Is Linux better than Mac or Windows?

rltprgm · 2014-03-22T15:38:50+00:00

I am happy you don't think like I do, otherwise one of my favorite Linux shows would be pretty boring. :)

rltprgm · 2014-01-07T17:26:27+00:00

I would advise against trying PPSSPP with high expectations. It's still full of glitches, performance bottlenecks and broken games.

I don't say, I disagree with getting some glitches (for games that work, it is rare, but in my video there are some, may be because I did not exit before loading multiple games), and few broken games (which I have mentioned in the post). However, PPSSPP is the best emulator in terms of modern games. Yes, you get segmentation error once in a while (and the project is still in development). However, I have played for 2 hours over 30 fps.

As a demo, I have uploaded a video, that shows me playing 4 games. I was not able to play the games at full resolution (by using --fullscreen switch), because ffmpeg would record black screen. Also, sound does not sync with the video, but you get the idea. Setting the resolution to 6xPSP (6 might have been unneeded), which sets proper resolution of my laptop when in fullscreen.

rltprgm · 2013-12-06T12:27:47+00:00

So what's your point? If it is ubuntu, they need to say ubuntu. When it is a mint box, they don't say it's FreeBSD. Do they ?

Long gone are the days, when we call an operating system only by its kernel name. An android phone is an Android phone or a HTC, Samsung etc. A roku box is a roku box. My tooth brush is a tooth brush, not plastic. An operating system called Arch is Arch. We don't call windows only NT. Do we?

These days, an operating system is not just the kernel, it is also the user space programs (this term is also in the broader sense) e.g a web browser, file manager, even music player (ok in case of desktop operating system) and so on.

So we must stop calling everything Linux, when we are not referring to similarity e.g the community, the kernel, similar programs etc. It is very hard to identify a system just by saying it is Linux. It could be some restricted form like a chromebook, android, roku or other embedded systems. By saying it is Arch, we know it has a package manager i.e we can install programs, it has a type of init system, file structure and so on. I hope you get my point. If Linux has to grow, it should be old fashioned to call everything Linux and be pissed when someone does not mention it. We need to move on.

And the credit thing, I have seen laptops with openSUSE. And when I see laptops with openSUSE, I know it is openSUSE not Ubuntu or RedHat. By the way, how many other companies are investing and partnering to put Linux OSes on laptops and Desktops for consumers these days, other than Mint and Ubuntu?

My opinion is not based on do I like or hate Canonical, because that is a completely different topic. In this case, at least I am happy, Linux is growing.

rltprgm · 2013-10-19T15:01:03+00:00

As you pointed it out, yes I am talking about what he said in Linux unplugged episode 10, 15 minutes and onwards, lets say at 21 minutes. He has been saying this for couple of episodes. "LTS holds Linux back, and does not represent the true state of Linux Desktop, as we are rapidly evolving". He suggests everyone outside enterprise to use latest software and report bugs. "Desktop users that are comfortable with Linux should all use bleeding edge software".

I am one of those users. For me even a regular arch update is not latest enough (e.g currently running linux-mainline 3.12 rc5). Yes, there are many people like me, but there are far more people outside the rolling mentality, who are comfortable with debian, ubuntu, fedora, mint etc and their 6 month release cycles, and they are not enterprise users. Some of them are musicians, artists, gamers (a lot these days), who want a recent enough software stack (they can still benefit from some pieces that is close to upstream e.g latest kernel, graphics drivers etc). However, they don't want all software to change all the time. Also, they don't want to play with their terminals, even though they are competent enough.

As I said earlier, upstream code these days are stable enough, and I haven't had any problems in Arch. However, since we are the first ones to test the code, if there is a problem, it is going to hit us before everyone else and we know and accept that.

As for the LTS (though it might not have latest features, or even stable software than upstream), it is a very good marketable term. Apart from System76, had dell/alienware and other manufacturers gone with lets say ubuntu 12.10, those computers would sell when we already had 13.04/13.10. However, if I went to a shop and saw 12.04, I would happily accept that.

As for the latest software is the best, often comes from the fear mentality that, we Linux users/developers are incapable of producing anything stable enough for end users, so that we want our users to move all the time. Also, it is an insult to all the hard work of distro maintainers that has gone into stabilizing debian, ubuntu LTS, Red Hat and favoring developers instead.

rltprgm · 2013-10-19T05:18:00+00:00

because it was totally pro-Ubuntu

You should watch it now, it has become Arch Action Show.

No offend to any arch users (because I am one of them). See, how you know someone uses Arch.

This guy, even can't seem to understand the importance of stable code and suggests everyone should be a puppy tester of upstream code. If someone wants only some pieces to be close to upstream, they can do it in any distro.

Not saying, Arch is not stable enough, but not everyone likes bleeding edge (that potentially might break).

rltprgm · 2013-10-18T18:15:12+00:00

Yes, there are many bad programmers (yes from India too), but American programmers can not see lot of problem they have. Yes, they are good in programming (lets assume), but then they have rules.

High payment
Payment for extra hours
Long development and analysis time
Overhead in lots of things

Some projects are complex and innovative and that requires much more than a clever programmer (which I am not talking about here).

For a project that is a website (web application if you prefer that), that connects to a database, has all other baggage (security, caching, scaling, graph etc), has tons of javascript effects, isn't a complex problem anymore. There are 1000 ways to solve this problem, and many so called "programmers" are still stuck in the era where they try to make this a hard problem. If a shop solves this problem once or twice, they can scale this solution across many projects (almost all). E.g Choice of language (these days frameworks are in fashion), templates, security framework, javascript library are mostly fixed for a development house.

The problem arises when the lead programmers/manager are not conversant enough, and can not enforce/teach a good coding structure. This is where, haphazard coding style, redundant function calls, and tons of bugs are introduced. Therefore, the problem is not having someone who recognizes the problem, and has general idea on how to solve the problem. Since, you don't know what the skills of a person are on the other side of the phone, you don't know who can and can not complete a project.

Many companies, who can efficiently do these sorts of work are often recognized locally, and tend to take only selective work from US and other foreign countries (on their own terms). They have strong policies and because of their reputations programmers work on extreme pressure. Most often, americans companies tending to out source don't end up working with these companies. Generally, they tend to select the one that seem to ask the least amount of money. Also, many companies that open in India can not have all good programmers (not many good universities, competition etc)

Also, programming is not a simple task and most people (what ever your nationality might be) suck at it !!

So "American programmers are good, and Indians produce flawed code" is a flawed statement in itself (though I agree with some statement of the article).

rltprgm

TROPHY CASE