I’m not proposing anything here, I’m curious what you all think of the future.

What is your vision for what you want Linux to be?

I often read about wanting a smooth desktop experience like on MacOS, or having all the hardware and applications supported like Windows, or the convenience of Google products (mail, cloud storage, docs), etc.

A few years ago people were talking about convergence of phone/desktop, i.e. you plug your phone into a big screen and keyboard and it’s now your desktop computer. That’s one vision. ChromeOS has its “everything is in the cloud” vision. Stallman has his vision where no matter what it is, the most important part is that it’s free software.

If you could decide the future of personal computing, what would it be?

  • dino
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Thats the reason I hate pacman. pacman -Syu…ok.

    • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      APT had (and kinda still has) the opposite problem. “apt-get install” is redundant. And true to Linux fashion, there have been a few implmentations of an “apt install” syntax, which were different enough to be a problem.

      Also my OSMC box bitches at me when I run “apt upgrade” because it wants me to type “apt full-upgrade…”

      There are some things I’d like to ask the Flatpak developers while holding them 6 inches off the ground by their shirt collar. Like why is it such a bitch to run flatpak update over ssh? It wants you to key in your password 96 times if you do that. It’s also really fun to deal with org.whatthefuck.WhatTheFuck too.

      • dino
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t think apt is as bad as pacman, I use nala on my debian machine. The best syntax in my book has zypper, but I am biased. Simply running a flatpak from cli is a hassle. :P

        • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah I’ll go with that; convention is you run software by evoking its name as a command. apt install vim, then you can run vim by typing “vim.” Not with Flatpak, you evoke “flatpak run .org.bullshit.Vim”. It’s not merely designed to be used through a GUI, it’s designed to be not used through a CLI.