things like changing DNS and hostname are definingly possible.

2) Most users do not need to join their computer to an AD so I am not sure what your point is.

3) You shouldn't be using a GUI to join computers to an AD anyway. It's 2021, not 2001. If you are joining ADs manually using a GUI then you are doing it wrong, plain and simple.

 

 

57 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

That's a bold and risky move to start dictating (even if the are right) how things will be done.

I get their point, at some point in time, Linux needs to stop with the 3 million DE and distro-of-the-week, and start concentrating on actual UI usability and software, but I"m not sure this is how to go about it. It's liable to blow up in their faces.

I think you have created this imaginary issue in your head. I have never seen any argue that choice is this bad. Want to use a simple, well documented distro? Then just pick Ubuntu. If you just install Ubuntu and don't intentionally mess around by doing things like changing DE then it will be fine. There being a lot of different DEs does not matter if you pick the most widely used distro and use the defaults. You don't have to chance DE or pick some obscure distro if you don't want to. 

It's like arguing we should get rid of browsers on Windows. "Browsers are so complicated, we should just get rid of all of them and everyone should use IE. Users shouldn't have to know which browser engine they use or constantly have to switch between IE, Chrome and Firefox. There should just be one browser and no extensions.".

[Radium_Angel]

13 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

You shouldn't be using a GUI to join computers to an AD anyway

Why not?

[leadeater]

3 hours ago, D-reaper said:

Not worth the hassle. And on an older computer, it will run much worse because Windows is so bloated today. The reason why MS is forces this strict hardware requirement it to compensate for the lack of quality and extra bloat they pushed into the OS. To me, nothing MS comes up with now will be as good as XP or 7 were. This is why I switched to Linux; because I could.

Not worth the hassle? So you won't do a fresh install of Windows but you'll take a computer running Windows and do a fresh install of Linux but that's also not a hassle? I don't follow your logical at all.

 

4 hours ago, D-reaper said:

We. Don't. Care. Get it? Seriously, get a life.

 

4 hours ago, D-reaper said:

People talk about how toxic the Linux community is all the time. Well, maybe you should look at yourself in the mirror.

 

[D-reaper]

3 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Not worth the hassle? So you won't do a fresh install of Windows but you'll take a computer running Windows and do a fresh install of Linux but that's also not a hassle? I don't follow your logical at all.

 

 

 

Maybe install Linux on an old computer and find out the difference for yourself?

[leadeater]

3 hours ago, Radium_Angel said:

There used to be a very nice GUI frontend to join an Ubuntu OS to a Windows domain.

It was simple, and quick.

It died off in favour of this CLI nightmare

https://computingforgeeks.com/join-ubuntu-debian-to-active-directory-ad-domain/

 

*nix is 90% there for daily use, but it's that 10% that keeps it from being truly successful

GNOME has a package for that, RHEL will install it when you enable GUI unless you prevent that package from installing (because you probably already have sssd etc already configured). It actually works very well, it's just a GUI to the realm join command.

 

Edit: gnome-initial-setup in case you're interested

[leadeater]

13 minutes ago, D-reaper said:

Maybe install Linux on an old computer and find out the difference for yourself?

Maybe don't assume I haven't used Linux or don't actively use it.

 

But no your target criticism only applies to upgrades and nothing you can say can change that so you're left only with arguing your personal preference about what you like to use while being rather "toxic" about it to boot, which is interesting since I took your comments earlier as an indication you aren't one or try to not be one. So I'd suggest dialing back from 11. 

[Paul Thexton]

4 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

Couldnt agree more, id even argue that it is easier to install a noob friendly linux distro than to install windows.....

Yep. I have a recent anecdote on that. I have until recently been a Windows free house. Only Mac / Linux here, but I wanted to put Windows 10 on an Intel NUC that I have.  Literally every guide I followed to create a bootable USB Windows installer failed, which were a mix of good old fashioned dd approach or manually copying files + expanding that weird >4GB file. All resulted in either getting errors during installation or wouldn’t boot at all. 
 

The solution? Create a Windows VM, pass through the USB stick to it, and use the windows media creation until to do it Massive, massive PITA. 

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, Paul Thexton said:

The solution? Create a Windows VM, pass through the USB stick to it, and use the windows media creation until to do it Massive, massive PITA. 

lol yea it's super simple to do on a Windows computer but creating one on Linux, it's like it actively detect Windows and goes "nah fuck that shit" 

[Paul Thexton]

7 minutes ago, leadeater said:

lol yea it's super simple to do on a Windows computer but creating one on Linux, it's like it actively detect Windows and goes "nah fuck that shit" 

It’s like Microsoft expect that if you want/need to create an installation USB, you already have a Windows machine on hand to do it. The more I look at different aspects of it the more stupid it is, fractally stupid even. 

[Guest willies leg]

52 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

Why not?

 

Doesn't scale.

Sure, it works with 1 or 2, or even shift click and do 20. But do 100? 1000? Or 1000 with names that follow a scheme?

[jagdtigger]

58 minutes ago, Paul Thexton said:

create a bootable USB Windows installer

I use ventoy, pretty handy, just drop the iso onto the drive and thats it.

[Radium_Angel]

1 hour ago, willies leg said:

 

Doesn't scale.

Sure, it works with 1 or 2, or even shift click and do 20. But do 100? 1000? Or 1000 with names that follow a scheme?

Which is fine, but I wasn't talking about 1000, but I can see where that might have been construed.