I am not concerned at all, mostly because I do not think that they have taken any anti-user actions recently.
There is no circumstance, where I as a user, either as a personal user or in my professional capacity as someone running production systems, am affected by their source code decision. It’s only an issue if I decide I want to release a Green Hat Linux AND I want to be their customer.
The GPL does not force them to do business with me, and it does NOT require them to distribute source to me if they did not distribute the software to me. Many people may consider this move against the spirit of the GPL, and I think that’s what is causing most of the anger. Well maybe it’s time for a new GPL then that codifies that and explicitly says that, and start the herculean effort of driving adoption of that new license. It didn’t go well for GPLv3 or AGPL.
Now the Fedora telemetry proposal… is just that, a proposal. They are being transparent about “hey we are considering this, what do y’all think?”. Well, they’re certainly getting feedback on what the community thinks about that.
Here, people are angry that they are even considering the idea of telemetry. This is understandable. People treat telemetry like it’s a dirty word, because Microsoft and co. have made it so. Telemetry can be used for nefarious purposes, there is no doubt about that.
I believe that telemetry can be a good thing when it is done correctly. The question of whether the box should be checked by default is an important one, they need to be careful that users actually understand and having it enabled is an informed decision and not something they click past without comprehending. As long as the data collected is restricted, strictly filtered to avoid fingerprinting and leaking user data, this can be used to improve the software. Without any data on how your users experience your software, you are flying blind and throwing darts at your codebase trying to make improvements. The people filing bugs are usually not representative of the average user or their experience. Basic information like “does anyone even use this” or “how reliable is this feature” can help them prioritize their efforts.
I’ll take a trust but verify approach on this. The client side code of Fedora is all open source, so if I have concerns I can take a look at exactly what it is doing and raise the alarm if there’s problems. I’m sure someone will make a Fedora De-telemetrified Spin I can switch to in that case. After all Fedora is not RHEL, their source issue is orthogonal to this one.
If you made it this far, you may think I made some reasonable points… or you think I’m on Red Hat’s payroll (I’m not). Well, I gave it straight as asked, this is how I feel. I’m a user if both RHEL and Fedora and I’m not planning to change that anytime soon.
I absolutely agree with everything you pointed out here. Fedora has been my go-to distro for awhile now and I’m gonna ride the Fedora wagon till the very end.
Fuck that noise. There is no reason to support repeated practices which violate the spirit of open source. There are plenty of decent choices out there which are not fedora and I wish people would use them instead of this ibm nonsense.
Not op, but if I’m honest for a laptop user who needs up to date packages. Fedora is the only distro I’ve used which is both stable and user friendly.
An excellent example is when i had Arch installed (both Manjaro and later EndevourOS) when I connected HDMI it never switched over to the new audio source. And whenever I did switch it, it would always go back to the built in speakers if I was to unplug and replug it.
Never had this as an issue in Fedora since it always remembers my last configuration.
Have you tried tumbleweed? As someone who uses both Fedora (or more accurately Nobara) and tumbleweed, my laptop experience on tumbleweed has actually been slightly better on tumbleweed.
Ever since the whole RHEL meltdown here I looked into alternatives if fedora stops getting support. So I’ve tried tumble weed in a VM.
From my initial impression it’s on par with fedora for most things. But a complete lack of community run repos like copr makes it hard for me to switch to right now. Especially since I need XPadNeo support.
However if I was to distort hop again this would be the one I move to next, at least at this time.
There is no such thing as a “beginner distro”. There are distros that need little to no intelligence to set up and maintain. Arch needs you to read and follow instructions. It is a myth that it is impossible for beginners to use Arch. There are several good installations instructions in the wiki, select one and follow it till the end.
There are also plenty of Arch derivates that preconfigure the system for you.
I beg to differ and say, even when the Arch wiki is a great source of knowledge, setting up own Arch system and maintaining it requires keeping on track with updates, to understand what is wrong with your system to look up the right keywords and so on. In my opinion it is better to stay on a stable, periodically released distro with tested repos like Debian, Mint or Ubuntu at first. Afterwards, you can still switch to Arch.
I tried a couple distros on VMs (mint xfce, Manjaro i3…) because I want to eventually resurrect my old laptop and I was trying stuff out.
Tried installing Arch in another VM this year. The regular instructions were complicated and I didn’t follow them because too much work. Tried using arch installer and couldn’t. Had to install arch installer (???) from the boot command line. But it gave me a keyring error as well. Idk how I solved that but eventually got through.
Then I had it functioning for some days. One day I try to turn the VM back on and it just doesn’t boot. I’m sorry arch, I love you but it wasn’t meant to be.
Overwhelming beginners with more than they can chew is not the best way to welcome them to Linux, giving them the chance to learn a bit at a time is instead.
There are distros that need little to no intelligence to set up and maintain
It’s not a matter of intelligence but prior knowledge, Arch wiki is the best thing ever for everyone, even if you don’t use Arch, BUT you need some Linux knowledge - at least Linux “lingo” - to be able to understand it.
That’s something a Linux newbie doesn’t have yet, exactly the reason why Arch is not recommended for newbies.
@Dirk@Fungus
Arch + aur is a little bit too much in my opinion. Old PC = old slow hardware. Some of aur pacages are basicly compile instructions. Also you won't benefit as much from rolling release.
For GUI stay away from GNOME as it is resource hungry. KDE claimes to be a lot better but honestly it is still a very polished flashy expirence out of the box.
Learn using KDE, atempt to replicate using window manager like AwesomeWM.
You will "waste" resource only for what is a mass have for You.
@mrXYZ
Unless you're doing something very unusual, you're not going to end up with many AUR packages. I've run Arch on SBCs without much trouble.
There are severely steps in between Gnome/KDE and Awesome. XFCE and Enlightenment are more user friendly options that are still quite lightweight. @Dirk@Fungus
If music production is your main objective, I would suggest Windows. I do some home recordings as well and have quite a baggage of pluggings and tools that are either unavailable, not compatible or not up to date on Linux (I’m on an Arch based distro). I have Windows and Linux on two separate SSDs for this exact reason. I managed to set up my Linux system in a way where I can work on some projects and got most programs to work one way or another but I always encounter hardware issues that have to do with drivers, especially with some of my older equipment. If you have the the option you can install another drive on youtrlaptop and run both Windows and Linux.
Now, there are folks out there that do music on Linux but there is a lot of work to do to keep things running, especially if you use lots different softwares and pluggins.
After some Research and reading through the answeres here i think you are right. I do appreciate all the suggestions, but ditching my vsts and especially my Hardware really isnt an Option for me. I have spent too much money on them and i love working with them, and for a lot of them, there really just is now alternative that cones close to the quality. I dont want to talk down on all the amazing work the foss community has created, but i hope people understand that i dont wabt abandon my (expensive) collection. And in the end, my goal is to make nusic and not tinker around with an operating system. Maybe i will try a dual Boot solution. It really is frustrating though, i would really like to switch to Linux and i dont mind to put some effort in. But it seems that as long as the companies behind all the software dont Support linux, i will have to Stick with Windows.
I understand and using Windows for certain things is perfectly valid. Perhaps things will change in a few years and we’ll be able to run all the plugins with a system similar to WINE, or something like that.
This is probably going to be the right choice. Captive markets are a thing and its not always practical for individuals to get out of them. Changing a good worklfow isn’t likely to be worth it unless there’s a different workflow you want more.
I wanted what I get with Linux more than I wanted any particular element of what my creative workflow was on Windows, but I’ve never really been super comfortable with the DAW-VST paradigm for music production in general. I’m way happier having to put a bit more work into doing custom stuff my own way than being locked out of entire approaches because that’s not how the software is intended to be used and I’m not in the target demographic for pricing. (I’m looking at you specifically, notch and touchdesigner.)
You could always set yourself up to switch to Linux in the future. Every time you buy new hardware, make sure it’s Linux-compatible. It may take years, but changes in industry typically are slow so that you can still make money in the interim.
Why did you write this post in English instead of Esperanto? English is a pretty shit language, especially as the Lingua Franca…
As for your reasoning, it’s obvious you don’t know what bash is used for. It’s purpose is to get shit done quickly and to make working with cli tools easy. For tasks where you need to write more than a few lines of code, or need a feature like cross platform compilation, you should switch to a proper language.
As for why that’s good, try writing something along the lines of “curl | jq | cat >> file” in C. For extra points write it out in a single line, in under a minute, while also keeping it perfectly readable.
linux
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.