Not trying to start flamewars, but more and more I wonder how much are people willing to put up with such practices. On linux for 15+ years and everytime I try to use mac or win, it is an ordeal. And ads. F*cking ads in a system someone has purchased. And spying. Really user hostile environment. No, thank you.
Also the OS mostly “just works”, just last week my Linux laptop disabled NVIDIA GPU (and almost bricked itself?? Not sure, had to fix apt) during automated updates
You have an interesting definition of "bricked"
That's defined as "the device has become a brick, cannot be recovered". It was mostly popularized by broken firmware updates which effectively destroyed the device, as it could no longer be salvaged.
You calling a borked package install in userspace almost bricked is telling about your technical capability.
And I agree that people that are basically technologically illiterate should not use Linux.
They could if someone administers it for them, but if nobody can help them - it's just not the right choice.
I think you might be betraying your own technical literacy gaps with that comment. In many Linux distros, your package manager can update your kernel and boot loader, from userspace. Yes plenty of safeguards exist to try to prevent really bad things from happening. Furthermore, brick has become slang for “doesn’t work”. I dislike the linguistic shift just as much as you but we can give the benefit of the doubt that the point is that everyday Linux uses still encounter massive problems like this with higher than normal frequency.
Which is the whole point, no? There would be more Linux everywhere if it didn’t occasionally break in ways that require special expertise to fix.
> i think you might be betraying your own technical literacy gaps with that comment. In many Linux distros, your package manager can update your kernel and boot loader, from userspace.
You think wrong.
I maintain multiple Linux system on the side an know about it well enough.
The Nvidia drivers however are not bios/uefi in case you didn't know. That's what firmware is.
Those can still be flashed from a root Linux booted into a graphical interface, but nonetheless were not the topic of discussion.
Aside from that - a borked kernel can still be easily recovered for most nowadays, as they usually keep the old versions around with a simple picker after an unsuccessful boot.
Still, I'm unable to grasp the point youre making in relation to what I said. I thought I was very explicitly recommending against people without any technological capability to use Linux... You seem to agree?
My impression of you is not something that can be right or wrong.
This thread spawned off of a discussion about how people still use Apple because though Linux may be easier than it's ever been it's still hard for anybody to run a Linux desktop system without occasional downtime and repair when something breaks. That was the point of the comment you responded to.
You responded to
"and almost bricked itself?? Not sure, had to fix apt"
with
"well um axually you don't know what bricked means and that's probably a sign that you're too dumb to use linux. people who are too dumb to use linux shouldn't use it".
I felt like your response wasn't fair. So I replied. But to be crystal clear:
1. they did fix their problem, but it was not a fun time for them. I can empathize 1000% with that. Sometimes I just want to do something and Linux (and everything I sign up for when deploying it) itself gets in the way. When an apt update causes a boot failure, it's annoying and it gets in the way.
2. "bricked" has evolved colloquially. never mind that the author used the term "almost bricked" to indicated they knew it wasn't hard bricked but intended to communicated that it also wasn't functional. there's a way for you to add commentary about the definition of bricked without attacking the person's technical aptitude
All in all, you, me, and the comment you initially replied to are saying the same thing: to operate linux you need to have a level of tolerance to deal with the occasional issues that come with it. And for many people that's not the right balance. Even many technical people choose more stable and predictable daily drivers. Everything else you introduced to the discussion detracted from that point. That's why I commented.
vitro · · focus · HN ↗
tomp · · focus · HN ↗
Build quality (aluminum), charging (magsafe), screen resolution, battery life, noise (or lack thereof), trackpad…
It’s like other vendors aren’t even trying.
Also the OS mostly “just works”, just last week my Linux laptop disabled NVIDIA GPU (and almost bricked itself?? Not sure, had to fix apt) during automated updates
ffsm8 · · focus · HN ↗
That's defined as "the device has become a brick, cannot be recovered". It was mostly popularized by broken firmware updates which effectively destroyed the device, as it could no longer be salvaged.
You calling a borked package install in userspace almost bricked is telling about your technical capability.
And I agree that people that are basically technologically illiterate should not use Linux.
They could if someone administers it for them, but if nobody can help them - it's just not the right choice.
dcow · · focus · HN ↗
Which is the whole point, no? There would be more Linux everywhere if it didn’t occasionally break in ways that require special expertise to fix.
ffsm8 · · focus · HN ↗
You think wrong.
I maintain multiple Linux system on the side an know about it well enough.
The Nvidia drivers however are not bios/uefi in case you didn't know. That's what firmware is.
Those can still be flashed from a root Linux booted into a graphical interface, but nonetheless were not the topic of discussion.
Aside from that - a borked kernel can still be easily recovered for most nowadays, as they usually keep the old versions around with a simple picker after an unsuccessful boot.
Still, I'm unable to grasp the point youre making in relation to what I said. I thought I was very explicitly recommending against people without any technological capability to use Linux... You seem to agree?
dcow · · focus · HN ↗
This thread spawned off of a discussion about how people still use Apple because though Linux may be easier than it's ever been it's still hard for anybody to run a Linux desktop system without occasional downtime and repair when something breaks. That was the point of the comment you responded to.
You responded to
"and almost bricked itself?? Not sure, had to fix apt"
with
"well um axually you don't know what bricked means and that's probably a sign that you're too dumb to use linux. people who are too dumb to use linux shouldn't use it".
I felt like your response wasn't fair. So I replied. But to be crystal clear:
1. they did fix their problem, but it was not a fun time for them. I can empathize 1000% with that. Sometimes I just want to do something and Linux (and everything I sign up for when deploying it) itself gets in the way. When an apt update causes a boot failure, it's annoying and it gets in the way.
2. "bricked" has evolved colloquially. never mind that the author used the term "almost bricked" to indicated they knew it wasn't hard bricked but intended to communicated that it also wasn't functional. there's a way for you to add commentary about the definition of bricked without attacking the person's technical aptitude
All in all, you, me, and the comment you initially replied to are saying the same thing: to operate linux you need to have a level of tolerance to deal with the occasional issues that come with it. And for many people that's not the right balance. Even many technical people choose more stable and predictable daily drivers. Everything else you introduced to the discussion detracted from that point. That's why I commented.
ffsm8 · · focus · HN ↗
Did you seriously forget what you wrote in your first sentence if your former comment?
[deleted] · · focus · HN ↗
[deleted]