Unix doesn't follow the Unix philosophy...

[keyboardlover]

Excellent article:

http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2012/05/25/unix-doesnt-follow-the-unix-philosophy/

Evidently, the Unix philosophy is old-fashioned and really doesn't "work" anymore with regards to modern software engineering practices. In short, it doesn't "scale".

The philosophy:

• Write programs that do one thing and do it well. (Huh? Today's trend is that systems are large and getting larger. That isn't likely to end any time soon - requirements demand it.)
  
• Write programs to work together. (As with my comment above, we want larger, more unified systems. We want to get away from the "siloed" application approach).
  
• Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a universal interface. (This is no longer true. The most "universal" interface we have now is XML, and even THAT is really anything but "universal".)
  

Comments? Questions? Different points of view?

Bueller?

[godly_music]

Well, I'm not programming savvy but I do know that the first rule still holds up if you have a modular system. Windows 7 is not a purely monolithic kernel, and the parts that are modular are required to do exactly what #1 says.

As well, I don't see why 'large systems' whatever that means should prohibit single applications to exist that are tailored towards a specific task. I can only speak as a desktop user here, but I've had all kinds of trouble with overloaded, pretty 'software suits' or 'multipurpose programs'. They're often so bogged down with things you don't need that you are effectively paying the price in extra occupied CPU and RAM.

Many of the programs that I consider simple and well thought out are even themselves able to load plugins which again, if they are good plugins, want to follow rule #1. I think 'do it well' scales extremely well, because it entails that the programmer thinks ahead and considers the scaling problem.

But whether Unix follows these rules or not, I really couldn't say. If text streams are antiquated, it shouldn't be a problem to change the rules. After all, they do not dictate programming practice but are meant to convey the wisdom of people who've worked in programming for a long time.

[keyboardlover]

When was the last time you use an application that did "one thing" and did it "well"?

[ThinkRob]

When was the last time you use an application that did "one thing" and did it "well"?

About two minutes ago.  'cat'.

Then again, I actually do run a proper UNIX, so I'm biased.

Write programs to work together. (As with my comment above, we want larger, more unified systems. We want to get away from the "siloed" application approach).

The two aren't mutually exclusive.

We can write programs that make up a unified system, yet work well independently.  It's just harder.  It also requires a lot of coordination, a lot of standardization, and an active effort to avoid NIH syndrome.  All three of those are things that the Linux community seems to be struggling with more and more lately.  (See: jwz's rant on the CADT development model.)

---

Really, I think that modern UNIX (which, post-Oracle, is pretty much just AIX and *BSDs) follow the UNIX philosophy just fine.  It's modern desktop Linux that seems to be running into more and more problems on this front...

[hashbaz]

This is something that interests me a lot.  You could argue that something like Eclipse follows the spirit of this philosophy with its bare framework + plugins architecture.

[TexasFlood]

Well, originally Unix was all about efficiency.  When originally developed in 1969, the CDC7600, the first Cray "super computer" introduced that year ran at 36.4MHz with less than half a MB of memory for a starting price of $5 million.  These days software can be a lot more bloated without costing a fortune.

[7bit]

... http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2012/05/25/unix-doesnt-follow-the-unix-philosophy/

Evidently, the Unix philosophy is old-fashioned and really doesn't "work" anymore with regards to modern software engineering practices. In short, it doesn't "scale".

• Write programs that do one thing and do it well. (Huh? Today's trend is that systems are large and getting larger. That isn't likely to end any time soon - requirements demand it.)

The Unix philosophy is no trend it is the ideal world!


Example: I love Emacs, but I hate when features get into my way, like opening an image file and not looking at the source code of it.

• Write programs to work together. (As with my comment above, we want larger, more unified systems. We want to get away from the "siloed" application approach).
  

Unified: Programs work together. Don't get your "siloed" application approach. ImageMagick is a good example.

• Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a universal interface. (This is no longer true. The most "universal" interface we have now is XML, and even THAT is really anything but "universal".)

The defect is in the design of XML. Keep data structures simple so you can keep your software simple.

XML (or more precise SGML) did not originate from the Unix world (IBM actually). On the other hand, what is wrong to be able to use data structures from other worlds? Line-wise data is not always the best choice.

[Ekaros]

I think it's more to usage cases and environments changing...

We just aren't computing like we used to, textual presentation does work for lot, but on other stuff you just need the visuals. And it does complicate things a lot.

[davkol]

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum

[Ekaros]

I just wanted to note that GNU's not UNIX. AFAIK GNU utils are more complicated than the ones on true unices.

Doesn't it say that just there

New versions tend to drift from old ones...

[Daniel Beardsmore]

UNIX predates high-resolution bitmapped displays, high quality stereo wave audio, and hardware 3D rendering.

When UNIX was conceived, computers really were used for computing, in text. Even after the Mac came out in 1984, it took years before WYSIWYG caught on, and many more years before the widespread adoption of displays even remotely suitable for graphical document processing. (Though that won't truthfully come until 300 DPI comes along and we can draw accurately positioned text without colour fringed hacks.)

That said, the belief that one isn't able to use small, dedicated graphical applications doesn't render this goal obsolete. If I want to manipulate some numbers, AutoHotkey (small, lightweight, dedicated tool) lets me bind Win+C to Calculator, a small, lightweight, dedicated tool. I use JujuEdit as a text editor as, while graphical, it loads instantly and is agnostic about text and binary, selecting a display mode suitable for the file, and has (showing its age here!) support for on-disk files up to 2 GB. It has few menus and only a handful of toolbar buttons and that's it – fast, simple, but concealing some very useful features (such as stepping through files by extension, and fully customisable syntax highlighting).

Given the choice, I'll typically opt for whichever program does the least possible above what I absolutely need: Winamp over iTunes for example, and I specifically don't install the media library facility as I have Windows Explorer¹ and Everything for that, the latter being a drive indexer that only indexes filenames, so there's zero noticeable indexing lag, and the hard drive doesn't grind excruciatingly every time you move away from the PC.

Image viewer/tweaker? IrfanView. Even on my creaky 8-year-old PC it's instantaneous at pretty much everything. Ugly as sin and brain-wrenchingly weird, but it's very small and very fast.



¹ Not valid as of Vista as Explorer was castrated

[zeDoktor]

Computers that ran Unix (not Linux which is made for small computers) were monolithic themselves. This paradigm doesn't scale because they didn't have horizontal scaling of systems like we do now. When software for mainframe-type applications now we don't ask "Can this computer run it?" we, instead, ask "Can 138 computers run it?" The Unix systems of yore are today's top500.org and work with parallelism across hundreds of nodes. That being said the Unix paradigm can still work for very many applications but it's easier to build on the work of others for the solutions that we need today then to create the application to read a n HTTP request and then create an application to parse the HTTP request and then create the application to connect and look up information from the database and then create the application to put this information together with some type of markup and then create the application that writes this back to the socket. We already have cat and grep and sed and awk and cut and ls and all that. There's no need to make them again. Those needs are filled and now our needs are more abstract. I think what I'm getting at is that saying that the Unix paradigm is/is not valid is moot because computing, as a paradigm, has changed because of the Unix paradigm and grown past it.

[zzspectrez]

When was the last time you use an application that did "one thing" and did it "well"?

Every day.  

Examples:   Vim,   grep, find, rsync, ssh, perl-rename, sed and of course xargs.

I could go on..  

I have found these simple programs have allowed me to do things much quicker then when I was stuck in windows and had to point and click everything.. I am just an end user not a developer but the time i have saved with these programs and the ability to pipe and redirect to them has made me a hater of any os that strays too far from this mode of thinking and the command line.  

I have abandoned windows entirely except to run turbotax once a year on a virtual machine.  

All my machines run Linux or FreeBSD except for my iPad!




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[sth]

[Malphas]

When was the last time you use an application that did "one thing" and did it "well"?

Yeah, this is one of the (many) things that I think makes Linux unappealing to mainstream users. There's a lack of high quality software suites and instead you have a deluge of text editors and network administrator tools, presumably because of this "do one thing well" philosophy.

[xcrx]

Yeah, this is one of the (many) things that I think makes Linux unappealing to mainstream users. There's a lack of high quality software suites and instead you have a deluge of text editors and network administrator tools, presumably because of this "do one thing well" philosophy.

Maybe unappealing to "mainstream" users but the power to modify your system any way you like is what drives most people to linux. For me linux computing is about freedom and power of ease of use.

Also there is no lack of software in linux, there are office suites, design suites, modeling suites, and probably any other suite you are looking for too. You just have to look for them. This can be a handy site if you are looking for something particular. http://alternativeto.net/

[Malphas]

the power to modify your system any way you like is what drives most people to linux. For me linux computing is about freedom and power of ease of use.

Alright fine. Nothing whatsoever to do with what I said, or the topic in general, but OK.

Also there is no lack of software in linux

Yeah I know that, but I said "high quality" software, which you handily omitted.

there are office suites, design suites, modeling suites

And they all suck.

[keyboardlover]

Every day.  

Examples:   Vim,   grep, find, rsync, ssh, perl-rename, sed and of course xargs.

I could go on..

Yea, but you are a niche user. Most users have no need for such tools and get by just fine every day using the tools within the OS they have.

But anyway, that wasn't my point. My point was that application development in general is getting away from the "one application, one purpose" theory because "in theory" it sounds great but "in practice" it doesn't work very well. The siloed app development approach has resulted in lots of disparate systems with little reuse and lots of common components which presents a nightmare for maintainability, extensibility and various other "illities".

[TexasFlood]

Also there is no lack of software in linux

Yeah I know that, but I said "high quality" software, which you handily omitted.

Such general statements are difficult to respond to.

For many users suites like open office / star office / ibm symphony / other products and variants are fine and high quality enough.  If you need specific capabilities of products like Microsoft Office or Adobe Photoshop then you're going to need Windows.  Obviously there is no reason for Microsoft to support Linux and Adobe has stated there don't appear to be enough projected sales to justify the development costs.  I use GIMP on Linux, love it and consider it to be high quality.  Sure there are some advanced capabilities Photoshop has over GIMP which if needed dictate Photoshop & Windows.  If you don't have such a need then Linux/GIMP is free vs. Windows/Photoshop at around $800.  

there are office suites, design suites, modeling suites

And they all suck.

Again, hard to respond to since you really didn't say anything other than you have a negative opinion.  It really boils down to what your needs are and what you're willing to spend.  I would bet there are a LOT of folks who would be fine using the below Apps/Suites for free if it saves then $100s of dollars. How many of these apps that "suck" have you actually used?

A big advantage for Windows home user sales historically is that you can buy a bundled desktop ready to go at any store that sells computers. Wal-Mart came out with Linspire and major vendors offered Linux but that didn't seem to get a lot of traction and it's MUCH easier to find a Desktop bundled with Windows, something Microsoft has always been more than competitive at (and been sued over).

Ubuntu(or whatever your favorite flavor is) vs Windows
Firefox vs. IE (in fact many Windows users and corporations prefer Firefox on Windows as well)
Open Office (or variant and there are other Linux office suites) vs MS Office
Evolution mail vs Outlook express
Dia or Kivio vs MS Visio
GIMP vs Acrobat
Bricscad vs Autocad

Some other points:

Linux has the edge with regard to stability, which is why many commercial environments schedule weekly stability reboots of Windows servers. Many Linux and other Unix variants run for years without reboots and when eventually rebooted it's for some other reason than a stability requirement. Sure an app can have a memory leak or something on any platform but at the OS level Windows has historically had MANY more such issues.

On the security front Windows issues are well known.  Linux/Unix servers don't need critical hotfixes every Tuesday like Windows.

I'm sure you'll say these last points don't address your point and you're right, but couldn't help myself,

[TexasFlood]

Also there is no lack of software in linux

Yeah I know that, but I said "high quality" software, which you handily omitted.

Such general statements are difficult to respond to.

For many users suites like open office / star office / ibm symphony / other products and variants are fine and high quality enough.  If you need specific capabilities of products like Microsoft Office or Adobe Photoshop then you're going to need Windows.  Obviously there is no reason for Microsoft to support Linux and Adobe has stated there don't appear to be enough projected sales to justify the development costs.  I use GIMP on Linux, love it and consider it to be high quality.  Sure there are some advanced capabilities Photoshop has over GIMP which if needed dictate Photoshop & Windows.  If you don't have such a need then Linux/GIMP is free vs. Windows/Photoshop at around $800.  

there are office suites, design suites, modeling suites

And they all suck.

Again, hard to respond to since you really didn't say anything other than you have a negative opinion.  It really boils down to what your needs are and what you're willing to spend.  I would bet there are a LOT of folks who would be fine using the below Apps/Suites for free if it saves then $100s of dollars. How many of these apps that "suck" have you actually used?

A big advantage for Windows home user sales historically is that you can buy a bundled desktop ready to go at any store that sells computers. Wal-Mart came out with Linspire and major vendors offered Linux but that didn't seem to get a lot of traction and it's MUCH easier to find a Desktop bundled with Windows, something Microsoft has always been more than competitive at (and been sued over). So Linux will lose many users simply due to lack of availability of bundles and lack of skill / desire to install it themselves.

Ubuntu(or whatever your favorite flavor is) vs Windows
Firefox vs. IE (in fact many Windows users and corporations prefer Firefox on Windows as well)
Open Office (or variant and there are other Linux office suites) vs MS Office
Evolution mail vs Outlook express
Dia or Kivio vs MS Visio
GIMP vs Photoshop
Bricscad vs Autocad

Some other points:

Linux has the edge with regard to stability, which is why many commercial environments schedule weekly stability reboots of Windows servers. Many Linux and other Unix variants run for years without reboots and when eventually rebooted it's for some other reason than a stability requirement. Sure an app can have a memory leak or something on any platform but at the OS level Windows has historically had MANY more such issues.

On the security front Windows issues are well known.  Linux/Unix servers don't need critical hotfixes every Tuesday like Windows.

I'm sure you'll say these last points don't address your post. And you're right, but couldn't help myself,

[davkol]

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum

[TexasFlood]

Also there is no lack of software in linux

Yeah I know that, but I said "high quality" software, which you handily omitted.

Such general statements are difficult to respond to.

For many users suites like open office / star office / ibm symphony / other products and variants are fine and high quality enough.  If you need specific capabilities of products like Microsoft Office or Adobe Photoshop then you're going to need Windows.  Obviously there is no reason for Microsoft to support Linux and Adobe has stated there don't appear to be enough projected sales to justify the development costs.  I use GIMP on Linux, love it and consider it to be high quality.  Sure there are some advanced capabilities Photoshop has over GIMP which if needed dictate Photoshop & Windows.  If you don't have such a need then Linux/GIMP is free vs. Windows/Photoshop at around $800.  

there are office suites, design suites, modeling suites

And they all suck.

Again, hard to respond to since you really didn't say anything other than you have a negative opinion.  It really boils down to what your needs are and what you're willing to spend.  I would bet there are a LOT of folks who would be fine using the below Apps/Suites for free if it saves then $100s of dollars. How many of these apps that "suck" have you actually used?

A big advantage for Windows home user sales historically is that you can buy a bundled desktop ready to go at any store that sells computers. Wal-Mart came out with Linspire and major vendors offered Linux but that didn't seem to get a lot of traction and it's MUCH easier to find a Desktop bundled with Windows, something Microsoft has always been more than competitive at (and been sued over). So Linux will lose many users simply due to lack of availability of bundles and lack of skill / desire to install it themselves.

Ubuntu(or whatever your favorite flavor is) vs Windows
Firefox vs. IE (in fact many Windows users and corporations prefer Firefox on Windows as well)
Open Office (or variant and there are other Linux office suites) vs MS Office
Evolution mail vs Outlook express
Dia or Kivio vs MS Visio
GIMP vs Photoshop
Bricscad vs Autocad

Some other points:

Linux has the edge with regard to stability, which is why many commercial environments schedule weekly stability reboots of Windows servers. Many Linux and other Unix variants run for years without reboots and when eventually rebooted it's for some other reason than a stability requirement. Sure an app can have a memory leak or something on any platform but at the OS level Windows has historically had MANY more such issues.

On the security front Windows issues are well known.  Linux/Unix servers don't need critical hotfixes every Tuesday like Windows.

I'm sure you'll say these last points don't address your post. And you're right, but couldn't help myself,

[Malphas]

GIMP and Open/Libre-Office are pretty much the perfect examples of why Linux software sucks. That's basically the two major ones every fanboy mentions when proclaiming the merits of GNU/Linux software, when it's obvious to anyone who assesses them honestly that they're both frickin' terrible.

There's a horribly unhealthy habit FOSS supporters have of trying to distort reality to fit around pushing their ideology rather than rate software based on its actual quality.

[TexasFlood]

GIMP and Open/Libre-Office are pretty much the perfect examples of why Linux software sucks. That's basically the two major ones every fanboy mentions when proclaiming the merits of GNU/Linux software, when it's obvious to anyone who assesses them honestly that they're both frickin' terrible.

There's a horribly unhealthy habit FOSS supporters have of trying to distort reality to fit around pushing their ideology rather than rate software based on its actual quality.

I use GIMP and like it. I know many folks who use GIMP and Open Office & feel it's adequate for their needs.

"sucks" and "frickin' terrible" again only mean you have a negative attitude, there are no points there to reply to so guess I'll pass this time.

There's a horribly unhealthy habit FOSS supporters have of trying to distort reality to fit around pushing their ideology rather than rate software based on its actual quality.

At the risk of seeming argumentative, your posts have no supporting technical points so who is pushing ideology here?

[TexasFlood]

GIMP and Open/Libre-Office are pretty much the perfect examples of why Linux software sucks. That's basically the two major ones every fanboy mentions when proclaiming the merits of GNU/Linux software, when it's obvious to anyone who assesses them honestly that they're both frickin' terrible.

There's a horribly unhealthy habit FOSS supporters have of trying to distort reality to fit around pushing their ideology rather than rate software based on its actual quality.

I use GIMP and like it. I know many folks who use GIMP and Open Office & feel it's adequate for their needs.

"sucks" and "frickin' terrible" again only mean you have a negative attitude, there are no points there to reply to so guess I'll pass this time.

There's a horribly unhealthy habit FOSS supporters have of trying to distort reality to fit around pushing their ideology rather than rate software based on its actual quality.

At the risk of seeming argumentative, your posts have no supporting technical points so who is pushing ideology here?

[Malphas]

If you say so. That's not usually how things work though. When someone makes a fairly obvious statement, like say, that a Kia sucks compared to a Lamborghini, or McDonald's sucks compared to L'Arpege, or Ikea sucks compared to Knoll, then it doesn't mean they just have a negative attitude, it's because all those things actually do suck. The fact Kia/McDonald's/Ikea are "adequate" to some people doesn't mean they aren't still awful in the grand scheme of things.

At the risk of seeming argumentative, your posts have no supporting technical points so who is pushing ideology here?

It's still you. You didn't provide any technical points either, I might add. Really, having to explain why Photoshop is superior to GIMP seems akin to explaining why stroganoff is tastier than dog****

[Djuzuh]

There's a horribly unhealthy habit FOSS supporters have of trying to distort reality to fit around pushing their ideology rather than rate software based on its actual quality.

I think it's more because they don't care that much about the finish/look. They want something that works, and does the task.

Whereas on the windows world, you are spoiled with Oh how beautifull application, because pretty applications means more sales. And after that you can't go back to something more cheap looking, even if it does the exact same thing. (And no, you don't need all the extra functions, since you will never use them. And if you really do, just code them yourself ! Or find another application that does it).

It don't think you need to lower your standarts. I just think you need to shift them. And only rate them on the use you'll do. Not on their looks. Not on the number of their options.

[Malphas]

Horrible, horrible argument. So if I buy a house that looks like crap, it doesn't mean it's any worse than a good looking one, since it still provides the same basic function of providing shelter? And hey, guess I don't need all those extra functions like running water or electricity, and if I do I can just install them myself or find a nearby well and generator! Nonsensical.

[Djuzuh]

You are obviously trolling and I should have ignored you.

[Malphas]

No really, that's the argument you were making. That missing features in bad software is acceptable because you either don't need it, can code it yourself or find another application to do it. Maybe my analogy was tongue in cheek, but only to highlight how ridiculous a statement that is. I have no problem with people preferring something like GIMP to something like Photoshop because it's free (as in beer) or free (as in open source) but just be honest about it rather than deluding yourself about it actually being as good or superior, when it's plainly obvious it's not.

For the record, I'm not saying all FOSS software is inferior to commercial software, there's obvious examples like Firefox, etc. where that's not the case, but generally it is, particularly when it comes to large application suites (which is the actual part relevant to this thread).

[keyboardlover]

Actually, most users "need" only a web browser that supports Gmail and Facebook.

Maybe.

In any case, web browsers, Gmail and Facebook are all applications that do MANY things well

A LOT of Off topic posts in this thread so far. I wonder if any of the Mods know UNIX well-enough to delete them?

[davkol]

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum

[Malphas]

Maybe.

In any case, web browsers, Gmail and Facebook are all applications that do MANY things well

A LOT of Off topic posts in this thread so far. I wonder if any of the Mods know UNIX well-enough to delete them?

Yes. I was trying to agree with the fact the "do one thing well" philosophy has a detrimental effect, but I should have known better than to say anything remotely negative about *nix on the Internet, sigh.

I don't really care about quality of proprietary software, because I can't use it (because of its license, which is obviously unethical).

Lol.

[TexasFlood]

If you say so. That's not usually how things work though. When someone makes a fairly obvious statement, like say, that a Kia sucks compared to a Lamborghini, or McDonald's sucks compared to L'Arpege, or Ikea sucks compared to Knoll, then it doesn't mean they just have a negative attitude, it's because all those things actually do suck. The fact Kia/McDonald's/Ikea are "adequate" to some people doesn't mean they aren't still awful in the grand scheme of things.


It's still you. You didn't provide any technical points either, I might add. Really, having to explain why Photoshop is superior to GIMP seems akin to explaining why stroganoff is tastier than dog****

You're right, I didn't really offer TECHNICAL points so guess I asked for that response.  But I did offer more than profanity.  So for basic images, GIMP if fine. If you need to do professional printing, you'll probably want Photoshop for the CMYK color mode support which is much more limited in GIMP. IF RGB support is adequate then either is fine.  How hard was that? I really won't argue that Photoshop is superior in most ways but GIMP is pretty good and free vs. $700 and will run from a CD or memory stick.

[TexasFlood]

If you say so. That's not usually how things work though. When someone makes a fairly obvious statement, like say, that a Kia sucks compared to a Lamborghini, or McDonald's sucks compared to L'Arpege, or Ikea sucks compared to Knoll, then it doesn't mean they just have a negative attitude, it's because all those things actually do suck. The fact Kia/McDonald's/Ikea are "adequate" to some people doesn't mean they aren't still awful in the grand scheme of things.


It's still you. You didn't provide any technical points either, I might add. Really, having to explain why Photoshop is superior to GIMP seems akin to explaining why stroganoff is tastier than dog****

You're right, I didn't really offer TECHNICAL points so guess I asked for that response.  But I did offer more than profanity.

So for basic images, GIMP if fine. If you need to do professional printing, you'll probably want Photoshop for the CMYK color mode support which is much more limited in GIMP. IF RGB support is adequate then either is fine.  How hard was that?

I really won't argue that Photoshop is superior in many ways but GIMP is pretty good and free vs. $700, will run from a CD or memory stick and anyone can easily load it to collaborate with someone or load on a 2nd/3rd PC.

[TexasFlood]

If you say so. That's not usually how things work though. When someone makes a fairly obvious statement, like say, that a Kia sucks compared to a Lamborghini, or McDonald's sucks compared to L'Arpege, or Ikea sucks compared to Knoll, then it doesn't mean they just have a negative attitude, it's because all those things actually do suck. The fact Kia/McDonald's/Ikea are "adequate" to some people doesn't mean they aren't still awful in the grand scheme of things.


It's still you. You didn't provide any technical points either, I might add. Really, having to explain why Photoshop is superior to GIMP seems akin to explaining why stroganoff is tastier than dog****

You're right, I didn't really offer much in the way of TECHNICAL points so guess I asked for that response.  But I did offer more than profanity.

So for basic images, GIMP if fine. If you need to do professional printing, you'll probably want Photoshop for the CMYK color mode support which is much more limited in GIMP. IF RGB support is adequate then either is fine.  How hard was that?

I really won't argue that Photoshop is superior in many ways but GIMP is pretty good and free vs. $700, will run from a CD or memory stick and anyone can easily load it to collaborate with someone or load on a 2nd/3rd PC.

[sth]

I use GIMP and like it. I know many folks who use GIMP and Open Office & feel it's adequate for their needs.

Aside from the stunning lack of originality in this entire thread, have you tried GIMP 2.8? I wanted to when I had Linux installed on my work machine but it hadn't made it to the repos of the distro I was using and I was too busy to compile at the time.

[TexasFlood]

... have you tried GIMP 2.8? I wanted to when I had Linux installed on my work machine but it hadn't made it to the repos of the distro I was using and I was too busy to compile at the time.

Yes but only on my Windows 7 box. My ubuntu box has a hard drive problem which I haven't had time to address so I moved my graphics work over to my Windows desktop and loaded up the latest version I could find. Think I have 2.6 on Ubuntu.

[jdcarpe]

Actually, most users "need" only a web browser that supports Gmail and Facebook.

Hence Chrome OS. The end user doesn't even know (or care) that he's using a Linux kernel, he just sees a browser, full-screen.

[smknjoe]

Way off topic, but in line with the argument - Linux was never meant to be a "desktop" or "GUIed" OS. It was meant to replicate SunOS/UNIX. Linus has blown off desktop builds and bug fixes for decades now because he thinks Linux development should be focused on the server market. It has really only be third party or home grown efforts that have focused on desktop builds and they typically are buggy or aren't fully developed.

[TexasFlood]

Way off topic, but in line with the argument - Linux was never meant to be a "desktop" or "GUIed" OS. It was meant to replicate SunOS/UNIX. Linus has blown off desktop builds and bug fixes for decades now because he thinks Linux development should be focused on the server market. It has really only be third party or home grown efforts that have focused on desktop builds and they typically are buggy or aren't fully developed.

I've had workstations that ran Solaris, Irix, AIX and Linux and all worked well for the intended purposes.  Doesn't Linus focus on the Linux kernel, not the distributions? So we're really talking about about patches/errata for whatever distribution you have.  Red Hat Enterprise Linux is pretty good about this as it's commercial and companies/customers will demand it.  There are so many distributions that it's hard to generalize.

[smknjoe]

I've had workstations that ran Solaris, Irix, AIX and Linux and all worked well for the intended purposes.  Doesn't Linus focus on the Linux kernel, not the distributions? So we're really talking about about patches/errata for whatever distribution you have.  Red Hat Enterprise Linux is pretty good about this as it's commercial and companies/customers will demand it.  There are so many distributions that it's hard to generalize.

You are absolutely correct. I should have said kernels instead of builds. And it's not fair to generalize anything about Linux because of the wide array of variations. From what I gather, and going by his general reputation in the Linux community, Linus doesn't really care about "user" versions.

I have used Linux fairly regularly for about 10 years and it's my daily driver, but it's still not a viable replacement for those who insist on using mainstream software such as Adobe suites, or expect a plug an play experience out of the box. Those workstations you used were probably for scientific, engineering, or similar uses. I have clients that still use AIX and SCO. I personally prefer UNIX/Linux. It's still not for everyone - it wasn't meant to be. That doesn't mean it won't be some day.

[zzspectrez]

But anyway, that wasn't my point. My point was that application development in general is getting away from the "one application, one purpose" theory because "in theory" it sounds great but "in practice" it doesn't work very well. The siloed app development approach has resulted in lots of disparate systems with little reuse and lots of common components which presents a nightmare for maintainability, extensibility and various other "illities".

A lot of the GUI apps in Linux end up using command line back ends which is transparent to the user.  Good example is cdr burning software.  They all use the same set of tools one creates the temp iso file another burns it to disk.  Many multimedia apps either use the same multimedia libraries or command line tools that do container mux/demux or codec encode/decode etc.  

Things are often not that much different on window apps. Instead of a commandline tool that does one thing good you may have system service app in the background handling that task or relevant code is shuffled off into some dll or shared library.

Then you end up with apps have disk bloat and multiple versions of code with different sets of bugs.  Even when reused code is in a shared library you have apps replacing Newer libraries with older versions causing other apps to crash. At least with vista and win 7 you don't end up with blue screens of death unless you have hardware problem or driver issue.

This kind of turned in to a rant sorry.  Not trying to bash windows.  It's a great piece of software and great desktop but just like Linux has its own headaches.  I have moved on.

I used to only use Linux for simple home file server and general server since around 1992  but the last two years has seen it get to the point that as a desktop it is better then windows in many ways.  Unless of course you are a hardcore gamer or tied to some specific commercial app.  


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[zzspectrez]

I've had workstations that ran Solaris, Irix, AIX and Linux and all worked well for the intended purposes.  Doesn't Linus focus on the Linux kernel, not the distributions? So we're really talking about about patches/errata for whatever distribution you have.  Red Hat Enterprise Linux is pretty good about this as it's commercial and companies/customers will demand it.  There are so many distributions that it's hard to generalize.

Linus focuses on kernel code merges mostly from my understanding. And since most financial backing is coming from commercial server market things have tended to default to being tuned for servers.  Some code that would benifit the desktop wasnt merged into official kernel but offered as patchsets by others. You used to have to rebuild your kernel to switch options to favor the desktop ( ie task scheduler ) or you would have latency issues that would make the desktop appear to lag.  The kernel would favor disk intensive task for example and block other processes.  This is not the case anymore.  It still favors server setups but even vanilla setups are quite desktop ready without any changes.   But even prior to this most desktop oriented distributions added patches and kernel configs for nice running desktops.  That's what shot Ubuntu to the limelight because they did all this for you and made it out of the box easy and useable.  


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[zzspectrez]

GIMP and Open/Libre-Office are pretty much the perfect examples of why Linux software sucks. That's basically the two major ones every fanboy mentions when proclaiming the merits of GNU/Linux software, when it's obvious to anyone who assesses them honestly that they're both frickin' terrible.

There's a horribly unhealthy habit FOSS supporters have of trying to distort reality to fit around pushing their ideology rather than rate software based on its actual quality.

You obviously haven't used them lately.  I used to dual boot for years because the apps were not up to par.  Now days they are for the most part.

 One of the best parts for me is this.  I generally have 3-5 machines ( laptop, desktop, server, kids comp, etc ) I would try to buy as many apps as I could but the way licensing works out I end up buying the same software 3-5 times or forced to run the old version on other machine ( new version better not be upgrade or you are not compliant license) or pirate.  I'm not rich so that means buy a few and pirate the rest or go without.  So I was pirating software even though I really didn't want to.  Thank god for gimp and ( paint.net  on windows ) because not to many years back you had to either buy photoshop or pirate it to do anything very useful with your digital photos.  I know there are cheaper apps know but they were all crap when I got first couple digital cameras.

You may have to be careful on gadgets you buy especially if you are an early adopter.  

Last time it bit me in the but was with a Wacom tablet I bought.  There was a revision change without a box change and it didn't work.. True story here.  I emailed maintainer for the code and he got back to me the next day and over the next week and half he was sending me code I was sending him error logs USB capture dumps and I ended up the first person with a working driver.  That was amazing I learned a lot of stuff I didn't know and got my tablet working.  That was an exceptional case but too cool not to share.  


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[hashbaz]

A lot of the GUI apps in Linux end up using command line back ends which is transparent to the user.  Good example is cdr burning software.  They all use the same set of tools one creates the temp iso file another burns it to disk.  Many multimedia apps either use the same multimedia libraries or command line tools that do container mux/demux or codec encode/decode etc.  

Things are often not that much different on window apps. Instead of a commandline tool that does one thing good you may have system service app in the background handling that task or relevant code is shuffled off into some dll or shared library.

Then you end up with apps have disk bloat and multiple versions of code with different sets of bugs.  Even when reused code is in a shared library you have apps replacing Newer libraries with older versions causing other apps to crash. At least with vista and win 7 you don't end up with blue screens of death unless you have hardware problem or driver issue.

This kind of turned in to a rant sorry.  Not trying to bash windows.  It's a great piece of software and great desktop but just like Linux has its own headaches.  I have moved on.

I used to only use Linux for simple home file server and general server since around 1992  but the last two years has seen it get to the point that as a desktop it is better then windows in many ways.  Unless of course you are a hardcore gamer or tied to some specific commercial app.  


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Linus focuses on kernel code merges mostly from my understanding. And since most financial backing is coming from commercial server market things have tended to default to being tuned for servers.  Some code that would benifit the desktop wasnt merged into official kernel but offered as patchsets by others. You used to have to rebuild your kernel to switch options to favor the desktop ( ie task scheduler ) or you would have latency issues that would make the desktop appear to lag.  The kernel would favor disk intensive task for example and block other processes.  This is not the case anymore.  It still favors server setups but even vanilla setups are quite desktop ready without any changes.   But even prior to this most desktop oriented distributions added patches and kernel configs for nice running desktops.  That's what shot Ubuntu to the limelight because they did all this for you and made it out of the box easy and useable.  


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

You obviously haven't used them lately.  I used to dual boot for years because the apps were not up to par.  Now days they are for the most part.

 One of the best parts for me is this.  I generally have 3-5 machines ( laptop, desktop, server, kids comp, etc ) I would try to buy as many apps as I could but the way licensing works out I end up buying the same software 3-5 times or forced to run the old version on other machine ( new version better not be upgrade or you are not compliant license) or pirate.  I'm not rich so that means buy a few and pirate the rest or go without.  So I was pirating software even though I really didn't want to.  Thank god for gimp and ( paint.net  on windows ) because not to many years back you had to either buy photoshop or pirate it to do anything very useful with your digital photos.  I know there are cheaper apps know but they were all crap when I got first couple digital cameras.

You may have to be careful on gadgets you buy especially if you are an early adopter.  

Last time it bit me in the but was with a Wacom tablet I bought.  There was a revision change without a box change and it didn't work.. True story here.  I emailed maintainer for the code and he got back to me the next day and over the next week and half he was sending me code I was sending him error logs USB capture dumps and I ended up the first person with a working driver.  That was amazing I learned a lot of stuff I didn't know and got my tablet working.  That was an exceptional case but too cool not to share.  


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD