this post was submitted on 22 Dec 2023
141 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37801 readers
208 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
People are mad at MS for being MS. MS isn't great, Windows is flawed, and there should be better alternatives. People would be quick to move to Linux if it worked for them. Most desktops now are for gaming. Most gamers have Nvidia. Linux famously has issues with Nvidia because 90% of the distros out there decided to jump on to Wayland before it was even half done. If that's the state of Linux where my 8-year-old Windows 10 machine still gets updates regularly and runs fine. Windows 10 will actively prevent you from trying to upgrade and bricking your system whereas Linux is absolutely like "Go ahead, hope you read all the patch notes for the 1000s different updates you are about to get!" Most people will go with Windows because Linux doesn't work for them.
Overall Linux has the power to be good, it just doesn't have the community will power to do so.
How the narrative has turned Nvidias active sabotage into Linux maintainers fault is beyond me.
Latest for their reluctance to act on scalpers it should be transparent what you're getting into with Nvidia.
And then people like you write thing like this... Why?!
Nvidia works fine on X11. You might say it's Nvidia's fault for not supporting Wayland more or not having open drivers but the truth is, it doesn't truly matter. What matters is the end result.
Wanna come configure optimus for me?
On windows it's trivial.
I think the disconnect here is that others are saying "they aren't supporting us," and your response is pretty much "lol, abandon what you're doing and go back to the corporations." A totally fair take, but how you're delivering it comes across as missing their point.
Also "it works on windows" is a terrible rebuttal in a discussion where you first say "it works fine on x11"
My point is that Linux does nothing to make it easy to support. Nvidia even has made an open source kernel driver. https://github.com/NVIDIA/open-gpu-kernel-modules Nvidia is doing a lot of work to support Linux and people don't seem to see it.
A question to configure Nvidia Optimus is also a terrible rebuttal in the first place. Optimus is blocked because Linux kernel doesn't want proprietary blobs. AMD has the same exact issue.
The problem is that nvidia's drivers are shit but we couldn't do anything because for the longest time, for nvidia cards to work at a decent speed, it requires the drivers to be signed by nvidia.
We couldn't do anything and you are blaming us for that.
Now that this, AFAIK, has been lifted new things like NVK are emerging.
The problem has been reluctance abd uncooperativeness from nvidia, not the linux community
The cause is what should matter because that's what could influence future decisions.
And there is no Wayland mandate anyway so I don't understand that side of the argument either - there is no "Linux" in this room who decided to switch...
So then Linux as a community needs to foster better working relations and funding for developers to get major things working on their platform.
No, it's more of a community hivemind which is part of the issue. A hivemind can act together for the most part but it increasingly becomes hard to have direction on a hivemind. It goes where it wants, you can't direct it but only offer it paths. So the majority of Linux users seem to want to scream that Linux is fine to use for common users while also saying "Well we don't need to be a majority OS anyways, we shouldn't invest time into trying to become one." Any feedback actual users give to Linux communities ends up like this discussion, just filled with excuses or remarks that the user is holding it wrong. Using the wrong hardware, using the wrong distro, not being knowledgeable enough. Yet they do nothing to resolve those issues.
So regarding this part:
I don't think anything can do that. Linux future decisions aren't influenceable except by contributors and they do what they want without really being able to tell them that the OS they've contributed to is somehow broken.
See and that's what's backwards from my point of view. Even though I was on win mainly back then I refused to buy Nvidia because of their shitty practices.
I'm talking about your and my behavior not about anyone else. :)
Cool, AMD also isn't a saint: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_FX#Controversy https://www.pcgamer.com/starfield-partners-with-amd-and-oh-boy-the-internet-is-not-happy/ every major company has it's issues. I don't hate AMD, I'd probably still buy them if I found them as good as Nvidia but overall I don't. They still do some shady stuff like blocking rival upscalers or straight-up lying to customers.
So if you base your opinion of a company around one thing, that's fine. More power to you. I see these large corporate hardware overlords as all the same and work with what makes my life easier.
My base opinion is flexibility. You blamed first Linux then Wayland now you're what about AMD... What's YOUR point?
You can stick with windows and Nvidia your whole life all I ask is not spread your bullshit from your OP.
My point is every large piece of tech is flawed and you have to find what you can work with. My original comment (not post, btw) isn't bullshit and if you want to insult people, go to a different instance. This is beehaw, Be nice. I'm not going to carry on a conversation with you calling names and acting clearly in bad faith. If you don't like my opinion, don't engage but I am able to have a my reasonable opinion about software.
Both Intel and AMD GPUs work fine on Linux. Both work fine with Wayland.
Wayland has been around for over a decade and has been in a usable state for the last 3 or so years.
Attributing the fact that Nvidia stuff still barely works to the fact that some distros have made Wayland the default is just stupid wrong.
Besides, Nvidia experience isn't/wasn't the smoothest even on Xorg. Linux desktop is simply not a priority for Nvidia.
k, so for the least used hardware, linux works fine. Good to know.
Eh, no, KDE last year just barely started working with Wayland.
The popular distros are what counts. Debian, Ubuntu, and Fedora. Just because you have some minor 0.00001% usage distro that still defaults to X11 doesn't really matter.
Worked well enough for me to run into the dozen of other issues that Linux has. While I am sure you will just blow it off as not the true fault of Linux, the result is the same. I like most people want a usable environment. Linux doesn't provide that out of the box. You can argue excuses for it all day but the end of it is, it's not going to be a useful OS until it works out of the box with things like wacom tablets (which are broken with nvidia drivers), xbox controllers (which are just broken unless you do research and install the correct driver), and tons of incompatible software (which I am sure you can blame the developers for.) The end result is the same though, you don't have a working environment.
Yeah, basically. Which raises a question: how companies with much smaller market share can justify providing support, but Nvidia, a company that dominates the GPU market, can't?
Debian supports several DEs with only Gnome defaulting to Wayland. Everything else uses X11 by default.
Some other popular distros that ship with Gnome or KDE still default to X11 too. Pop!_OS, for example. Zorin. SteamOS too, technically. EndeavorOS and Manjaro are similar to Debian, since they support several DEs.
Either way, none of those are Wayland exclusive and changing to X11 takes exactly 2 clicks on the login screen. Which isn't necessary for anyone using AMD or Intel, and wouldn't be necessary for Nvidia users, if Nvidia actually bothered to support their hardware properly. But I digress.
Oh, it's no way perfect. Never claimed it is.
This both depends on the disto you use and on what you consider a "usable environment".
If you extensively use Office 365, OneDrive, need ActiveDirectory, have portable storage encrypted with BitLocker, etc. then, sure, you won't have a good experience with any distro out there. Or even if you don't, but you grab a geek oriented distro (e.g. Arch or Gentoo) or a barebones one (e.g. Debian) you, again, won't have the best experience.
A lot of people, however, don't really do a whole lot on their devices. The most widely used OS in the world, at this point in time, is Android, of all things.
If all you need to do is use the web and, maybe, edit some documents or pictures now and then, Linux is perfectly capable of that.
Real life example: I've switched my parents onto Linux. They're very much not computer savvy and Gnome with it's minimalistic mobile device-like UI and very visual app-store-like program manager is significantly easier for them to grasp. The number of issues they ask me to deal with has dropped by... A lot. Actually, every single issue this year was the printer failing to connect to the Wifi, so, I don't suppose that counts as a technical issue with the computer, does it?
I use Gnome (Wayland) with an AMD GPU. My tablet is plug and play... Unlike on Windows. Go figure.
"most" desktops are used in business and other organizations, not by gamers, and it is these customers and their systems that will be the bulk of the e-waste generated by the forced-obsolescence of their hardware due to 10's EOL and 11's 'new' requirements.
At least one computer in every US household (these stats show 2 but let's just keep it one https://www.statista.com/statistics/1107206/average-number-of-connected-devices-us-house/ since it is an average). It's hard to say that desktops are mostly used in business since there are only 754,633 office workers in the US (https://www.zippia.com/office-worker-jobs/demographics/) and 131.43 million households. ( https://www.statista.com/statistics/183635/number-of-households-in-the-us/ )
Also, many people used Windows XP after its EoL, so much so that they increased it. It's likely going to be the case here. Windows 10 EoL doesn't mean the end of use. People seriously, care little about security. They don't care about having the latest updates. They care about using a functioning computer.
Did you actually think about this for a second? Do you really think only 0.2% of the American population or 0.4% of American workers are working in the office? This should be a lesson on not to pick the first Google result.
Linux is only a problem for folks used to someone else. Also, the article is about ewaste. Meaning, these machines are going to be trashed unless someone puts linux on them. So I'd say your diatribe of misinformation was misplaced.
I assume you mean for folks used to something else and if that's what you mean, no, it's not. People want to play minecraft, fortnite, and use office without problems. Hell, right now with how the Nvidia/Wayland situation is, I can't even launch the fedora 36 live cd to install it without it crashing on my 3080, amd ryzen 9.
No, it doesn't, It means they'll be using Windows 10 without patching. At the EoL, Windows 10 doesn't uninstall itself.
At EoL, corporate security tells the IT department to uninstall it.
Windows works great because MS tapes it back together slightly faster than it falls apart.
When EoL hits, those devices are either trashed, firewalled into oblivion, or assimilated into the kube.
In that case, big corporations are already on Windows 11 and have thrown away any Windows 10 computer that couldn't upgrade. Most of those machines go home with people though.
if this was true then Windows XP and 7 wouldn't have lasted as long as they did.
I know someone who only just switched from XP to 10. They literally did it yesterday, after battling with 10 for a couple of months - eventually they relented and replaced the components that were simply too old to work with 10. They only upgraded they reached a point where too much of the software they relied upon ceased being compatible with XP. Technically their 15 year old graphics card is now unnecessary landfill, since it was working and my friend didn't want to stop using it - but I'm not sure I'd say a graphics card that has been in continuous use for so long could really be considered "wasted" even if it was still functional at the time of disposal.
Seems to me that the problem of working computers (and individual components) going to waste while still being usable, due to changes in software requiring changes in OS is not new. The only way to prevent it would be to ban all further development of both hardware and software, so that hardware never becomes out of date.
@frog @MJBrune I don't think we need to ban development, I think we need to resume focus on optimization so that things like a chat app don't take up 1+ GB of RAM for example. If the operating system can still fit in old hardware's specs, then unless someone is trying to do a task that is demanding for the currently available hardware (and it sounds like 15yo graphics card ain't in that demographic) then it should largely be a case of update operating system, grab new versions of programs, and be about your day.
Yes being pedantic is easy. Did you have a point? What does nvidia's failings have to do with anything? Pull that garbage out, drop in linux mint and donate it to a poor kid that needs it for school.
I think you're massively over-generalizing here to make Linux look like an unstable mess. Rolling release distros are the ones that want you to read the patch notes. Arch is the poster child for those. Stable distros like Mint and Ubuntu and elementaryOS don't brick your system with every update. They hold back updates and stick with older kernels to ensure stability. Linux is, already, very good. It sounds like you haven't used it for any length of time. Valve's work on Proton has made Linux gaming viable for a whole lot of people, but the majority of computer users don't play intense video games. They want web browsing, email, office software, that kind of thing. Linux does those just great on almost any device all the way down to Raspberry Pi boards.
I have to agree with this. I tried Linux a couple of months ago, and ran into those issues with Nvidia. My computer was reasonably stable in the desktop environment using a particular version of the drivers, so as long as I was happy to never update the drivers and never do anything but email, web browsing, and word processing, Linux would have been fine. If I wanted to play any games or do any digital art or anything else that required my graphics card, it was either unstable or running barely faster than continental drift, depending on which set of drivers I was using.
Like, I do think Linux is pretty cool, but it very much feels like a project for people who have the time and money to continuously tinker with their computer to get it working exactly as they want. It's not there yet on the "it just works no matter what you do" front, which is what the vast majority of computer users need from their operating system. Windows, for all its many faults, is broadly stable and can largely be ignored once it's installed - although I do think it benefits from a reformat every 12-18 months.
I think Linux blows windows out of the water as a server operating system. I've been using it that way for over 25 years now.
For desktop, there's a few problems. First is that the average user cannot install an operating system. So unless it comes pre-installed they're going to be out of luck. The second is that I've not found a distro that won't occasionally just blow itself up on an upgrade. Driver issues, circular dependencies, and all manner of other things that a normal user just doesn't know how to deal with.
Then you get to gaming. Which is WAY WAY better all the time. But, knowing what works and what doesn't, which drivers to use, the best distro that has most of the gaming stuff already sorted for you. Not to mention the Wayland + NVidia issues that people are also talking about here. Also, I've never proven it. But on FPS games it feels like there's just a bit more latency on linux (albeit I think overall most games run smoother on linux).
I think Desktop is still great on Linux. But for mass consumption, it still has a way to go and I do wonder if, while windows exists and is preinstalled on everything if it will ever be more than a niche thing. Most users don't know there's an alternative and for sure would have no clue how to go about installing it.
And if your machine was to be tossed in the trash otherwise, how well do the proprietary drivers operate in the dump?
I might as well have tossed my computer in the trash if I'd kept Linux on it, since I couldn't actually do anything with it.
compare this to your previous statement :
Can it do all these totally normal and useful things or is it trash because you can not do anything with it? What nebulous "stuff I need my computer to do" is linux not stable enough for?
I don't need a server, nor an office desktop. I need something that can play games and do digital art, both of which Linux is not stable enough for, which I stated in my initial post. A computer that crashes every couple of minutes while gaming or doing digital art is not useful for me. Chucking my perfectly good Nvidia graphics card in the bin so I can buy something else that is more compatible with Linux is wasteful. And since starting my degree, I have also determined that about 50% of the software I need to use for group project modules doesn't work on Linux and doesn't have appropriate open source alternatives that wouldn't cause compatibility issues when the files are sent on to other team mates - we've all got to be using the same version of the same software.
So yeah, Linux in its present state doesn't suit my needs.
The real ewaste problem here is not people like me that keep using components until they die from wear and tear, and replace only broken components not entire computers. I'm quite happy to keep using Windows 10 as long as it is compatible with my hardware and software, regardless of whether Microsoft are still supporting it. The problem is the people who throw out perfectly usable computers because the OS is no longer supported.
It is perfect for a poor person that just needs internet and email. But yup, because it didn't meet your use case it is trash. That there is some thinkin'.
Wait, I'm allowed to dis Wayland here!?
Barely, I'm getting a bunch of Linux nerd flak due to a reasonable opinion I made as a top-level comment. So much for Be Nice.
That is because your statement is not particularly reasonable or rooted in reality.
If you want to dis linux that is fine, go right ahead. I crap on Mac all the time and hate MS with a burning passion. I still use them, which I suppose is why I hate them. I frequently hate linux too, that is just the nature of being in IT.
things have generally been going good in this section of the thread, but just a general reminder to all participants that thoughtful comments with some time put into them (as a few of the replies to this comment have been) are going to lead to more constructive discourse than quick, impulsive ones. you're also definitely not obliged to respond to everything you disagree with or anyone who replies to you, so keep that in mind
I maintain a Linux server at work which has our ERP on it (I wouldn't say I'm great at it but know the basics). I use Linux at home for a few projects and things like routers, etc. My daily PC at home is Windows. I like Linux but the issues I've had in the past, while they can be resolved, generally take up more time that I'm willing to put in. I don't want a hobby just to keep my PC working.
Because you were not just looking at the web and email, the issues are not relevant. Most folks are not setting up a load balancer or adding an extra NIC. Your protestations are invalid anyway as the article is about ewaste, and not personal choice given all options. These devices are what they are. So given the circumstances, it is put linux on them or they are trash.
That's absolutely the case and it reminds me that Linux is a hobby OS for trinkering. Not a production OS for people who want to get stuff done. From 2008 to 2014 I used Linux as my daily driver. After that, I switched to Linux every year to see if it got better and it never truly has. This year I finally nuked my Linux hard drive and put NTFS on it as a 4th SSD for Windows to use. Linux might be ready one day but it will be because of a proprietary company gave it direction, motive, and industry connections to solve the problems with it.
It is so obivious that you have never used linux... or you have only tried vanilla arch or something
I've used it since about 2007. I've used Ubuntu, Fedora, Linux Mint, Manjaro, and Arch, Was a FreeBSD porter for a few years, and have a lot of experience releasing games for Linux, Mac, and consoles. It's clear you have no clue about me and are mindlessly defending an OS you are overly obsessed with. Don't worry, I was there a few years ago. There is help out there.