In a fit of rage a while back, I wiped my hard drive and purged everything Windows related (I would maybe have considered dual-booting, but Windows had placed an immovable file at exactly the 10 gig mark of a 13 gig hard drive; fuck that, then). Considering my alternatives, I picked Linux, and installed potato; between a free Debian system, and shelling out money for Corel or RedHat, the choice was obvious, though in all fairness, I installed Slackware first, laughed my balls off, then wiped that.

Since then, I've spent so much of my time screwing around with my computer, trying to climb out of the pit of my ignorance, that I can't get any work done. On the other hand, I've never enjoyed my ignorance this much. But for this reason alone, Linux sucks.

At the day's end, the sense of freedom is more than worth it; in secret, when nobody's looking, I give my computer a hug.

This of course is competely opionated and is really only an argument on Why For Me Linux Sucks.

I've installed RedHat 5.2, SuSe 6.2, and RedHat 7.1 when they all just came out and with none of them I got past more than a few hours playing around with them. Everything in it was just so unintuitive and impossible to figure out.

A lot Linux advocates simply say "well you're just used to Windows, you have to get used to Linux too" and that's true to a certain extent- but only so far. I've rarely ever used Macs, but when I have I have been able to sit down and figure out how to do what I want (change a display setting or troubleshoot network error) in a matter of minutes. I've even managed to figure out lots of things in BeOS back when I didn't even know that much about computers. But now when I know so much more than I used to and even with a tutorial I can't get certain things going (*coughSambacough*).

The lack of standardization is another really, really big pain with me. In Windows every textbox has the same abilities. You can Ctrl+C, Ctrl+V, Ctrl+X, Ctrl+Z, Ctrl+A, Ctrl+Arrow Key, or right click for a menu to do the same in any textbox (with a few rare exceptions). In X-Windows (using Gnome+Sawfish) every single textbox was completely different. From the File Explorer thing locations, GAIM IM windows, to Netscape, they all had completely different and non-labelled commands.

And of course I could always spend hours and hours and hours figuring this stuff out or reading throgh pages of shitty tutorials, but other than some more experience with a Unix-like enviroment, Windows works great for me. Heck, my second computer running 3 mIRCs, AIM, WinSocks, GameSpy3D, and Netscape on Win98SE has been up for 3 weeks at a time (only when roommate had to unplug computer to vaccuum did I have to shutdown). And atleast with Litestep, Netscape has only crashed four times on me since July 2000 (as of May 2001).

Thus there is no benefit in me using Linux, only hours and hours of headaches.
Linux was never intended for the average desktop user and (for the most part) still isn't *. RedHat, SuSe, and Debian are all geared towards businesses. Complaining that you can't get your word processing done as fast as you can in Windows is the equivalent of complaining that the Windows ME machine you just swapped in as a web server for your company keeps crashing. ME isn't made for web servers and Linux isn't really made for desktops *. Noding "Why Porsche Sucks" complaining that you can't fit all of your kids in your brand new Boxster is as irrational as all of the arguments I have seen in the writeups above. Therefore, this is my list as it is correctly applied:

Why Linux Sucks

  • Poor support from local shops and consultants - Many small to medium sized businesses depend on their local computer store when they run into troubles or many have agreements with consultants because plain phone support doesn't always cut it. These places usually have one or more MSCEs. Unfortunately, most don't have an equivalent Linux expert.
  • Linux's bad image among the occasional IS manager - It is hard to convince your manager that Linux would be a better solution for an application when they have never heard of it before or have only been listening to anti-Linux parties.
  • Linux Crankies
  • Lack of hardware support - It is getting better, but there is still hardware that Linux won't recognize.
  • Lack of hardware manufacturer support - Many companies don't think it is worth it to release a driver for Linux for their hardware.

    DISCLAIMER: I am an avid Linux user.

    * Linus Torvalds has stated that making a consumer-oriented desktop is not a priority. Certain distributions are out there, though - namely Mandrake and Corel. There are also tons of desktop-oriented projects and more and more are popping up every day.

  • Gone Jackal is talking about how Linux sucks as a desktop operating system. He is 100% correct. I would not suggest to anyone, even myself, that using Linux or any other free Unix-like on the desktop is going to be at all productive (or even fun). I've been there, I've done that, and my nick should prove it. The idea of Linux sucking as far as a server operating system is a bit less substantial. Microsoft, obviously, wants you to believe Linux sucks. People who listen only to MS might idly believe this, but really it doesn't hold water. Free Unixlikes have an incredible price-to-performance ratio. You can't beat the price, the performance ain't too shabby either.

    The point is, Linux is a foundation, and you can build almost anything on it. For the past few decades, Unix has sort of been grandfathered into the role of server in the back room. But, it can be used for GUI purposes. Look at SGI, or Sun. The reason that "Linux sucks" is 100% of the fault of X11, X-Windows, X, The X Window System, or whatever you wish to call this monstrosity, because that's what it is. Man, does it ever suck. The only reason Linux can't be a viable desktop is because a.) Microsoft dominates the market (although increasingly less so) and b.) X11 fucking sucks and Joe Sixpack would get fed up after about 5 minutes with it and go boot up Windows. In fact, I would probably do the same.

    For an example of how someone is trying to make a good GUI based on a Unix core, look at Mac OS X. Far from perfect yet, but it's getting there. If someone would do this for Linux, and make it not totally suck, we might have something. But until then, Linux has, does, and will continue to, suck for desktop applications. Blaming the inherent faults in X11 on "Linux" isn't really fair, though. It's like someone saying "The internet sucks" when they mean "The world wide web sucks".

    The discussion in this node really should be under "Why X11 sucks", but we all already know that, and the whole point of this writeup is to illustrate how Linux doesn't suck, it just plays host (along with a myriad of other Unixlikes) to the horror that is X11. Don't hate the playa, hate the game.


    The management further apologizes for whatever it may have done to get this node downvoted.

    Log in or registerto write something here or to contact authors.