people are experiencing innovation fatigue
What innovation? The user experience hasn't undergone significant innovation (improvement) in the last decade
people are experiencing innovation fatigue
What innovation? The user experience hasn't undergone significant innovation (improvement) in the last decade
I have a computer capable of outputting video like 5 different ways: over the internet, near-field EM, HDMI, yadda
I just want a fucking standards compatible dumb screen
I heard a talk a few days ago, and the fella said that if you want a non-smart monitor, you'll need to pay somewhat more for what he called an 'industrial monitor'. He said the 'smart TV' is cheaper because of all the data it'll collect, and they can sell that data to make the price-to-the-user lower. (Don't know for myself, my old Samsung monitor's only smarts were to send data out to one URL, and I was able to change that URL to a site that doesn't exist.)
Pi hole is required internet safety
There's gotta be a market for taking cheap smart TVs, replacing the guts with dumb tv, and reselling it, right?
I installed Lubuntu on my Microsoft Surface 2 and my custom PC from 2014 that couldn’t get upgraded to windows 11 due to lack of a tpm chip. We don’t need better hardware, we need better operating systems. We need more Linux.
We need more real Linux -- GNU/Linux, with compliant copyleft licensing -- not Tivoized crap like they put on TVs.
Roku OS, Amazon Fire OS, Tizen (Samsung TV OS), etc. -- all technically Linux, but you wouldn't know it because they've systematically butchered them to destroy everything that made Linux good (the users' freedom).
What's the point of being so pedantic?, they were obviously not advocating for more Roku installs.
Because the distinction matters. The corporate raping of Linux has to stop being tolerated or else nothing is solved. The technical details of the kernel don't actually matter; the licensing and openness is what matters. Hell, if the Windows NT kernel got magically relicensed to AGPLv3 tomorrow it would instantly become the superior option just because of that.
Linux doesn't fucking matter. Copyleft matters.
Sigh. This kind of nonsense is why so many people get scared away from even trying linux. Who cares which distro you use, as long as it is linux it is a step in the right direction, and a whole lot of people (including myself) have taken that step very recently, despite some arrogant linux bros doing their best to gatekeep us away from even trying.
do you seriously think roku, tizen, amazon fire are a step in the right direction?
Yes. Kinda.
How do you think Linux devs get paid? The devices are locked down, sure, but there are strong incentives to upstream code and fund further development upstream. Linux ”won” because of this. You can’t build and develop Linux for such a wide audience and hardware flora with a bunch of hobbyists.
As Linus himself said plenty of times - GPL2 was the correct choice. Roku, Tizen, Chromebooks and Amazon garbage are absolutely within what the developers intended, and the devs are doing the work after all.
From a consumer standpoint, I absolutely agree with you, open everything is wonderful. However - commercial interests currently fund most OSS development. Without those funds, development stops and developers must take other paying jobs (probably closed source). Would be nice to change this, but then we need to completely pivot our funding model. You need to pay devs, either directly or indirectly (taxes, foundations, etc).
So far, the open source community hasn’t been very good at figuring out funding models for consumer products. It usually ends with the development team needing to put food on the table, so they add a subscription and close down parts of the project. About two seconds later, the project has ten forks and the original author can’t buy groceries.
”Buy me a beer” simply isn’t s viable mechanism to fund open source. How should we do it?
Personal preference: Slowly move the public sector towards open source, and require them to provide financial aid to products they use. Not perfect, but something that could happen gradually, without shocking the system.
tl;dr: yes, but also no.
The devices are locked down, sure, but there are strong incentives to upstream code and fund further development upstream. Linux ”won” because of this. You can’t build and develop Linux for such a wide audience and hardware flora with a bunch of hobbyists.
if these companies were upstreaming code, it would not be a problem to replace the factory operating system on their products with something else. however just like phone makers, they don't upstream the driver code needed for the onboard devices to work.
so far the only good I found to have come of it, is that after we find a vulnerability in their code, we can open a shell in the system and use ready made familiar tools to try to tame the devices from inside. until they force an update that patches the vuln because it got too popular, and you are locked out again.
Agreed, it’s not perfect, especially not with regards to drivers from some of them. But:
I expect that the ability of B2C-products to keep their code somewhat closed keeps them from moving to other platforms, while simultaneously pumping money upstream to their suppliers, expecting them to contribute to development. The linked list is dominated by hardware vendors, cloud vendors and B2B-vendors.
Linux didn’t win on technical merit, it won on licensing flexibility. Devs and maintainers are very happy with GPL2. Does it suck if you own a Tivo? Yes. Don’t buy one. On the consumer side, we can do some voting with our wallets, and some B2C vendors are starting to notice.
Do you think anyone, anywhere think of roku and amazon fire when they hear "you should try linux"?
read this thread again, please, because you completely missed the point. but you know what, I'll help:
grue said:
We need more real Linux -- GNU/Linux, with compliant copyleft licensing -- not Tivoized crap like they put on TVs.
Roku OS, Amazon Fire OS, Tizen (Samsung TV OS), etc. -- all technically Linux, but you wouldn't know it because they've systematically butchered them to destroy everything that made Linux good (the users' freedom).
Rothe said:
... Who cares which distro you use, as long as it is linux it is a step in the right direction, ...
roku, amazon fire, tizen and co are all "linux based" operating systems. the topic was not about people recommending linux to each other, but about corporations misusing the foundations of it to further their greed. point being, something runs linux does not make it good. and that's where grue's call for real linux on these devices gets relevant.
Sure, because caring about users' rights is "insane." Because caring about societal effects of (lack of) antitrust and consumer protection law is "insane." Because having an ounce of goddamn self-respect and not wanting to be abused is "insane."
No, I don't think I'm insane at all, actually. I think the people incomprehensibly arguing against me in this thread can fuck all the way off with their corporatist simping!
I agree with your morals and your end goal.
How do you want to fund the development of Open Source? Because currently most of it is funded by corporations, in turn funded by ”corporatist simping”. The expectations of the average user simply can’t be fulfilled by hobbyist developers, and then we need funding. How do we get the Windows user ”John Smith” to personally fork over money to the correct developers?
Proton/Wine/KDE would not be in their current state unless they got that sweet proprietary Valve money. In our current world we need to use corporate money to further open source, not fight it. Follow the stream and steer the flow. Given time, we can diversify funding and control.
What the fuck? I said I don't even actually care if the kernel is Linux or NT (or anything else) as long as it's genuinely open so the user can modify it, and you somehow try to twist that as quibbling over distros?! Way to miss the point by a goddamn mile!
Tizen is actually pretty fun to hack tbh
People just need to install lubuntu or some Linux distribution on their pc. Tech companies for years have forced consumer upgrades for average pc users when it wasn’t necessary.
I have a photo company in my town that still ruins dos off of windows 95 and has internet for email on windows 2000s for their point of sale machines is all dos. Even dot matrix printers. I was born in 1984 and remember this. Shows you don’t need the latest tech
That's great for the folks who have access to decades-old pre-enshittification technology and the means to maintain it, but what about everybody else?
Continuing my smart TV OS analogy, your answer is like saying just to use a dumb TV instead. There aren't any dumb TVs anymore! The TV manufacturer cartel colluded to quit making them!
"Just go live in the fucking woods like the goddamn Unabomber, eschewing modern technology" is not a valid solution for normal people! The law must be changed to protect them from predatory abusive corporations.
A modern tv without internet connection is a dump tv.
i use my tv as secondary display on my desktop and run anything i want to watch from it.
Continuing my smart TV OS analogy, your answer is like saying just to use a dumb TV instead. There aren’t any dumb TVs anymore! The TV manufacturer cartel colluded to quit making them!
Yes there are, every smart tv becomes dumb as soon as you disconnect it from the internet. Just use it the same way you would use a monitor for your computer.
You aren't wrong but you sound unhinged. That's coming from someone who lives in the woods and runs Mint.
Eh, the printers should be swapped for laserjet to save money and ears. I don't even know where one could buy paper for dot matrix printers either.
The CNC machines I run at work run from windows xp. IT disconnected them from the network, so I have to get.dxf files from my engineer on a thumb drive to program machining paths from. Ain't that progress? No it's lazy.
This is where the Linux and self hosting people chime in.
Self hosting doesn’t make you immune, though. See how Plex evolved, for example. Self hosting plus free software that isn’t abandoned or compromised is the way, but idealistic developers need to take bread to the table too.
So the way maybe is self-hosted + libre software + a non-profit supporting the project. And that can too be corrupted, for example, the Mozilla Foundation and Google’s influence.
Always be ready to migrate.
This is why permissive licensing isn't good enough; copyleft is essential. (And not just GPLv2 copyleft, but copyleft with anti-tivoization and cloud loophole protection as well, such as AGPLv3.) Every part of the system -- the tech itself, the management, and the legal/business structure -- has to be designed to resist being subverted against the user.
Always be ready to migrate.
or be ready to contribute to the project you use, so they don't have to sell out to google.
or be ready to contribute to the project you use, so they don’t have to sell out to google.
that may happen despite your contributing or not
you can also have car accident with or without alcohol, but that doesn't mean that dui is good idea.
Yes, of course you shouldn't drive under influence. Still, what a bad analogy. Two completely unrelated scenarios.
your inability to understand it doesn't make it bad analogy. in both cases, one of the outcomes is far more likely. and your argument is as stupid as drunk driver explaining "i can crash sober, so why try"
your inability to understand it doesn’t make it bad analogy
Wow how condescending we are today. I'm sorry I failed to appreciate the analogy that your big, beautiful smooth brain produced.
Prick.
Ive contributed to several projects, code and translation, but you can really expect every user to be a programmer, or every programmer to contribute to every piece of software they use.
Besides, contribution is not a protection from capture, just look at MySQL.
Ive contributed to several projects, code and translation, but you can really expect every user to be a programmer,
i meant contributing with money. contributing code is nice, but that doesn't help them to pay for electricity.
I get tut-tutted by other Linux nerds for this a lot, but I think Linux is impersonal in a different way because it simply demands more of the user. Sure, it gives freedom, but that freedom comes with responsibility, and a lot of people just are like "ain't nobody got time for that!" Which I think is a valid way to feel.
I've been a developer for decades. I've contributed to FOSS code and do a lot of my own development.
I just want a desktop that works. No fuss.
Yes I could compile my own x11 (and have) but I would rather spend my time doing my own shit than trying to stand up a new VM for some edge issue I'm having.
Just...just give me a UI I can use.
It's why I use Ubuntu.
Linux has come a long way though and it's basically turn key for some distros. Even with flatpak or system catalogs built into the gui.
In a lot of ways it's been like this for a long time. I recall back in 2007 when Vista was breaking everything, I installed Ubuntu and was shocked that there were zero driver issues. Even the fucking printer worked. Printers never work!
It's only gotten better since.
Freedom and taking ownership (responsibility) for one's actions go hand in hand.
People irritated at having to make their own choices don't get to then be mad that choices are being made for them when they outsource that decision making process, imo.
I agree. Linux has come a long way, and I love using it. But its definitely not for everybody.
Many times I just don't want to do something because I don't want to invest the time. I also get that there's a GUI that is very capable, but then why is the terminal easier sometimes?
I also need to look up everything I do. That's probably me just being a noob but I can never look through the system and figure out how to do something. Everything I do is an internet search first, then an implementation. Again, probably just lack of knowledge on my part but comparing that to the average Windows user, I can see the allure of adding AI to just do things you ask it to. Time is valuable and if you're not invested into your system then its not worth it to most.
Oh yeah linux people have been building like crazy these past 10 years.
Sometimes the user experience is so slick its boring. But the great past of.linux is even when the usage is simple I can always tweak it or modify it to my exact liking.
On Mac it either works nicely or I'm fucked.
The poor user experience is intentional. Compare FireTV to AppleTV. Everything about FireTV is carefully designed to coerce you into spending money. Easy access to the content you already have doesn’t make money, so the UX serves Amazon, not you. Apple does it, too, but with a more subtlety.
Laughs in every computer I own is Linux and my mobile is GrapheneOS
Cries a little for everyone else
I'm just starting that journey .. Graphene is dope once you learn your way around
I switched to gOS and had to go back for NFC payments and auto.
It is great to see though, those are just necessities for me. Having gone back, I can say I hate pixel launcher and can't even change keyboard
I'm genuinely curious, what makes NFC a necessity? And what do you mean by auto?
Its trains when I travel for me. I am not giving up my tap to pay.
I might just be old, but I can do that with my debit and credit cards without involving my phone, so I couldn't care less.
Lifestyle creep is real. I was like you before. Keep fighting the good fight and I will join you once Linux figures out NFC.
I don't carry a wallet, and card contactless is limited to like 50. Can't even do the weekly shop.
Android Auto for driving is difficult to get working, I see gOS can do it but I couldn't get it to work.
Sure, I might own the hardware
Not for long. The goal seems to be to make RAM, flash memory, and GPU's so expensive that most consumers will need to purchase low-powered client devices and subscribe to cloud computing business models. It's a handful of companies who are cornering the markets, controlling the supply, and seeking rents.
I don't really see that happen. It would mean developers (or crappy AI code generators) would have to write efficient code for the low-powered client devices. The web is basically already other people's computers and look how memory hungry browsers are, or maybe more specifically the websites/apps that run in the browsers.
It is not user experience, it is user manipulation. We are so so far beyond Stallman's warnings about enslavement through corporate software design.
top 91 comments