Quoting: scaine

Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: scaine

Quoting: slaapliedjeI knid of think of the story of the rabbit and the turtle. Canonical is the rabbit in this, trying to hurry up and get to the end without all the planning and development, so they can get something out quicker, but is a mess underneath. Where Redhat is slow and methodical and ends up winning in the end.

Wow, more casual Ubuntu-bashing, eh? Upstart replaced the SystemV init system in 2006 and was used by various distributions (including Redhat, ffs) for about 7 or 8 years. It was instrumental in pushing the start up times of Linux from the 30sec+ norm in those days to the sub-10s we have now. Iteratively, it was surpassed by SystemD and that's fine. That's good, that's what makes Linux better, over time. Upstart wasn't "a mess underneath", nor was Mir, nor Unity, nor Snap, nor many of the other truly exceptional, innovative things Canonical have contributed over the decades they've been around.

Occasionally they did indeed put out duds. That's also fine. As long as we're all running Linux, we're all in this together.

Although from the comments on this thread, you'd hardly fucking think it. :sad:

The problem with Ubuntu is they think of people as Ubuntu users, not as Linux users. Upstart was used briefly in Fedora, It was never used in RHEL. Snap is a mess. Unity was... meh.

Briefly? Like 5 releases briefly? I've never thought of five years as a brief time, I have to admit. It was also a beta option in RHEL for a similar time, but you're right, it was never adopted, since start-up time on a server O/S is pretty insignificant compared to the POST checks in most Enterprise environments. I vaguely remember Debian considering it too, for quite a while, but I can't remember their reasons for not adopting it. Back then, their focus was and still to a large is, servers.

But anyway, my point is that Upstart was very well thought out - a fully asynchronous service management/init system with a simple interface, massively extendable, yet completely backwards compatible with SysV.

Snap is a mess, is it? Based on what?

Unity was meh? Based on... ah, okay. Your opinion, I suppose, which is fair enough. Opinions differ. Mine was/is that Unity is a great example of Canonical's innovation - reacting to the options in front of them at the time and, crucially, doing something about it. Back then (around 2010), Gnome Shell - now that was a mess. A wholly forced, non-configurable change in workflow. Canonical had to react to that, and Unity was born. It was a brilliant half-way house between gnome 2 and shell. It was, itself, also a bit shitty until the 2012 releases, but that's iterative development for you.

Also back then, remember, Canonical were pushing the idea of a converged mobile & desktop experience. The "Edge" phone was coming, powered by Unity. Incredible vision, when you realise this was twelve years ago. I remember being blown away by the possibility of using my phone as a dashboard screen on my desktop, and resizing, mobile-aware apps - something we take a little more for granted these days, but absolutely mind-blowing at the time.

But I doubt any of this is convincing you, slaapliedje. Pretty sure you've made up your mind about Canonical for reasons I certainly can't fathom. But there's some context for why I'm repeatedly impressed by Canonical and what they've brought to the Linux desktop.

5 releases of Fedora is 2.5 years, as they do about 6-ish months. And yeah when you're my age, 2.5 years is nothing.

Evidence of snaps being a mess? Just look at what everyone says about their slow performance, their singular store source, the fact they've had crypto mining bits hidden in programs uploaded.

Anyhow, I, nor anyone else, needs to justify to random people online why we don't use Ubuntu, just as much as you don't need to justify why you'd use it. It's my own personal belief that Ubuntu was, as their mission statement said (yes I was there at the beginning of it) was to create a 6 month release of Debian based upon the Gnome desktop was later on ditched and became just another 'based on Debian' distro for me. So I moved back to using Debian and have enjoyed not having any proprietary software installed on my system in a method other than the one I choose myself.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: scaine

Quoting: slaapliedjeI knid of think of the story of the rabbit and the turtle. Canonical is the rabbit in this, trying to hurry up and get to the end without all the planning and development, so they can get something out quicker, but is a mess underneath. Where Redhat is slow and methodical and ends up winning in the end.

Wow, more casual Ubuntu-bashing, eh? Upstart replaced the SystemV init system in 2006 and was used by various distributions (including Redhat, ffs) for about 7 or 8 years. It was instrumental in pushing the start up times of Linux from the 30sec+ norm in those days to the sub-10s we have now. Iteratively, it was surpassed by SystemD and that's fine. That's good, that's what makes Linux better, over time. Upstart wasn't "a mess underneath", nor was Mir, nor Unity, nor Snap, nor many of the other truly exceptional, innovative things Canonical have contributed over the decades they've been around.

Occasionally they did indeed put out duds. That's also fine. As long as we're all running Linux, we're all in this together.

Although from the comments on this thread, you'd hardly fucking think it. :sad:

The problem with Ubuntu is they think of people as Ubuntu users, not as Linux users. Upstart was used briefly in Fedora, It was never used in RHEL. Snap is a mess. Unity was... meh.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: AciDWeirdly, it's still pretty hard to find a good 13in laptop with 32GB of ram.
I'm loving my XPS13, but 16GB is too short when running VMs, IDEs, and heaps of apps.

Still, it's not possible to get the 32GB ram version with Linux, only with Windows...

Is that where you get a fatty tower to run you vms on remotely? 😀

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Liam Dawe

Quoting: ssj17vegetaDamn those lazy devs who don't care to do the bloody job themselves. Do native ports goddamn it !

It’s not laziness not to want to spend time on a still tiny niche of gamers. Let’s not say things like this huh? The Steam Deck May change things but that’s still a long time away.

More like shoddy decisions that make native ports less viable. Whether it is choice of engine, third party video codecs, or just the choice of not wanting to support various operating systems.
I do find it amusing that smaller porting houses are fully capable of releasing and maintaining native Linux and mac ports... but then the big ones like Ubisoft can't be bothered. Granted that is a numbers game. 'Oh, we could sell 1 million more copies? Meh, we are looking at the 100 million...' where the potential for smaller devs is worth it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Craggles086So I had more complaints about Ubuntu's use of Snaps then I ever had of Mir.

Ubuntu put some early work into Wayland if I remember correctly before Wayland was on anyones radar, before they decided that Mir was more suited to their purposes.

Would have been nice to see more support for Mir on the desktop from the open source community when Mir and Wayland looked like they were competing against similar goals. Good things have come out of a bit of competition, even in the open source community. Just look at gnome vs kde.

As far as Ubuntu being the source of the NIH philosophy, wasn't SystemD a bit of NIH from the Fedora / Redhat team, and now it is incorporated throughout most of Linux?

Depends on how you look at it... upstart was a thing, but wasn't something that seemed either good enough, or widely tested enough for all the other distributions to adopt. Plus it literally only covered init, whereas systemd covers much more. Systemd for example has some watchdog like elements to it.
Canonical only has a small team of developers, IBM/Redhat have tons more, and if there is a core project out there for Linux stuff, it seems like redhat's hands are in it at some level.
I knid of think of the story of the rabbit and the turtle. Canonical is the rabbit in this, trying to hurry up and get to the end without all the planning and development, so they can get something out quicker, but is a mess underneath. Where Redhat is slow and methodical and ends up winning in the end.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Does something like this also support cloud saves?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: 1xok

Quoting: slaapliedjeLet's be honest here... SteamOS for generic hardware DOES NOT MATTER.

I think for PC handhelds, the user interface of SteamOS is currently by far the most comfortable. And exactly what end users expect. Whether things like suspend/resume work on any hardware, I have my doubts. But other manufacturers are currently moving in the direction of Zen/RDNA2.

Valve itself has communicated the plan to open SteamOS especially for comparable devices. Valve earns its money with software and especially with Steam. It is important for them that people use Steam. And SteamOS takes care of that. Openness or not: Most people stay in the bed they fell into.

So I'm pretty sure SteamOS will still be released separately from Steam Deck. Valve wants to create a standard for PC handhelds. A standard that is synonymous with Steam.

Yes, and I am betting any ol' PC eill eventually be able to run it as well. So people can build their own Steam Machines. The upcoming Zen architecture seems to be just awesome for it. And with how hard it is still to get PS5s and Xboxes, getting a consolized computer may be a better option.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: Comandante ÑoñardoSO... No release for Linux desktops yet? :angry:

I'm starting to think it may never happen. Consider: With SteamOS just for the Steam Deck, that single hardware target, there's a whole lot of stuff Valve don't need to worry about that a normal desktop distro does. Plus, they have various features designed to let you easily manipulate that particular hardware, which might need work to get running on other hardware or might not apply at all.
How strongly are they gonna be motivated to put in a bunch of extra effort making SteamOS fit for the broad spectrum of PC hardware, when that doesn't particularly advance their agenda and they have plenty of work to do that's more directly useful to them (verifying games, improving SteamOS on the Deck itself, improving Proton and other enabling technologies)? Maybe not very.

Let's be honest here... SteamOS for generic hardware DOES NOT MATTER. Any Linux distro can 100% be stripped down / tweaked with ease to provide tge same, or very similar experience to the Steam Deck.

That said... it would make it much easier if we didn't have to go through that effort and had an official way to take generic hardware and slap SteamOS on it. Though with the variety of controls the Steam Deck has... we would likely need a Steam Controller 2.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: akselmo

Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: akselmoStunning! I lost my saves recently due to switching from Kubuntu to Fedora, so I suppose it's time to start it all over again.. With shinies! :)

This is why I always have a separate /home partition... also make backups!

I did take backups.. Everything except the Morrowind saves! :'D

I'm in the same boat with a few games. Like I was really far in Neverwinter nights, and lost the saves. I beat the original Morrowind back in the day... but never the expansions, and didn't want to start over again...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: soulsourceThat'S good news. My girlfriend keeps complaining about the "whining" of the Steam Deck...

So she's... whining about it? ;)

But to be serious: Such sounds can be very annoying.

Creates a whine tunnel.

View this comment - View article - View full comments