Print Story Lol Linux
Diary
By jayhawk88 (Tue Oct 25, 2011 at 04:11:15 PM EST) (all tags)
I'm sorry, but...


  • Download latest/greatest Fedora 15 ISO, looking to install it on a VMWare, get a new Squid/SquidGuard proxy server going
  • Oops it's a LiveCD, I didn't want that, I'll go look for the regular one
  • Huh, there is no regular one apparently, guess there must be an install icon somewhere?
  • Nope
  • Nope
  • Says it should be on the Desktop, nope
  • Ah, there it is hidden in the Applications menu.
  • OK, it's installed, let's try to install these VMWare tools for better graphics support so Gnome3 will work
  • Can't find GCC? That's weird, but I guess technically it's not needed by the average user. Let's update
  • Error on update, can't add Rawhide package? WTF?
  • Internet tells me, "Don't run the graphical update program, run YUM instead"
  • Or install this YUM Graphical package
Look, I'm a Linux noob, I'll be the first to admit that, but at the same time, this isn't my first rodeo either. I've been doing this shit for close to 20 years now, I can figure a thing or two out, but I have to go forum diving just to get the damn thing installed? Really? Maybe The Community is past caring now, and Linux has just reached the "It is what it is" point, but stupid crap like "I'm just not going to give you an install icon if Gnome doesn't load for some reason" or "you have to know which update program to use" really seems like an OS that is going backwards, not forwards.
< more stuff and things. | HuSi: I hat abandoned thee >
Lol Linux | 37 comments (37 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
People still use RedHat? by fluffy (2.00 / 0) #1 Wed Oct 26, 2011 at 02:24:44 AM EST
I mean, aside from corporate users?

Try Ubuntu or Debian. They're a fuckton easier to get going with, and their package systems don't fucking suck. 
busy bees buzz | sockpuppet revolution
I am tired of ubuntu, by wumpus (2.00 / 0) #4 Wed Oct 26, 2011 at 06:36:01 AM EST
but I haven't managed to load any red-hat shipped OS since 1997. Any system that insists on wiping your disk if you didn't use their fdisk utility (or possibly only have ever had windows on it) does not need to be examined.

Can't say much for unity (the crap ubunutu sticks between you and your applications).

Wumpus

[ Parent ]
We may be by barooo (2.00 / 0) #10 Wed Oct 26, 2011 at 11:25:54 AM EST
forced to use RHEL, the company that we outsource our IT to has a backup solution that "supports linux" but actually requires a proprietary binary only driver that only works on RHEL.

This blows, because we are relying on Moonshine for our production rails deployments which basically requires ubuntu.  Not sure who'll win, but I'm guessing backups. 

man, i need a beefy taco now.
-gzt
[ Parent ]
Sounds like a job for a VM by fluffy (2.00 / 0) #20 Wed Oct 26, 2011 at 05:11:54 PM EST
A backup system can back up an Ubuntu virtualbox image just as well as any other file. 
busy bees buzz | sockpuppet revolution
[ Parent ]
That's by barooo (2.00 / 0) #26 Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 11:21:51 AM EST
a possibility you would think.  But it's already a vm.  Something tells me that is not a recipe for performance. 

man, i need a beefy taco now.
-gzt
[ Parent ]
There's ways to make it run well by fluffy (2.00 / 0) #28 Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 01:29:03 PM EST
Some VMs allow you to mount a raw partition directly. Although that defeats the point of making it back-up-able.

In my experience the VM overhead doesn't really contribute that much but I haven't done any real performance analysis in a server environment. All I know is that running make+gcc+whatever in a VM on my desktop is just as fast as doing it directly. 
busy bees buzz | sockpuppet revolution
[ Parent ]
I am so by barooo (2.00 / 0) #32 Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 04:47:12 PM EST
not interested in infrastructure and administration.  I just don't give a fuck about that level of things anymore and haven't since about 1997.  I'm hoping the guys on our team that do care will figure it out without me :) 

man, i need a beefy taco now.
-gzt
[ Parent ]
A shitload of hosting providers by yankeehack (2.00 / 0) #22 Wed Oct 26, 2011 at 08:44:10 PM EST
still use RedHat.
"...she dares to indulge in the secret sport. You can't be a MILF with the F, at least in part because the M is predicated upon it."-CBB
[ Parent ]
I can concur. by dev trash (2.00 / 0) #35 Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 07:29:39 PM EST


--
I DON'T CARE ABOUT YOUR BALLS! ->clock
[ Parent ]
Similar experience by gazbo (2.00 / 0) #2 Wed Oct 26, 2011 at 04:22:11 AM EST
Took me a while to figure out how to install the fucking thing, even once I knew for sure that it was possible.  And the lack of GCC seemed very strange.  There's still a lot of stuff out there that uses it, so it doesn't seem wasteful to include it; I use a couple of akmod packages that save me a lot of pain, for example.

I didn't notice the problem with updater, but then I was probably doing it through CLI yum anyway.  And after all that, my system still refused to actually boot from the HDD (though to be fair, that's almost certainly a problem with the VM host).

Oh, and before F15 I tried F16 beta - now I get that it's beta, but the default installation warns that it has unresolvable dependency issues in its packages - wtf? How is that acceptable? Or is this just another example of the word "beta" being used to mean "anything at all other than released".


I recommend always assuming 7th normal form where items in a text column are not allowed to rhyme.

I'm not sure why you'd choose Fedora by lm (4.00 / 3) #3 Wed Oct 26, 2011 at 06:02:41 AM EST
Let's just say that 10 years ago, when I had an overabundance of time and very little money, I was using Linux.

These days I use OS X.


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
Yep. I ran Debian until I went to OSX. by wiredog (4.00 / 1) #5 Wed Oct 26, 2011 at 07:59:06 AM EST
I like it that things just work. That said, I still occasionally install Debian in a VMWare machine. For the lulz.

Earth First!
(We can strip mine the rest later.)

[ Parent ]
I've generally had the best luck with Debian by lm (2.00 / 0) #6 Wed Oct 26, 2011 at 08:38:19 AM EST
At differing times I've played around with Redhat, Debian, Caldera, SuSE, and a few others. Debian was really the only one that I found consistently reliable.

I suspect that were I to try Linux again, I'd go with Ubuntu.


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
I tried Ubuntu. It's annoying. by wiredog (2.00 / 0) #9 Wed Oct 26, 2011 at 10:29:08 AM EST
This rant is spot on.

Earth First!
(We can strip mine the rest later.)

[ Parent ]
Dude! Seriously? by lm (2.00 / 0) #14 Wed Oct 26, 2011 at 02:12:36 PM EST
Linux with a GUI?

I bet you go rock climbing while wearing flip flops and a dress.


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
Nothin wrong with by wiredog (2.00 / 0) #15 Wed Oct 26, 2011 at 02:15:54 PM EST
GUI's. KDE, Old Skool Gnome. But Unity is annoying and difficult to configure. If there was a .conf file it wasn't in one of the usual places. I mean, yeah, I could've beaten it into submission eventually...

Earth First!
(We can strip mine the rest later.)

[ Parent ]
Unity is complete shit by fluffy (4.00 / 1) #21 Wed Oct 26, 2011 at 05:16:32 PM EST
which is why when I run Ubuntu as a desktop OS I run xubuntu, because xfce is at least not terrible.

It is possible to run Ubuntu with classic Gnome too, but it takes some doing. 
busy bees buzz | sockpuppet revolution
[ Parent ]
OS X by dmg (2.00 / 0) #7 Wed Oct 26, 2011 at 09:32:02 AM EST
A solid 70%+ of the developers and admins where I work run OS X. The only ones that don't tend to be the die hard microsoft drones and the unwashed Linux zealots.

Empirical evidence amongst my social circle shows a big shift towards the mac platform.

Linux sucks precisely because of the ethos that produced it. It will never be easy to install, because for the die hard Linux fan, the whole fun of it is demonstrating your superior "intelligence" by knowing a load of obscure stuff.
--
dmg - HuSi's most dimwitted overprivileged user.

[ Parent ]
I did try Ubuntu as well by jayhawk88 (2.00 / 0) #23 Wed Oct 26, 2011 at 11:29:54 PM EST
Was basically going to try both and decide which was better/easier to maintain. It installed a lot easier but the interface was annoying the shit out of me. Took me like 5 minutes to find a Terminal icon.

I don't know, mostly I was just annoyed after fighting both of these for the better part of a day.  Side note for anyone still reading this: Anyone know of a good proxy/blacklist solution that isn't Squid/SquidGuard? Microsoft wants you to install a whole damn turnkey identity/security management solution these days just to get a little proxy. All I need to do is keep students from loading up Playboy.com and sites like that on public use PC's.

[ Parent ]
Linux for the Desktop by Gedvondur (4.00 / 1) #8 Wed Oct 26, 2011 at 10:19:44 AM EST
Is dead dead dead dead.

Nobody fucking cares anymore, Windows has improved too much and OSX offers a better alternative if you hate software from Redmond.


The community killed itself by being more concerned whether or not it was 1000% compliant with the GPL than it was concerned about whether or not somebody could actually use the fucking thing. Even geeks are tired of configuration problems and installation headaches.

Now, nobody but people who treat technology as religion and uber-geeks bother with it anymore.


*note:  These comments are ONLY about desktop linux, not about server linux.


"So I will be hitting the snatch hard, I think, tonight." - gzt
The desktop is dying by georgeha (2.00 / 0) #11 Wed Oct 26, 2011 at 12:29:39 PM EST
My daughter does much more FBing on her ipod than on  one of our desktops.


[ Parent ]
And I'm sitting here reading HuSi on my phone by lm (2.00 / 0) #16 Wed Oct 26, 2011 at 02:16:49 PM EST
A phone that hosts its very not-Unix graphical userland on Linux.

But I do have to concede that I still use a desktop to run TeX.


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
My Droid is becoming my preferred browser by georgeha (2.00 / 0) #17 Wed Oct 26, 2011 at 02:46:48 PM EST
when I'm out and about, much quicker than booting up a laptop.


[ Parent ]
"The community killed itself" by Oberon (2.00 / 0) #12 Wed Oct 26, 2011 at 01:33:11 PM EST
I strongly disagree. I think Ubuntu was going in exactly the right direction, doing good work in terms of publicity, and gaining a lot of traction, to the point where to many new users, Ubuntu was Linux.

Then they dropped the ball. Whether it came from Shuttleworth or elsewhere in Ubuntu Towers, the desire to put their own stamp on the UI took precedence over things like bugfixes and expanded vendor certification.

"""
Now, nobody but people who treat technology as religion and uber-geeks bother with it anymore.
"""

No, there are lots of other constituencies for desktop Linux. Two examples I have knowledge of:

  1. Scientists and engineers
  2. Ordinary folks who are heartily sick of Windows, but don't want to pay for a Mac


How now, mad spirit?
[ Parent ]
Well by Gedvondur (2.00 / 0) #13 Wed Oct 26, 2011 at 01:47:38 PM EST
I certainly can't argue that there ARE users.  But as a total number, it's been dropping for years.  And the people who are dropping it are the ones in your second category, the only ones who could actually make it into a real force, the ordinary folks.

My experience is that ordinary folks discover Linux, take the plunge, struggle with it from two months to a year, and then end up back on a newer copy of Windows or buy a Mac.


As to Ubuntu, I agree, it's the best Linux desktop.  The UI thing might have thrown the hardcore Linux geeks to other distros, but the common folk who don't know the difference?  They bought Macs or cheap machines with Windows 7 because even with Ubuntu's improvements, Linux is STILL a huge pain in the ass for the average user.  Plus, when it comes to software, the vast majority is written for Windows or Mac.  Nothing Ubuntu could have done would have changed this in the long run, only delayed it.

It's all about getting things done.  Mac and Windows 7 have made it....bearable to run commercial OS.  There is no appreciable advantage to Linux for a guy who just wants to do stuff on his system, not fuck with the OS day and night.

Add all these things together and we are left with scientists, engineers, and hard core geeks running and caring about an OS that has no appreciable relevance to the desktop market anymore with a less than 1% market share.


If it makes you feel better, I credit Linux desktops (well, more OSX but still some Linux desktop) for an appreciable increase in the quality of Windows.




"So I will be hitting the snatch hard, I think, tonight." - gzt
[ Parent ]
? by Oberon (2.00 / 0) #18 Wed Oct 26, 2011 at 02:52:31 PM EST
I'm not sure how you conclude that Linux use "has been dropping for years". Some people try Linux and drop it, some stick with it. Unfortunately no hard numbers are available.

Of course, as you allude to, if the existence of desktop Linux has driven Microsoft to smarten their act up a bit with security etc., and to offer more reasonable prices in certain markets (large office deployments and the developing world are the two that spring to mind), then it's done some good even to those who do not use it.


How now, mad spirit?
[ Parent ]
I get my numbers by Gedvondur (2.00 / 0) #25 Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 09:22:18 AM EST
From companies like IDC and Gartner who have been tracking Linux desktop usage.  It's dropped nearly in half to less than a percent in five years.

Those are the usage estimates for the industry.  If you want to claim that there is a great uncounted mass out there, go ahead but its shaky thin ground to rest your argument on.


At the end of the day, the market forces are just not there to make it a real, viable OS that gets things like games written for it.  Or even other commercial software.  And because of that, it will langish in nerd-land forever.




"So I will be hitting the snatch hard, I think, tonight." - gzt
[ Parent ]
you seem to be overgeneralizing by infinitera (2.00 / 0) #27 Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 01:24:37 PM EST
Not being a viable desktop OS does not make it less so in the datacenter.

[…] a professional layabout. Which I aspire to be, but am not yet. — CheeseburgerBrown

[ Parent ]
I think you mis-understand by Gedvondur (4.00 / 1) #30 Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 02:15:24 PM EST
My comments are ONLY about Linux as a desktop OS. 

In the data center it's full speed ahead and damn the torpedoes.  :-)





"So I will be hitting the snatch hard, I think, tonight." - gzt
[ Parent ]
all you need is quake. by the mariner (4.00 / 2) #29 Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 01:58:23 PM EST
the game problem was solved a long time ago. the answer is quake. other games just rot your brain.

even if you run linux, you can still play quake. you've got a text editor, a compiler, and quake. you're all set. 

[ Parent ]
Ok by Oberon (4.00 / 1) #31 Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 03:50:46 PM EST
I don't have access to IDC or Gartner reports so I'll take your word for that. (I'm not counting the occasional crumbs they throw out in press releases, which usually include so little detail as to be worthless).

For the record, I didn't think Linux desktop use had ever got much above 1%, either according to those agencies or web stats. I do think that both measures are probably underestimating Linux use in developing countries, because internet use is less widespread (so web stats will not catch them) and markets have a lower dollar value (so the agencies don't really care).

You do have something of a point in suggesting that Mac OS X may be taking some "power user" share from Linux. A long time ago someone (I forget who) suggested that Microsoft should just go ahead and produce their own version of Linux. They were more-or-less right, just a different proprietary vendor and a different UNIX.

Mac OS X = Microsoft Linux

I should get that on a t-shirt ....


How now, mad spirit?
[ Parent ]
Heh by Gedvondur (2.00 / 0) #33 Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 05:04:40 PM EST
That would make a great shirt!

"So I will be hitting the snatch hard, I think, tonight." - gzt
[ Parent ]
Microsoft *n?x by Captain Tenille (2.00 / 0) #36 Fri Oct 28, 2011 at 04:09:21 PM EST
I think they may not be able to sell a Unix or Unix-like operating system, actually, per the terms of their sale of Xenix to the Santa Cruz Organization long long ago. 

---------

/* You are not expected to understand this. */


[ Parent ]
We were a solaris shop by ana (4.00 / 1) #19 Wed Oct 26, 2011 at 04:18:06 PM EST
until the bang-to-buck ratio changed dramatically in favor of Linux. Nowadays we're CentOS Linux, with a few Macs-in-tosh.

Sorry to hear Ubuntu jumped the Snarky Shark. It was a mostly okay thing back before my machine bit the big one and we sprang for a Mac. Mostly, I say, because it would never do wifi at all. 

I now know what the noise that is usually spelled "lolwhut" sounds like. --Kellnerin

[ Parent ]
I must be in the minority by clover kicker (2.00 / 0) #24 Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 08:10:47 AM EST
Years ago I spent hours customizing my desktop. These days I've completely given up and just work with whatever the defaults are.

Unity is annoying, but after a few days it's no more annoying then Vista/Win7, at least to me.

but you have choices! by dev trash (2.00 / 0) #34 Thu Oct 27, 2011 at 07:23:16 PM EST


--
I DON'T CARE ABOUT YOUR BALLS! ->clock
Linux by duxup (2.00 / 0) #37 Mon Oct 31, 2011 at 02:03:03 PM EST
is dead, at least as dead as it ever was for desktop uses.  

It never was going to make it, I was amused in the past about articles about how it was going to take over the desktop.  It just never seemed to be going that way.

____
Lol Linux | 37 comments (37 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback