Let's be honest here
I like Linux as much as the next guy
...... But a violent kick to the 'nards is still more pleasant than Windows 11, so this is a "Luigi Wins By Doing Absolutely Nothing" scenario.
I like Windows 11. It has the best HDR support of any OS, bar none. AutoHDR is a godsend.
My only complaint is about the taskbar, which I fixed by installing StartAllBack.
Off only the top of my head.
-Potentially faster installation
-Free
-More control
-Many distributions from LinuxFromScratch to Mint, making it meet the interests of nearly every demographic
-Wonderful sense of community
-No spying
-No bloatware depending on distro
-No ads
-Many window managers supporting different workflows
-Incredible command line power
-Easy installation of software with package managers
-Less malware
-Fully customizeable ux/ui
-Can uninstall anything you don't want
-Will help you learn how a computer works at a deeper level if you want to
Potentiallyfaster installationParticularly when you're flashing the ISO you downloaded from MS to USB and it doesn't work unless you use MS's magic tool. Thus dropping you into the bootstrap paradox.
Especially because it gets partway through the install before failing to load NVMe drivers complaining there is no installation media to load them from.
It turns out it's faster to install Ubuntu and download one of MS's windows VM's and use that to download and flash a USB than actually install Windows 11.
While installing Linux is faster you can use the Windows ISO directly with Ventoy instead of the Microsoft tool. At least, that's how I do it.
-Potentially faster installation
Installed CachyOs yesterday that must have been the longest install I have been through. I'm liking it so far though.
-No spying
depending on the distro
-No ads
depending on the distro
-Can uninstall anything you don’t want
How can you uninstall
systemd?It will differ by distro, but generally for debian, you begin uninstalling systemd by installing something else like
SysV init:apt install sysvinit-core sysvinit-utils cp /usr/share/sysvinit/inittab /etc/inittabThen you will need to configure grub by editing
/etc/default/grubchanging:GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX_DEFAULT="init=/bin/systemd console=hvc0 console=ttyS0"to
GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX_DEFAULT="init=/lib/sysvinit/init console=hvc0 console=ttyS0"and then executing
update-grubas root.Then you can reboot so that the system boots off of sysvinit instead and then purge systemd with
apt-get remove --purge --auto-remove systemd. This also removes packages that depend on systemd.Then you pin systemd packages to prevent apt from installing systemd or systemd-like packages in the future.
echo -e 'Package: systemd\nPin: release *\nPin-Priority: -1' > /etc/apt/preferences.d/systemd echo -e '\n\nPackage: *systemd*\nPin: release *\nPin-Priority: -1' >> /etc/apt/preferences.d/systemdDepending on if the distro is multiarch, you might also need:
echo -e '\nPackage: systemd:amd64\nPin: release *\nPin-Priority: -1' >> /etc/apt/preferences.d/systemd echo -e '\nPackage: systemd:i386\nPin: release *\nPin-Priority: -1' >> /etc/apt/preferences.d/systemdThis information was sourced from this wiki dedicated specifically to removing systemd on multiple distributions and replacing it with something else:
Kowalski! Analysis!
I was really enjoying the video until he used the word "ricing". While the creator may not know, that word is fairly racist.
A lot of people seem to argue about ricing and the "original" meaning of it. But honestly as an Asian I don't really think any Asian(at least in my country) actually care or even know the meaning of it. The ricing term of the Linux community is far from racism. What so wrong with rice? cuz we love it? I honestly don't get it.
im asian, i like rice. i like linux. im not offended.
Don't shoot the messenger, I'm just sharing what was taught to me. I don't really have the spoons to sit here and debate or defend it.
It is clearly racist. "Ricing" comes from a derogatory term for Asian racing vehicles. You cannot excuse the racism inherent to it by personal ignorance. It's the same logic as black face being racist, whether you're personally aware of the history behind it or not.
Though I no longer live in the US, as an Asian computer scientist, I am quite aware of how it is clearly perceived as a racist term by many Asian Americans. To me, it will also never stop being offensive. So, please, stop with this "ricing" stuff.
have you seen anyone offended by it?
Precisely one person, here in this thread, on behalf of imagined others.
Mental Outlaw is a reich-wing freak, so that's par for the course. Unfortunately, there are a fair amount of these shitheads in the Linux YouTube space.
I'm reposting a reply to similar comment. Replying to "Mental Outlaw is far right and cryptobro". But the TLDR of that could be that he has some takes that people here like and some takes that people here don't like but he is not a National Socialist, otherwise give source. Perhaps Drew has been cooking again?
Those are just insults people, who cannot gasp that someone could have a slightly different opinion about something, use against him.
Some political things about him include: He ...
- is an anarchist (or somewhere on that political spectrum)
- wants to have the right to own a gun
- is pro free speech
- thinks using money should not have to earn mega corporations that much money
- thinks "brother should not kill brother" in the war in Ukraine
- is not a fan of Elon Musk, Teslas or self driving cars
- is pro Free Software and for privacy
Obviously depends on what is meant with "far right nutjob". If it implies that anarchy (no government) is the opposite of socialism (far left - maximum government) then yeah but usually it just means "massive bigot", which I don't think he is, otherwise give source.
Similar with crypto bro. For me it means the pump and dump scheme scammer or at least someone who is pro crypto because he sees it as a mean to get rich quick. But if "Crypto bro" just means anyone who likes the advantages of crypto, then he indeed is one.
But regardless of how we name things, he doesn't have any evil values (as far as I know). He just has different opinions than the average lemmy user. It should not be hard to tolerate him, considering this platform is a mass murderer fanclub (actual evil values, not just "quirky" politics).
Linux is cool, shame about the video being by Mental Outlaw though
Could be worse could be luke smith
He's quit youtubing like 2 years ago. Also:
I will always remember Luke Smith as the perfect example of what happens when you fall for every single /g/ meme at once, without carefully analyzing them first. He owns four ThinkPads at least. While I see nothing wrong with them in themselves, as they are admittedly pretty good value for the price, four is just mindless consumerism, contradictory to his "philosophy". He started using every single shitty pseudominimalist, ncurses-based program, used a shitty riced out i3 setup of dubious actual productivity (like all tiling wms), then fell for the full Suckless meme and went in even deeper. Then he started making videos shitting on Python and praising C, which is ironic considering he is not even a programmer by his own admission. He effectively spent years trying out, configuring and hopelessly trying to integrate tens of meme programs to build what is, combined, effectively a shittier Emacs, just like most of /g/ was doing in their "productive" desktop threads a year or two ago. Then he read the Unabomber manifesto and blindly accepted it without constructively analyzing it first, same with the anarcho-primitivist ideology that was all the rage about a year and a half ago on 4chan and 8ch. While he stated on his website that he "didn't browse 4chan much anymore" it was obvious this wasn't the case. Then he went and took the memes way too far, and unironically went to live in isolation. While I see nothing wrong in itself, the actual reason he did it is massive cringe. He became Christian because of 4chan, the least christian website. He has the mentality of someone 10 years younger than he is, yet he acts like a literal boomer jokingly criticizing "zoomers" despite he himself being the worst example of a millennial. He attacks "nerds" when it't painfully obvious he's deeply unhappy with himself, as it was obviously self-directed criticism thinly veiled as an edgy dabbing video. He is a perfect example of someone you should avoid becoming at all costs.
Why is my T440s so much slower on fedora than w11? 😔
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX. Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called “Linux,” and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project. There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use.
Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called “Linux” distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.
-- Richard Stallman
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, systemd/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, systemd plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning systemd system made useful by the systemd corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX. Many computer users run a modified version of the systemd system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of systemd which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the systemd system, developed by the systemd developers. There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the systemd operating system: the whole system is basically systemd with Linux added, or systemd/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of systemd/Linux.
No, Richard, it's 'Linux', not 'GNU/Linux'. The most important contributions that the FSF made to Linux were the creation of the GPL and the GCC compiler. Those are fine and inspired products. GCC is a monumental achievement and has earned you, RMS, and the Free Software Foundation countless kudos and much appreciation.
Following are some reasons for you to mull over, including some already answered in your FAQ.
One guy, Linus Torvalds, used GCC to make his operating system (yes, Linux is an OS -- more on this later). He named it 'Linux' with a little help from his friends. Why doesn't he call it GNU/Linux? Because he wrote it, with more help from his friends, not you. You named your stuff, I named my stuff -- including the software I wrote using GCC -- and Linus named his stuff. The proper name is Linux because Linus Torvalds says so. Linus has spoken. Accept his authority. To do otherwise is to become a nag. You don't want to be known as a nag, do you?
(An operating system) != (a distribution). Linux is an operating system. By my definition, an operating system is that software which provides and limits access to hardware resources on a computer. That definition applies whereever you see Linux in use. However, Linux is usually distributed with a collection of utilities and applications to make it easily configurable as a desktop system, a server, a development box, or a graphics workstation, or whatever the user needs. In such a configuration, we have a Linux (based) distribution. Therein lies your strongest argument for the unwieldy title 'GNU/Linux' (when said bundled software is largely from the FSF). Go bug the distribution makers on that one. Take your beef to Red Hat, Mandrake, and Slackware. At least there you have an argument. Linux alone is an operating system that can be used in various applications without any GNU software whatsoever. Embedded applications come to mind as an obvious example.
Next, even if we limit the GNU/Linux title to the GNU-based Linux distributions, we run into another obvious problem. XFree86 may well be more important to a particular Linux installation than the sum of all the GNU contributions. More properly, shouldn't the distribution be called XFree86/Linux? Or, at a minimum, XFree86/GNU/Linux? Of course, it would be rather arbitrary to draw the line there when many other fine contributions go unlisted. Yes, I know you've heard this one before. Get used to it. You'll keep hearing it until you can cleanly counter it.
You seem to like the lines-of-code metric. There are many lines of GNU code in a typical Linux distribution. You seem to suggest that (more LOC) == (more important). However, I submit to you that raw LOC numbers do not directly correlate with importance. I would suggest that clock cycles spent on code is a better metric. For example, if my system spends 90% of its time executing XFree86 code, XFree86 is probably the single most important collection of code on my system. Even if I loaded ten times as many lines of useless bloatware on my system and I never excuted that bloatware, it certainly isn't more important code than XFree86. Obviously, this metric isn't perfect either, but LOC really, really sucks. Please refrain from using it ever again in supporting any argument.
Last, I'd like to point out that we Linux and GNU users shouldn't be fighting among ourselves over naming other people's software. But what the heck, I'm in a bad mood now. I think I'm feeling sufficiently obnoxious to make the point that GCC is so very famous and, yes, so very useful only because Linux was developed. In a show of proper respect and gratitude, shouldn't you and everyone refer to GCC as 'the Linux compiler'? Or at least, 'Linux GCC'? Seriously, where would your masterpiece be without Linux? Languishing with the HURD?
If there is a moral buried in this rant, maybe it is this:
Be grateful for your abilities and your incredible success and your considerable fame. Continue to use that success and fame for good, not evil. Also, be especially grateful for Linux' huge contribution to that success. You, RMS, the Free Software Foundation, and GNU software have reached their current high profiles largely on the back of Linux. You have changed the world. Now, go forth and don't be a nag.
Thanks for listening.
- Linus Torvalds
I think it wasn't actually Stallman - it's a common misattribution.
It was Stallman. There was just a very little detail that was not exactly as he said, but otherwise entire quote is from him: https://www.gnu.org/gnu/incorrect-quotation.en.html
So, kaboom ?
Good video!
