For a while now, I have been posting a number of rants that explain why it is I use Windows XP instead of Linux today on my desktop.
I have decided to no longer post these kinds of rants. I have made my decision; my desktop now runs Windows XP. [1] This does not mean I hate Linux. It's an excellent server OS and embedded OS.
My primary concern right now is not what operating system I use on my computer.
My primary concern is to find a good job in California and to be closer to my family and make good money again. If my 14 years of using Linux can help me do this, great. If I get a job as a .net developer or Windows sys admin, great. If I completely leave the tech industry and get a job as a professional translator or teaching ESL, great.
I think working on Deadwood and getting MaraDNS 2.0 out the door may help me accomplish this goal. Even if not, I have a lot of free time because of my current work situation (part-time work, with a lot of dead time between translations and when the computers are just happily humming along), so it gives me something to do that is more productive than, say, arguing on Slashdot. [2] And, hopefully, something that helps people and makes the world a slightly better place.
I was listening to CNN recently, and they were talking about how a lot of people unemployed because of the crisis are doing a lot of volunteer work to pass the time and help people. Deadwood and MaraDNS 2.0 is my volunteer project during this economic downturn.
- Sam
[1] I have a CentOS 5 VMware virtual machine I use for Deadwood/MaraDNS development. I also have a CentOS 5 Linux partition I boot into for 64-bit testing and to use as a music player to listen to music at night every now and then. I can't use it for much more because my hardware isn't fully supported, even though I did buy a Linux laptop.
[2] Slashdot was a big time sink for me back when I was a Linux fanatic. I would spend hours on Slashdot instead of doing useful things like work on open-source projects. One of the reasons I have spent a lot of effort justifying my decision to use Windows XP on the desktop is because I was justifying, to the person I was a decade ago, why I made this decision.
Showing posts with label Linux sucks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Linux sucks. Show all posts
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
2002: The year Linux on the desktop died
People keep talking about there soon being the "year of the Linux desktop". I've seen this prediction for at least a decade. This prediction will never become true. Indeed, Linux on the desktop died in 2002.
There are three events in 2002 that killed Linux ever having any chance of making it on the desktop:
Sure, it didn't have a very friendly user interface, but for people who took the time and effort to learn it, it was a very powerful and stable system. Indeed, in the mid-1990s, after spending an hour trying to log in to our UNIX server at work from Windows and failing, I said "there has to be a better way", and installed Slackware 96 on my computer at work. This computer became a Linux server that I used to process reports and perform other tasks; it eventually was upgraded to RedHat 4.2 (with the FVWM1 windows manager) and the server was still up after I left the company until the company was bought out. At no cost, the company I worked at had a very capable workgroup server in our office.
I was sure Linux would some day become more friendly on the desktop and people would start buying Linux applications in droves. Indeed, in part to support the Linux cause, and in part to have a nice office suite on my desktop, I bought a lot of applications for Linux. I bought commercial versions of Red Hat Linux, I bought both versions of Wordperfect that were made for Linux, I bought another office suite called "ApplixWare", I bought another spreadsheet and database for Linux, and I bought a lot of Loki games for Linux, including games I never played.
Sure, it was a cottage industry, but there was a definite market for Linux software out there.
This market died in the early 2000s. Corel bet the ship on Linux succeeding on the desktop in 1999; it didn't and Corel went down in flames as a result. With both Mac OS and Windows updated to have Linux's stability, what little market there was for commercial Linux software all but evaporated.
Wordperfect is no longer available for Linux. Corel is no longer available for Linux. Loki Games died in 2002 and I think Quake 4 was the last commercial game with a Linux port (John Carmack has talked about moving away from OpenGL, and it looks like ID Games, the last holdout for commercial Linux games [1], never made a Linux port of their latest game, Quake Live)
Applixware is still around, but in a much-reduced form; it's no longer for retail sale but exists as a "download-then-register" product. They appear to be targeting enterprise desktops (what were called "Workstations" in the 1980s and 1990s), and no longer target the end-user desktop.
There is no market for Linux desktop applications today. If you want to make money selling desktop software, Linux is not the platform to target.
So, why is there still a lot of noise about Linux on the desktop in the internet?
It's like the Amiga in the 1990s. The Amiga died in 1992 when Commodore stopped making this computer. No matter that there were still people with Amigas on their desktops, using Amigas for professional work as recently as 1997. The Amiga was dead in the marketplace: No one was making any money selling Amigas any more, and indeed, you could no longer buy a new Amiga.
People kept talking about the return of the Amiga in the 1990s, but it never happened. People keep talking about the year of the Linux desktop in the 2000s, but it is never going to happen.
[1] For years ID games were available for Linux: Doom, Quake, Quake II, Quake III, etc., but this seems to have finally stopped.
There are three events in 2002 that killed Linux ever having any chance of making it on the desktop:
- Mac OS X was out and getting application support; UNIX was finally on the desktop (and it wasn't Linux)
- Windows XP came out: Microsoft finally had an OS for end-user desktops with server-level stability
- Loki games, a company that made games for Linux, went out of business. This was the final nail in the coffin for commercial desktop applications for Linux
Sure, it didn't have a very friendly user interface, but for people who took the time and effort to learn it, it was a very powerful and stable system. Indeed, in the mid-1990s, after spending an hour trying to log in to our UNIX server at work from Windows and failing, I said "there has to be a better way", and installed Slackware 96 on my computer at work. This computer became a Linux server that I used to process reports and perform other tasks; it eventually was upgraded to RedHat 4.2 (with the FVWM1 windows manager) and the server was still up after I left the company until the company was bought out. At no cost, the company I worked at had a very capable workgroup server in our office.
I was sure Linux would some day become more friendly on the desktop and people would start buying Linux applications in droves. Indeed, in part to support the Linux cause, and in part to have a nice office suite on my desktop, I bought a lot of applications for Linux. I bought commercial versions of Red Hat Linux, I bought both versions of Wordperfect that were made for Linux, I bought another office suite called "ApplixWare", I bought another spreadsheet and database for Linux, and I bought a lot of Loki games for Linux, including games I never played.
Sure, it was a cottage industry, but there was a definite market for Linux software out there.
This market died in the early 2000s. Corel bet the ship on Linux succeeding on the desktop in 1999; it didn't and Corel went down in flames as a result. With both Mac OS and Windows updated to have Linux's stability, what little market there was for commercial Linux software all but evaporated.
Wordperfect is no longer available for Linux. Corel is no longer available for Linux. Loki Games died in 2002 and I think Quake 4 was the last commercial game with a Linux port (John Carmack has talked about moving away from OpenGL, and it looks like ID Games, the last holdout for commercial Linux games [1], never made a Linux port of their latest game, Quake Live)
Applixware is still around, but in a much-reduced form; it's no longer for retail sale but exists as a "download-then-register" product. They appear to be targeting enterprise desktops (what were called "Workstations" in the 1980s and 1990s), and no longer target the end-user desktop.
There is no market for Linux desktop applications today. If you want to make money selling desktop software, Linux is not the platform to target.
So, why is there still a lot of noise about Linux on the desktop in the internet?
It's like the Amiga in the 1990s. The Amiga died in 1992 when Commodore stopped making this computer. No matter that there were still people with Amigas on their desktops, using Amigas for professional work as recently as 1997. The Amiga was dead in the marketplace: No one was making any money selling Amigas any more, and indeed, you could no longer buy a new Amiga.
People kept talking about the return of the Amiga in the 1990s, but it never happened. People keep talking about the year of the Linux desktop in the 2000s, but it is never going to happen.
[1] For years ID games were available for Linux: Doom, Quake, Quake II, Quake III, etc., but this seems to have finally stopped.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Deadwood (MaraDNS) roadmap
Now that Deadwood 2.3.01 is out, I spent the last day coming up with plans of what to do with this code. One plan I had was to add this code to Busybox, but the code is far too big to be a Busybox module, and making it small enough to run in Busybox is more bother than it's worth.
Quite frankly, I'm moving away from Linux. I have spent over eight years working my butt off on MaraDNS for Linux and have some small donations and a free web hosting provider to show for it. I have only gotten one job interview for MaraDNS (with Google), which didn't pan out. During interviews, when I say I'm the MaraDNS guy, I get the "What's MaraDNS?" response.
The thing I don't like about Linux is its cult-like belief system. There is an idea that people making digital media of any kind (music, movies, computer programs, video games, art, etc.) should do all of their work for fun and for free, and that people will somehow magically get money for their work (musicians should earn 100% of their money from concerts, open-source programmers can get better jobs because of the positive reputation their open-source project, people can make money from services and support, etc.)
Well, I've been in the trenches. It's more like this: If you have an email address on your web page, you get all kinds of inane feature requests and bug reports for fixed bugs in old versions of the program added to some Linux or BSD distribution. People send emails sending veiled threats demanding I support them or add the feature they want or they will no longer use my program (see this Slashdot posting for an example of this kind of attitude). People send incomplete bug reports and don't follow up when I ask for more information to reproduce the problem.
Money? Not very much. I finally, last year, cut off private email support then set up a "pay me if you want features or an unsupported OS supported" model. This worked; I even get some pocket change from people willing to sponsor me (see my list of MaraDNS sponsors).
At this point, I don't do private email support without being paid for my time. I don't add feature requests without being paid for my time. I don't support any OS besides CentOS 5 and Windows XP (with some pointers for Vista users) without being paid for my time.
I feel, on some level, like Eric Scheibeler did after moving beyond Amway (I'm right now reading his excellent book Merchants of Deception). I feel I am finally moving beyond a big lie I have been living for well over a decade.
That said, I am still working on Deadwood. Because of my current work situation, I have a lot of free time, and I still want to get a MaraDNS 2.0 out there. But, my focus has changed. MaraDNS 2.0 will have far better Windows support than older versions of MaraDNS, because, quite frankly, Windows is where most of the users are, and, yes, where most of the money is.
OK, now that I got that out of my system, what is my plan for Deadwood? Well, the next thing I want to implement is more tightly integrating the TCP and UDP code. I want Deadwood to be able to get TCP answers from the cache, and to be able to send a TCP query when getting a truncated response from upstream.
After that, I want to make it possible to have upstream_servers for hostnames besides the root hostname (".").
Then I should take MaraDNS' DNS compression and decompression code and port it to Deadwood's codebase.
Next, I can think about TTL aging and resource record rotation.
Then I can concentrate on real recursion.
There's a lot to be done with Deadwood.
Quite frankly, I'm moving away from Linux. I have spent over eight years working my butt off on MaraDNS for Linux and have some small donations and a free web hosting provider to show for it. I have only gotten one job interview for MaraDNS (with Google), which didn't pan out. During interviews, when I say I'm the MaraDNS guy, I get the "What's MaraDNS?" response.
The thing I don't like about Linux is its cult-like belief system. There is an idea that people making digital media of any kind (music, movies, computer programs, video games, art, etc.) should do all of their work for fun and for free, and that people will somehow magically get money for their work (musicians should earn 100% of their money from concerts, open-source programmers can get better jobs because of the positive reputation their open-source project, people can make money from services and support, etc.)
Well, I've been in the trenches. It's more like this: If you have an email address on your web page, you get all kinds of inane feature requests and bug reports for fixed bugs in old versions of the program added to some Linux or BSD distribution. People send emails sending veiled threats demanding I support them or add the feature they want or they will no longer use my program (see this Slashdot posting for an example of this kind of attitude). People send incomplete bug reports and don't follow up when I ask for more information to reproduce the problem.
Money? Not very much. I finally, last year, cut off private email support then set up a "pay me if you want features or an unsupported OS supported" model. This worked; I even get some pocket change from people willing to sponsor me (see my list of MaraDNS sponsors).
At this point, I don't do private email support without being paid for my time. I don't add feature requests without being paid for my time. I don't support any OS besides CentOS 5 and Windows XP (with some pointers for Vista users) without being paid for my time.
I feel, on some level, like Eric Scheibeler did after moving beyond Amway (I'm right now reading his excellent book Merchants of Deception). I feel I am finally moving beyond a big lie I have been living for well over a decade.
That said, I am still working on Deadwood. Because of my current work situation, I have a lot of free time, and I still want to get a MaraDNS 2.0 out there. But, my focus has changed. MaraDNS 2.0 will have far better Windows support than older versions of MaraDNS, because, quite frankly, Windows is where most of the users are, and, yes, where most of the money is.
OK, now that I got that out of my system, what is my plan for Deadwood? Well, the next thing I want to implement is more tightly integrating the TCP and UDP code. I want Deadwood to be able to get TCP answers from the cache, and to be able to send a TCP query when getting a truncated response from upstream.
After that, I want to make it possible to have upstream_servers for hostnames besides the root hostname (".").
Then I should take MaraDNS' DNS compression and decompression code and port it to Deadwood's codebase.
Next, I can think about TTL aging and resource record rotation.
Then I can concentrate on real recursion.
There's a lot to be done with Deadwood.
Friday, April 17, 2009
Why we will never have the year of the Linux desktop
The is a misconception Linux enthusiasts have that no one makes drivers for Linux because of the chicken-and-egg problem: Since everyone uses Windows, hardware makers only make drivers for Windows.
However, one fact Linux zealots ignore is that Linux is not a friendly place for people to make third party drivers.
The problem is that some Linux developers do not respect a company's desire to have trade secrets, and have an anti-corporate attitude that poisons Linux. I call this the "GPL religion", where some zealots believe that people who make money selling software are somehow evil.
Linux needs to let third parties make binary-only drivers for Linux for Linux to succeed on the desktop.
Here is an example of a kernel developer who is religiously opposed to binary drivers. From the linked article:
You think you want a stable kernel interface, but you really do not, and you don't even know it. What you want is a stable running driver, and you get that only if your driver is in the main kernel tree.
In the real world, I have three choices: I can use a stable Linux kernel without support for all of my hardware (CentOS 5), I can have an unstable Linux kernel with support for all of my hardware (Ubuntu), or I can use Microsoft Windows, which gives me both a stable kernel (Windows XP) and support for all of my hardware (since Windows is a friendly place for people to make third-party drivers).
Linux [is] such a strong, stable, and mature operating system which is the reason you are using it in the first place.
No, it's not. I am using Windows XP right now because Linux is not a usable desktop operating system.
Linux kernel development is continuous and at a rapid pace, never stopping to slow down. As such, the kernel developers find bugs in current interfaces, or figure out a better way to do things. If they do that, they then fix the current interfaces to work better.
This idiocy is what happens when engineers, not managers, drive development. Linux is about tweaking things and constantly breaking perfectly working software. If you want to use your computer to get work done, however, Linux is a horrible choice for a desktop OS.
Having an unstable interface is OK if the only drivers you have to worry about are the disk controller and NIC drivers (Linux in the server back room). It's a horrible choice if you want to have a sound card driver, a video card driver, a mouse driver, and all the other happy stuff that a desktop OS needs.
However, one fact Linux zealots ignore is that Linux is not a friendly place for people to make third party drivers.
The problem is that some Linux developers do not respect a company's desire to have trade secrets, and have an anti-corporate attitude that poisons Linux. I call this the "GPL religion", where some zealots believe that people who make money selling software are somehow evil.
Linux needs to let third parties make binary-only drivers for Linux for Linux to succeed on the desktop.
Here is an example of a kernel developer who is religiously opposed to binary drivers. From the linked article:
You think you want a stable kernel interface, but you really do not, and you don't even know it. What you want is a stable running driver, and you get that only if your driver is in the main kernel tree.
In the real world, I have three choices: I can use a stable Linux kernel without support for all of my hardware (CentOS 5), I can have an unstable Linux kernel with support for all of my hardware (Ubuntu), or I can use Microsoft Windows, which gives me both a stable kernel (Windows XP) and support for all of my hardware (since Windows is a friendly place for people to make third-party drivers).
Linux [is] such a strong, stable, and mature operating system which is the reason you are using it in the first place.
No, it's not. I am using Windows XP right now because Linux is not a usable desktop operating system.
Linux kernel development is continuous and at a rapid pace, never stopping to slow down. As such, the kernel developers find bugs in current interfaces, or figure out a better way to do things. If they do that, they then fix the current interfaces to work better.
This idiocy is what happens when engineers, not managers, drive development. Linux is about tweaking things and constantly breaking perfectly working software. If you want to use your computer to get work done, however, Linux is a horrible choice for a desktop OS.
Having an unstable interface is OK if the only drivers you have to worry about are the disk controller and NIC drivers (Linux in the server back room). It's a horrible choice if you want to have a sound card driver, a video card driver, a mouse driver, and all the other happy stuff that a desktop OS needs.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Why I like Windows: Things just work
Earlier this week, I was preparing an English class and needed to print out the next day's lesson. They just installed a new network printer which is, of all places, on my desk. So, I figured it would be more convenient to print to the printer on my desk than the one 5 meters away on the other side of the office, especially since I like to print documents on both sides in order to minimize paper use.
So, in XP the first thing I tried doing was using the network driver to hook up to this printer. The network driver couldn't find the printer (it probably uses some other networking protocol or some such). So, I just disconnected the printer from its networking box, and connected it to my Windows XP virtual machine (which has USB support).
The printer just worked. All I had to do was plug it in to the USB port. It appeared in the list of printers. I decided to make it the default printer and change its name to "on my desk"; this was done with a simple right-click.
This is why I like Windows. Things just work. Because, quite frankly, I am not living in my mother's basement, have a job, and have better things to do with my time than try and get something to work in Linux that works right away in Windows.
The bad news is that they have since moved this printer and it's now uptairs. Oh well, it was nice while it lasted.
So, in XP the first thing I tried doing was using the network driver to hook up to this printer. The network driver couldn't find the printer (it probably uses some other networking protocol or some such). So, I just disconnected the printer from its networking box, and connected it to my Windows XP virtual machine (which has USB support).
The printer just worked. All I had to do was plug it in to the USB port. It appeared in the list of printers. I decided to make it the default printer and change its name to "on my desk"; this was done with a simple right-click.
This is why I like Windows. Things just work. Because, quite frankly, I am not living in my mother's basement, have a job, and have better things to do with my time than try and get something to work in Linux that works right away in Windows.
The bad news is that they have since moved this printer and it's now uptairs. Oh well, it was nice while it lasted.
Friday, April 3, 2009
Deadwood snapshot update; On open source
I have just posted an update to Deadwood today. Lots of changes:
I feel empty and betrayed by Open Source.
For years I believed the big open source lie. I believed that a group of volunteers working together on the internet could make professional-quality end-user software. I was wrong. Flat-out wrong.
What BSD and later on Linux has shown is that a group of volunteers working during their free time can make a free computer operating system which is very powerful, but very difficult to learn.
This is what Linux was when I first used it in 1995. It was no Solaris, but it was a good deal more stable than Windows 3.11 and Windows 95. It would take me hours to get X configured and working, but once it was working, it was rock-solid stable. I wasn't getting any BSODs (messages Windows shows when the system crashes).
I remember I had Windows 95 [1] and Linux in early 1996, and wanted to set up PPP (the most common way of using a modem to access the internet) so I could use Netscape. It took make about half an hour to get Netscape and PPP going in Windows 95; it took me two or three days to get Netscape and PPP to work in Linux.
However, despite the difficulty of using Linux, I preferred it because of its stability. I had one friend with a driver in Windows 95 that was constantly giving him BSODs; I told him he should use Linux more. I remember another friend who tried getting Windows 95 working on an AMD motherboard he had and him reinstalling and re-reinstalling Windows 95 and never getting the system to quite work right.
I remember feeling Microsoft was an evil monopoly because you couldn't make a motherboard or other peripheral without getting Microsoft to support it. I remember Microsoft using their monopolistic practices in the 1990s to drive Netscape out of business and hating Microsoft for doing that.
At the same time, I was resenting all of the companies who wouldn't release hardware specs for their cards so we could use them in Linux, and resenting the companies (like Real networks) who made video players without Linux support. I felt like a second-class computer citizen. There was so much I couldn't do because I used Linux; I couldn't watch videos in Real player. I couldn't use Microsoft office (and spent a good deal of money buying WordPerfect and Applixware's office suite for Linux) or easily read .doc files.
I remember people using StarOffice (since its binary was a free download) and thinking these people were cheap bastards for not getting a real office suite for Linux (I had managed to get a good job in Silicon Valley at this time, so it was nothing to spend $200 or $300 here and there to get an office suite).
Solaris was still big and the issues I had with Microsoft Solaris admins had too. So I wasn't alone in my dislike of Microsoft.
Well, in the 2000s, a lot changed. The dot-com bubble burst and I no longer worked in the tech industry. Solaris basically died, with I got a degree in computational Linguistics and moved to Mexico to discover myself.
Netscape was killed by Microsoft's monopolistic practices; by 2002 everyone was using Internet Explorer. Windows XP came out in 2002 and the instability problems that always plagued Windows 95 were once and for all resolved by having people use a version of Microsoft's server-class code on the desktop.
Linux, however, did not improve their desktop experience.
In the mid-1990s, the big distro to use was Slackware; in 1997 I went from Slackware to RedHat because it was easier to apply security patches in RedHat. RedHat was the dominant distro to use when the dot-com bubble burst in 2001.
RedHat never made a serious effort to make Linux a desktop OS; their bread and butter was selling servers.
In 2003, RedHat realized they couldn't sustain their business model giving their flagship product away, so they did the RHEL/Fedora core split. I used Fedora core for a while, then moved from Fedora Core to CentOS when this free RHEL clone became available.
To fill the vacuum for a desktop-oriented Linux, their was first Mandrake (originally a fork of RedHat 5) then later on, Mark Shuttleworth made a few billion dollars and decided to fund his own free Desktop Linux, Ubuntu.
Because of fragmentation in Linux (the eternal KDE-vs-Gnome battle), desktop development was divided between two different desktop projects (more if you count things like XFCE and Blackbox). Free software developers are more interested in "scratching their own itch" than in adding features that don't benefit themselves but benefit users of the software; this makes it more difficult to motivate people to help with end-user Desktop software.
Linux, simply put, did not have a usable end-user desktop when Windows XP came out in 2002. Microsoft won the race: Microsoft was able to make their high-quality desktop use server-class code for the underlying operating system before Linux could make their server-class operating system an end-user desktop.
Linux still does not have a usable end-user desktop today. Issues that don't matter when making a *NIX server matter a lot when making a desktop computer. It matters on the desktop that the underlying libraries and kernel change so much it's hard to make a binary-only desktop program that will continue to work for the foreseeable future. It matters on the desktop that binary-only drivers are not welcome, and that the kernel developers go out of their way to not allow these kinds of drivers.
I have looked at Linux for years, and have been using Linux since 1995, and as my only real desktop OS from 1995 until 2003. It hasn't changed. It's always been fragmented with strange bugs and a lack of discipline to give users the things they expect a desktop desktop to have. I thought in 2000 we would have the year of the Linux desktop. I realize, in 2009, that we're never going to have the year of the Linux desktop.
Firefox shows that people can make open-source professional-quality desktop software that people will use. About 30% of people surf the internet using Firefox and it didn't come out until 2004 or so. 1%, maybe 2% of people surf the internet using Linux, even though Linux has been around since 1991. In little over four years, Firefox was able to get desktop adoption Linux can only dream of.
It's sad that Linux is too fragmented to do the same thing. Ubuntu's instability (because they have to use unstable versions of software to support new hardware) is on par with Windows 3.11. I'm glad that Linux has become a viable server OS; I'm sad that Linux will never become a viable desktop OS.
- Sam
[1] I didn't use Windows 95 very much back then; Linux was my primary desktop OS and Windows 95 was on my old 486 so I could keep my skills up to date.
- log file name changed from "log.txt" to "dwlog.txt" (so admins who forgot where they put Deadwood can more easily find dwlog.txt)
- Date and time added to Windows dwlog.txt logfile
- log file flushed (updated) whenever there is a second of inactivity (if the server is busy, the log file won't get flushed, but will get flushed when idle)
- INSTALL file changed to use Win32 line breaks and renamed "INSTALL.txt"; file updated to have more comprehensive startup information for CentOS 5 and a note about dwlog.txt.
- Fatal dwood2rc error now correctly noted as a dwood2rc error
- Makefile renamed Makefile.centos5 in src/; Makefile.mingw renamed Makefile.mingw310 (I'm making it clear I only support CentOS 5 and MinGW 3.1.0)
- Cleanup of Makefile for CentOS 5 duende helper
- Some compile-time warnings when compiling in Windows removed
I feel empty and betrayed by Open Source.
For years I believed the big open source lie. I believed that a group of volunteers working together on the internet could make professional-quality end-user software. I was wrong. Flat-out wrong.
What BSD and later on Linux has shown is that a group of volunteers working during their free time can make a free computer operating system which is very powerful, but very difficult to learn.
This is what Linux was when I first used it in 1995. It was no Solaris, but it was a good deal more stable than Windows 3.11 and Windows 95. It would take me hours to get X configured and working, but once it was working, it was rock-solid stable. I wasn't getting any BSODs (messages Windows shows when the system crashes).
I remember I had Windows 95 [1] and Linux in early 1996, and wanted to set up PPP (the most common way of using a modem to access the internet) so I could use Netscape. It took make about half an hour to get Netscape and PPP going in Windows 95; it took me two or three days to get Netscape and PPP to work in Linux.
However, despite the difficulty of using Linux, I preferred it because of its stability. I had one friend with a driver in Windows 95 that was constantly giving him BSODs; I told him he should use Linux more. I remember another friend who tried getting Windows 95 working on an AMD motherboard he had and him reinstalling and re-reinstalling Windows 95 and never getting the system to quite work right.
I remember feeling Microsoft was an evil monopoly because you couldn't make a motherboard or other peripheral without getting Microsoft to support it. I remember Microsoft using their monopolistic practices in the 1990s to drive Netscape out of business and hating Microsoft for doing that.
At the same time, I was resenting all of the companies who wouldn't release hardware specs for their cards so we could use them in Linux, and resenting the companies (like Real networks) who made video players without Linux support. I felt like a second-class computer citizen. There was so much I couldn't do because I used Linux; I couldn't watch videos in Real player. I couldn't use Microsoft office (and spent a good deal of money buying WordPerfect and Applixware's office suite for Linux) or easily read .doc files.
I remember people using StarOffice (since its binary was a free download) and thinking these people were cheap bastards for not getting a real office suite for Linux (I had managed to get a good job in Silicon Valley at this time, so it was nothing to spend $200 or $300 here and there to get an office suite).
Solaris was still big and the issues I had with Microsoft Solaris admins had too. So I wasn't alone in my dislike of Microsoft.
Well, in the 2000s, a lot changed. The dot-com bubble burst and I no longer worked in the tech industry. Solaris basically died, with I got a degree in computational Linguistics and moved to Mexico to discover myself.
Netscape was killed by Microsoft's monopolistic practices; by 2002 everyone was using Internet Explorer. Windows XP came out in 2002 and the instability problems that always plagued Windows 95 were once and for all resolved by having people use a version of Microsoft's server-class code on the desktop.
Linux, however, did not improve their desktop experience.
In the mid-1990s, the big distro to use was Slackware; in 1997 I went from Slackware to RedHat because it was easier to apply security patches in RedHat. RedHat was the dominant distro to use when the dot-com bubble burst in 2001.
RedHat never made a serious effort to make Linux a desktop OS; their bread and butter was selling servers.
In 2003, RedHat realized they couldn't sustain their business model giving their flagship product away, so they did the RHEL/Fedora core split. I used Fedora core for a while, then moved from Fedora Core to CentOS when this free RHEL clone became available.
To fill the vacuum for a desktop-oriented Linux, their was first Mandrake (originally a fork of RedHat 5) then later on, Mark Shuttleworth made a few billion dollars and decided to fund his own free Desktop Linux, Ubuntu.
Because of fragmentation in Linux (the eternal KDE-vs-Gnome battle), desktop development was divided between two different desktop projects (more if you count things like XFCE and Blackbox). Free software developers are more interested in "scratching their own itch" than in adding features that don't benefit themselves but benefit users of the software; this makes it more difficult to motivate people to help with end-user Desktop software.
Linux, simply put, did not have a usable end-user desktop when Windows XP came out in 2002. Microsoft won the race: Microsoft was able to make their high-quality desktop use server-class code for the underlying operating system before Linux could make their server-class operating system an end-user desktop.
Linux still does not have a usable end-user desktop today. Issues that don't matter when making a *NIX server matter a lot when making a desktop computer. It matters on the desktop that the underlying libraries and kernel change so much it's hard to make a binary-only desktop program that will continue to work for the foreseeable future. It matters on the desktop that binary-only drivers are not welcome, and that the kernel developers go out of their way to not allow these kinds of drivers.
I have looked at Linux for years, and have been using Linux since 1995, and as my only real desktop OS from 1995 until 2003. It hasn't changed. It's always been fragmented with strange bugs and a lack of discipline to give users the things they expect a desktop desktop to have. I thought in 2000 we would have the year of the Linux desktop. I realize, in 2009, that we're never going to have the year of the Linux desktop.
Firefox shows that people can make open-source professional-quality desktop software that people will use. About 30% of people surf the internet using Firefox and it didn't come out until 2004 or so. 1%, maybe 2% of people surf the internet using Linux, even though Linux has been around since 1991. In little over four years, Firefox was able to get desktop adoption Linux can only dream of.
It's sad that Linux is too fragmented to do the same thing. Ubuntu's instability (because they have to use unstable versions of software to support new hardware) is on par with Windows 3.11. I'm glad that Linux has become a viable server OS; I'm sad that Linux will never become a viable desktop OS.
- Sam
[1] I didn't use Windows 95 very much back then; Linux was my primary desktop OS and Windows 95 was on my old 486 so I could keep my skills up to date.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Linux sucks: CentOS 5 doesn't support my laptop
OK, I've tried Ubuntu. It was nothing but crash after crash after crash. I finally threw out Ubuntu, repartitioned my hard disk, and used only Windows XP, with CentOS 5 in a virtual machine.
Last night, I tried to install CentOS 5 on my laptop. I wasted most of a day worth of work on this project.
It didn't work.
The base install was pretty quick and took maybe 40 minutes.
First of all, the wireless card didn't work. I followed the directions on the CentOS wiki and it still didn't work. I was able to see wireless networks, but was unable to connect to my home network. I wasted about an hour of my life trying to get this to work.
This morning, I tried getting the touchpad driver working so the touchpad doesn't click the mouse button every time I tap the touchpad. After installing the synaptics driver, I had to figure out how to configure xorg.conf to use the driver. Well over an hour of my life wasted doing that.
Once I did all that, it still didn't work. It would seem my touchpad isn't supported with the touchpad driver in CentOS 5. I tried newer drivers; either the newer driver wouldn't compile or the driver wouldn't work.
So far, I had wasted four hours of my life. In Windows, the same amount of work would have given me a working computer at this point. Actually, in Windows, it would have taken about an hour to install the base system, under an hour to get all the drivers up and going, and I could have played video games or spent time with my girlfriend the other two hours.
I did buy Linux hardware. I specifically got a Linux-compatible Dell. And, yes, the hardware does work in Ubuntu, but, unfortunately, the system is too unstable for me to use.
I pointed out the issue here:
Linux sucks on the desktop. I'm back to using Windows XP. Even at $5 an hour, the $100 that Windows XP home edition costs [1] is 20 hours of labor; it would take me about that long to get everything working in CentOS 5.3.
OK, since I wasted my time with Linux (again), I didn't get a chance to work on Deadwood. I will continue working on it tomorrow.
- Sam
[1] As an aside, cdsfu.com sells pirated software and Google needs to stop letting them advertise.
Last night, I tried to install CentOS 5 on my laptop. I wasted most of a day worth of work on this project.
It didn't work.
The base install was pretty quick and took maybe 40 minutes.
First of all, the wireless card didn't work. I followed the directions on the CentOS wiki and it still didn't work. I was able to see wireless networks, but was unable to connect to my home network. I wasted about an hour of my life trying to get this to work.
This morning, I tried getting the touchpad driver working so the touchpad doesn't click the mouse button every time I tap the touchpad. After installing the synaptics driver, I had to figure out how to configure xorg.conf to use the driver. Well over an hour of my life wasted doing that.
Once I did all that, it still didn't work. It would seem my touchpad isn't supported with the touchpad driver in CentOS 5. I tried newer drivers; either the newer driver wouldn't compile or the driver wouldn't work.
So far, I had wasted four hours of my life. In Windows, the same amount of work would have given me a working computer at this point. Actually, in Windows, it would have taken about an hour to install the base system, under an hour to get all the drivers up and going, and I could have played video games or spent time with my girlfriend the other two hours.
I did buy Linux hardware. I specifically got a Linux-compatible Dell. And, yes, the hardware does work in Ubuntu, but, unfortunately, the system is too unstable for me to use.
I pointed out the issue here:
Linux's problem is this: Drivers for CentOS 3 do NOT work in CentOS 5. Why is that? Why do the Linux developers need to constantly change the driver model while Microsoft is able to keep the driver model stable? Constantly changing driver models is fine in the server back room, but is not OK for an OS that wants to be on the desktop.Here is how one freetard replied to me:
This is why Windows XP, not Linux, is on my desktop right now; Ubuntu is far too unstable for me and I shouldn't be forced to use an unstable OS just to have drivers. I mean, there are drivers for all my hardware in Windows XP. And there are drivers for all of my hardware in Ubuntu 7. So why aren't there drivers for all of my hardware in CentOS 3?
(I may move back to Linux on the desktop if all my hardware works with CentOS 5.3; we'll see)
your [sic] being technically handicapped and/or grossly uninformed about Linux kernel development. However, if you keep sticking your foot into your mouth, you will at least add some mild entertainment to the thread while we wait.I replied to this idiot:
YoureAnIdiotForNotLikingLinux(TM)He never replied to me.
A lot of people here have been using Linux for a long time, or used to be freetards (I myself am a recovering freetard). We probably know Linux a good deal better than you do. Note also that Ken Thompson doesn't like Linux, and Dennis Ritchie uses Microsoft Outlook to read email these days.
Anyway, could you care to explain where I am wrong and how I'm wrong. Please back up your assertions with facts.
Linux sucks on the desktop. I'm back to using Windows XP. Even at $5 an hour, the $100 that Windows XP home edition costs [1] is 20 hours of labor; it would take me about that long to get everything working in CentOS 5.3.
OK, since I wasted my time with Linux (again), I didn't get a chance to work on Deadwood. I will continue working on it tomorrow.
- Sam
[1] As an aside, cdsfu.com sells pirated software and Google needs to stop letting them advertise.
Friday, February 27, 2009
Deadwood snapshot update; Windows XP is better than Ubuntu
I have uploaded a new snapshot of Deadwood today with tests added for upstream_servers and upstream_port.
I have just moved and haven't been able to get online at the new place yet. The place is supposed to have internet, so I will work with my new roommate and will look at the router this afternoon to see if the issue can be resolved (it could be that the key changed when they changed the ESSID but no one remembers doing this, much less the new key, or it could be that things are broken upstream).
If I can't resolve the issue with internet at home, I will not be able to release Deadwood again until Monday. Update: I now have internet working at my new place; expect to see a Deadwood update tomorrow.
This release can be downloaded at the usual place
While waiting for CentOS 5.3 to be released, I moved things around on my hard disk and reinstalled Windows XP.
It's a relief compared to Ubuntu. Everything works. Without problem. Things that took me days to resolve work out of the box in Windows XP: Getting a password protected screen saver (In Windows XP, it's actually done with "Change session" from the start menu) that doesn't crash the system and getting VMware to work.
When I put in my 50 meg "hockey rink" business card CD, it mounts within seconds. In Ubuntu, it would not mount at all or take over a minute to mount; this is a problem I was never able to resolve. Indeed, I spent a day pulling out my hair and wasting money burning expendable media until I realized this was an Linux-specific problem and not a problem with the media in question.
Sound in VMware isn't a problem; I can have multiple guest operating systems with sound active at the same time. In Ubuntu, only one application can use the sound card at the same time.
The keyboard just works in Windows XP; I needed to tweak configuration files to get it to work in Ubuntu.
Windows XP is a good deal more light and responsive running VMware player than Ubuntu; suspending or restoring an OS would often take two or three minutes in Ubuntu but only takes a few seconds in Windows XP. Windows XP and the Windows VMware client are far more lightweight; I can comfortably run three guest operating systems at the same time with 512 megs allocated for each guest; Ubuntu could only run two and would thrash (swap excessively and have the computer be unresponsive) with suspending or restoring a guest OS.
Comprared to Ubuntu, things work like a dream in Windows XP.
Nothing has changed since this blogger posted this why Ubuntu sucks blog back in 2007. Ubuntu still sucks (for my purposes: Having a good VMware host operating system) and Windows XP is a far better operating system.
I've been using Linux since 1995 and refused to dual boot my machine until 2003. Linux used to be more stable but harder to use; Ubuntu is trying to make another Windows but I just don't think it makes sense to try and shoestring all of the open source projects out there to make an end-user desktop. For example, Linux was never designed to allow someone to just insert or remove a CD without mounting or unmounting it; trying to make Linux do this just causes it to be unable to read media Windows XP can read without problem.
I think the real solution to making a open-source desktop environment is to make an operating system designed to be on the users desktop from the start. There are at least two projects that try to do this: Haiku OS (an open-source implementation of the failed 1990s BeOS) and Syllable (an open-source OS based on ideas from Amiga OS and other sources)
I will let people know how things work with CentOS 5.3 once CentOS 5.3 is available.
I have just moved and haven't been able to get online at the new place yet. The place is supposed to have internet, so I will work with my new roommate and will look at the router this afternoon to see if the issue can be resolved (it could be that the key changed when they changed the ESSID but no one remembers doing this, much less the new key, or it could be that things are broken upstream).
If I can't resolve the issue with internet at home, I will not be able to release Deadwood again until Monday. Update: I now have internet working at my new place; expect to see a Deadwood update tomorrow.
This release can be downloaded at the usual place
While waiting for CentOS 5.3 to be released, I moved things around on my hard disk and reinstalled Windows XP.
It's a relief compared to Ubuntu. Everything works. Without problem. Things that took me days to resolve work out of the box in Windows XP: Getting a password protected screen saver (In Windows XP, it's actually done with "Change session" from the start menu) that doesn't crash the system and getting VMware to work.
When I put in my 50 meg "hockey rink" business card CD, it mounts within seconds. In Ubuntu, it would not mount at all or take over a minute to mount; this is a problem I was never able to resolve. Indeed, I spent a day pulling out my hair and wasting money burning expendable media until I realized this was an Linux-specific problem and not a problem with the media in question.
Sound in VMware isn't a problem; I can have multiple guest operating systems with sound active at the same time. In Ubuntu, only one application can use the sound card at the same time.
The keyboard just works in Windows XP; I needed to tweak configuration files to get it to work in Ubuntu.
Windows XP is a good deal more light and responsive running VMware player than Ubuntu; suspending or restoring an OS would often take two or three minutes in Ubuntu but only takes a few seconds in Windows XP. Windows XP and the Windows VMware client are far more lightweight; I can comfortably run three guest operating systems at the same time with 512 megs allocated for each guest; Ubuntu could only run two and would thrash (swap excessively and have the computer be unresponsive) with suspending or restoring a guest OS.
Comprared to Ubuntu, things work like a dream in Windows XP.
Nothing has changed since this blogger posted this why Ubuntu sucks blog back in 2007. Ubuntu still sucks (for my purposes: Having a good VMware host operating system) and Windows XP is a far better operating system.
I've been using Linux since 1995 and refused to dual boot my machine until 2003. Linux used to be more stable but harder to use; Ubuntu is trying to make another Windows but I just don't think it makes sense to try and shoestring all of the open source projects out there to make an end-user desktop. For example, Linux was never designed to allow someone to just insert or remove a CD without mounting or unmounting it; trying to make Linux do this just causes it to be unable to read media Windows XP can read without problem.
I think the real solution to making a open-source desktop environment is to make an operating system designed to be on the users desktop from the start. There are at least two projects that try to do this: Haiku OS (an open-source implementation of the failed 1990s BeOS) and Syllable (an open-source OS based on ideas from Amiga OS and other sources)
I will let people know how things work with CentOS 5.3 once CentOS 5.3 is available.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Deadwood and MaraDNS updates; yet another Ubuntu rant
I have added a single test to Deadwood today: a test for the parameter bind_address. I now only have 16 more dwood2rc parameters to make tests for. This work can be downloaded by clicking on this link.
I have also integrated Milan Kupcevic's patch to add dns_port to zoneserver; the latest snapshot with this patch applied can be downloaded at this link.
Ubuntu does it again! Yet another Ubuntu bug, what a surprise.
I don't think I've mentioned on this blog that Ubuntu's build of Abiword crashes when I go to insert -> symbol. Do the folks at Ubuntu do any testing at all? Or do they just foist a beta on unsuspecting users as the latest and greatest release of Ubuntu?
Another issue: Ubuntu's auto-mounter (a.k.a. hal) is really unstable. It either can't mount a perfectly good CD (Ubuntu is a little annoyed with CDs; this isn't a problem when booting from a CD in the BIOS in Windows, but it takes a couple of minutes to mount a CD in Ubuntu for whatever reason), or won't properly umount the CD/DVD when I eject it. Again, do they test anything with Ubuntu?
I'm through with Ubuntu. Next time I install an OS, I'm going to install CentOS or Fedora Core. CentOS 5.3 should come out in a couple of weeks; I'm going to make that my main OS and ditch Ubuntu. Ubuntu is nothing but a headache that makes me want to run to the Linux hater's blog.
I have also integrated Milan Kupcevic's patch to add dns_port to zoneserver; the latest snapshot with this patch applied can be downloaded at this link.
Ubuntu does it again! Yet another Ubuntu bug, what a surprise.
I don't think I've mentioned on this blog that Ubuntu's build of Abiword crashes when I go to insert -> symbol. Do the folks at Ubuntu do any testing at all? Or do they just foist a beta on unsuspecting users as the latest and greatest release of Ubuntu?
Another issue: Ubuntu's auto-mounter (a.k.a. hal) is really unstable. It either can't mount a perfectly good CD (Ubuntu is a little annoyed with CDs; this isn't a problem when booting from a CD in the BIOS in Windows, but it takes a couple of minutes to mount a CD in Ubuntu for whatever reason), or won't properly umount the CD/DVD when I eject it. Again, do they test anything with Ubuntu?
I'm through with Ubuntu. Next time I install an OS, I'm going to install CentOS or Fedora Core. CentOS 5.3 should come out in a couple of weeks; I'm going to make that my main OS and ditch Ubuntu. Ubuntu is nothing but a headache that makes me want to run to the Linux hater's blog.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Deadwood roadmap; On Ubuntu
I have looked at the Deadwood code in CentOS 5.2, and I'm seeing the same problem I saw in Cygwin a couple of weeks ago: DwTcp (the TCP half of Deadwood) doesn't work. Strange, because the code did work back in late 2007. So, I'm going to have to work on this code before releasing another stable release of Deadwood.
You know, my issue is not with Linux. My issue is with Ubuntu Linux, which is trying to make a desktop OS to compete with Windows. Linux has made a lot of progress for the end-user ever since the mid-1990s, when FVWM was the state of the art for end-user usability.
But, Linux as an end-user desktop is beta-quality at best. There's a number of reasons for this. One is that it's impossible to give Linux programmers the kind of discipline needed to make a stable end-user desktop. People constantly want to branch out in new directions and develop new software instead of making stable the software they have already developed. Since people, by and large, aren't getting paid, people aren't very motivated to the the boring, uninteresting programming that users want.
Linux kernel developers don't want to make a stable API or ABI for drivers; this results in people forced to use unstable and untested kernels to have a system that works with their hardware. Instead of continuing development on KDE3, it has been replaced with KDE4. Unfortunately, KDE4 doesn't even have a GUI-based network configuration program; so a perfectly good desktop environment has been abandoned and replaced by one without basic functionality.
Ubuntu essentially forces me to use Gnome; I tried to use it with FVWM in 2007 and 2008 and found that I couldn't do things like configure my network card with "ifconfig" and what not without some daemon erasing my configuration or making my configuration not work.
So, yes, with Ubuntu Linux I'm forced to use unstable software that crashes. This is very different from the situation in the 1990s, where, while not friendly and needing a lot of training to master, Linux had a lot more stability than the not-protected versions of Windows (Windows 3.11, Windows 95, etc.)
You know, my issue is not with Linux. My issue is with Ubuntu Linux, which is trying to make a desktop OS to compete with Windows. Linux has made a lot of progress for the end-user ever since the mid-1990s, when FVWM was the state of the art for end-user usability.
But, Linux as an end-user desktop is beta-quality at best. There's a number of reasons for this. One is that it's impossible to give Linux programmers the kind of discipline needed to make a stable end-user desktop. People constantly want to branch out in new directions and develop new software instead of making stable the software they have already developed. Since people, by and large, aren't getting paid, people aren't very motivated to the the boring, uninteresting programming that users want.
Linux kernel developers don't want to make a stable API or ABI for drivers; this results in people forced to use unstable and untested kernels to have a system that works with their hardware. Instead of continuing development on KDE3, it has been replaced with KDE4. Unfortunately, KDE4 doesn't even have a GUI-based network configuration program; so a perfectly good desktop environment has been abandoned and replaced by one without basic functionality.
Ubuntu essentially forces me to use Gnome; I tried to use it with FVWM in 2007 and 2008 and found that I couldn't do things like configure my network card with "ifconfig" and what not without some daemon erasing my configuration or making my configuration not work.
So, yes, with Ubuntu Linux I'm forced to use unstable software that crashes. This is very different from the situation in the 1990s, where, while not friendly and needing a lot of training to master, Linux had a lot more stability than the not-protected versions of Windows (Windows 3.11, Windows 95, etc.)
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Linux sucks: My system has crashed three times today
Linux sucks: My Ubuntu 8.10 system has crashed three times today.
Three times.
All three times when I password protected the system. Twice, the system crashed when I inserted a blank CD or DVD while the password protected screen saver was activated. This might have been caused by VMware (which tries to make mounted CDs visible to the guest OS), so I told VMware to not look for a CD and the system didn't crash while the screensaver was active.
The third time, my boss called me in to his office to help him with an email. When I came back out again, my system had rebooted, with messages like this in the logs:
Feb 10 12:24:09 Merequetengue kernel: [ 5852.179340] compiz.real[7047] trap stack segment ip:41024e sp:7fff605b93b0 error:0
Feb 10 12:24:16 Merequetengue kernel: [ 5859.014131] metacity[6971]: segfault at 0 ip 000000000046441e sp 00007fff05278c70 error 4 in metacity[400000+88000]
Needless to say, I'm giving Ubuntu one last chance. I'm going to get rid of Gnome, which makes Windows 3.11 look positively stable, and try using the KDE desktop. Yeah, this means I have to reconfigure all of my wireless network connections again. What a pain.
I can hear the bullshit from the freetards:
I'm happy the Linux haters blog is back again. Linux needs less zealots who think the three crashes I had today were hallucinations, and more people willing to look at and resolve the serious desktop usability problems Linux currently has.
Update: the third crash was not, to be pedantic, a crash; while the screen saver was running, something happened to kill the X process. It was, for all intents and purposes, a crash: I had to reboot my two VMware virtual machines and restart all applications before working again.
Kde4 is crap; no GUI network manager (and no way of installing KDE3, which does have a network manager, instead with Ubuntu); XFCE is also crap, with a very confusing menu on right click and no apparent GUI network manager.
My current workaround is to use Gnome, but to turn off all cutesy effects (right click on root window, change desktop background, then click on the "effects" tab) and to use "xlock" instead of Gnome's stupid screen locker (sudo apt-get install xlockmore then run the command as xlock). I also have detached the optical drives in the VMware guests. I'll let people know whether or not this stops the crashes.
Three times.
All three times when I password protected the system. Twice, the system crashed when I inserted a blank CD or DVD while the password protected screen saver was activated. This might have been caused by VMware (which tries to make mounted CDs visible to the guest OS), so I told VMware to not look for a CD and the system didn't crash while the screensaver was active.
The third time, my boss called me in to his office to help him with an email. When I came back out again, my system had rebooted, with messages like this in the logs:
Feb 10 12:24:09 Merequetengue kernel: [ 5852.179340] compiz.real[7047] trap stack segment ip:41024e sp:7fff605b93b0 error:0
Feb 10 12:24:16 Merequetengue kernel: [ 5859.014131] metacity[6971]: segfault at 0 ip 000000000046441e sp 00007fff05278c70 error 4 in metacity[400000+88000]
Needless to say, I'm giving Ubuntu one last chance. I'm going to get rid of Gnome, which makes Windows 3.11 look positively stable, and try using the KDE desktop. Yeah, this means I have to reconfigure all of my wireless network connections again. What a pain.
I can hear the bullshit from the freetards:
- Oh, my system doesn't crash like this so it must be a hardware problem (No, because my system most assuredly does not crash like this when running Windows XP, or CentOS for that matter)
- Well, it crashes because you're a clueless Linux newbie (No, I've been using Linux since June 19, 1995, back when you were playing with GI Joe dolls)
- Maybe you should try harder to make your system not crash (No, maybe Canonical should distribute stable operating systems that don't crash three times a day)
- You must be a paid Microsoft shill (No, please take your medication when you have paranoid fantasies like this)
- You really should buy Linux-compatible hardware (Guess what, idiot freetard, I did. I bought a Dell 1420 Linux-compatible computer)
I'm happy the Linux haters blog is back again. Linux needs less zealots who think the three crashes I had today were hallucinations, and more people willing to look at and resolve the serious desktop usability problems Linux currently has.
Update: the third crash was not, to be pedantic, a crash; while the screen saver was running, something happened to kill the X process. It was, for all intents and purposes, a crash: I had to reboot my two VMware virtual machines and restart all applications before working again.
Kde4 is crap; no GUI network manager (and no way of installing KDE3, which does have a network manager, instead with Ubuntu); XFCE is also crap, with a very confusing menu on right click and no apparent GUI network manager.
My current workaround is to use Gnome, but to turn off all cutesy effects (right click on root window, change desktop background, then click on the "effects" tab) and to use "xlock" instead of Gnome's stupid screen locker (sudo apt-get install xlockmore then run the command as xlock). I also have detached the optical drives in the VMware guests. I'll let people know whether or not this stops the crashes.
Saturday, February 7, 2009
MaraDNS snapshot update: Webpage updated
After finally getting VMware player to work in Linux, I am able to get back to finishing up the XeroBank-sponsored MaraDNS development. I have updated a new version of MaraDNS, which simply updates the MaraDNS.org webpage. I no longer have a roadmap page, since the page is outdated and the most current information about MaraDNS is right here on the blog. I have added a list of sponsors whose generosity make continued MaraDNS development and improvements possible.
The only work I have to do before releasing MaraDNS 1.3.13 is to re-verify that all of the regressions pass, and to perform a standard stress test I like to do before making a new MaraDNS release. The release should be done next week sometime.
The snapshot can be downloaded by clicking on this link
The reason for the delay in making a new snapshot of MaraDNS is because I decided to use Linux again. Ubuntu Linux, even. It took me the last three days to make the appropriate backups, install Ubuntu, and then struggle with getting VMplayer to work in Ubuntu 8.10.
I had a number of problems with VMware player, which I have touched on in previous blog entries. One is that the CentOS 5.2 guest was not correctly set up to handle key repeat speed in a consistent manner. I fixed this by adding divider=10 clocksource=acpi_pm to all of the kernel entries in /etc/grub.conf (in the guest operating system); here is what my grub.conf looks like:
default=0
timeout=5
splashimage=(hd0,0)/grub/splash.xpm.gz
hiddenmenu
title CentOS (2.6.18-92.1.22.el5)
root (hd0,0)
kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.18-92.1.22.el5 ro root=/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 rhgb quiet divider=10 clocksource=acpi_pm
initrd /initrd-2.6.18-92.1.22.el5.img
title CentOS (2.6.18-92.1.1.el5)
root (hd0,0)
kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.18-92.1.1.el5 ro root=/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 rhgb quiet divider=10 clocksource=acpi_pm
initrd /initrd-2.6.18-92.1.1.el5.img
title CentOS (2.6.18-92.el5)
root (hd0,0)
kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.18-92.el5 ro root=/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 rhgb quiet divider=10 clocksource=acpi_pm
initrd /initrd-2.6.18-92.el5.img
Note that this solution is CentOS-specific; search on vmware.com's web site for the "magic recipe" to add to other distributions' kernels.
Another is that the arrow keys and a bunch of other keys do not work. There are two solutions posted various places on the internet; the one that works best for me is the one where we just define all of the keys that don't work with VMware player. I added the following lines to /etc/vmware/config (in the host operating system):
xkeymap.keycode.108 = 0x138 # Alt_R
xkeymap.keycode.106 = 0x135 # KP_Divide
xkeymap.keycode.104 = 0x11c # KP_Enter
xkeymap.keycode.111 = 0x148 # Up
xkeymap.keycode.116 = 0x150 # Down
xkeymap.keycode.113 = 0x14b # Left
xkeymap.keycode.114 = 0x14d # Right
xkeymap.keycode.105 = 0x11d # Control_R
xkeymap.keycode.118 = 0x152 # Insert
xkeymap.keycode.119 = 0x153 # Delete
xkeymap.keycode.110 = 0x147 # Home
xkeymap.keycode.115 = 0x14f # End
xkeymap.keycode.112 = 0x149 # Prior
xkeymap.keycode.117 = 0x151 # Next
xkeymap.keycode.78 = 0x46 # Scroll_Lock
xkeymap.keycode.127 = 0x100 # Pause
xkeymap.keycode.133 = 0x15b # Meta_L
xkeymap.keycode.134 = 0x15c # Meta_R
xkeymap.keycode.135 = 0x15d # Menu
xkeymap.keycode.107 = 0x137 # Print Scrn
Finally, I had serious problems with sound playback stuttering, making it impossible for me to play back all of a single .mp3 file in my Windows XP guest operating systems. I fixed this problem by adding the following lines to the .vmx file for my Windows XP guest operating systems (this is a modification to the relevant .vmx file on the host operating system):
sound.virtualDev = "es1371"
sound.highPriority = TRUE
sound.buffering = "10000000000.0"
sound.copyDelayFactor = "1000000.0"
sound.directSound = "false"
sound.ignoreOverflows = "true"
sound.maxLength = "2048"
sound.smallBlockSize = "1024"
sound.virtualrealcorrection = "10000000000.0"
pciSound.priorityBoost = "true"
I also have these lines describing sound in the /etc/vmware/config file:
sound.Autodetect = true
sound.fileName = "-1"
sound.maxLength = 64
sound.smallBlockSize = 32
But I don't think this second batch of lines help; I had problems until adding the first batch of sound-related lines to my .vmx files.
And, oh, it's only possible to play sound on one VMware guest at a time, and not while playing sounds from other sources. I only use one VMware guest at a time that needs sound (my CentOS 5.2 guest doesn't), and have disabled all sounds in my host's Gnome user interface.
Now, observe that all of these issues are Linux-specific issues. I tested; the Windows XP 32-bit host doesn't have any of these issues (except for the CentOS one, which is caused by the Linux kernel). This is my annoyance with Linux: Things just work on Windows. Things don't work on Linux without spending days tweaking things, for a variety of reasons, mainly serious problems with Linux's sound architecture.
This is why I'm going to use a minimum of applications in Linux; the only real application I will use is VMware, and just do all my work from inside virtual machines I set up. This way, I only have the headache of configuring a minimum of applications:
So, yeah, progress is being made in Linux. It might even be ready for the end-user desktop one of these years.
The only work I have to do before releasing MaraDNS 1.3.13 is to re-verify that all of the regressions pass, and to perform a standard stress test I like to do before making a new MaraDNS release. The release should be done next week sometime.
The snapshot can be downloaded by clicking on this link
The reason for the delay in making a new snapshot of MaraDNS is because I decided to use Linux again. Ubuntu Linux, even. It took me the last three days to make the appropriate backups, install Ubuntu, and then struggle with getting VMplayer to work in Ubuntu 8.10.
I had a number of problems with VMware player, which I have touched on in previous blog entries. One is that the CentOS 5.2 guest was not correctly set up to handle key repeat speed in a consistent manner. I fixed this by adding divider=10 clocksource=acpi_pm to all of the kernel entries in /etc/grub.conf (in the guest operating system); here is what my grub.conf looks like:
default=0
timeout=5
splashimage=(hd0,0)/grub/splash.xpm.gz
hiddenmenu
title CentOS (2.6.18-92.1.22.el5)
root (hd0,0)
kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.18-92.1.22.el5 ro root=/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 rhgb quiet divider=10 clocksource=acpi_pm
initrd /initrd-2.6.18-92.1.22.el5.img
title CentOS (2.6.18-92.1.1.el5)
root (hd0,0)
kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.18-92.1.1.el5 ro root=/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 rhgb quiet divider=10 clocksource=acpi_pm
initrd /initrd-2.6.18-92.1.1.el5.img
title CentOS (2.6.18-92.el5)
root (hd0,0)
kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.18-92.el5 ro root=/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 rhgb quiet divider=10 clocksource=acpi_pm
initrd /initrd-2.6.18-92.el5.img
Note that this solution is CentOS-specific; search on vmware.com's web site for the "magic recipe" to add to other distributions' kernels.
Another is that the arrow keys and a bunch of other keys do not work. There are two solutions posted various places on the internet; the one that works best for me is the one where we just define all of the keys that don't work with VMware player. I added the following lines to /etc/vmware/config (in the host operating system):
xkeymap.keycode.108 = 0x138 # Alt_R
xkeymap.keycode.106 = 0x135 # KP_Divide
xkeymap.keycode.104 = 0x11c # KP_Enter
xkeymap.keycode.111 = 0x148 # Up
xkeymap.keycode.116 = 0x150 # Down
xkeymap.keycode.113 = 0x14b # Left
xkeymap.keycode.114 = 0x14d # Right
xkeymap.keycode.105 = 0x11d # Control_R
xkeymap.keycode.118 = 0x152 # Insert
xkeymap.keycode.119 = 0x153 # Delete
xkeymap.keycode.110 = 0x147 # Home
xkeymap.keycode.115 = 0x14f # End
xkeymap.keycode.112 = 0x149 # Prior
xkeymap.keycode.117 = 0x151 # Next
xkeymap.keycode.78 = 0x46 # Scroll_Lock
xkeymap.keycode.127 = 0x100 # Pause
xkeymap.keycode.133 = 0x15b # Meta_L
xkeymap.keycode.134 = 0x15c # Meta_R
xkeymap.keycode.135 = 0x15d # Menu
xkeymap.keycode.107 = 0x137 # Print Scrn
Finally, I had serious problems with sound playback stuttering, making it impossible for me to play back all of a single .mp3 file in my Windows XP guest operating systems. I fixed this problem by adding the following lines to the .vmx file for my Windows XP guest operating systems (this is a modification to the relevant .vmx file on the host operating system):
sound.virtualDev = "es1371"
sound.highPriority = TRUE
sound.buffering = "10000000000.0"
sound.copyDelayFactor = "1000000.0"
sound.directSound = "false"
sound.ignoreOverflows = "true"
sound.maxLength = "2048"
sound.smallBlockSize = "1024"
sound.virtualrealcorrection = "10000000000.0"
pciSound.priorityBoost = "true"
I also have these lines describing sound in the /etc/vmware/config file:
sound.Autodetect = true
sound.fileName = "-1"
sound.maxLength = 64
sound.smallBlockSize = 32
But I don't think this second batch of lines help; I had problems until adding the first batch of sound-related lines to my .vmx files.
And, oh, it's only possible to play sound on one VMware guest at a time, and not while playing sounds from other sources. I only use one VMware guest at a time that needs sound (my CentOS 5.2 guest doesn't), and have disabled all sounds in my host's Gnome user interface.
Now, observe that all of these issues are Linux-specific issues. I tested; the Windows XP 32-bit host doesn't have any of these issues (except for the CentOS one, which is caused by the Linux kernel). This is my annoyance with Linux: Things just work on Windows. Things don't work on Linux without spending days tweaking things, for a variety of reasons, mainly serious problems with Linux's sound architecture.
This is why I'm going to use a minimum of applications in Linux; the only real application I will use is VMware, and just do all my work from inside virtual machines I set up. This way, I only have the headache of configuring a minimum of applications:
- The VMware player
- The firewall (I will describe how I set up ufw to protect my system in a future blog entry)
- The core operating system (including things like the sound card, the networking, the video card, etc.)
So, yeah, progress is being made in Linux. It might even be ready for the end-user desktop one of these years.
Friday, February 6, 2009
VMware update: Keyboard repeat problem solved
Well, playing around with VMware some more, I have discovered some issues which I have been working on fixing.
One is that the CentOS 5.2 guest had some issues with the keyboard repeat rate being inconsistent. This problem made the system nay-to-impossible to be productive on. After much struggle, and extensive Google searching, and trial and error, I found the solution was to add some parameters to the guest kernel:
divider=10 clocksource=acpi_pm
Edit /etc/grub.conf and add these two parameters to all of the lines marked kernel. Next, reboot the guest OS.
Once I did this, the issue seems to have gone away (knock on wood).
The other issue is with stuttering sound when playing a mp3 in the Windows guest OS. This issue does not appear to affect all applications; I was able to talk to my girlfriend over SkyPE in a Windows guest OS for an hour last night without any stuttering.
I haven't found a solution to this issue yet; some people indicate that VMware player 2.0 doesn't have this issue, so I will see if I get get better results from VMware player 2.0.5 instead of 2.5. I will let people know if I can resolve the Windows sound issue; my gut instinct is that this is caused by Linux, since sound in Linux is a bloody mess.
Update: The sound problem doesn't exist when using Windows XP as a host. So, this is a Linux-specific problem. Did I mention that the sound is a lot quieter in Linux than it is in Windows on the same machine? Linux sound is a disaster; until basic desktop functionality like sound works, Linux will stay in the server back room.
Second update: OK, after much prodding around on the internet, I found some useful information over at Sanbarrow.com. I added the following to the .vmx file for my Windows XP virtual machine, and it appears to resolve the issue:
As a related issue, adding this to /etc/vmware/config resolves the keyboard issue, and appears to be the best fix:
xkeymap.nokeycodeMap = true
Final update: The reason why I didn't have any problems with Skype last night is because I was using a USB headset. When a USB headset is connected to a guest OS, the guest OS talks directly to the USB headset and doesn't use the host's sound card, so the stuttering problems don't exist when using a headset.
Indeed, it's possible to have one guest play a song or what not while another guest plays sound through the USB headset at the same time.
One is that the CentOS 5.2 guest had some issues with the keyboard repeat rate being inconsistent. This problem made the system nay-to-impossible to be productive on. After much struggle, and extensive Google searching, and trial and error, I found the solution was to add some parameters to the guest kernel:
divider=10 clocksource=acpi_pm
Edit /etc/grub.conf and add these two parameters to all of the lines marked kernel. Next, reboot the guest OS.
Once I did this, the issue seems to have gone away (knock on wood).
The other issue is with stuttering sound when playing a mp3 in the Windows guest OS. This issue does not appear to affect all applications; I was able to talk to my girlfriend over SkyPE in a Windows guest OS for an hour last night without any stuttering.
I haven't found a solution to this issue yet; some people indicate that VMware player 2.0 doesn't have this issue, so I will see if I get get better results from VMware player 2.0.5 instead of 2.5. I will let people know if I can resolve the Windows sound issue; my gut instinct is that this is caused by Linux, since sound in Linux is a bloody mess.
Update: The sound problem doesn't exist when using Windows XP as a host. So, this is a Linux-specific problem. Did I mention that the sound is a lot quieter in Linux than it is in Windows on the same machine? Linux sound is a disaster; until basic desktop functionality like sound works, Linux will stay in the server back room.
Second update: OK, after much prodding around on the internet, I found some useful information over at Sanbarrow.com. I added the following to the .vmx file for my Windows XP virtual machine, and it appears to resolve the issue:
sound.virtualDev = "es1371"
sound.highPriority = TRUE
sound.buffering = "10000000000.0"
sound.copyDelayFactor = "1000000.0"
sound.directSound = "false"
sound.ignoreOverflows = "true"
sound.maxLength = "2048"
sound.smallBlockSize = "1024"
sound.virtualrealcorrection = "10000000000.0"
pciSound.priorityBoost = "true"
As a related issue, adding this to /etc/vmware/config resolves the keyboard issue, and appears to be the best fix:
xkeymap.nokeycodeMap = true
Final update: The reason why I didn't have any problems with Skype last night is because I was using a USB headset. When a USB headset is connected to a guest OS, the guest OS talks directly to the USB headset and doesn't use the host's sound card, so the stuttering problems don't exist when using a headset.
Indeed, it's possible to have one guest play a song or what not while another guest plays sound through the USB headset at the same time.
Sunday, January 18, 2009
MaraDNS support boundaries; Linux rocks as a server
To clarify the boundaries of support for MaraDNS, a memory leak has to be something where one can show that MaraDNS is allocating memory while running that is never freed, and results in MaraDNS using more and more memory while running. Memory allocated but not freed during startup doesn't count; while I cleaned most of those in 2006, there is one that I couldn't clean up because the recursive code depends on it.
Did I mention that I'll happily do other things for MaraDNS if paid? These boundaries of support only cover what I'll do for fun and for free.
Let me clarify something: I think Linux is an excellent server operating system. While not quite as nice as FreeBSD, if one uses a stable distribution, such as Debian stable or RHEL/CentOS on supported hardware, one has an excellent server. According to some reports I have heard, a Linux server can handle about four times the traffic as the same machine running a server version of Windows.
Indeed, just this last week there was some problem with our internet connection at work making it difficult to keep TCP connections open. What was interesting was that the problem only seemed to be happening with Windows servers; I had no problem downloading files from Linux and other servers but couldn't download a simple 100 kilobyte email from our email provider who runs Windows as a server.
However, Linux doesn't work as a desktop OS yet:
Did I mention that I'll happily do other things for MaraDNS if paid? These boundaries of support only cover what I'll do for fun and for free.
Let me clarify something: I think Linux is an excellent server operating system. While not quite as nice as FreeBSD, if one uses a stable distribution, such as Debian stable or RHEL/CentOS on supported hardware, one has an excellent server. According to some reports I have heard, a Linux server can handle about four times the traffic as the same machine running a server version of Windows.
Indeed, just this last week there was some problem with our internet connection at work making it difficult to keep TCP connections open. What was interesting was that the problem only seemed to be happening with Windows servers; I had no problem downloading files from Linux and other servers but couldn't download a simple 100 kilobyte email from our email provider who runs Windows as a server.
However, Linux doesn't work as a desktop OS yet:
- Binary compatibility. The Linux Kernel developers do not care as much as they should about binary compatibility. I can no longer play these video games for Linux I bought a few years ago in modern releases of Linux (the sound no longer works). The ABI (and hell, the API) for kernel modules changes from version to version; forget about getting new hardware to work with an older kernel (LWN tries to justify this practice by implying it's not OK to want to run new hardware on an older, stable kernel; my response is simple: Windows has no problem with having a stable driver model allowing new drivers to be made for older OSes yet working without problem on newer OSes. Why can't Linux do this?)
- Because of this issue with drivers, I have two choices. I can have an unstable distribution of Linux (Ubuntu) that works with my hardware but has basic functionality, such as using wireless with static IPs, broken (not to mention a bug that damages hard disks and makes them not last nearly as long as they do in Windows), or I can have a stable distribution of Linux (RHEL/CentOS) that doesn't fully work with my hardware (The wireless driver has issues with crashing and sound doesn't work)
- Fragmentation. I don't like the fact that, with my open source programs, it is difficult to resolve issues like my program not starting up correctly in Linux at boot time. Different distributions of Linux have different ways of doing this and issues like this make supporting Linux applications more difficult. I actually just threw in the towel and no longer support my application except through the public list
- The user community. I don't like people who treat Linux like a religion, being someone who was the that way about Linux a decade ago. I don't think it's appropriate to declare Jihads against people who don't think Linux is God's gift to the earth, and the actions of Linux zealots (which you can see on a number of bulletin boards, such as Slashdot and to a lesser degree Digg) are pretty annoying at times
- Applications. Since Linux isn't a friendly environment for binary-only applications, a large number of quality applications are not ported to Linux. This even includes things like being able to transfer files to and from my cell phone from my computer--Nokia makes a nice software suite that lets me transfer files to and from its internal memory, send text messages using my computer's keyboard, make changes to my cell phone's addressbook, etc. Forget about doing any if this in Linux.
Friday, January 16, 2009
Invasion of the Linux fanboyz
Linux sucks.
It sucks because of its fanboyz. Let me give you one issue.
Some young lady ordered a computer from Dell. For whatever reason, the computer ended up being a computer with Linux instead of Windows. This lady tried using it, and ended up completely lost, unable to take her classes at college, and wants to have Windows on her computer again.
So, how to Linux users react to it? With extreme hostility. A comment calling her an "airhead" gets moderated as a positive, helpful comment on Slashdot.
Pathetic. Someone tries Linux, decides they don't like it, and wants Linux removed from their computer. Linux fanboyz react to this person by calling her every name in the book.
Disgusting.
There's a reason that Linux is a failure on the desktop. It's not because anyone who doesn't like Linux is an idiot. It's because Linux has some serious issues that they need to resolve before Linux is ready for the desktop.
In the meantime, I will continue to use Windows XP as my primary desktop operating system, and a VMware image of Linux for development work.
It sucks because of its fanboyz. Let me give you one issue.
Some young lady ordered a computer from Dell. For whatever reason, the computer ended up being a computer with Linux instead of Windows. This lady tried using it, and ended up completely lost, unable to take her classes at college, and wants to have Windows on her computer again.
So, how to Linux users react to it? With extreme hostility. A comment calling her an "airhead" gets moderated as a positive, helpful comment on Slashdot.
Pathetic. Someone tries Linux, decides they don't like it, and wants Linux removed from their computer. Linux fanboyz react to this person by calling her every name in the book.
Disgusting.
There's a reason that Linux is a failure on the desktop. It's not because anyone who doesn't like Linux is an idiot. It's because Linux has some serious issues that they need to resolve before Linux is ready for the desktop.
In the meantime, I will continue to use Windows XP as my primary desktop operating system, and a VMware image of Linux for development work.
Thursday, August 7, 2008
Linux (OK, Ubuntu) sucks: Updates
Linux's update handling was obviously designed by a bunch of kids in their mommy's basement who spend all day on the internet, and whose mommy pays for them to have a high-speed broadband connection.
Down here in Mexico, I don't have an ultra-fast broadband connection. I don't have internet at home either. I'm just a recovering Linux fanboy trying to develop a life beyond sitting around on Slashdot and Digg all day flaming anyone who doesn't think Linux is God's gift to earth.
So, this morning, I booted in the Ubuntu that I installed last weekend (I had some time to kill before dating a girl Saturday evening). Got on the network, then started seeing if I could download the updates to bring my system up to date.
Well, except the connection here at work was seriously lagging (it does that sometimes). The DNS broke down about halfway through the painfully slow process of seeing what packages were available to be updated.
Does the update manager bother to cache the IPs of the site it connected to to get updates? Nope. Is there a usable DNS server on the localhost port in the default install of Ubuntu? Nope. Does Ubuntu come with a usable compiler and development environment so I can compile my own DNS server on the localhost port? Nope, you have to apt-get it.
apt-get is another usability nightmare. You would think apt is smart enough to figure that anyone who wants a C compiler also wants to, you know, compile programs that run. But, no. Once you get gcc, you also have to hunt down and get the "libc-dev" package to compile anything.
So, anyway, this process of looking for updates failed halfway through. I had a list of packages to update, but I have no idea if some critical security update was missed. I had better things to do with my time than to restart the "look at the big huge package lists to see what updates I need" process.
So I booted back in to Windows.
Let's compare this to Microsoft. With Microsoft, the update process is one that is perfectly usable, even on a dialup connection. It will run the updates in the background, with a low priority given to the packets uses for downloading updates. This required something Linux isn't very good at: Coordination with the people responsible for making sure the operating system is up to date and the people who implement the TCP stack is as simple as getting a few people together in a meeting room somewhere in Redmond and talk about the need to have it so downloading updates can be done on a slow connection that is often offline without affecting the user's internet experience.
The update process is one where, if something fails, like DNS dying halfway through the process, the task is stopped where the failure happened, and can be painlessly started again without needing to go back to square one. It's one where downloads can be interrupted and resumed again at any time.
The closest Linux gets is with CentOS, where I can just go here and download the updates by hand. Should the download be interrupted, I only have to re-download one package instead of the whole spiel. Once I download the updates, I then have to, by hand, see which RPM files I have on my system and update them. OK, I can kinda-sorta automate this with something like for a in *rpm ; do if rpm -qa | grep $( echo $a | awk -F- '{print $1}' ) ; then rpm --upgrade --nodeps $a ; fi ; done but that's a little unreliable and buggy.
But even that doesn't hold a candle to Microsoft's update process. Don't get me started on the distributions where the distribution maker one day lost interest in keeping the distribution up to date, making it so the distribution has no security updates whatsoever.
Down here in Mexico, I don't have an ultra-fast broadband connection. I don't have internet at home either. I'm just a recovering Linux fanboy trying to develop a life beyond sitting around on Slashdot and Digg all day flaming anyone who doesn't think Linux is God's gift to earth.
So, this morning, I booted in the Ubuntu that I installed last weekend (I had some time to kill before dating a girl Saturday evening). Got on the network, then started seeing if I could download the updates to bring my system up to date.
Well, except the connection here at work was seriously lagging (it does that sometimes). The DNS broke down about halfway through the painfully slow process of seeing what packages were available to be updated.
Does the update manager bother to cache the IPs of the site it connected to to get updates? Nope. Is there a usable DNS server on the localhost port in the default install of Ubuntu? Nope. Does Ubuntu come with a usable compiler and development environment so I can compile my own DNS server on the localhost port? Nope, you have to apt-get it.
apt-get is another usability nightmare. You would think apt is smart enough to figure that anyone who wants a C compiler also wants to, you know, compile programs that run. But, no. Once you get gcc, you also have to hunt down and get the "libc-dev" package to compile anything.
So, anyway, this process of looking for updates failed halfway through. I had a list of packages to update, but I have no idea if some critical security update was missed. I had better things to do with my time than to restart the "look at the big huge package lists to see what updates I need" process.
So I booted back in to Windows.
Let's compare this to Microsoft. With Microsoft, the update process is one that is perfectly usable, even on a dialup connection. It will run the updates in the background, with a low priority given to the packets uses for downloading updates. This required something Linux isn't very good at: Coordination with the people responsible for making sure the operating system is up to date and the people who implement the TCP stack is as simple as getting a few people together in a meeting room somewhere in Redmond and talk about the need to have it so downloading updates can be done on a slow connection that is often offline without affecting the user's internet experience.
The update process is one where, if something fails, like DNS dying halfway through the process, the task is stopped where the failure happened, and can be painlessly started again without needing to go back to square one. It's one where downloads can be interrupted and resumed again at any time.
The closest Linux gets is with CentOS, where I can just go here and download the updates by hand. Should the download be interrupted, I only have to re-download one package instead of the whole spiel. Once I download the updates, I then have to, by hand, see which RPM files I have on my system and update them. OK, I can kinda-sorta automate this with something like for a in *rpm ; do if rpm -qa | grep $( echo $a | awk -F- '{print $1}' ) ; then rpm --upgrade --nodeps $a ; fi ; done but that's a little unreliable and buggy.
But even that doesn't hold a candle to Microsoft's update process. Don't get me started on the distributions where the distribution maker one day lost interest in keeping the distribution up to date, making it so the distribution has no security updates whatsoever.
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Linux sucks: Hardware drivers
Today, I'm going to talk about the sad state of Linux's hardware drivers.
Drivers are something you need to use a modern computer. Computer manufactures, in order to reduce the cost of computers, constantly change the hardware a computer uses. This isn't a problem normally; one simply downloads the drivers for the new hardware and everything works fine.
Well, it's not a problem in Windows. See, Microsoft has made it as easy as possible to make a driver in Windows. Once a driver is made, that driver is guaranteed to work for years. Indeed, most XP drivers work just fine in Vista; Microsoft went to a lot of effort to make sure, when you upgrade the OS, the hardware still works.
This level of stability goes both ways. Installing Windows XP on new hardware is possible; installing a version of Linux from the same era (RedHat Enterprise Linux 3 or CentOS 3) on a new computer is impossible.
The problem is that Linux doesn't have a unified driver model. Drivers frequently break between minor kernel versions and forget about having a new driver work with an older kernel.
This is a real-world problem. I bought a Linux compatible notebook. I very specifically chose hardware that would work with Linux with the minimum of hassle. When Ubuntu proved to be unusable (the wireless driver never worked with a static IP and one day just stopped working altogether), I put CentOS 5.2 on this computer.
The video card finally worked with CentOS; X, unlike the kernel, is pretty stable about their driver API. The sound card doesn't work. I only got the networking card to work by installing a third-party driver; it's an older driver version and has an issue with crashing if I don't send traffic over the wireless interface; I usually have a process ping the gateway router once a second, which causes the problem to not manifest itself.
I wish the core kernel developers would find something more productive to do with their time than constantly changing the kernel-level API and ABI for drivers, breaking drivers and making it nay-to-impossible to backport drivers for new hardware.
This is one area where Windows clearly kicks Linux's ass: Drivers. Drivers for a given version of Windows are pretty much guaranteed to work for at least five years. This laptop has no problem working in Windows XP, a seven-year-old OS; none of this laptop's hardware works with a circa-1991 era Linux kernel (yes, I tried this), since new drivers don't work with older kernels.
Drivers are something you need to use a modern computer. Computer manufactures, in order to reduce the cost of computers, constantly change the hardware a computer uses. This isn't a problem normally; one simply downloads the drivers for the new hardware and everything works fine.
Well, it's not a problem in Windows. See, Microsoft has made it as easy as possible to make a driver in Windows. Once a driver is made, that driver is guaranteed to work for years. Indeed, most XP drivers work just fine in Vista; Microsoft went to a lot of effort to make sure, when you upgrade the OS, the hardware still works.
This level of stability goes both ways. Installing Windows XP on new hardware is possible; installing a version of Linux from the same era (RedHat Enterprise Linux 3 or CentOS 3) on a new computer is impossible.
The problem is that Linux doesn't have a unified driver model. Drivers frequently break between minor kernel versions and forget about having a new driver work with an older kernel.
This is a real-world problem. I bought a Linux compatible notebook. I very specifically chose hardware that would work with Linux with the minimum of hassle. When Ubuntu proved to be unusable (the wireless driver never worked with a static IP and one day just stopped working altogether), I put CentOS 5.2 on this computer.
The video card finally worked with CentOS; X, unlike the kernel, is pretty stable about their driver API. The sound card doesn't work. I only got the networking card to work by installing a third-party driver; it's an older driver version and has an issue with crashing if I don't send traffic over the wireless interface; I usually have a process ping the gateway router once a second, which causes the problem to not manifest itself.
I wish the core kernel developers would find something more productive to do with their time than constantly changing the kernel-level API and ABI for drivers, breaking drivers and making it nay-to-impossible to backport drivers for new hardware.
This is one area where Windows clearly kicks Linux's ass: Drivers. Drivers for a given version of Windows are pretty much guaranteed to work for at least five years. This laptop has no problem working in Windows XP, a seven-year-old OS; none of this laptop's hardware works with a circa-1991 era Linux kernel (yes, I tried this), since new drivers don't work with older kernels.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
OK, I just didn't publish two poor arguments
OK, a couple of people tried publishing some rather pathetic arguments trying to argue that Linux is not a commercial failure. Pathetic argument number one:
And a couple of dumb arguments from another person:
This particular person posted some other arguments:
It's difficult to buy a Toyota Prius. You have to get signed up and go on a waiting list to get one. The wait can sometimes be months. Despite this, the Prius is extremely popular. To get a Dell with Linux, all you have to do is go to go to this page and order your Dell from there. Much easier than getting a Prius, yet Linux computers aren't exactly selling like hotcakes.
This user also pointed out that Dell specials don't exist for Linux computers. Not true; a year ago there was a Dell special that existed for Windows, not Linux, on the 1420, and it even made it to the Slashdot front page. So much stink was raised about it, Dell recanted and made the special available for Linux users also.
Anyway, if you want to post your fanboy arguments, please do so in the Linux haters blog. Any other posts trying to argue that everyone is secretly using Linux instead of Windows on the desktop, or that more than 2% of desktop users use Linux will not be published. Save your rant for the Linux haters blog.
My next article will be about the reasons why Linux has failed on the desktop.
If you're technically competent enough to use Linux, you're probably not buying Dell computers voluntarilyBzzt. Argumentum ad hominem. Please play again. Let's see. I'm technically competent enough to use Linux. Hell, I'm technically competent enough to create my own Linux distribution. I use a Dell. They're fine computers.
And a couple of dumb arguments from another person:
However, calling Linux a "commercial failure" with "less than 1% marketshare" is wrong.Ok, nice assertion. Does this person have any stats to back up their argument. Let's see:
The stats for the sites that I work with show between 5% and 7% Linux market shareBzzt. Anecdotal evidence. I specifically asked the fanboys to not post that kind of evidence; I wish fanboys would, like, actually read my blog entries before trying to comment.
This particular person posted some other arguments:
You can't really point to Dell stats until the mainstream customization form has a radio button for Ubuntu for $50 less than WindowsErr, if a significant number of users wanted Linux on their computers, the Dell Linux program would have been successful enough for them to do that. The fact of the matter is that Dell doesn't want to deal with the support nightmare of average users finding this (to them) monstrosity called Linux on their computer because they clicked the wrong button. This is why Dell makes people go out of their way to get Linux.
It's difficult to buy a Toyota Prius. You have to get signed up and go on a waiting list to get one. The wait can sometimes be months. Despite this, the Prius is extremely popular. To get a Dell with Linux, all you have to do is go to go to this page and order your Dell from there. Much easier than getting a Prius, yet Linux computers aren't exactly selling like hotcakes.
This user also pointed out that Dell specials don't exist for Linux computers. Not true; a year ago there was a Dell special that existed for Windows, not Linux, on the 1420, and it even made it to the Slashdot front page. So much stink was raised about it, Dell recanted and made the special available for Linux users also.
Anyway, if you want to post your fanboy arguments, please do so in the Linux haters blog. Any other posts trying to argue that everyone is secretly using Linux instead of Windows on the desktop, or that more than 2% of desktop users use Linux will not be published. Save your rant for the Linux haters blog.
My next article will be about the reasons why Linux has failed on the desktop.
Sunday, July 13, 2008
Linux is a commercial failure
If you buy a Dell computer with Linux preinstalled, you get two benefits:
What does this mean? It means no one wants to use Linux on the desktop.
Now, I am aware how Linux fanboys think. Before you try and post the usual "But those statistics are wrong" spiel, other statistics say pretty much the same thing; browser stats at web sites; Loki's failure; etc. If you want to question these statistics, do so with solid evidence showing that more than, oh, 5 percent of desktop users using Linux. And don't waste my time with "Me and my three buddies all use Linux" antecedents. [2]
So, in my next articles, I will talk about why it is, some 14 years after Linux 1.0 was released it has made no headway on the desktop.
- Sam
[1] The volume of Linux computers purchased is still some 40,000 computers purchased per month.
[2] Comments are moderated and regurgitations of these spiels will not be approved. Come up with something original, guys.
- The computer is about $50 cheaper than the equivalent Windows computer
- The computer's hardware is known to work with Linux
What does this mean? It means no one wants to use Linux on the desktop.
Now, I am aware how Linux fanboys think. Before you try and post the usual "But those statistics are wrong" spiel, other statistics say pretty much the same thing; browser stats at web sites; Loki's failure; etc. If you want to question these statistics, do so with solid evidence showing that more than, oh, 5 percent of desktop users using Linux. And don't waste my time with "Me and my three buddies all use Linux" antecedents. [2]
So, in my next articles, I will talk about why it is, some 14 years after Linux 1.0 was released it has made no headway on the desktop.
- Sam
[1] The volume of Linux computers purchased is still some 40,000 computers purchased per month.
[2] Comments are moderated and regurgitations of these spiels will not be approved. Come up with something original, guys.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Linux Sucks: Clarification
I noticed that my last Linux sucks article wasn't clear about how I borked my Linux install, so I will explain what happened more clearly:
I installed CentOS 5.2. I like a distribution that works and will continue to work, complete with security bugs being patched, without having to reinstall the OS every 6 months. You know, like Windows. Also, I used RedHat from 1997 until 2004, and a combination of Fedora and CentOS from 2004 until mid-2007, so I'm more comfortable with an RPM-based distribution than a .deb-based one, since, among other reasons, Debian packagers are known to add security bugs to programs.
I then went to atrpms to get drivers for my wireless card. These RPMS are designed to work with CentOS/RHEL, and I only installed the drivers for my wireless card.
Anyway, the atrpms wasn't what borked my system.
What borked my system was going to mirrors.kernel.org, downloading the CentOS updates, and starting to install them by hand. You know, like how one updated RPM-based distributions for years.
It would have been fine if I had RTFM and did "rpm -e --allmatches --nodeps"; however I thought fixing this with rpm was impossible because "rpm -e -f" doesn't do the right thing ("-f" here really ought to be treated like "--allmatches --nodeps". Maybe one day I'll submit a patch).
Once I had the xulrunner rpm corrupting my database making "yum update" impossible, I did a Google search on various terms ("Same RPM installed twice", "Corrupt RPM database", etc) and the answers I saw told me to edit files in /var/lib/rpm by hand. So I did that, which completely broke things and forced a reinstall of CentOS.
And, oh, I do have some things in /usr/local/bin. Among other things, version 1 of the FVWM window manager and version 3.96 of the Lame mp3 encoder (which I feel sounds better than Lame 3.97). And, no, that isn't what caused the problem.
- Sam
I installed CentOS 5.2. I like a distribution that works and will continue to work, complete with security bugs being patched, without having to reinstall the OS every 6 months. You know, like Windows. Also, I used RedHat from 1997 until 2004, and a combination of Fedora and CentOS from 2004 until mid-2007, so I'm more comfortable with an RPM-based distribution than a .deb-based one, since, among other reasons, Debian packagers are known to add security bugs to programs.
I then went to atrpms to get drivers for my wireless card. These RPMS are designed to work with CentOS/RHEL, and I only installed the drivers for my wireless card.
Anyway, the atrpms wasn't what borked my system.
What borked my system was going to mirrors.kernel.org, downloading the CentOS updates, and starting to install them by hand. You know, like how one updated RPM-based distributions for years.
It would have been fine if I had RTFM and did "rpm -e --allmatches --nodeps"; however I thought fixing this with rpm was impossible because "rpm -e -f" doesn't do the right thing ("-f" here really ought to be treated like "--allmatches --nodeps". Maybe one day I'll submit a patch).
Once I had the xulrunner rpm corrupting my database making "yum update" impossible, I did a Google search on various terms ("Same RPM installed twice", "Corrupt RPM database", etc) and the answers I saw told me to edit files in /var/lib/rpm by hand. So I did that, which completely broke things and forced a reinstall of CentOS.
And, oh, I do have some things in /usr/local/bin. Among other things, version 1 of the FVWM window manager and version 3.96 of the Lame mp3 encoder (which I feel sounds better than Lame 3.97). And, no, that isn't what caused the problem.
- Sam
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
