Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 1st Sep 2012 21:15 UTC
Windows The Verge published a video demonstrating how desktop mode and Office 2013 - a desktop application - work on Windows RT, the ARM version of Windows 8. The video showed a desktop mode that clearly didn't work well for touch, and even Office 2013, which has a rudimentary touch mode built-in, didn't work properly either. It looked and felt clunky, often didn't respond properly, and even showed touch lag.
Thread beginning with comment 533615
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Window opportuniry
by darknexus on Sun 2nd Sep 2012 18:50 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Window opportuniry"
darknexus
Member since:
2008-07-15

darknexus: I don't know what OS you normally use, but you seem to be talking about Linux from years ago. I run Fedora on the desktop, and while I have run into some issues, none of them were ever bad enough to keep me from being able to use the system. Part of the issue is that Linux is constantly updating. Linux is under continual advancement.

You've just said it yourself. Most people don't want to be constantly updating, and they're quite content to have a few years between versions. The bleeding edge is called that for a reason, you know.

-While X is certainly a bit old, it has enterprise features that other OS's still don't support, especially when it comes to multi user systems, which Windows and OS X are NOT.

Hmm, where to begin? First, the home user doesn't care one bit if their os has enterprise features. What they se is this: graphics crashed, all my programs went down with it. They do not care if it's because of unstable half-implemented video drivers, nor that some enterprise-level feature is present. They want it to work and do so relatively reliably. X, due to a combination of age and driver instability, is not reliable enough on an unpredictable home user situation. Yes, you can do amazing things with it on the corporate desktop but, to 99% of users, those features will never see the light of day. The other 1%… well, they're already using X.org aren't they? As for multi-user systems… you accuse me of talking about the Linux from years ago. I'll come right back and say you are talking about the Windows from years ago, and OS X? OS X was built on a UNIX userland (FreeBSD-based to be precise) from day one. You do not get much more multi-user than that and yes, I have administered Macs in a multi-user configuration. They are just as multi-user as Linux with X.org, with the advantage of easy configuration in most situations. If you can claim, with a straight face, that OS X and Windows (at least the NT-based versions) are not multi-user, then I'm sorry but I have to take away your geek card. ;)

I have used pulse since it was put in Fedora. In at least the last 2 years I haven't had a single problem.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that you don't do much audio recording or editing, and that you don't use VOIP software to keep in contact with people. Sure, you can play your music through Pulse and usually it will work, but for recording or gaming the latency is just staggering.

Your kernel API's are going to change. Its a fact of life. They do in Windows and OS X as well. Your user space APIs are stable. I can run software that was produced half a decade ago with no problems. (like Loki games).

That doesn't matter if distro x (Ubuntu, I'm looking at you) decides to patch glibc and break binary compatibility. It does happen. Add to that, drivers are not stable in Linux, by which I mean that I cannot simply download a driver and load it. No, it has to match the kernel version and compilation that I have in whichever distribution I'm running. That's ridiculous. I can run drivers, 32-bit ones at least, on Windows 7 now that were created when XP was released. It's not recommended of course, but there are times when it just has to be done. I don't care, and neither does the average user, about what happens to the internal kernel APIs. That's not what I'm talking about. If you are going to change those internal APIs though, you need to keep the external interfaces the same (a userland for drivers if you will). This is what Windows and OS X do, and guess what, it works. All the user has to do is download a driver for their version of the os (or the closest available if there isn't one), install it, and go. It's not that simple in Linux and, until it is, no one except developers and corporate IT departments will adopt it. It will never be that simple because maintaining such a stable external API isn't fun. It's that 20% that no one in the Linux community ever want to do because it doesn't have the shiny factor.

I won't deny that Linux has some issues to work out to get to the desktop. But its not as bad as you make it out to be. Half or more of the problem you listed will never affect normal desktop users anyway.

Come back when you've actually tech supported normal users on Linux as I have. Every problem I've listed is a recurring theme and has been for the last ten years, with the exception of Pulseaudio which is newer. It works for you. It can work for me. We both have the technical knowledge to fix it when something unexpected happens. Most people do not and, while both Windows and OS X can and do break, overall they break far less often. The breakage needs to keep to a minimum for a home desktop and, though programmers don't like to hear it, that means giving up new feature X and fixing old bugs in their programs. It's not fun. It's not rewarding. You'll never get recognized for fixing bugs and keeping stability. It is necessary, however, and this concept is fundamental to the desktop experience.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[6]: Window opportuniry
by AdrianoML on Sun 2nd Sep 2012 19:54 in reply to "RE[5]: Window opportuniry"
AdrianoML Member since:
2010-08-13

You've just said it yourself. Most people don't want to be constantly updating, and they're quite content to have a few years between versions. The bleeding edge is called that for a reason, you know.

If you don't want breakage, use Ubuntu LTS (Just like Google does) or Debian. Fedora is a bleeding edge distro made for linux enthusiasts. Don't try to match bleeding edge systems (like Arch) with "long-term" systems (like Windows).

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that you don't do much audio recording or editing, and that you don't use VOIP software to keep in contact with people. Sure, you can play your music through Pulse and usually it will work, but for recording or gaming the latency is just staggering.


Pulseaudio is a very nice sound systems with low latency or (XOR) low power usage in mind. It does not even overlap with Alsa, it actually let's Alsa do what it's good for (kernel/driver handling) and replaces Alsa Userspace, which was really broken and featureless.
And even though the pulseaudio transition was pretty messy, nowadays you're a fool for not using it.

Add to that, drivers are not stable in Linux, by which I mean that I cannot simply download a driver and load it.

That just show how ignorant you are to "the Linux way". You know, they don't need ABI/API stability for drivers because, hey look, 99.999% of all drivers are included inside the kernel (yay score for monolithic kernels), and so every single change they make automatically takes into account these drivers. Just saying that "you can't simply download a driver and load it" shows how much of a Windows mindset you're trying to bring into the Linux world. That will never change for really GOOD reasons.


If you are going to change those internal APIs though, you need to keep the external interfaces the same (a userland for drivers if you will). This is what Windows and OS X do, and guess what, it works.

Guess what, Linux does THE SAME for the external, userland APIs. You can load up programs statically compiled more than 10 years ago, and they will run fine. (look at my Unreal Tournament 99 post) The reason we don't usually do that is because since we already have source code for pretty much everything we can dynamically link everything, reduce RAM/Disk usage, fix bugs and just recompile everything again. That's what distro do and will keep doing.

All the user has to do is download a driver for their version of the os (or the closest available if there isn't one), install it, and go. It's not that simple in Linux and, until it is, no one except developers and corporate IT departments will adopt it.

Again, since 99.999% of drivers come with the kernel, the user does not need to do anything in Linux. It's actually easier. Oh, and the plug 'n play is much faster. Things only get ugly when no driver is available.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[6]: Window opportuniry
by foregam on Sun 2nd Sep 2012 21:52 in reply to "RE[5]: Window opportuniry"
foregam Member since:
2010-11-17

Hmm, where to begin? First, the home user doesn't care one bit if their os has enterprise features. What they se is this: graphics crashed, all my programs went down with it. They do not care if it's because of unstable half-implemented video drivers, nor that some enterprise-level feature is present. They want it to work and do so relatively reliably. X, due to a combination of age and driver instability, is not reliable enough on an unpredictable home user situation. Yes, you can do amazing things with it on the corporate desktop but, to 99% of users, those features will never see the light of day. The other 1%… well, they're already using X.org aren't they? [...]

In my experience it has only happened with the (pre-AMD) ATI *cringe* and Nvidia binary drivers. The Mobile Radeon chipset in particular is such a crock that it can make a strong man weep. I don't remember X.org crashing on any other hardware.

That doesn't matter if distro x (Ubuntu, I'm looking at you) decides to patch glibc and break binary compatibility. It does happen. Add to that, drivers are not stable in Linux, by which I mean that I cannot simply download a driver and load it. No, it has to match the kernel version and compilation that I have in whichever distribution I'm running. That's ridiculous. I can run drivers, 32-bit ones at least, on Windows 7 now that were created when XP was released. It's not recommended of course, but there are times when it just has to be done. I don't care, and neither does the average user, about what happens to the internal kernel APIs. That's not what I'm talking about. If you are going to change those internal APIs though, you need to keep the external interfaces the same (a userland for drivers if you will). This is what Windows and OS X do, and guess what, it works. All the user has to do is download a driver for their version of the os (or the closest available if there isn't one), install it, and go. It's not that simple in Linux and, until it is, no one except developers and corporate IT departments will adopt it. It will never be that simple because maintaining such a stable external API isn't fun. It's that 20% that no one in the Linux community ever want to do because it doesn't have the shiny factor.

Good point, but I still have to see a desktop Linux user download drivers from the Net. Most of them, third-party drivers included, can be found in the distribution repositories.

You've just said it yourself. Most people don't want to be constantly updating, and they're quite content to have a few years between versions. The bleeding edge is called that for a reason, you know.

Come back when you've actually tech supported normal users on Linux as I have. Every problem I've listed is a recurring theme and has been for the last ten years, with the exception of Pulseaudio which is newer. It works for you. It can work for me. We both have the technical knowledge to fix it when something unexpected happens. Most people do not and, while both Windows and OS X can and do break, overall they break far less often. The breakage needs to keep to a minimum for a home desktop and, though programmers don't like to hear it, that means giving up new feature X and fixing old bugs in their programs. It's not fun. It's not rewarding. You'll never get recognized for fixing bugs and keeping stability. It is necessary, however, and this concept is fundamental to the desktop experience.

For some reason these features are promoted as enterprise stuff, so that's where you get them. Debian and Scientific Linux in my experience are great desktops but don't get as much attention as Ubuntu and Fedora.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[7]: Window opportuniry
by darknexus on Mon 3rd Sep 2012 09:08 in reply to "RE[6]: Window opportuniry"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Good point, but I still have to see a desktop Linux user download drivers from the Net. Most of them, third-party drivers included, can be found in the distribution repositories.

Nice in theory, but for quite a few device classes there simply aren't Linux drivers. Case in point, quite a few modern printers and almost all modern scanners. Granted, it's because these drivers haven't been developed. The reason is simple: there's no standard to target. Printers and scanners are not kernel drivers anymore (thank goodness for that) however, with scanners in particular, you face several problems when developing said driver. The version of sane used, the version of glibc and other libraries it is compiled against, 32-bit or 64-bit, etc. My scanner (Canoscan 5600F) has Linux drivers, but they're almost impossible to get working and require endless amounts of fiddling because the drivers Canon have provided do not match any version of SANE other than the one in RHEL. I'll stress that I understand the reasons and I know how to get it working; I bought this model, in fact, because it's compatible with all major operating systems that I use no matter how fiddly the Linux support is. I know the Linux community would blame Canon at this point and claim they should GPL their drivers (another argument I hate) but, if I were them, I wouldn't even bother making Linux drivers until I could reasonably target the majority of systems out there. That doesn't help the average home user that just wants to scan a few pictures however. To them, it doesn't work and there's nothing they can quickly install to make it work. It either works or it doesn't, and it doesn't help that most hardware doesn't even give an indication when they buy it if it's Linux compatible or not. If the driver is in the repositories and it fully supports your device, great. If it's not, and you're not a tech, you're royally screwed even if said driver does exist because the odds of being able to install it yourself (whether in source or binary form) are close to zero even if you follow the instructions exactly. Further, if your distro updates its kernel and it is a kernel driver, it gets wiped away and you have to do it all over again, and it might not work this next time around if an API has changed.
I haven't even gone into the trouble of trying to use Linux to communicate with an iDevice which, like it or not, is something a lot of home users will want to do. That's an entire can of worms in and of itself and yes, I know this is because of the fact that the developers of libimobiledevice and usbmuxd have to reverse engineer the USB communication protocol that Apple keeps changing. A test for you though: Say that to a typical home user and see if they understand it. My guess is their eyes will glaze over a bit until you finish and then ask: "Well, will it work or not?" Note, this isn't actually a guess. ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Window opportuniry
by TechGeek on Mon 3rd Sep 2012 00:40 in reply to "RE[5]: Window opportuniry"
TechGeek Member since:
2006-01-14

You've just said it yourself. Most people don't want to be constantly updating, and they're quite content to have a few years between versions. The bleeding edge is called that for a reason, you know.


I never said Fedora was the choice to use for a desktop OS. My point was that even in Fedora, which is pretty much as far on the cutting edge as you can get, you don't see the problems you are listing.

As for multi user, Windows is not multi user. Why would you claim the abilities of the NT base, but then complain about how certain features on Linux are enterprise based. The desktop version of Windows is not multi user. Never has been, probably never will be. As for OS X, it wasn't until Lion apparently. I admit, I don't use OS X very much. But still, for most of its life, OS X could only spawn one gui interface at a time. But I will give that it has now progressed to that point.

I have NEVER had X crash and take all my programs with it. I have had it refuse to start. But once started, it has always been rock solid.

I am going to go out on a limb and say that if professional film studios can use Blender and Autodesk on Linux to work on professional films, then the state of Linux audio must not be that bad really.

You run 32 bit Windows XP on WIndows 7? Well good for you. But I guarantee that more drivers for Windows XP don't work on WIndows 7 than do. All three OS's break compatibility on different levels all the time. At least on Linux its not a bloody trade secret when it happens. It gets documented.

Its funny you mention supporting Linux at work. Sounds like you hate your job. I would if I had to use a system that I felt like that about. Simple fact is that distros like RHEL and SUSE and a few others get 10 years of support. They don't get the bleeding edge stuff, they don't break compatibility, they don't have driver issues, they just work. I don't use them for my desktop, but then I like the bleeding edge. But you are complaining about a problem that only really exists in a small portion of the Linux community. A portion I might add, that frequently advertises that they are cutting edge development distros that will have issues.'

I actually support only a few linux people, mostly I deal with Windows and OS X users. And I have to say that I have vastly more problem with WIndows and to a lesser extent OS X than I do with Linux. My sister runs a computer support company, and she has a business because Windows just doesn't work for most people. Between stupid user behavior and malware/virus laiden software, its a giant mess. Linux is immaculate compared to what is out their for Windows users.

Reply Parent Score: -1

RE[7]: Window opportuniry
by edwdig on Mon 3rd Sep 2012 02:49 in reply to "RE[6]: Window opportuniry"
edwdig Member since:
2005-08-22

As for multi user, Windows is not multi user. Why would you claim the abilities of the NT base, but then complain about how certain features on Linux are enterprise based. The desktop version of Windows is not multi user. Never has been, probably never will be


You do realize that the last version of Windows not to come from the NT base was Millenium Edition back in 2000, right? Home users have been on NT since the release of XP back in 2001. Home versions of Windows have been fully multi-user for over a decade now.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[7]: Window opportuniry
by ilovebeer on Mon 3rd Sep 2012 03:14 in reply to "RE[6]: Window opportuniry"
ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

I am going to go out on a limb and say that if professional film studios can use Blender and Autodesk on Linux to work on professional films, then the state of Linux audio must not be that bad really.

Linux has no place in the world or pro audio & video. While a very short list of software may be available, you'll be hard-pressed to find anyone who actually uses it. Real pro audio & video is completely dominated by Windows and OSX systems.

I actually support only a few linux people, mostly I deal with Windows and OS X users. And I have to say that I have vastly more problem with WIndows and to a lesser extent OS X than I do with Linux. My sister runs a computer support company, and she has a business because Windows just doesn't work for most people.

Of course you'll have people who have had good luck with linux. The same can be said for Windows and OSX as well. But, all the linux forums and mailing lists tell another linux story. There IS constant breakage, there IS ongoing problems, there IS no shortage of users fighting to get it to work properly.

Also, claiming that Windows doesn't work for most people doesn't do anything but signal sane people not to take you seriously.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[6]: Window opportuniry
by ichi on Mon 3rd Sep 2012 07:17 in reply to "RE[5]: Window opportuniry"
ichi Member since:
2007-03-06

What they se is this: graphics crashed, all my programs went down with it.


Please correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK the fact that your apps go down along with the X server is because of the frameworks running on top of X not taking advantage of some of it's features.

That is, X itself does actually support resuming your apps when recovering from a crash, so replacing X with something else wouldn't magically fix that problem.

Reply Parent Score: 1