Do Linux developers have no taste?
-
You're not wrong. Even if you demonstrate how easy it is to make things better, they don't want to know. I know it's a Hell of a generalisation, but I really haven't seen any evidence to contradict it.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
I used to have a single frame cartoon that showed Satan at the counter of a computer shop saying something like: "I need a new OS. Not one of those fancy, pretty ones - I want a mean SOB!" Pretty sure he wanted Linux.
There are two types of people in this world: those that pronounce GIF with a soft G, and those who do not deserve to speak words, ever.
-
After working for decades on Windows, I took the plunge into Linux for my current job. What baffles me the most is how accepting Linux developers in general are of all the crap applications. No, it's worse than that; they praise the crap applications. Endlessly. And if you criticize the apps, you get heaps of denial. Then there are the UIs written by the clueless. "Yeah, but what about Windows 8," is a typical comeback. There are some superficial design choices not everyone likes in Windows 8 (mostly the start menu and lack of Aero--I don't mind either and now turn off Aero when I have to use Windows 7.) Beyond that, the UI is very consistent, renders extremely well and is magnitudes more stable than any GUI on Linux. Then there's git, which is the worse version control system I've used since Visual Source Safe. The proponents tout the rich feature set of git, ignoring the fact that the rich feature set is there to get around all the problems of a fundamentally flawed design. I work with three, honest-to-God, git experts, but a day doesn't go by when one of them says, while using it or helping someone, "Oops, I don't know what happened there." Often followed by, "this makes no sense, but you have to create a branch...." Then there's moving files via "git mv" which git later "decides" were deleted and recreated. And don't get me started on all its errors with rebases and merges (due largely to bad design.) Naturally, some Linux fan-boys are going to lose their heads over this, but I go back to the question; do Linux developers have no taste? Seriously. Are you unable to see badly rendered fonts? When you want to do something relatively common, which on Windows or Mac takes a click or two, but on Linux takes a list of dozens of detailed instructions, don't you ask why? Don't you use GDB and wonder why it sucks so bad?
Out of curiosity, why did you troll Linux users primarily to gripe about Git? I mean, I get it, Git can be exceptionally obtuse, but that has nothing to do with your post. Anyway, the GUI on Linux is called BASH. If you're using anything else and griping about it, then your problem isn't with Linux, it's with KDE/Gnome/Whatever. As far as software goes, if you're not writing it yourself then you're getting what you paid for. As a plus, you can generally crack open the Github page and see for yourself.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli
-
Out of curiosity, why did you troll Linux users primarily to gripe about Git? I mean, I get it, Git can be exceptionally obtuse, but that has nothing to do with your post. Anyway, the GUI on Linux is called BASH. If you're using anything else and griping about it, then your problem isn't with Linux, it's with KDE/Gnome/Whatever. As far as software goes, if you're not writing it yourself then you're getting what you paid for. As a plus, you can generally crack open the Github page and see for yourself.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli
Git was written by Linus Torvalds, the main guy of Linux. So using Linux to gripe about Git is entirely appropriate. BASH is not a GUI. Maybe a TUI.
Nathan Minier wrote:
getting what you paid for
Do these guys (of the gotten software) have no pride of workmanship?
#SupportHeForShe Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
-
After working for decades on Windows, I took the plunge into Linux for my current job. What baffles me the most is how accepting Linux developers in general are of all the crap applications. No, it's worse than that; they praise the crap applications. Endlessly. And if you criticize the apps, you get heaps of denial. Then there are the UIs written by the clueless. "Yeah, but what about Windows 8," is a typical comeback. There are some superficial design choices not everyone likes in Windows 8 (mostly the start menu and lack of Aero--I don't mind either and now turn off Aero when I have to use Windows 7.) Beyond that, the UI is very consistent, renders extremely well and is magnitudes more stable than any GUI on Linux. Then there's git, which is the worse version control system I've used since Visual Source Safe. The proponents tout the rich feature set of git, ignoring the fact that the rich feature set is there to get around all the problems of a fundamentally flawed design. I work with three, honest-to-God, git experts, but a day doesn't go by when one of them says, while using it or helping someone, "Oops, I don't know what happened there." Often followed by, "this makes no sense, but you have to create a branch...." Then there's moving files via "git mv" which git later "decides" were deleted and recreated. And don't get me started on all its errors with rebases and merges (due largely to bad design.) Naturally, some Linux fan-boys are going to lose their heads over this, but I go back to the question; do Linux developers have no taste? Seriously. Are you unable to see badly rendered fonts? When you want to do something relatively common, which on Windows or Mac takes a click or two, but on Linux takes a list of dozens of detailed instructions, don't you ask why? Don't you use GDB and wonder why it sucks so bad?
I used to be a Git hater too. It takes a while to understand it but I would not want to go back. As for the guys claiming to be experts, they probably keep up with the Kardashians... Its one thing to say you're an expert and another to demonstrate it. Don't give up on Git too soon.
Hogan
-
I used to have a single frame cartoon that showed Satan at the counter of a computer shop saying something like: "I need a new OS. Not one of those fancy, pretty ones - I want a mean SOB!" Pretty sure he wanted Linux.
There are two types of people in this world: those that pronounce GIF with a soft G, and those who do not deserve to speak words, ever.
Sounds like good T-shirt material -- with "GIMME LINUX!" on the back.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
After working for decades on Windows, I took the plunge into Linux for my current job. What baffles me the most is how accepting Linux developers in general are of all the crap applications. No, it's worse than that; they praise the crap applications. Endlessly. And if you criticize the apps, you get heaps of denial. Then there are the UIs written by the clueless. "Yeah, but what about Windows 8," is a typical comeback. There are some superficial design choices not everyone likes in Windows 8 (mostly the start menu and lack of Aero--I don't mind either and now turn off Aero when I have to use Windows 7.) Beyond that, the UI is very consistent, renders extremely well and is magnitudes more stable than any GUI on Linux. Then there's git, which is the worse version control system I've used since Visual Source Safe. The proponents tout the rich feature set of git, ignoring the fact that the rich feature set is there to get around all the problems of a fundamentally flawed design. I work with three, honest-to-God, git experts, but a day doesn't go by when one of them says, while using it or helping someone, "Oops, I don't know what happened there." Often followed by, "this makes no sense, but you have to create a branch...." Then there's moving files via "git mv" which git later "decides" were deleted and recreated. And don't get me started on all its errors with rebases and merges (due largely to bad design.) Naturally, some Linux fan-boys are going to lose their heads over this, but I go back to the question; do Linux developers have no taste? Seriously. Are you unable to see badly rendered fonts? When you want to do something relatively common, which on Windows or Mac takes a click or two, but on Linux takes a list of dozens of detailed instructions, don't you ask why? Don't you use GDB and wonder why it sucks so bad?
Joe Woodbury wrote:
No, it's worse than that; they praise the crap applications. Endlessly. And if you criticize the apps, you get heaps of denial.
Most of those apps were written by 'enthousiasts' in their spare time; naturally they defend it more than a commercial developer who creates what is in the spec. On Windows there was also an earlier focus on UI than on Linux, partially thanks to (I hate to say it) Visual Basic 6 and MS Access. Means said commercial dev had specs that included a UI, while the hobbyist on Linux was trying to figure out to make a UI for X-windows, Gnome, KDE, or simply give up.
Joe Woodbury wrote:
"Yeah, but what about Windows 8," is a typical comeback.
Lesson number one is that you don't argue about UI with anyone using "M$" as a reference to Microsoft. Simply don't go there.
Joe Woodbury wrote:
Then there's git, which is the worse version control system I've used since Visual Source Safe.
TeamSource. Never found anything to match it.
Joe Woodbury wrote:
Are you unable to see badly rendered fonts?
I spent weeks on getting an installer to work on Linux, and it 'works'* - I could care less about how it renders its font in the installer, I don't even want to know. *) as in, works on my machine and similar machines. Depending on your mono-configuration things might blow up in spectacular ways I could not imagine.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
-
Git was written by Linus Torvalds, the main guy of Linux. So using Linux to gripe about Git is entirely appropriate. BASH is not a GUI. Maybe a TUI.
Nathan Minier wrote:
getting what you paid for
Do these guys (of the gotten software) have no pride of workmanship?
#SupportHeForShe Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
TheGreatAndPowerfulOz wrote:
BASH is not a GUI.
I think that was Nathan's point. Linux as an OS does not have a GUI. Linux desktop distros include one (or more) GUI's. So if you're complaining about the GUI you shouldn't be calling out Linux iteself - complain about the specific GUI.
There are two types of people in this world: those that pronounce GIF with a soft G, and those who do not deserve to speak words, ever.
-
Git was written by Linus Torvalds, the main guy of Linux. So using Linux to gripe about Git is entirely appropriate. BASH is not a GUI. Maybe a TUI.
Nathan Minier wrote:
getting what you paid for
Do these guys (of the gotten software) have no pride of workmanship?
#SupportHeForShe Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
> TheGreatAndPowerfulOz wrote: >Git was written by Linus Torvalds, the main guy of Linux. So using Linux to gripe about Git is entirely appropriate. They are completely separate products. One does not beget the other, so I can't agree. That's almost exactly like saying that Windows sucks because of Team Foundation. >BASH is not a GUI. Maybe a TUI. ...that was kind of the point. >Do these guys (of the gotten software) have no pride of workmanship? So you're saying that you've looked at every package, deemed it all to be low quality and have determined that the devs therefore have no pride? That's pretty awesome, you must be the best versed Linux guy on the planet. All I'm saying is that people shouldn't gripe when a screwdriver isn't terribly good at pounding in nails.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli
-
Out of curiosity, why did you troll Linux users primarily to gripe about Git? I mean, I get it, Git can be exceptionally obtuse, but that has nothing to do with your post. Anyway, the GUI on Linux is called BASH. If you're using anything else and griping about it, then your problem isn't with Linux, it's with KDE/Gnome/Whatever. As far as software goes, if you're not writing it yourself then you're getting what you paid for. As a plus, you can generally crack open the Github page and see for yourself.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli
git has everything to do with my post. It's awful software and is emblematic of bad taste. Try raising legitimate issues with git on Linux developer forums and you'll be flamed. Hell, half the time you ask a legitimate QUESTION, you get flamed. (BTW, for those who have to use git, here is the best introduction I've seen: git - the simple guide - no deep shit![^])
-
> TheGreatAndPowerfulOz wrote: >Git was written by Linus Torvalds, the main guy of Linux. So using Linux to gripe about Git is entirely appropriate. They are completely separate products. One does not beget the other, so I can't agree. That's almost exactly like saying that Windows sucks because of Team Foundation. >BASH is not a GUI. Maybe a TUI. ...that was kind of the point. >Do these guys (of the gotten software) have no pride of workmanship? So you're saying that you've looked at every package, deemed it all to be low quality and have determined that the devs therefore have no pride? That's pretty awesome, you must be the best versed Linux guy on the planet. All I'm saying is that people shouldn't gripe when a screwdriver isn't terribly good at pounding in nails.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli
You are missing the point and doing what most Linux apologists do--deflect. From my perspective, most Linux developers have bad taste from the kernel to the GUI and it's all related. The very attitude that "BASH is the GUI, get used to it" illustrates the problem. Why is it a positive do so something with 30 consecutive commands in BASH versus one or two in a Windows prompt? You know what's funny? Bringing over a Linux guru, doing something quick in Windows and asking "Now how do you do that in Linux." Then watching them open a shell and start typing furiously for five minutes. Yes, that just happened to me this past Friday (and it not only didn't quite do what I wanted to do in Windows, I ended up fixing the problem in Windows!)
-
TheGreatAndPowerfulOz wrote:
BASH is not a GUI.
I think that was Nathan's point. Linux as an OS does not have a GUI. Linux desktop distros include one (or more) GUI's. So if you're complaining about the GUI you shouldn't be calling out Linux iteself - complain about the specific GUI.
There are two types of people in this world: those that pronounce GIF with a soft G, and those who do not deserve to speak words, ever.
Point taken. Although, Linus is apparently working on a Linux GUI: Linux can still beat Windows in the desktop war, and Linus Torvalds is 'working on it'[^]
#SupportHeForShe Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
-
Point taken. Although, Linus is apparently working on a Linux GUI: Linux can still beat Windows in the desktop war, and Linus Torvalds is 'working on it'[^]
#SupportHeForShe Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
-
After working for decades on Windows, I took the plunge into Linux for my current job. What baffles me the most is how accepting Linux developers in general are of all the crap applications. No, it's worse than that; they praise the crap applications. Endlessly. And if you criticize the apps, you get heaps of denial. Then there are the UIs written by the clueless. "Yeah, but what about Windows 8," is a typical comeback. There are some superficial design choices not everyone likes in Windows 8 (mostly the start menu and lack of Aero--I don't mind either and now turn off Aero when I have to use Windows 7.) Beyond that, the UI is very consistent, renders extremely well and is magnitudes more stable than any GUI on Linux. Then there's git, which is the worse version control system I've used since Visual Source Safe. The proponents tout the rich feature set of git, ignoring the fact that the rich feature set is there to get around all the problems of a fundamentally flawed design. I work with three, honest-to-God, git experts, but a day doesn't go by when one of them says, while using it or helping someone, "Oops, I don't know what happened there." Often followed by, "this makes no sense, but you have to create a branch...." Then there's moving files via "git mv" which git later "decides" were deleted and recreated. And don't get me started on all its errors with rebases and merges (due largely to bad design.) Naturally, some Linux fan-boys are going to lose their heads over this, but I go back to the question; do Linux developers have no taste? Seriously. Are you unable to see badly rendered fonts? When you want to do something relatively common, which on Windows or Mac takes a click or two, but on Linux takes a list of dozens of detailed instructions, don't you ask why? Don't you use GDB and wonder why it sucks so bad?
-
> TheGreatAndPowerfulOz wrote: >Git was written by Linus Torvalds, the main guy of Linux. So using Linux to gripe about Git is entirely appropriate. They are completely separate products. One does not beget the other, so I can't agree. That's almost exactly like saying that Windows sucks because of Team Foundation. >BASH is not a GUI. Maybe a TUI. ...that was kind of the point. >Do these guys (of the gotten software) have no pride of workmanship? So you're saying that you've looked at every package, deemed it all to be low quality and have determined that the devs therefore have no pride? That's pretty awesome, you must be the best versed Linux guy on the planet. All I'm saying is that people shouldn't gripe when a screwdriver isn't terribly good at pounding in nails.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli
Nathan Minier wrote:
They are completely separate products. One does not beget the other
So what? They had the same father, ergo the same problem: crap!
Nathan Minier wrote:
the point
I got that, now. :-O However, that's the part of the problem. BASH is it, get used to it. That attitude is why most linux software is crap.
Nathan Minier wrote:
So you're saying that you've looked at every package,
No, but I've looked at enough to see a general pattern.
Nathan Minier wrote:
All I'm saying is that people shouldn't gripe when a screwdriver isn't terribly good at pounding in nails.
Nice metaphor, but not at all what's being griped about.
#SupportHeForShe Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
-
I saw that article. My take away was not that Torvalds was working on an actual GUI though.
There are two types of people in this world: those that pronounce GIF with a soft G, and those who do not deserve to speak words, ever.
You could be right. Even if he were, I'm not sure it'd be any good.
#SupportHeForShe Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
-
You are missing the point and doing what most Linux apologists do--deflect. From my perspective, most Linux developers have bad taste from the kernel to the GUI and it's all related. The very attitude that "BASH is the GUI, get used to it" illustrates the problem. Why is it a positive do so something with 30 consecutive commands in BASH versus one or two in a Windows prompt? You know what's funny? Bringing over a Linux guru, doing something quick in Windows and asking "Now how do you do that in Linux." Then watching them open a shell and start typing furiously for five minutes. Yes, that just happened to me this past Friday (and it not only didn't quite do what I wanted to do in Windows, I ended up fixing the problem in Windows!)
I think you're missing a point as well. The comment wasn't so much "BASH is the GUI, get used to it." It was "If you have a problem with a Linux based GUI such as KDE or Gnome why blame the kernel (Linux)?" Some (most?) Linux gurus are purists in that the OS should handle the basic file system and hardware interfaces and that the GUI (if one even exists) is a separate entity. Remember DOS and Windows 3.x? Similar situation. As for doing something quick in Windows versus command line stuff in Linux... all depends on what you're doing. There are some things you can do via command line (Windows / Apple / Linux) that have no analog in the GUI.
There are two types of people in this world: those that pronounce GIF with a soft G, and those who do not deserve to speak words, ever.
-
You are missing the point and doing what most Linux apologists do--deflect. From my perspective, most Linux developers have bad taste from the kernel to the GUI and it's all related. The very attitude that "BASH is the GUI, get used to it" illustrates the problem. Why is it a positive do so something with 30 consecutive commands in BASH versus one or two in a Windows prompt? You know what's funny? Bringing over a Linux guru, doing something quick in Windows and asking "Now how do you do that in Linux." Then watching them open a shell and start typing furiously for five minutes. Yes, that just happened to me this past Friday (and it not only didn't quite do what I wanted to do in Windows, I ended up fixing the problem in Windows!)
Not deflecting a thing; making a point. You don't use Linux for the same things as you would Windows. You use it to minimize the system footprint and for scenarios that would be challenging-to-impossible on a Windows machine. Try playing with varied multi-key encryption schemes on a logical volume in Windows for use on an ARM rig with RAM in the MBs and you'll learn that quickly. Or running a server with flexible firewall configurations based on state management. Or a single-machine LAN on no budget. If you need something trivial and in the box, then of course Windows is easier. What you get with Linux is a granularized platform with finer operational control. Powershell comes close, but doesn't quite hit the mark on that. And if understanding the appropriate tool for the appropriate job is being an apologist, then I suppose I'm guilty of that much.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli
-
I used to be a Git hater too. It takes a while to understand it but I would not want to go back. As for the guys claiming to be experts, they probably keep up with the Kardashians... Its one thing to say you're an expert and another to demonstrate it. Don't give up on Git too soon.
Hogan
snorkie wrote:
Its one thing to say you're an expert and another to demonstrate it.
This is one of my complaints; arguing that the expert really isn't so and therefore the criticism isn't valid is a form of ad hominem argument. It's a form of deflection (so is pretending that a criticism of Linux is about GUIs, not Linux itself or git.) For the record, they never claimed to be experts; I've observed them and am smart enough to separate the novices from the experts.) Interestingly, the more-or-less opposite of ad homimem logical fallacy is Appeal to Authority, another common problem. BTW, from a business perspective git has been a disaster. The cost in time has vastly exceeded the price for just about any competing commercial product and those costs will keep mounting. (The two bright spots are SourceTree, which is a very well written git GUI, and that we may persuade the powers that be to switch to GitLab, which will help the process flow.)
-
Nathan Minier wrote:
They are completely separate products. One does not beget the other
So what? They had the same father, ergo the same problem: crap!
Nathan Minier wrote:
the point
I got that, now. :-O However, that's the part of the problem. BASH is it, get used to it. That attitude is why most linux software is crap.
Nathan Minier wrote:
So you're saying that you've looked at every package,
No, but I've looked at enough to see a general pattern.
Nathan Minier wrote:
All I'm saying is that people shouldn't gripe when a screwdriver isn't terribly good at pounding in nails.
Nice metaphor, but not at all what's being griped about.
#SupportHeForShe Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
>TheGreatAndPowerfulOz wrote: >Nice metaphor, but not at all what's being griped about. Yeah. It is.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli
-
>TheGreatAndPowerfulOz wrote: >Nice metaphor, but not at all what's being griped about. Yeah. It is.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli
nanner nanner :(( :rolleyes:
#SupportHeForShe Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun