Javascript semicolon flamewar
-
@nonpartisan said:
Why do I use it? It's more compatible to my way of working. And I've discussed this before . . . I can do things faster on a command line than I can through the GUI.
Nothing I do with my computer could be done faster on a command line. I have no idea what exactly you're "doing", but it's certainly not what I'm doing. Or what 99.9% of the population is doing.
@nonpartisan said:
I don't like the Registry (a specific component of Windows, not Windows in general).
You don't have to like the Registry, but you do have to admit it solves many problems that still exist with configuration on Linux and OS X.
-
@Mason Wheeler said:
Imagine if the writing industry existed in such a state that only TwainCo employees were able to analyze Huckleberry Finn, and only those who worked for Hugo, Inc. could study Les Miserables, and so on. Without solid examples of good writing freely available to study and learn from, the progress of literature would be greatly impeded.
...and it would look a lot like the state of software development today. Because of compilers (and minifiers/obfuscators/etc), software is a unique medium: It's a work of creative effort in which it's generally not possible for the next generation of aspiring creators to see what went into it. And as long as this state persists, software will continue to suck.
Now let's imagine you made a popular operating system. Your operating system provides a data structure that represents a list of icons, and some API functions that programs can use to retrieve or store icons in the list. Unfortunately, this feature was really rushed and the API functions suck-- they're slow, they require calling other functions to prepare for the call, they can fail in weird ways, etc.
But your operating system is open source! So a developer who comes across this painful API can simply bypass it altogether because, by looking at your OS' source, he can find exactly what format icon lists are stored in and just read/write to the data structure directly! Awesome, look at the power of open source!
Now you want to add a feature to your popular operating system. Some users have been complaining that they can't see the icons, so you want to add a flag to each one saying whether the icon is "high contrast" or not, so that the OS can choose to only show "high contrast" icons. Awesome new feature. You even fixed the API while you're at it! So you roll it out and...
Oh wait the developer from the second paragraph? His program just crashed. It turns out he wasn't using the API functions, he was just altering the data structure directly. Since his code doesn't know about the added data, it writes gibberish data, and bam dead.
The open source "solution" to the problem is one of the following:
1) Just let the program break, they were doing something wrong and they deserve it (this is the "OS X way")
2) Never, ever, ever, ever add a new feature to the OS ever because you have no idea how many applications will break in strange ways (this is the "Linux way", although there's overlap with the "OS X way" as well)Both of those suck ass. The Microsoft solution is of course:
3) Don't open up your source, do your damndest to cope with the flawed software anyway because your sales depend on it
-
@nonpartisan said:
I can do things faster on a command line than I can through the GUI.
A lot of people believe that. Howver, there are lots of tests that have been done where they actually time how long it takes to complete a task and overall a GUI is faster.
-
@Mason Wheeler said:
incorrect metaphor
Note that your metaphor is incorrect.
It is incorrect because it pairs the wrong properties, thus creates a false similarity.
Code is not equivalent to narrative or any other aspect part of the final visible product. Code is equivalent to the instruments; the footpedal kit a guitarist uses; the camera filters; the cameras; the production of the cameras etc.
"Creative effort" in software* is visible in the exact same way as in the media* pulled into this ill-matched allegory. That is to say, partially. Is it more? Is it less? Who knows! You can't quantify this shit!
So for the love of nonpartisan's God, please stop using metaphors because they're all wrong and skewed* and hamfisted* right down to the last one and the result is you get wiseguys* posting* shit* like I just did.
And finally, I still haven't found a proper* music player for Ubuntu because they all suck* and Foobar2000 is Windows-only. Maybe I should play with Wine*. And I can't upgrade my ubuntu playbox, because I don't have a spare drive* for the livecd, nor have I managed to make the box* boot* from this USB stick*. Not a clue whether it's the stick* or the motherboard*.
*) these are all metaphors. There may be more that I've forgotten.
-
@blakeyrat said:
Nothing I do with my computer could be done faster on a command line. I have no idea what exactly you're "doing", but it's certainly not what I'm doing. Or what 99.9% of the population is doing.
I wonder if address bars can be considered mini-commandlines. I type so much there, in firefox's superbar. It's like grepping through my history, except he grep is implicit, and the results are keyboard-navigable as well.
Perhaps I'm blurring the line between "command line" and "complete keyboard access" a little much. Perhaps that line doesn't really exist.
-
@Mason Wheeler said:
Actually, much more common (and more valid) than your strawman complaint is the actual complaint: that they make money off of products that they did not create, and destroy the livelihood of the people who are actually doing the creating.
Care to give examples? Because I think you're full of shit.
-
@blakeyrat said:
@nonpartisan said:
I don't like the Registry (a specific component of Windows, not Windows in general).
You don't have to like the Registry, but you do have to admit it solves many problems that still exist with configuration on Linux and OS X.I'll let blakeyrat supply the answer to those problems, 'I have no idea what exactly you're "doing", but it's certainly not what I'm doing.' However, I'm smart enough to admit that different people do different things than I do, and I don't get butthurt about them doing those things.
-
@nonpartisan said:
I can do things faster on a command line than I can through the GUI.
In general, I call bullshit. Maybe you are faster in CLI, but anyone proficient in a GUI can probably beat you. Plus, you aren't counting all of the time lost trying to troubleshoot stupid Linux problems.
@nonpartisan said:
So now you know someone who uses it not because I'm a computer nerd, not because I want to stick it to The Man, but because for me, it is The Best Way to Get Work Done.
You're obviously not a normal user. Regardless, your point seems to boil down to "A dump truck is better than a car because I can drive around with a bunch of dirt in the back". Which is true for you, I guess, but it's irrelevant for most users which is what we're talking about here. Also, I'm somewhat doubtful that the only tool for the job only runs on Linux; did you even look for alternatives on Windows?
-
@dhromed said:
While you're correct in that his metaphor sucks, I don't think you know what a metaphor is, judging by all the stars.@Mason Wheeler said:
incorrect metaphor
Note that your metaphor is incorrect.
It is incorrect because it pairs the wrong properties, thus creates a false similarity.
Code is not equivalent to narrative or any other aspect part of the final visible product. Code is equivalent to the instruments; the footpedal kit a guitarist uses; the camera filters; the cameras; the production of the cameras etc.
"Creative effort" in software* is visible in the exact same way as in the media* pulled into this ill-matched allegory. That is to say, partially. Is it more? Is it less? Who knows! You can't quantify this shit!
So for the love of nonpartisan's God, please stop using metaphors because they're all wrong and skewed* and hamfisted* right down to the last one and the result is you get wiseguys* posting* shit* like I just did.
And finally, I still haven't found a proper* music player for Ubuntu because they all suck* and Foobar2000 is Windows-only. Maybe I should play with Wine*. And I can't upgrade my ubuntu playbox, because I don't have a spare drive* for the livecd, nor have I managed to make the box* boot* from this USB stick*. Not a clue whether it's the stick* or the motherboard*.
*) these are all metaphors. There may be more that I've forgotten.
-
@Mason Wheeler said:
Probably the best pro-Open Source argument I've heard had nothing to do with ideology (epecially of the insane Stallman variety.) It went something like this:
We all know that software sucks. Not software from this guy or software from that company, but software in general. It sucks. It's bug-ridden and resource-hogging and full of security holes, and people keep making the same mistakes over and over and over again. And why is that? Because they aren't able to learn to do it right.
Look at any other medium. If you have a book, you can read the book and analyze the narrative structure, the plot, the characters, the viewpoints, everything that goes into it. Same if you have a movie or TV show, plus you can examine and discuss filming and acting techniques. Or in a piece of music, an aspiring musician can hear the entire song and learn how the rhythm, the melody and harmony and the verse structure work. But what if they couldn't?
Imagine if the writing industry existed in such a state that only TwainCo employees were able to analyze Huckleberry Finn, and only those who worked for Hugo, Inc. could study Les Miserables, and so on. Without solid examples of good writing freely available to study and learn from, the progress of literature would be greatly impeded.
...and it would look a lot like the state of software development today. Because of compilers (and minifiers/obfuscators/etc), software is a unique medium: It's a work of creative effort in which it's generally not possible for the next generation of aspiring creators to see what went into it. And as long as this state persists, software will continue to suck.
That has to be the most ridiculous fucking argument I've ever seen. First off: not all software sucks. Maybe the reason you expect software to be bug-ridden, resource-hogging and full of security holes is because you've been exposed to FOSS for far too long. Second: the entire point of a book is to read it. The point of software is to use it, not read the source. I can use software just fine without the source. Finally: you might have a point if FOSS was more secure, less buggy and less efficient than closed source, but that's absolutely not true.
Do you actually use Linux or are you just a lurker on Slashdot? Because, seriously, there are security updates and bug fixes every single fucking day for Linux. FOSS has not produced better software, not by a long shot. And don't get me started on how fuckups like OpenSSL are holding back Internet security for everyone by not implementing modern standards. Oh, but let's rag on Microsoft for not implementing every last detail of every last retarded W3C spec.
Seriously, any time someone says "Imagine a world where.." I prepare myself for the most strained, useless analogy a single neuron can crap out.
-
@blakeyrat said:
Nothing I do with my computer could be done faster on a command line. I have no idea what exactly you're "doing", but it's certainly not what I'm doing. Or what 99.9% of the population is doing
I didn't try to argue whether you could do it faster on a command line or not. I said that I can do things faster on a command line than I can do through the GUI.@blakeyrat said:
@nonpartisan said:
I don't have to admit anything, especially when I get Access Denied going to that link.I don't like the Registry (a specific component of Windows, not Windows in general).
You don't have to like the Registry, but you do have to admit it solves many problems that still exist with configuration on Linux and OS X.
mod: fixed rogue rouge quote in link and also in other posts. —dh
-
@El_Heffe said:
Process 2,000+ switch configuration files, determine if their access lists are up to date. If not, feed them to a Perl/Expect script that automatically logs into each device, updates the configs, saves them to the device and rewrites them back to the configuration server. The hard part is writing the Perl/Expect to connect to the device, not the part of the line that searches the configs.@nonpartisan said:
I can do things faster on a command line than I can through the GUI.
A lot of people believe that. Howver, there are lots of tests that have been done where they actually time how long it takes to complete a task and overall a GUI is faster.
-
@morbiuswilters said:
@nonpartisan said:
Ummmm . . . okay. I never said that the CLI in general is faster for everyone. I said I can do things faster on the command line than I can do through the GUI. If I was as proficient in the GUI as others, then perhaps I would be as faster or maybe faster. But I doubt it. I'm also curious about how many keystrokes (keyboard shortcuts) these people who are proficient in the GUI are using -- which brings it closer to using a CLI. After all, the difference between using a CLI and a GUI with keyboard shortcuts is really, in essence, the language. That is, if Alt-F + O opens a file in the GUI and :e opens a file in vi . . . really, what's the difference?I can do things faster on a command line than I can through the GUI.
In general, I call bullshit. Maybe you are faster in CLI, but anyone proficient in a GUI can probably beat you. Plus, you aren't counting all of the time lost trying to troubleshoot stupid Linux problems.
@morbiuswilters said:
@nonpartisan said:
All I was trying to do was tell you that you now know someone who uses Linux (or FreeBSD, for that matter) who does not fit into the two narrow, stereotypical criteria in your list.So now you know someone who uses it not because I'm a computer nerd, not because I want to stick it to The Man, but because for me, it is The Best Way to Get Work Done.
You're obviously not a normal user. Regardless, your point seems to boil down to "A dump truck is better than a car because I can drive around with a bunch of dirt in the back". Which is true for you, I guess, but it's irrelevant for most users which is what we're talking about here.
@morbiuswilters said:
Also, I'm somewhat doubtful that the only tool for the job only runs on Linux; did you even look for alternatives on Windows?
Now here's the kicker. I knew I was having problem getting good captures. So I did a Google search (it has been a couple of years, but I think it was something like "network capture ring buffer") and lo and behold, the first tool that I found that looked easy enough for me to use for my immediate need was gulp. I vaguely recall seeing something for Windows out there, but I think it required installing another device driver or some such.With gulp, I believe I did a ./configure and a make and that was it -- I was able to start it doing what I needed. The command-line options were very similar to what I use with tcpdump, so little learning curve required there. It looked cleaner, it looked familiar, I already had a Linux installation ready to go, and it got the job done. Could it have had a fatal flaw that totally wiped my system? Absolutely, but it didn't; and the Windows tool could have had a fatal flaw in it too. At that time, both were unknowns.
Now, could the Windows tool have done what I needed? Most likely. But the time investment in gulp was less if I had a problem with it. I downloaded, created the make file, ran make, and it was ready. If it didn't work, I would just wipe out the directory and it was gone. With Windows, I would have had to install it, let it install the driver, reboot, learn the utility's way of doing things (and I admit -- maybe it had options that were exactly the same as tcpdump or Wireshark -- I didn't look further after I found gulp), and if it didn't work, uninstall and reboot to get rid of the new driver. To me, that's not clean.
Did I get lucky? Maybe. But in this case, I was able to download an open (source|sores) package and get work done with it. And that was what I needed to do.
-
@nonpartisan said:
All I was trying to do was tell you that you now know someone who uses Linux (or FreeBSD, for that matter) who does not fit into the two narrow, stereotypical criteria in your list.
And I'm pointing out that you fit into the category of the computer nerd, as do I. You're doing network debugging and compiling from source, FFS. How do you think this makes Linux a suitable OS for most people? It's a niche tool, at best.
@nonpartisan said:
But in this case, I was able to download an open (source|sores) package and get work done with it. And that was what I needed to do.
Great. I don't recall ever saying that there weren't good open source packages out there. It's just that most open source sucks, especially the desktop stuff. Also, it doesn't change the fact that running Linux means spending lots of time troubleshooting problems in the kernel, toolchain, libraries, desktop environment, etc.. that you just wouldn't have to do in Windows.
Sometimes I wonder if the reason open source produces such crap is because FOSStards refuse to admit things suck, so nothing gets improved.
-
@morbiuswilters said:
Great. I don't recall ever saying that there weren't good open source packages out there. It's just that most open source sucks
You say that as if you were entirely ignorant of Sturgeon's Law, which I truly hope is not the case.
-
@Mason Wheeler said:
@morbiuswilters said:
Great. I don't recall ever saying that there weren't good open source packages out there. It's just that most open source sucks
You say that as if you were entirely ignorant of Sturgeon's Law, which I truly hope is not the case.
I'm sure he knows it. He probably just chooses to ignore it in this context, given his gigantic throbbing irrational spittle-spewing hate-on for open-source software.
-
@blakeyrat said:
@nonpartisan said:
Why do I use it? It's more compatible to my way of working. And I've discussed this before . . . I can do things faster on a command line than I can through the GUI.
Nothing I do with my computer could be done faster on a command line. I have no idea what exactly you're "doing", but it's certainly not what I'm doing. Or what 99.9% of the population is doing.
@nonpartisan said:
I don't like the Registry (a specific component of Windows, not Windows in general).
You don't have to like the Registry, but you do have to admit it solves many problems that still exist with configuration on Linux and OS X.
FTFY (extra quote mark in the link)
-
@morbiuswilters said:
@nonpartisan said:
You're no longer responding to the statement that I originally quoted, so I'll just leave this one where it lies.All I was trying to do was tell you that you now know someone who uses Linux (or FreeBSD, for that matter) who does not fit into the two narrow, stereotypical criteria in your list.
And I'm pointing out that you fit into the category of the computer nerd, as do I. You're doing network debugging and compiling from source, FFS. How do you think this makes Linux a suitable OS for most people? It's a niche tool, at best.
@morbiuswilters said:
Great. I don't recall ever saying that there weren't good open source packages out there. It's just that most open source sucks, especially the desktop stuff. Also, it doesn't change the fact that running Linux means spending lots of time troubleshooting problems in the kernel, toolchain, libraries, desktop environment, etc.. that you just wouldn't have to do in Windows.
I know that Linux distros can be tweaked down at a low level, but I've had to do very little of that. The last time I compiled a kernel myself was back for the 2.0-series kernels, when I upgraded my Slackware installation myself. In fact, with Ubuntu 11.04 (the last version I installed) the only significant issue I've had is that the wireless connection can be unreliable. The only other tweaking I've done is gulp's recommendation on a value to change in the /proc filesystem, and I equate a change like that to a recommendation to change a low-level setting in the Windows TCP stack -- not something that needs to be done often, but when it needs to be done there isn't a convenient GUI setting for it; you need to edit the Registry directly to make the change.@morbiuswilters said:
Sometimes I wonder if the reason open source produces such crap is because FOSStards refuse to admit things suck, so nothing gets improved.
Guess how many times I've needed a quick utility under Windows and only found crap that said "Limited use!! We'll give you the first two characters of your password!!" or "Limited to 100 devices for evaluation!" or "Full functionality for 30 days, then you must purchase!" Guess how many times I've needed a quick utility under Linux or FreeBSD that was limited in such a manner. And lest I be misunderstood, I don't have a problem purchasing software. But typically the problems I experience require a quick, one-time solution -- spending $50 in such a situation is rarely worth it to me. As we have a network of 3,000+ routers, switches and access points, 100 devices won't let me get an entire building. And 30 days is typically not enough time to give a network-related utility a good evaluation. But the open source utilities I've found are, typically, immediately useful and without limitation. This gives me the freedom to give it a good evaluation. So if by saying "things suck" you mean "utilities are immediately useful", then yes, I guess open source sucks.
-
@Mason Wheeler said:
@morbiuswilters said:
Great. I don't recall ever saying that there weren't good open source packages out there. It's just that most open source sucks
You say that as if you were entirely ignorant of Sturgeon's Law, which I truly hope is not the case.
Oh boy, a TV Tropes link; that's a credible source. Oh, except that it doesn't even apply in this case: far less than 90% of Microsoft's products suck and far, far more than 90% of FOSS sucks.
-
@Zylon said:
I'm sure he knows it. He probably just chooses to ignore it in this context, given his gigantic throbbing irrational spittle-spewing hate-on for open-source software.
Right, even though it has abso-fucking-lutely no applicability in this case. Were your parents cousins or something? Paint-huffing, crack-smoking cousins? Because I have no other explanation for why you are dumber than a pile of dog shit.
-
@nonpartisan said:
I know that Linux distros can be tweaked down at a low level, but I've had to do very little of that. The last time I compiled a kernel myself was back for the 2.0-series kernels, when I upgraded my Slackware installation myself.
I said nothing about tweaking anything or compiling kernels. I'm starting to think you're being thick on-purpose. I said that the software stack, top-to-bottom is buggy as shit. And it absolutely is, I've never had a desktop Linux install that didn't suck ass compared to Windows. Need an application to do X? Linux has 5 of them, none more than 70% complete. Oh, and if it hasn't been kept up-to-date it probably won't even compile on a modern system. And even if it compiles it probably crash the first time you try to use it.
@nonpartisan said:
So if by saying "things suck" you mean "utilities are immediately useful", then yes, I guess open source sucks.
Right, that's exactly what I must have meant. Look: I'm glad you managed to find a single utility that didn't fall to fucking pieces the first time you ran it. Fantastic. I am not impressed. I don't think you've convinced anyone that FOSS isn't 99.99% garbage, so good going; I guess we could call your posts "open source quality" for all the sense they've made.
-
-
@morbiuswilters said:
Oh, except that it doesn't even apply in this case: far less than 90% of Microsoft's products suck and far, far more than 90% of FOSS sucks.
Go-go-gadget goalposts!
-
@Zylon said:
@morbiuswilters said:
Oh, except that it doesn't even apply in this case: far less than 90% of Microsoft's products suck and far, far more than 90% of FOSS sucks.
Go-go-gadget goalposts!
Well, since we're primarily talking about Microsoft here, I assume that's a fair comparison to make. If you cast your net wide into the sea of closed source you'll find a lot of crap shareware, but most of that suffers for the same reason FOSS does: it's written by some amateur who hard-codes special folder paths. Of course, you can still build a well-functioning closed source system by avoiding shitty shareware but building a well-functioning FOSS desktop is impossible. Inevitably you'll run into hardware incompatibilities, a deficiency of good software and buggy, ugly, inconsistent UIs.
That said, there is some decent-quality FOSS: the Linux kernel; Firefox (well, before it became shitty); Webkit/Chromium; Apache; nginx; MySQL; Postgres.. that's about all I can think of. Many of the languages are decent for string manipulation or serving up web apps, but the GUI support is pretty crappy unless you want to get ass-raped by C/C++.
-
@bgodot said:
Thanks bgodot. Getting an "Access Denied" I didn't look at the URL to see if it was malformed or not; I would've looked if I'd gotten a "page not found" or something like that.@blakeyrat said:
You don't have to like the Registry, but you do have to admit it solves many problems that still exist with configuration on Linux and OS X.
FTFY (extra quote mark in the link)
-
@morbiuswilters said:
I said nothing about tweaking anything or compiling kernels. I'm starting to think you're being thick on-purpose. I said that the software stack, top-to-bottom is buggy as shit. And it absolutely is, I've never had a desktop Linux install that didn't suck ass compared to Windows. Need an application to do X? Linux has 5 of them, none more than 70% complete. Oh, and if it hasn't been kept up-to-date it probably won't even compile on a modern system. And even if it compiles it probably crash the first time you try to use it.
Well then what in the holy fuck did you mean by this?Earlier today . . . (emphasis mine)@morbiuswilters said:
In my mind, troubleshooting the kernel, libraries, etc. would include having to compile the kernel and compile the libraries for debugging purposes. I am not being thick on purpose, I am responding to your fucking words. In order to use the Linux installation that I have, I turn it on, and I use it. I have not had to troubleshoot problems in the kernel . . . or its libraries. I don't know what piece of shit distribution you're using, but I just haven't had those problems. I do understand that one person's experiences doth not definitive evidence make, just like someone's recent ranting about Firefox when others were saying "I haven't seen it crash like that" and yet that same person kept railing about it being a piece of shit because it kept crashing in a way that no one else could replicate. @morbiuswilters said:Also, it doesn't change the fact that running Linux means spending lots of time troubleshooting problems in the kernel, toolchain, libraries, desktop environment, etc.. that you just wouldn't have to do in Windows.
Right, that's exactly what I must have meant. Look: I'm glad you managed to find a single utility that didn't fall to fucking pieces the first time you ran it. Fantastic. I am not impressed. I don't think you've convinced anyone that FOSS isn't 99.99% garbage, so good going; I guess we could call your posts "open source quality" for all the sense they've made
If your post is supposed to be representative of the quality of a Windows system, you're not creating a great image either. Can't even remember that you were the one that brought in having to troubleshoot the base Linux install after I responded to it.Windows has its purpose. Linux has its purpose. If it doesn't suit you, fine. Don't fucking use it. My experience is not the same as your experience. I manage to get my work done and get it done effectively because of the way I utilize the UNIX way of things. Get over it and move the fuck on for $DEITY's sake.
-
@nonpartisan said:
In my mind, troubleshooting the kernel, libraries, etc. would include having to compile the kernel and compile the libraries for debugging purposes.
Not necessarily, plenty of times it involves searching forums, bug databases, etc..
@nonpartisan said:
In order to use the Linux installation that I have, I turn it on, and I use it. I have not had to troubleshoot problems in the kernel . . . or its libraries. I don't know what piece of shit distribution you're using, but I just haven't had those problems.
It's not any particular distro, these are bugs in the kernel, device drivers, libraries, system software, etc.. Now, it's true that to truly comprehend the magnitude of Linux desktop shittiness it's necessary to dig into code, but to experience it you just have to install Linux. Now that you mention it, though, Ubuntu is particular awful, mostly because they insist on replacing a lot of default Linux programs and configuration with their own, even-less-usable crap (like Unity).
@nonpartisan said:
...just like someone's recent ranting about Firefox when others were saying "I haven't seen it crash like that" and yet that same person kept railing about it being a piece of shit because it kept crashing in a way that no one else could replicate.
Except plenty of people could replicate it. And it's a complaint I commonly hear from non-developers I know, so I'm hardly the only person who thinks Firefox is shitty.
@nonpartisan said:
If your post is supposed to be representative of the quality of a Windows system...
Well, considering I'm writing this from a Linux desktop, I find that to be unlikely.
@nonpartisan said:
If it doesn't suit you, fine. Don't fucking use it. My experience is not the same as your experience. I manage to get my work done and get it done effectively because of the way I utilize the UNIX way of things. Get over it and move the fuck on for $DEITY's sake.
Ah, now there's that Linux Attitude I've been talking about. You remembered to include the "$DEITY" cliche, but forgot to say "RTFM" and "You have the source so if you don't like the way it works, just change it."
That said, I have no intention of shutting up. The entire point of this site is to call out shitty software; if you want like-minded people to jerk you off, go back to Slashdot. Attitudes like yours are why the Linux desktop is always going to be a distant, mediocre pipe dream. Accepting inferiority guarantees that nothing will improve.
-
@morbiuswilters said:
@zzo38 said:
I have written a preprocessor...
Please tell me it's written in Forth. Do you have a Gopher site up with the source tarballs?
You skipped over the best part. His preprocessor also shortens the syntax for lambdas. Can you imagine the advantage this guy has over people typing out full method declarations? The fact that his code is write-only puts the competition even further behind.
-
@morbiuswilters said:
Except plenty of people could replicate it. And it's a complaint I commonly hear from non-developers I know, so I'm hardly the only person who thinks Firefox is shitty.
I was referring specifically to the "I Hate Firefox" thread. First page:- "You're overreacting! I have 10-15 tabs at any given moment and ff set to load em at boot. It's very stable."
- "I had version 3.23 installed for a while, and god, did it suck. Five tabs were enough to bring it to a crawl. The latest versions though are working quite fine..."
- "And it's rock stable for me. Never ever crashes."
- "The only problems with FF i had weren't FF's fault."
- "Since upgrading to the latest version it only seems to outright crash if I've left it running overnight with a Flash clip embedded on the page running. Otherwise, the latest version on Win7 is pretty stable for me."
- "I have no problems with FFX."
- "I use Firefox and IE at work and at home, and I've never found Firefox to be unstable."
- "I'm using FF on a shitty P4 with 2Gb of RAM and it works fine. I can't remember the last time that it crashed . . ."
- "But FF has been pissing me off so much lately. It isn't crashing-- I've found it rather stable. Memory hog, yes, but I'll be willing to accept part of the blame with 20+ tabs open, a good chunk of them running FireBug or some other sort of dev tool. Whatever, I have enough memory."
- "It's been a good long time since I've seen Firefox crash. Flash? All the fucking time, but not Firefox."
And the thread quickly changed to a debate about the immorality of ad blockers and whether Firebug was really a Firefox creation, in addition to other debugging plug-ins, add-ons, etc.
@morbiuswilters said:Ah, now there's that Linux Attitude I've been talking about. You remembered to include the "$DEITY" cliche, but forgot to say "RTFM" and "You have the source so if you don't like the way it works, just change it."
Except I am not exhibiting a Linux Attitude. As I said in the beginning, the right tool for the right job. For my purposes, I use Windows for e-mail and office-type work, and the UNIX paradigm (not just Linux, as I've said, but FreeBSD as well, and about six Solaris servers that I hadn't mentioned before) to get my job done. And they work for me. This is the "attitude" I'm projecting -- the right tool for the right job. Your tool set may or may not include Linux (or Solaris, or FreeBSD, or AIX, or OpenServer, or . . .). Fine. I don't fucking care if you use it or not.@morbiuswilters said:
That said, I have no intention of shutting up.
I never told you to shut up. That said, you're going to get Athlete's Tongue if you keep putting your foot in your mouth.@morbiuswilters said:
The entire point of this site is to call out shitty software; if you want like-minded people to jerk you off, go back to Slashdot. Attitudes like yours are why the Linux desktop is always going to be a distant, mediocre pipe dream. Accepting inferiority guarantees that nothing will improve.
This all started because you claimed the only people you know that use Linux are those that want to know more about their systems or those that want to stick it to The Man. I know how my computer works and I don't have an innate, burning desire to stick it to . . . whomever. I replied, explaining that I use Linux (and FreeBSD -- this was not a Linux-only fanboy reply) and saying how I used it to accomplish my day-to-day job. Thus, I presented myself as a third type of person -- one who uses it because it's the right tool for certain tasks for me. You're the one that started taking an attitude against Linux that I wasn't projecting. For me, there are times when Windows is appropriate. For me, there are times when Linux is appropriate. Apparently for you, there are times when Linux is appropriate too -- you admitted writing your previous reply on a Linux desktop. If you never, ever, ever, ever use Linux again, if you blow up the media that has your Linux setup on it (whether a hard drive or a bootable CD or what-the-hell-ever), my world is not going to end and I am just not going to give a flying fuck. If every trace of Linux were to be wiped off the face of the Earth, I would just migrate to FreeBSD. I'm not a Linux-only champion; I just don't care. And I don't really want to get into a debate as to whether you consider FreeBSD (or any of the *BSDs for that matter) are inferior or not. I use both. It's faster for me to use them. If you use Windows, or OS/2, or BeOS, or AmigaOS, or the GEM Desktop on an Atari ST, or Apple DOS, or . . . bully for you. I just don't give a flying fuck.
-
@Sutherlands said:
While you're correct in that his metaphor sucks, I don't think you know what a metaphor is, judging by all the stars.
I admit I my have stretched the definition somewhat.
-
@nonpartisan said:
This all started because you claimed the only people you know that use Linux are those that want to know more about their systems or those that want to stick it to The Man. I know how my computer works and I don't have an innate, burning desire to stick it to . . . whomever.
A bit of advice son.Never wrestle with a pig. The pig will enjoy it and you'll only get dirty.
-
@OzPeter said:
A bit of advice son.
Never wrestle with a pig. The pig will enjoy it and you'll only get dirty.
Well, morbius likes getting dirty, so I'm sure he appreciates the advice, but it's not for him, really.
-
@morbiuswilters said:
The entire point of this site is to call out shitty software;
No, it's not. It's to call out horrible code. (And occasionally details of the working environments that produce such, but that's not the point here.) Do you have a sample or three from Linux (or other open-source projects) you can point to?
Shouldn't be too hard to find if they're all as terrible as you say. The code's right there for anyone to see; hearing you talk, you should practically be able to throw a dart at the codebase and have it land right in the middle of a big, stinking pile of WTFery. So what'cha got for us?
-
@OzPeter said:
@nonpartisan said:
Yeah, I know. Thanks. Somehow I keep thinking of the "big-car-small-dick" thing and thinking "big-TDWTF-forum-post-count . . ."This all started because you claimed the only people you know that use Linux are those that want to know more about their systems or those that want to stick it to The Man. I know how my computer works and I don't have an innate, burning desire to stick it to . . . whomever.
A bit of advice son.Never wrestle with a pig. The pig will enjoy it and you'll only get dirty.
-
@Mason Wheeler said:
@morbiuswilters said:
The entire point of this site is to call out shitty software;
No, it's not. It's to call out horrible code. (And occasionally details of the working environments that produce such, but that's not the point here.) Do you have a sample or three from Linux (or other open-source projects) you can point to?
Shouldn't be too hard to find if they're all as terrible as you say. The code's right there for anyone to see; hearing you talk, you should practically be able to throw a dart at the codebase and have it land right in the middle of a big, stinking pile of WTFery. So what'cha got for us?
Here I was, thinking this site was for making lame jokes and trolling like a sucker.
-
@nonpartisan said:
Somehow I keep thinking of the "big-car-small-dick" thing and thinking "big-TDWTF-forum-post-count . . ."
Mine is just enormous!
-
@Mason Wheeler said:
No, it's not. It's to call out horrible code.
And software. Where would you get the idea that code is the only thing that matters? Shitty software can actually be pretty well-written, although it will tend to not..
@Mason Wheeler said:
Do you have a sample or three from Linux (or other open-source projects) you can point to?
- Unity (WTF is that shit?)
- Gnome3
- NetworkManager (I think it's from Gnome.. whatever it is it's a real piece of shit. Sometimes it gets confused and won't let me connect to a network or disconnect from my current network. I can't seem to get it to prioritize networks; doesn't even seem to be supported).
- Multi-monitor support (The piece that actually controls this comes from Gnome, I think. Plug a second monitor in and half the time both screens just go batshit. Unplug something and the same happens. After these screwups forced me to reboot a few times I gave in and wrote my own daemon that calls xrandr directly. That worked well but having to write your own daemon hardly counts as "good software").
- Firefox (I've already bitched about how much I hate it)
- Random gnome widgets (Just decide to crash or stop working for no reason)
- Pulseaudio (likes to get fucked up at times, getting it straightened out is a PITA.. still better than ALSA and OSS. Oh, and it has a condition which causes it to bail if run as root, which I fucking hate.)
- CUPS (It's improved a lot since OSX came into the fold but it's still inferior to Windows printing.. Jesus)
And since we're on the subject, might as well cover:
- MySQL prior to 5.0 (Lacked pretty much every single feature an RDBMS needs)
- Postgres prior to 9.1 (Lacks any kind of simple, useful replication, making it unsuitable for a real deployment)
Of course, I could go on-and-on about autoconf incompatibities and the horror of trying to make portable binaries for Linux, but I figure those aren't really "desktop" concerns..
- Unity (WTF is that shit?)
-
@pkmnfrk said:
@zzo38 said:
No, it requires you to insert semicolons manually. It discards all line breaks and comments, so that it will never select the wrong place to put a semicolon when it is ambiguous.I hate the JavaScript's automatic semicolon insertion. I have written a preprocessor which disables that feature as well as adding some things such as a shorter syntax for function lambdas
How, exactly, would you use a preprocessor to disable automatic semi-colon insertion? Does it insert semi-colons for you? Automatically?
-
@nonpartisan said:
First page:
And several people agreed it was shit. Part of using Open Sores is learning to deal with the delusional assholes who can't see how shitty their software is.
@nonpartisan said:
...lots of rambling, insane nonsense..
I could really give a shit about you or what you use. The entire point of this argument has been that FOSS desktop applications are almost entirely shit, which I think I've demonstrated quite well. FOSS produces garbage. Linux can make a good server or embedded kernel, and that's about it. I use it exclusively because I am paid to build on FOSS server platforms and it's just easier to do that shit from a command line rather than from a Windows desktop. Considering that I have far more experience with FOSS than you, I'd venture to say that I am in a far better position to judge it's quality.
tl;dr The FOSS desktop is a joke and you are mentally challenged. Also, I fucked your wife.
-
@morbiuswilters said:
Also, I fucked your wife.
Thank you! She's been fucking me for years.
*dah dum tish*
-
@morbiuswilters said:
The entire point of this argument has been that FOSS desktop applications are almost entirely shit, which I think I've demonstrated quite well.
I know you think so. It also appears, from the comments posted, that you are basically alone in thinking so. Loud assertions with nothing to back them up to not a good demonstration make.
In the other thread, you sid Firefox is horrible, that it crashes incessantly, etc. This is completely at variance with everyone else's experience with it.
In this thread, you say FOSS is horrible, that it has usability problems all over, etc. This is completely at variance with everyone else's experience with it.
I think a clear pattern is emerging here. We have enough data to deduce where the problem lies. (Here's a hint: it's not with the open-source software.)
-
@morbiuswilters said:
Considering that I have far more experience with FOSS than you, I'd venture to say that I am in a far better position to judge it's quality.
I have enough experience to know that I can use it to get my job done effectively.@morbiuswilters said:Also, I fucked your wife.
That was my ex. She kept my name. I talked to her recently. She laughed about a recent encounter. Must've been you.
-
@Mason Wheeler said:
In the other thread, you sid Firefox is horrible, that it crashes incessantly, etc. This is completely at variance with everyone else's experience with it.
Why do you keep saying something that you know is untrue? Lots of people have had Firefox behave like crap.
@Mason Wheeler said:
In this thread, you say FOSS is horrible, that it has usability problems all over, etc. This is completely at variance with everyone else's experience with it.
Actually, this is the experience that, like, everyone but you and that other dipshit has had. Say "Linux desktop" to an actual, professional programmer (not amateurs like you or nonpartisan) and watch them laugh.
-
@nonpartisan said:
@morbiuswilters said:
Considering that I have far more experience with FOSS than you, I'd venture to say that I am in a far better position to judge it's quality.
I have enough experience to know that I can use it to get my job done effectively.There are people who will try to "hammer" a nail in with a rock. I'm sure they feel rocks are effective tools. To the rest of us they are jokes.
@nonpartisan said:
@morbiuswilters said:
Also, I fucked your wife.
That was my ex. She kept my name. I talked to her recently. She laughed about a recent encounter. Must've been you.No, this was back when you were married. Glad to hear she finally got up the nerve to leave you, though.
To the other, non-retarded people reading this thread: I'd just like to point out that I've given multiple examples of shitty FOSS on multiple occasions. And every single time it's been ignored by these idiots as they plow ahead with their "The Linux desktop is totally gonna pwn Windows" nonsense. Let the record show that I tried to teach the ignorant, that I tried to bring light to the darkness, but ultimately the inferior-minded refuse to accept the help of their betters.
-
@morbiuswilters said:
@Mason Wheeler said:
In this thread, you say FOSS is horrible, that it has usability problems all over, etc. This is completely at variance with everyone else's experience with it.
Actually, this is the experience that, like, everyone but you and that other dipshit has had. Say "Linux desktop" to an actual, professional programmer (not amateurs like you or nonpartisan) and watch them laugh.
I don't know where you keep getting these ideas from. I'm a real, professional programmer, (been doing it profesionally for years now,) and I'd laugh right along side the rest of them, as I'm fully aware that desktop Linux is a mess and a half. But I'm not equating "desktop Linux" with "all Open-Source software," which seems to be an implicit assumption on your part. And my experience with open-source, both as development libraries and as desktop products for consumers (on Windows) is that it follows the exact same Sturgeon's Law distribution as non-open source programs do, but is considerably easier to fix when you get something crappy, at least for a professional programmer such as myself.
-
@morbiuswilters said:
"The Linux desktop is totally gonna pwn Windows"
Tell me where in this thread I ever said that the Linux desktop was going to beat Windows. Tell me where I ever said that the tools I use under Linux are GUI tools that are superior to Windows. (I mentioned Wireshark in passing, but I use that under Windows as well; user interface is the same on both, neither platform is superior.) Tell me. Go ahead, I'll wait . . .@morbiuswilters said:I tried to bring light to the darkness
Your lamp burned out after 1,000 turns. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.You also completely ignore the fact that I started out saying I use Linux and FreeBSD. I never turned this into a Linux-is-superior debate. In fact, I specifically tried to steer away from it. You're the one who kept trying to bring a fight that I never intended to start.
-
@Mason Wheeler said:
I'm a real, professional programmer...
Aww.. so cute!
@Mason Wheeler said:
But I'm not equating "desktop Linux" with "all Open-Source software," which seems to be an implicit assumption on your part.
Well, this argument started with discussions of alternative desktop OSes. Sadly, Linux is probably the best Open Sores desktop out there.
But, at the end of the day you agreed with me and that's all I needed to hear. You need to just learn to admit you're wrong sooner and save yourself the embarrassment.
-
@nonpartisan said:
Tell me where in this thread I ever said that the Linux desktop was going to beat Windows. Tell me where I ever said that the tools I use under Linux are GUI tools that are superior to Windows.
You just argued for several pages that the Linux desktop (or open source desktop, which is basically the same thing) isn't shit. And now you're agreeing with me, too?
@nonpartisan said:
You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
You also call your ex-wife "grue"?
@nonpartisan said:
You also completely ignore the fact that I started out saying I use Linux and FreeBSD. I never turned this into a Linux-is-superior debate. In fact, I specifically tried to steer away from it. You're the one who kept trying to bring a fight that I never intended to start.
Well, considering FreeBSD is a shittier desktop than Linux, I'd say I covered my bases. My point was that Open Sores has nothing on closed source. I never said every single FOSS project was shit, just that 99% were. Let's review some of thee more successful open source projects:
- Linux kernel (actually pretty good)
- Apache (noted history of security flaws; not strong in the performance department)
- MySQL (not bad but was a joke for a long time)
- PHP (I like it but many people consider it a joke)
- Firefox (which is actually shitty, but whatevs)
- Webkit/Chromium (which is actually awesome, but whatevs)
Notice how the only successful end-user applications are web browsers*. (I'm aware that people would argue for other things like Postgres/Perl/Ruby/Python/nginx/Postfix/etc.. but those aren't quite as popular.) So Open Sores can produce good software, but it almost never will.
*Also note that building applications on top of a document markup language is inherently retarded and that open source browsers have contributed to making it happen. So I blame them for the stupidity of web apps.
- Linux kernel (actually pretty good)
-
@morbiuswilters said:
But, at the end of the day you agreed with me and that's all I needed to hear. You need to just learn to admit you're wrong sooner and safe yourself the embarrassment.
I saw this and sat there in amazement for a few brief moments, wondering how in the world you could possibly misconstrue my words that way, wondering what kind of delusional mind it takes to take that input and produce that output.
Then I thought back over the rest of this thread, and the Firefox one, and shrugged. I already have my answer, I guess.
-
While we're recommending random geek sitcoms, see The Guild. The last episode has a good cameo from Stan Lee, and Wil has a major role. If you're wondering 'Wil who', you probably wouldn't enjoy it.
