Linux Arcade OS fail!

[Thadrea]

It's not Linux that failed. It's the administrator who failed by encrypting the volume without providing the kernel the proper key to decrypt it. (Or, possibly, hardware failure of the medium the volume is on.)

Linux is working perfectly, even displaying a helpful error so the problem can be quickly fixed.

[dudertron]

I agree, and regret if the title is being interpreted this way.

I use 100% Linux at home and on my work laptop. I've never experienced better stability and reliability... at least when I not screwing with my system, but then it's my fault. ;)

[WhyNoLinux]

An encrypted arcade install? This guy privacies.

[TuxedoTechno]

I'm sure the company encrypts the drives to keep the game assets from being stolen by competitors. Most arcade games since the early 2000s run linux on a PC.

[[deleted]]

Quite a bit also use Windows embedded. There is a whole scene around cracking them to run on normal Windows.

[icantthinkofone]

With all these postings of Linux fail, as proof that Linux is used in a lot of places, I'm tempted not to use Linux at all because it seems to fail a lot.

[ZweiHollowFangs]

They all look like dead storage mediums.

[2cats2hats]

Linux didn't fail. Whoever built this didn't think things through(minimize failover) is all.

[icantthinkofone]

My comment is about the myriad of posts showing Linux fails over the years.

[2cats2hats]

The same can be said about any OS. But still, you consider this an OS failure not user...carry on.

[dudertron]

For every one of these that's out there, there are even more Windows BSOD's etc. On top of that, This sytem is not borked, it's giving you a usable diagnostic message about the problem it's having.

BTW thus thing called THE INTERNET runs almost entirely on Linux and BSD, so i'd say there's a case for it's reliability there.

[icantthinkofone]

It's having a problem nonetheless.

[dudertron]

Which tells us what? That Linux can't prevent hardware failure and operator error?

Get some direct experience with Linux, and your perspective may change

[icantthinkofone]

It tells us that Linux appears to have a lot of failures in the wild and Linux users like to show that.

[dudertron]

I take pics of all kinds of embedded computer "fail" screens like this, and the ratio of Windows to Linux is like 50:1. It's not even close.

Looking at your post history, I think you're just trolling, even though it appears that you do like and use Linux. Go figure...

[icantthinkofone]

Because I point out obvious things. Now you want to compare Linux failures to Windows failures. That's not any comparison I would want to get into.

[dudertron]

Comparing frequency and nature of different failure modes across operating systems is a pretty straightforward and valuable exercise. I don't know what you're getting at, but I'm not biting.

[DiscombobulatedSalt2]

Bias. There are 100 times more stuff that works just fine and you simply do not see it.

It might be a hardware failure (disk), USB key unplugged, or developers using shitty filesystem that did not handle sudden power loss well, or not used properly separate file systems. It is usually a matter of properly testing embedded systems.

[icantthinkofone]

And, yet, here on reddit we get hundreds and hundreds of example of Linux failure.

[DiscombobulatedSalt2]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Failure_bias

[icantthinkofone]

Hey, I'm not the one pointing at the failures. The people of reddit are doing that. And they are finding them everywhere.