What editor is more feature-rich then vim? Out the box it is lacking some sane config but it is one of the more powerful and flexible editors out there - more then a rival for any modern IDE.
nous
joined 2 years ago
Vims defaults are quite crap overall. It is why everyone needs 100s of lines of configs and many plugins to turn it into something decent. Well worth the setup but it could go a long way to making things nicer to use out the box.
Nobody sane uses vim as an IDE
Huh? Many people do this. With the right plugins and config it is just as capable as any IDE.
Instead, it's about the irretrievable, sunken costs associated with a loss of incompatible software and hardware that the person would no longer be able to use after switching to Linux.
... When windows has made its latest release incompatible with most existing hardware out there because of some arbitrary requirements. I have not seen any major hardware compatibility issues with Linux in quite a few years now. It is not common at all for some hardware to not work. In less then about a year Windows in going to make a huge amount of existing hardware unusable for supported versions of windows. That alone will help with Linuxs market share.
Most arguments in this article are overblown out very outdated. Software compatibility is a issue, but much less then it used to be. Big companies like Adobe and Microsoft which refuse to support Linux are also starting to alienate their user base making the cost of switching more and more apprising all the while the linux friendly alternatives are growing in popularity. And as I said above hardware is not a big issue these days and about to be a big issue for Windows systems.
It does touch berfily on the main point sa to why linux os not very popular ATM:
Most people don't even know what Linux is because they've never seen it pre-installed on a laptop in a store. But I digress.
That is the problem, defaults. Most people don't care or want to change their OS and most people have hardware and workloads that are easily compatible to Linux. It is really only a minority of people that require things that Windows supports better - sadly those are also the types of people more willing to break from the default OS.
The year of the Linux desktop won't come until we, the Linux community, find a way to balance the cost of switching with the future benefits of daily driving Linux from the perspective of an average user. Until then, Linux will remain more like a niche thing, made by enthusiasts for enthusiasts.
No it wont. The normal user will only switch when they are forced to by their current system stopping working or new hardware comes with Linux by default. The average user is your aunt how uses their computer to log into facebook or look up recipes online. A professional that requires adobe suite is not an average user and only makes up a tiny fraction of the overall userbase. It would be nice to support their workloads, but even if adobe was fully supported on Linux that would still only be a fraction more users that would be willing to move. For the average user it is the defaults that their system comes with that makes the biggest difference.
The problem is ides inlining only part of the error and generally skip all the helpful text on how to fix the error.
Fairly sure that Matt Mullenweg has already completely undermined Wordpress.org's trust and reliability.
From what I can tell xbps-src are just the source packages to the main repos in Void. That is not what AUR is. We have access to the main repo sources in Arch just like Void. The main thing about AUR is anyone can contribute without any gated approvals. That is the big difference between the main source repos of either distro and AUR. Unless I have misunderstood what xbps is.
but looking at templates they can actually understand its kinda simple script and get the idea of how it works
Same exact idea with PKGBUILDs. No benefit to Void here. The way Void does things will not change people looking at or understanding the packages they install. You have the same optitunities on both systems for looking at the source of packages. So that argument for Void is void :)
Also void has runit so this mean u have to get more simple programs to run system like seatd dbus and etc.
Not really a good argument either. Systemd and runit are different but that doesn't make runit better in terms of learning anything. If you want to learn how most Linux systems boot and operate you need to learn systemd as that is what the vast majority of distros use. Learning runit instead only means you are learning a niche way of booting a tiny fraction of systems.
Neither of these arguments are a very strong case for Void over arch.
XBPS-SRC does not look like an alternative to AUR at all. It looks like Voids alternative to https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/packaging/packages - where Arch maintains all its packages. Nor is comparing the number of packages in AUR to Void main repos a good idea - Arch has its own main repos that are a better equivalent. The Void templates do not look dissimilar form what a PKGBUILD file is either and you can do the same things with writing your own PKGBUILD or pulling them from repos if you really want to. I don't see how void is any better then Arch in anything you have described here. IMO it just looks like it does more of the same things with a bit difference in syntax/commands you run. Nothing you have said here is really a solid argument for using Void or Arch at all.
The AUR is not even that great. I think most people seem to get confused between what is in the AUR and the main packages since they just use tools like yay that install from both. But most people only use a couple of packages from the AUR - it is the package selection in the main repos which is what is so nice about Arch. The AUR is just nice for more niche things that have not made it into the main repos yet.
I hope u don’t use AUR blindly and just do yay -S something without looking what pkgbuild is doing, it might be dangerous not knowing what program can do and what script that is downloading it too right?
Same goes for Void? Most people wont read the source of third party packages they install. No matter what distro they are on. AUR tooling does try to help with this but most people ignore it. Same will go for Void. It is not a distro problem - just a humans are lazy problem. Plus even if people did read them there is only a small subset of people that actually understand them enough to spot obviously malicious packages - though that can spot hidden malicious packages are vastly smaller.
252 of that 592 used memory is buffers/cache, not application memory. That is used by the kernel for kernel buffers and the filesystem cache - IE files read by something at some point. The kernel keeps them in memory in case they are needed again to speed up file reads. You can effectively ignore these vales as they will always grow to fill your ram and will be evicted when programs require memory and there is not enough free.
These tools are not lieing to you, just telling you something other then what you are reading into them. Tracking and reporting on what is using memory is a complex topic and here used is just what is physically allocate. It doesn't mean much over all as it always tends to be full of your system has been running for a decent amount of time. Available is typically the more useful one to look at as it is an estimate about how much the kernel can reclaim now if an application request it without needing to swap things out.
Can you share the output of free? There are multiple values to read from that.
I never thought shaking the bed would cause adhesion issues 🤔 always thought it was far more the head crashing/clipping or scraping the surface of the part while printing.
I said editor, not an OS that lacks a decent editor :)