Shame it's U.S. only. I didn't check to see if they ship over here (to the UK), but that's a sweet laptop and I really wanted to see a GBP price on that thing to compare to what I paid for my last big purchase back in 2016, the Dell XPS Developer Edition.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Two of my colleagues at work now have their Decks and are both Windows die-hards. They were both blown away by the gaming experience, expecting it to be a big sticking point, and expecting to be installing Windows on it. One of them said to me yesterday that they described my ranting about Linux as "the ravings of a mad man... but he was right!".

Sweet sweet validation.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: setimeseHi, guys.

Do you happen to know can I use Loupedeck Live under Linux?

I found it when searching for Elgato's stream deck alternatives, but the writer of the article https://streammentor.com/stream-deck-alternative/ [External Link] couldn't help me.

I thought of ordering it, but won't if it's noncompatible with Linux.

I doubt that would work. These Elgato devices are absolutely non-functional bricks without the software to drive them. For the Streamdeck that's either Boatswain or streamdeck-ui, but I don't see any mention of the Loupedeck in those tools. Audio controls would be a very different set of interfaces to support.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

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.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

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:

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: elmapulspeaking of hatsune miku, she IS creative commons, the character was made to be used by anyone, so they decided that change her licence to creative commmons was the logical thing to do:
https://creativecommons.org/2012/12/14/hatsune-miku-joins-the-cc-community/ [External Link]
unfortunatelly its non comercial, you need an special licence to do anything comercial with her (wich is kind of a good thing, it may be impossible to make an game with such a quality without some kind of exclusivity of the use of the characters, not to mention they need to licence the song so composers get paid anyway)

considering that miku is creative commons, pairing her with linux make a lot of sense, it was an "crime" an "heresy" that this didnt happen before, but this is finally being fixed.

Well, steady now. It's Deck-ready, but still uses Proton. And it's got Denuvo anti-tamper, so it's a straight no for me. Looks like fun though, and I do enjoy a rhythm game. Might pick it up if they ever remove the anti-tamper.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: mr-victory

Quoting: scaineOn Endeavour, I type the password after BIOS and sit patiently for about 30 seconds while... something... happens.

Most probably GRUB does the deceyption and GRUB lacks acceleration, (I don't know what exactly it lacks) increasing boot time.

Yep. I didn't want to go into the detail, but that's exactly what's happening. On Ubuntu, they quite rightly don't LUKS /boot, so you get a nice plymouth-based decrypt prompt and it's fast - really fast. But on Endeavour they also LUKS the /boot partition and a) it's slow and b) looks like shit because it's pre-plymouth. Stupid solution. More secure? Sure. But goddam, I'm not an MI5 agent. I just want to secure my /home - I wouldn't even bother with LUKS at all if they still had /home encryption... I forget what that was called, but it was found to be vulnerable, so LUKS it is.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Purple Library GuyFalse premise on two levels. First, if I perceive Snaps as something that will mess with the workability of my computer, I'm going to care even if I'm not technical. I'm not sure about that, but I do wonder.

It's not a false premise if you just want to use your computer, which was your example. And I agree - my example is my wife who has no idea if she's on a snap, a flatpak or deb. She just wants to use her PC. Snaps are irrelevant to her.

Quoting: Purple Library GuySecond, if I have a political interest in openness, open source, and decentralization of power, I might care about the way Ubuntu does Snaps. And in fact I do have such a political interest.

Again, sure, but that's not what you said and what I responded to. You were being "just a computer user". And I agree with you - if you care about this stuff, that changes everything.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: scaineI agree with all of that... but it's not really relevant here, is it? His point was that if you care, you can't turn off snaps. But as a computer user (as you put it), why would you care? Just use the computer. That's what Ubuntu is good at - getting out of the way and just working.

E.g. because your primary daily driver, the browser, starts slower?

Sure, yeah. But a) only the very first time after boot and b) it's already fixed according to an earlier comment. These things get blown out of proportion, I think. Right now, for example, I'm using a LUKS-encrypted drive I ticked a box for in my Endeavour OS install. On Pop and Ubuntu, that means I type a password after the BIOS and then again to log into my desktop. On Endeavour, I type the password after BIOS and sit patiently for about 30 seconds while... something... happens. It's annoying, but... it's once a day at the most. It's a shitty design decision, but it's hardly a deal breaker.

Narrator: This was a deal-breaker. Scaine is moving back to Pop_OS at some point over the coming summer.

Okay, so yes, I'll be moving back to Pop_OS, and yes the shitty boot sequence is a contributing factor. But it's not the only reason. These things do get blown out of proportion a fair bit. I've really enjoyed my time on Endeavour.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: ShabbyX

Quoting: Lycurgus87And learn to use your system, because probably (about 99%) you are the problem, not your machine, nor the software.

Oh no no no, never say that. Take any device (a computer, a door, a hose, whatever), and if most users have trouble using it, that's definitely a design flaw of the device.

Here, see this: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yY96hTb8WgI [External Link]

At work we've got, on a single walk through a single floor, doors that
* are just opened manually,
* must be opened manually, but only after you show your entrance card to some device,
* open automatically after you show your entrance card to some device, and must not be moved by the handle they've got, because otherwise, most probably, world explodes.

Please, if you constructed a door so stupidly that it must not be moved by its handle, AT LEAST DON'T GIVE IT A FU**ING HANDLE!

At our work, we do have quite a few doors with pull-handles that are push. At least the opposite isn't true, I suppose! But it does make me wonder what people are thinking when they put doors up. This isn't brain surgery you know? If you need to push a door to open it, why does it feature a pull handle?? Infuriating.

View this comment - View article - View full comments