The game worked just great using Flash, but the migration to HTML5 has been a nightmare for the programmers, as well as the players. There is just so much you can't do in HTML5 that could be done in Flash with ease.
Since I never had to mess with changing my operations in the auto-clicker, I missed some of the features it had I never needed.
Studying it again last night I found I can add a line and move it up to where I need it, and edit existing lines to change things in them. Sad I never saw that was possible earlier. So good things do come from snooping around.
FWIW: There is no such similar program that can do this on a Windows machine.
I know, I've owned nearly every auto-clicker made for Windows. Most are super simple. Some have a few features.
And then you get into the ones you have to pay for, and they still don't have the features needed to use them on FT in HTML5.
I know, because my wife still uses Windows, hi hi.
Smug As A Bug
Re: Smug As A Bug
I'd guess there is a sound reason for auto clickers to be absent in the Windows environment. I can't think of too many applications for such a piece of software. Also, you take Farm Town to the extreme. There are die hard gamers who get involved with their hobby way more than you are doing, but they don't play the kind of games you are talking about. Linux gamers are not as rare as they used to be, but still, I'd guess whatever isn't played on PS2 or XBox is played in Windows. In other words you have a very special need in a very special circumstance. Program developers could never make a living providing what you use every day. There just are not that many buyers for such things. I also sympathize with you for losing the functionality due to the obsolescence of Flash. HTML5 can't be blamed for it's inability to keep up with the flaws and security risks of Flash, plus, HTML5 is not intended to be used for the same purposes as was Flash. Instead of trying to make square games fit into round markup language, game developers should accept the reality that Flash is history. They knew this was coming for years, but never bothered to come up with an alternative. What you are experiencing now is the product of a lack of foresight on the part of the game devs. It has Zinga written all over it. 
Re: Smug As A Bug
Flash was a multi-level scale-able platform. Think of it like the Layers in PhotoShop.
HTML5 Canvas is like a flat piece of canvas you paint on. No comparison at all to Flash.
WebGL is really nothing more than a very limited image library.
So in order to get something that ran easily on Flash, you now need several programs, including JavaScript to even come close to getting the same features found in the one Flash program.
Now if you ask me, using all these separate programs would be more of a security risk than using Flash, hi hi.
But that's what happens when a company puts all their eggs in one basket.
The latest release of Google Chrome does not handle WebGL very well at all.
It keeps turning it off during use for some strange reason. It worked perfect in their previous versions.
Zynga never could get anything right, but they were in bed with Farcebook so got top billing.
Many of the games Debi plays on Windows doesn't use a browser or Flash Player, they all have their own game engine that loads along with the game. They are using tricks which allow them to access features of the NT kernel that somehow got leaked to them. This is one of the reasons they can't be ported over to Linux or MAC machines. And they are worried also now that they know NT is coming to an end.
I don't remember their name anymore, but the company who developed the games like Crystal Calliburn and others, have developed their own game and display engine. Which I think is more like how streaming video works. Or possibly like how these big fancy shootem up games work. I hear they are super complicated feats of programming, hi hi.
HTML5 Canvas is like a flat piece of canvas you paint on. No comparison at all to Flash.
WebGL is really nothing more than a very limited image library.
So in order to get something that ran easily on Flash, you now need several programs, including JavaScript to even come close to getting the same features found in the one Flash program.
Now if you ask me, using all these separate programs would be more of a security risk than using Flash, hi hi.
But that's what happens when a company puts all their eggs in one basket.
The latest release of Google Chrome does not handle WebGL very well at all.
It keeps turning it off during use for some strange reason. It worked perfect in their previous versions.
Zynga never could get anything right, but they were in bed with Farcebook so got top billing.
Many of the games Debi plays on Windows doesn't use a browser or Flash Player, they all have their own game engine that loads along with the game. They are using tricks which allow them to access features of the NT kernel that somehow got leaked to them. This is one of the reasons they can't be ported over to Linux or MAC machines. And they are worried also now that they know NT is coming to an end.
I don't remember their name anymore, but the company who developed the games like Crystal Calliburn and others, have developed their own game and display engine. Which I think is more like how streaming video works. Or possibly like how these big fancy shootem up games work. I hear they are super complicated feats of programming, hi hi.
Re: Smug As A Bug
I think we can agree that HTML5 is not Flash. There is no way to make either one of those do what the other does. Now that Flash is deprecated there is a lot of moaning and groaning, but it's not like this end point for Flash came as a surprise.
Windows has a couple neat features that could emulate what Flash does in the sense that they seem to have direct access to the kernel without going through an API first. There is something called AcitveX and .net Framework which can give Flash a good run for the money. The problem is as you point out. Both ActiveX and the .net Framework are proprietary. They have limited appeal in the gaming world. Some of the games I still find time to play are available on such platforms as Steam. Steam can be run both on Linux and Windows so that the variety of games there can be enjoyed on any platform. Steam, of course, is in the business of maximizing profits and you must buy most of what they offer. There are other gaming servers that offer an equally broad selection of games, and some are free. Some of those freebies are pretty sophisticated.
While on the subject of Windows, and Microsoft, I have told you in the past how some of my inputs to them seem to have not only been recognized but also implemented. I'm not all that special or knowledgeable, but I am a member of their Insider Preview program. Thus when I find a bug in whatever they are pushing this week, I'm likely to go to the Feedback Hub and complain about it. I've mentioned in the past where my complaints have been addressed at least a couple times. But, it's been like going to a Linux tech support forum and the braniacs there saying your problem is known and being investigated; look for a fix (hopefully) in the next release. Well, this Insider Program updates the OS every week so that the fixes, if any, become apparent rather quickly. But, it's never been possible to talk to a Microsoft developer directly. I don't blame them for not wanting to because there are a lot of air heads doing the beta testing as well as people who know what they are doing. Microsoft has now altered the structure of their Feedback mechanism so that if a bug is reported by more than one person it gets lumped into a category of it's own. That way you can search for problems by category and see if anybody else is having the same issues.
Well I had a problem two weeks ago and told them about it. A day or so later I got a notification that my input was put into one of those defined categories and it was upvoted. I don't know why a complaint would get an upvote, but I guess that means other people saw the same thing but were too lazy to write about it so they just ticked the upvote button. LOL Since my complaint was published a new release was issued. I got another notice that some developer commented on my input. Really? A Microsoft developer? So I looked at what she wrote and it was fairly generic. Basically she said other people were having the same issue and they fixed it in the current release. Thank you for bringing it our attention.
I can guess what you must be thinking about my experience, but I have to tell you no Linux developer ever thanked me for my input and I've given a lot more to the Linux world than I ever did to Microsoft. It's a small matter, I know, but it made my day.
Windows has a couple neat features that could emulate what Flash does in the sense that they seem to have direct access to the kernel without going through an API first. There is something called AcitveX and .net Framework which can give Flash a good run for the money. The problem is as you point out. Both ActiveX and the .net Framework are proprietary. They have limited appeal in the gaming world. Some of the games I still find time to play are available on such platforms as Steam. Steam can be run both on Linux and Windows so that the variety of games there can be enjoyed on any platform. Steam, of course, is in the business of maximizing profits and you must buy most of what they offer. There are other gaming servers that offer an equally broad selection of games, and some are free. Some of those freebies are pretty sophisticated.
While on the subject of Windows, and Microsoft, I have told you in the past how some of my inputs to them seem to have not only been recognized but also implemented. I'm not all that special or knowledgeable, but I am a member of their Insider Preview program. Thus when I find a bug in whatever they are pushing this week, I'm likely to go to the Feedback Hub and complain about it. I've mentioned in the past where my complaints have been addressed at least a couple times. But, it's been like going to a Linux tech support forum and the braniacs there saying your problem is known and being investigated; look for a fix (hopefully) in the next release. Well, this Insider Program updates the OS every week so that the fixes, if any, become apparent rather quickly. But, it's never been possible to talk to a Microsoft developer directly. I don't blame them for not wanting to because there are a lot of air heads doing the beta testing as well as people who know what they are doing. Microsoft has now altered the structure of their Feedback mechanism so that if a bug is reported by more than one person it gets lumped into a category of it's own. That way you can search for problems by category and see if anybody else is having the same issues.
Well I had a problem two weeks ago and told them about it. A day or so later I got a notification that my input was put into one of those defined categories and it was upvoted. I don't know why a complaint would get an upvote, but I guess that means other people saw the same thing but were too lazy to write about it so they just ticked the upvote button. LOL Since my complaint was published a new release was issued. I got another notice that some developer commented on my input. Really? A Microsoft developer? So I looked at what she wrote and it was fairly generic. Basically she said other people were having the same issue and they fixed it in the current release. Thank you for bringing it our attention.
I can guess what you must be thinking about my experience, but I have to tell you no Linux developer ever thanked me for my input and I've given a lot more to the Linux world than I ever did to Microsoft. It's a small matter, I know, but it made my day.
Re: Smug As A Bug
There were several programs, most proprietary that had functions similar to Flash, albeit with the same problems as Flash.
I'm not a Beta Tester, but have received feedback from Linux program developers when I offered a few suggestions to them.
Some of those suggestions were implemented as well. However, I have no idea how many other people suggested the same things.
Most of the changes you see will never end up as a patch to Windows, and will be held back until Windows comes out with a new release, you know the one that was never going to change anymore, hi hi.
Other than the big Distro's, most Linux programs are developed by small groups of individuals, the other individuals use parts of the code for something else, and often request something be added to the original code, and it does take place.
The days of companies and major corporations relying on Windows for their on-floor computers is slowly dwindling, as their programs become fixed so only their own programs can be accessed.
As an example: Even though my doctors office no longer has their own server, and work on-line with a hospitals mainframe. Only couple of their computers in the patient rooms can be backed out of the server provided programs to the Windows desktop.
If they log out, they are only logging out of the main server, and the server provided log-in screen appears.
If they reboot, sure then you see Windows loading, but then it automatically connects to the server and the server screen is displayed for them to log-in. There are no other programs they can get to.
Now in the office, they can back out of the server and get to a Windows desktop to use other programs, but none of the patient rooms.
It looks like both banks I use have the same type of setup.
I'm not a Beta Tester, but have received feedback from Linux program developers when I offered a few suggestions to them.
Some of those suggestions were implemented as well. However, I have no idea how many other people suggested the same things.
Most of the changes you see will never end up as a patch to Windows, and will be held back until Windows comes out with a new release, you know the one that was never going to change anymore, hi hi.
Other than the big Distro's, most Linux programs are developed by small groups of individuals, the other individuals use parts of the code for something else, and often request something be added to the original code, and it does take place.
The days of companies and major corporations relying on Windows for their on-floor computers is slowly dwindling, as their programs become fixed so only their own programs can be accessed.
As an example: Even though my doctors office no longer has their own server, and work on-line with a hospitals mainframe. Only couple of their computers in the patient rooms can be backed out of the server provided programs to the Windows desktop.
If they log out, they are only logging out of the main server, and the server provided log-in screen appears.
If they reboot, sure then you see Windows loading, but then it automatically connects to the server and the server screen is displayed for them to log-in. There are no other programs they can get to.
Now in the office, they can back out of the server and get to a Windows desktop to use other programs, but none of the patient rooms.
It looks like both banks I use have the same type of setup.
Re: Smug As A Bug
I can't say for certain, but your description sounds like the doctors and the bank is using virtual desktops. Windows isn't the only platform for such things, but it is a big part of their cloud services. The virtual desktops rely on Windows as a service, and that service originates from a server up in The Cloud. The services provided by Windows can be very broad or very limited depending on the needs of the client. Doing things in the cloud eliminates the traditional desktop hardware but it does not eliminate the underlying Windows As A Service. All I know is what I've read and what you have seen could be something entirely different. It just sounds like cloud computing.
Also, most of the Linux developers I've talked to - and I admit it's only been a few - are focused on the so called distribution and not on the underlying Linux kernel or it's support software. You can add any desktop environment you can imagine onto the basic kernel and claim to be a Linux developer when in reality you are simply adding apps to a framework somebody else has developed. That is the reason why fundamental problems with Linux propagate so prolifically. The DE developers simply copy the flawed Linux code and add their own set of desktop packages to claim they came up with something new and wonderful. Eventually the actual Linux base code gets fixed but that does not mean the distribution development team will go back and update their brainchild. This is all thought to be a wonderful way to write operating systems using software that is free and open sourced. It can indeed be wonderful, but all too often it's chaos.
And, I think the demise of the desktop computer has been put on hold. With more people working from home these days the need for desktop systems has been renewed. It remains to be seen if life at the office has changed permanently, but for the time being sales of desktops are not tanking like they used to before the pandemic.
Also, most of the Linux developers I've talked to - and I admit it's only been a few - are focused on the so called distribution and not on the underlying Linux kernel or it's support software. You can add any desktop environment you can imagine onto the basic kernel and claim to be a Linux developer when in reality you are simply adding apps to a framework somebody else has developed. That is the reason why fundamental problems with Linux propagate so prolifically. The DE developers simply copy the flawed Linux code and add their own set of desktop packages to claim they came up with something new and wonderful. Eventually the actual Linux base code gets fixed but that does not mean the distribution development team will go back and update their brainchild. This is all thought to be a wonderful way to write operating systems using software that is free and open sourced. It can indeed be wonderful, but all too often it's chaos.
And, I think the demise of the desktop computer has been put on hold. With more people working from home these days the need for desktop systems has been renewed. It remains to be seen if life at the office has changed permanently, but for the time being sales of desktops are not tanking like they used to before the pandemic.
Re: Smug As A Bug
I've talked to the IT guys at both of the car insurance companies I've used, and both of them said it doesn't matter what brand of computer they use at the agents offices. They can use Windows, MAC, nearly any Linux Distro from BSD to RedHat to Debian based. They can also sign into the system either using a browser, or a company supplied connection program, which is what they prefer they use. They supply said connection program, which in and of itself is like a browser in a way, and they have it ported for every common operating system out there. All the work is done on screens pulled from the mainframe, so if you can see the screen you can do the job, either in the office or remotely at a clients house from a laptop.
I don't know why you are always saying Linux codes are flawed. Linux is so stable it is used by nearly every server farm or computing company out there, including over 500 of the worlds supercomputers. Super huge companies still using mainframe computers are often running whatever the mainframe is using on that machine only, such as UNIX, IBM or Z/OS, etc.
I happen to know several people who didn't own a desktop computer, and did almost everything from a laptop, until they had to start working from home. Then even the laptop die-hards have gone out and bought desktop computers. Almost all of those working at home using a laptop have added external keyboards and mice as well.
My wife's son, who has big gaming desktops at home for personal use, has a very expensive laptop provided for his business use. But it came with keyboard, mouse, and drawing pad, that all fit into a neat little case. Sorta reminded me of the old Trash-80 portables, of which I had two of those myself. Not nearly as heavy though, hi hi. Looks like a small briefcase actually.
I don't know why you are always saying Linux codes are flawed. Linux is so stable it is used by nearly every server farm or computing company out there, including over 500 of the worlds supercomputers. Super huge companies still using mainframe computers are often running whatever the mainframe is using on that machine only, such as UNIX, IBM or Z/OS, etc.
I happen to know several people who didn't own a desktop computer, and did almost everything from a laptop, until they had to start working from home. Then even the laptop die-hards have gone out and bought desktop computers. Almost all of those working at home using a laptop have added external keyboards and mice as well.
My wife's son, who has big gaming desktops at home for personal use, has a very expensive laptop provided for his business use. But it came with keyboard, mouse, and drawing pad, that all fit into a neat little case. Sorta reminded me of the old Trash-80 portables, of which I had two of those myself. Not nearly as heavy though, hi hi. Looks like a small briefcase actually.
Re: Smug As A Bug
You of all people would know that I am not fluent in Linux. However, I have experimented with it in the hope of finding its redeeming value so that I can do away with the Pay For Use operating system made famous by Microsoft. All you have to do is read some of my Linux adventures that are well documented here in these forums to see what kind of flaws are built into Linux. I'll be the first to admit that much of what I wrote and complained about is the result of my own ignorance and the need to climb the learning curve. I've been there and done that and now know what it is that turns people off when it comes to Linux. Your observations about Linux being run on systems that require advanced degrees in computer science to operate is valid. Truth be told there are quite a few Microsoft servers out there too, also run by people with egg-shaped foreheads. All that is lovely. It's a nice club to belong to. In fact I was a member at one time. But now I'm confined to my desktop and I know what Linux can and cannot do for me.
Your friends at the insurance companies seem to have discovered computer Nirvana. Yes, that is why cloud computing is taking over the workplace. You can do anything from anywhere using any equipment when The Cloud is your resource. It's not only versatile but also cost effective. The hardware and software required to connect to The Cloud is cheap, and you never have to update the software or buy a license for the next version being released. All that is covered in your connection fee and subscription to the Cloud services. Us home users don't have a need for all that flexibility unless we are bringing the office to our homes. In those cases the corporation is paying for The Cloud. All you need is the hardware to connect, and some companies provide that too.
Your friends at the insurance companies seem to have discovered computer Nirvana. Yes, that is why cloud computing is taking over the workplace. You can do anything from anywhere using any equipment when The Cloud is your resource. It's not only versatile but also cost effective. The hardware and software required to connect to The Cloud is cheap, and you never have to update the software or buy a license for the next version being released. All that is covered in your connection fee and subscription to the Cloud services. Us home users don't have a need for all that flexibility unless we are bringing the office to our homes. In those cases the corporation is paying for The Cloud. All you need is the hardware to connect, and some companies provide that too.
Re: Smug As A Bug
I do know from your activities of trying to do things most people don't do with any OS, has brought to light some of the problems associated with doing those oddball things a normal user would never be doing.
Most computer users go out and buy a computer and use whatever OS is installed on it. They've never installed an OS themselves, so have no idea what is going on under the hood. This is the crowd ms has catered to. They take what is fed to them on a spoon and never graduate to a fork and knife.
I'm not all that literate about computers either. I used Windows up until it no longer served my needs, or budget.
The Ultimate Spyware OS called Vista is what pushed me over to Linux again, and I've been here ever since.
I do a lot of different types of jobs on the computer every day, day in and day out.
And Debian Linux gave me control over how can do things on my computer.
Debian is a little harder to set up than let's say Ubuntu or Linux Mint.
But Ubuntu was there with an easy install when I made the switch.
It allowed me to learn enough about Linux to try out a few other Distro's.
I think Linux Mint is much better than Ubuntu, but since both were built on Debian, as I learned more, and Debian got a little easier to install, I tried it on some older computers first, and liked it so much, I decided to make it my go-to Distro on all of my machines. I still dual-boot to Linux Mint but rarely do, since I do have one machine I keep on Linux Mint running all day, simply for a feature in it I wish I could put on Debian. They have something similar, but not the same thing.
I've not had any problems with running Debian, which is one reason I stick with it. A lot less problems than I ever had with Windows machines. XP was the most stable and long favored Windows Distro, a shame it had to end.
The Cloud is nothing more than a Server somewhere, not much different than the Hosting Services we use to display our websites on. You could even have your own Cloud, which is probably more like what the hospitals are doing for the doctors office who are members of their groups, and insurance companies are doing for the satellite offices under their control.
And I'm beginning to think that is what my neighbor was actually doing with all the accounts he's been getting around town, and expanding steadily. Heck, he might even be in other states already for all I know, hi hi.
Cell Phones running Android have got a lot of people used to the cell phone interface, and they don't complain when Windows programs don't run on their cell phones anymore, so it is easy for them to move over to another Linux based netbook, laptop, or desktop using the cell phone look alike Distro's on Linux.
Also, with cell phones, they are learning 5G is messing with medical devices, such as folks with pacemakers, iPhone 12 may be shut down because of this very soon too, since it is their phones that seem to be causing the most problems right now.
When microwave ovens first came out, they caused all kinds of problems with medical equipment also, but shielding on them has improved somewhat. Even so, you still see signs, Warning Microwave in Use Here!
It may not have been a good idea for the FCC to open up those bands for use with cell phones.
Most computer users go out and buy a computer and use whatever OS is installed on it. They've never installed an OS themselves, so have no idea what is going on under the hood. This is the crowd ms has catered to. They take what is fed to them on a spoon and never graduate to a fork and knife.
I'm not all that literate about computers either. I used Windows up until it no longer served my needs, or budget.
The Ultimate Spyware OS called Vista is what pushed me over to Linux again, and I've been here ever since.
I do a lot of different types of jobs on the computer every day, day in and day out.
And Debian Linux gave me control over how can do things on my computer.
Debian is a little harder to set up than let's say Ubuntu or Linux Mint.
But Ubuntu was there with an easy install when I made the switch.
It allowed me to learn enough about Linux to try out a few other Distro's.
I think Linux Mint is much better than Ubuntu, but since both were built on Debian, as I learned more, and Debian got a little easier to install, I tried it on some older computers first, and liked it so much, I decided to make it my go-to Distro on all of my machines. I still dual-boot to Linux Mint but rarely do, since I do have one machine I keep on Linux Mint running all day, simply for a feature in it I wish I could put on Debian. They have something similar, but not the same thing.
I've not had any problems with running Debian, which is one reason I stick with it. A lot less problems than I ever had with Windows machines. XP was the most stable and long favored Windows Distro, a shame it had to end.
The Cloud is nothing more than a Server somewhere, not much different than the Hosting Services we use to display our websites on. You could even have your own Cloud, which is probably more like what the hospitals are doing for the doctors office who are members of their groups, and insurance companies are doing for the satellite offices under their control.
And I'm beginning to think that is what my neighbor was actually doing with all the accounts he's been getting around town, and expanding steadily. Heck, he might even be in other states already for all I know, hi hi.
Cell Phones running Android have got a lot of people used to the cell phone interface, and they don't complain when Windows programs don't run on their cell phones anymore, so it is easy for them to move over to another Linux based netbook, laptop, or desktop using the cell phone look alike Distro's on Linux.
Also, with cell phones, they are learning 5G is messing with medical devices, such as folks with pacemakers, iPhone 12 may be shut down because of this very soon too, since it is their phones that seem to be causing the most problems right now.
When microwave ovens first came out, they caused all kinds of problems with medical equipment also, but shielding on them has improved somewhat. Even so, you still see signs, Warning Microwave in Use Here!
It may not have been a good idea for the FCC to open up those bands for use with cell phones.
Re: Smug As A Bug
I am not the average/normal computer user. Neither are you from what I can discern by your comments here. I honestly could not give you a profile for the typical computer user because I don't believe one set of circumstances fits all peoples' needs. The commonality we all have, however, is the operating system. We all use one, or many, and go along merrily on our way doing what we do best. My issues with Linux are not in what it can or cannot do in terms of what people expect from it. I can say the same for Windows. The issues that bother me most are those related to the operating system itself. Linux is of particular interest to me because for many years I've read and heard people proclaim how much better it is than Windows. I ignored that propaganda for many years, but then I decided to give it an evaluation to determine for myself how valid the claims are.
I'll try to summarize my points in terms we both can relate to. Debian is probably the quintessential version of a Linux operating system. They certainly have a longer history than most and have tried to stay purely Linux more so than the people who followed them. It's a great operating system for people who understand how to custom build an environment suited to their personal needs. The fact that it is so flexible is probably Debian's greatest asset. Having said all that, Debian is "flawed" in that it only caters to specific hardware configurations; I'm talking about their hard line on open sourced software. There have been some changes in that policy in recent years but for the most part Debian excluded users who wanted to add some proprietary software/hardware to their machines. I am specifically referring to gamers who like to use nVidia video cards. At one time not too long ago Debian simply would not boot into a system with nVidia hardware installed until some very sophisticated mods and work arounds were applied to their out of the box distribution. Then, and only then, could the proprietary nVidia drivers be installed.
You personally told me the problem is with nVidia. Use something else. I'm not picking on you personally because I've received that advice from other sources as well. OK, that could be the solution. But then I'd have to say Debian cannot perform better than Windows which will recognize the hardware, boot the operating system, and offer generic drivers to make it all work. This strikes me as being contradicting the claims that Linux is better than Windows.
The average/normal computer user would not know what to do in order to make their nVidia hardware work in a Debian Linux operating system. I can accept that. Then there is the claim from Linux advocates that the system is very customizable, which is something obviously lacking in Windows. To prove that point true somebody took the underlying Debian code and added an Ubuntu desktop to it. We now have a wonderful new distribution of Linux with what used to be the Unity desktop that looked and felt a lot like Windows. But, of course, it wasn't Windows. Like the core upon which it was built, Ubuntu would not boot into a machine with nVidia hardware either.
Then along comes the Mint team. They took some core software from Debian and from Ubuntu and added their own desktop environment, well, because they could. The desktop with Cinnamon is pretty nice in fact, but like Debian and Ubuntu it excluded booting into anything with a nVidia presence in the hardware. Do you see the pattern here? The core coding for Debian was flawed yet other developers ignored that fact because Debian was not their game. They were only interested in the new desktop environment and any problems with Debian are owned by Debian. So now gamers not only cannot run Debian Linux, they can't boot into Ubuntu Linux, nor Linux Mint.
And I won't get into EFI, but it's the same scenario. Linux developers propagate with abandon the flaws built into the core software.
You might say I'm asking too much because nobody else wants to do what I'm doing. I'd refer you to the tech support forums for Debian, Ubuntu, and Mint (plus half a dozen others I did not mention here) so that you can see what people are complaining about. There are a lot of folks wanting to multi-boot operating systems and even more who are interested in a USB portable version of an OS. When they run into the same flaws I have seen, they go to those support forums and sometimes get usable answers.
Windows does not have problems with proprietary software/hardware. Windows has it's own stable boot manager that I've not seen fail yet. I have seen it corrupted by Linux attempts to take over booting, but that's a different story. My point here is that Windows just works where Linux needs further adjustments.
I'll end this rant on a positive note. The three Linux OS's I cited above are today different than they were even 12 months ago. An obvious shift in thinking has occurred to abandon the strict adherence to open source software. Efforts have also been put into a better EFI booting experience. I see this as a departure from the original intent of Linux, but it is an improvement that might make them competitive in the long run. There are still some basic flaws propagating across many Linux distros, but at least now, in 2021, some developers are beginning to address the issues.
And, lastly, you are not going to see any of the above flaws in your office. You simply are not doing what I'm doing. You have a computer environment that suits your needs on every level, and I'm not one to complain about the success of others. If, some day, you attempt to do some of the other things Linux is supposedly designed to do, you may be posting your rants here too.
I'll try to summarize my points in terms we both can relate to. Debian is probably the quintessential version of a Linux operating system. They certainly have a longer history than most and have tried to stay purely Linux more so than the people who followed them. It's a great operating system for people who understand how to custom build an environment suited to their personal needs. The fact that it is so flexible is probably Debian's greatest asset. Having said all that, Debian is "flawed" in that it only caters to specific hardware configurations; I'm talking about their hard line on open sourced software. There have been some changes in that policy in recent years but for the most part Debian excluded users who wanted to add some proprietary software/hardware to their machines. I am specifically referring to gamers who like to use nVidia video cards. At one time not too long ago Debian simply would not boot into a system with nVidia hardware installed until some very sophisticated mods and work arounds were applied to their out of the box distribution. Then, and only then, could the proprietary nVidia drivers be installed.
You personally told me the problem is with nVidia. Use something else. I'm not picking on you personally because I've received that advice from other sources as well. OK, that could be the solution. But then I'd have to say Debian cannot perform better than Windows which will recognize the hardware, boot the operating system, and offer generic drivers to make it all work. This strikes me as being contradicting the claims that Linux is better than Windows.
The average/normal computer user would not know what to do in order to make their nVidia hardware work in a Debian Linux operating system. I can accept that. Then there is the claim from Linux advocates that the system is very customizable, which is something obviously lacking in Windows. To prove that point true somebody took the underlying Debian code and added an Ubuntu desktop to it. We now have a wonderful new distribution of Linux with what used to be the Unity desktop that looked and felt a lot like Windows. But, of course, it wasn't Windows. Like the core upon which it was built, Ubuntu would not boot into a machine with nVidia hardware either.
Then along comes the Mint team. They took some core software from Debian and from Ubuntu and added their own desktop environment, well, because they could. The desktop with Cinnamon is pretty nice in fact, but like Debian and Ubuntu it excluded booting into anything with a nVidia presence in the hardware. Do you see the pattern here? The core coding for Debian was flawed yet other developers ignored that fact because Debian was not their game. They were only interested in the new desktop environment and any problems with Debian are owned by Debian. So now gamers not only cannot run Debian Linux, they can't boot into Ubuntu Linux, nor Linux Mint.
And I won't get into EFI, but it's the same scenario. Linux developers propagate with abandon the flaws built into the core software.
You might say I'm asking too much because nobody else wants to do what I'm doing. I'd refer you to the tech support forums for Debian, Ubuntu, and Mint (plus half a dozen others I did not mention here) so that you can see what people are complaining about. There are a lot of folks wanting to multi-boot operating systems and even more who are interested in a USB portable version of an OS. When they run into the same flaws I have seen, they go to those support forums and sometimes get usable answers.
Windows does not have problems with proprietary software/hardware. Windows has it's own stable boot manager that I've not seen fail yet. I have seen it corrupted by Linux attempts to take over booting, but that's a different story. My point here is that Windows just works where Linux needs further adjustments.
I'll end this rant on a positive note. The three Linux OS's I cited above are today different than they were even 12 months ago. An obvious shift in thinking has occurred to abandon the strict adherence to open source software. Efforts have also been put into a better EFI booting experience. I see this as a departure from the original intent of Linux, but it is an improvement that might make them competitive in the long run. There are still some basic flaws propagating across many Linux distros, but at least now, in 2021, some developers are beginning to address the issues.
And, lastly, you are not going to see any of the above flaws in your office. You simply are not doing what I'm doing. You have a computer environment that suits your needs on every level, and I'm not one to complain about the success of others. If, some day, you attempt to do some of the other things Linux is supposedly designed to do, you may be posting your rants here too.
Re: Smug As A Bug
I don't agree with that, simply because nearly every computer I've owned had Nvidia graphics in them.
Only on a couple of computers that had separate GPU cards, did I have to add contrib and non-free to the repositories.
This is very simple to do as well. And now the install window asks if you want to include contrib or non-free or both.
In the case of GPU cards, they will use a generic driver at first until the system is installed, and then you can download and install a 3rd party driver for the separate video card.
But I've never had an install fail because of a system using Nvidia on-board graphics.
And if you recall, we had similar problems with Windows as well.
I remember having to go out and buy a SoundBlaster brand video card in order to get my new computer working with Windows.
I forget now what brand of video card was in it, that worked with msDOS, but it wouldn't work with Windows 3.0 or 3.11.
Debian is basically total open source, so does not include proprietary drivers, but that doesn't mean they are not available.
There are many proprietary devices that you can run on Debian just by using contrib and non-free, or if necessary turning on backports and adding a repository that has the drivers you need.
All of the hardware vendors are in bed with ms, and will write their drivers and software to ms standards.
If they didn't, they would be out of business.
But on an interesting note, many of them are using Linux and its tools for doing their job of writing for Windows.
Windows may have garnered the desktop marketplace, being one of the first.
But they never could get their hooks into commercial applications, massive server farms, or supercomputers.
But they did make reliable desktops that everyone learned for years, so for this reason, they do remain on the floor of most major businesses.
When they talk about their massive market share, they are only referring to the home and front end of businesses.
They never mention the back end of business or what systems run the entire world.
Some guy posted not to long ago, which OS's were used in what areas.
In nearly every category, the big three mainframe OS's led the list for big business.
But when you got to server farms and supercomputers Linux was at the top of the list.
Windows didn't even appear on the lists until you got small office, front office, and home computers.
Some large businesses still use Windows for their servers, so they have nearly instant service when something goes wrong.
But very few of the really big businesses have Windows in the back room, only out on the floor.
I've also noticed that some larger business, who can afford to, are writing their own front end programs, or paying to have them written for them. And this is one reason you can use almost any computer you want to on their systems now.
I do have a few things I don't like about Debian, and is one of the reasons I have Linux Mint running on another computer all day every day. It keeps me abreast of changes to the OS that Debian or Ubuntu never mention. Many of those changes only have to do with Linux Mint, such as new Kernel upgrades every couple of days or weeks. Which might be because of the particular version of Linux Mint I am using too. So naturally, those updates don't appear on Ubuntu or Debian, as they only apply to Linux Mint. One example is: I would not know on Debian that Google Chrome has a new version out. Debian don't tell us that, but Linux Mint does the second it is added to their repository. It may appear an hour or two later on Ubuntu, but usually not on Debian for 4 to 6 hours. Which is OK. If I know there is an update, and I see it on Mint in the morning, I wait until after dinner to run an update on Debian.
Although I like Linux Mint Mate as my desktop, I don't like using it for my daily work. It is slower for one, and some things are slightly different in usage. It could be too that I'm just used to using Debian and most comfortable with it. But at least, unlike Windows programs, Linux programs are Logical.
Only on a couple of computers that had separate GPU cards, did I have to add contrib and non-free to the repositories.
This is very simple to do as well. And now the install window asks if you want to include contrib or non-free or both.
In the case of GPU cards, they will use a generic driver at first until the system is installed, and then you can download and install a 3rd party driver for the separate video card.
But I've never had an install fail because of a system using Nvidia on-board graphics.
And if you recall, we had similar problems with Windows as well.
I remember having to go out and buy a SoundBlaster brand video card in order to get my new computer working with Windows.
I forget now what brand of video card was in it, that worked with msDOS, but it wouldn't work with Windows 3.0 or 3.11.
Debian is basically total open source, so does not include proprietary drivers, but that doesn't mean they are not available.
There are many proprietary devices that you can run on Debian just by using contrib and non-free, or if necessary turning on backports and adding a repository that has the drivers you need.
All of the hardware vendors are in bed with ms, and will write their drivers and software to ms standards.
If they didn't, they would be out of business.
But on an interesting note, many of them are using Linux and its tools for doing their job of writing for Windows.
Windows may have garnered the desktop marketplace, being one of the first.
But they never could get their hooks into commercial applications, massive server farms, or supercomputers.
But they did make reliable desktops that everyone learned for years, so for this reason, they do remain on the floor of most major businesses.
When they talk about their massive market share, they are only referring to the home and front end of businesses.
They never mention the back end of business or what systems run the entire world.
Some guy posted not to long ago, which OS's were used in what areas.
In nearly every category, the big three mainframe OS's led the list for big business.
But when you got to server farms and supercomputers Linux was at the top of the list.
Windows didn't even appear on the lists until you got small office, front office, and home computers.
Some large businesses still use Windows for their servers, so they have nearly instant service when something goes wrong.
But very few of the really big businesses have Windows in the back room, only out on the floor.
I've also noticed that some larger business, who can afford to, are writing their own front end programs, or paying to have them written for them. And this is one reason you can use almost any computer you want to on their systems now.
I do have a few things I don't like about Debian, and is one of the reasons I have Linux Mint running on another computer all day every day. It keeps me abreast of changes to the OS that Debian or Ubuntu never mention. Many of those changes only have to do with Linux Mint, such as new Kernel upgrades every couple of days or weeks. Which might be because of the particular version of Linux Mint I am using too. So naturally, those updates don't appear on Ubuntu or Debian, as they only apply to Linux Mint. One example is: I would not know on Debian that Google Chrome has a new version out. Debian don't tell us that, but Linux Mint does the second it is added to their repository. It may appear an hour or two later on Ubuntu, but usually not on Debian for 4 to 6 hours. Which is OK. If I know there is an update, and I see it on Mint in the morning, I wait until after dinner to run an update on Debian.
Although I like Linux Mint Mate as my desktop, I don't like using it for my daily work. It is slower for one, and some things are slightly different in usage. It could be too that I'm just used to using Debian and most comfortable with it. But at least, unlike Windows programs, Linux programs are Logical.
Re: Smug As A Bug
Apparently at some point in time after your Linux experiences with nVidia video cards and prior to my experiences with nVidia video cards an open source driver was written for use by the Linux kernel. That driver is commonly known as Nouveau and was designed to solve the exact problem to which I refer in my comments. Instead of providing a seamless interface to nVidia hardware, the Nouveau driver which is part of the Linux kernel since 2012 broke the video component of the operating system. Debian, as well as any other Debian distribution of Linux, would attempt to use the Nouveau driver but failed and the machne would go into an infinite loop. The solution was to install the nVidia proprietary driver and replace the built in Nouveau driver. That solution works perfectly, but it's a Catch 22. You can't install the nVidia driver unless the Nouveau driver allows the desktop to display, which it did not. Typically, but not always, booting in the recovery mode will allow installation of the nVidia driver and all is well after that. There have been many recommended mods to the kernel instructions given by Grub, but seldom did those modes produce the desired results. This failure issue is built into Debian Linux because of their free an open source policy for included software. Thus any distro based on Debian and with nVidia hardware fails to boot. That is not to say Debian, or it's derivatives cannot use the nVidia drivers. It can, but getting to the point where they can be installed is where Debian failed every time. I'll give them credit for fixing the problem 7-8 years later, but during that time Windows never failed due to nVidia hardware.
As I recall you never switched over to GPT and EFI booting. That's fine if it works for you. I can, and have, give example of how Linux fails in that regard too. Take the example of where BOTH Ubuntu and Linux Mint identify themselves as Ubuntu in the ESP partition. This is not a problem for Grub, albeit incorrect, but it breaks the Windows boot manager. I know there is no love lost between Micorsoft and Linux, but that does not justify the defect that is present to this very day. Again, not all distros have this problem even when based on Debian/Ubuntu base coding. Some Linux developers went through the trouble and expense of fixing Grub so that there are no conflicts in naming convention. The only Linux Mint developer I had an occasion to talk to about this problem told me he didn't realize Windows can boot into Linux. Well, my friend, that says it all.
Your characterization of Windows in the marketplace isn't exactly how Micorsoft would describe it. The claim to fame out of Redmond certainly is rooted in desktop computers and their Office Suite software. Nothing in the computer world remains static for very long and the people at Microsoft realize this more than you would think. Windows does not and never was intended to have a large presence in the client/server world. That is a niche market and Linux is welcome to it. If you need a server farm or a super-computer to make a living, then more power to you for using what works best. But, I need not remind you (hopefully) that those servers would have nothing to do if it were not for their clients which were predominantly desktop computers. You might find it enlightening to read up a bit on Microsoft's current business plan. It no longer puts an emphasis on desktop computer operating systems. The bulk of its revenue is coming from the Cloud, where there happens to be a heck of a lot of servers. I'm sure Microsoft is using Linux servers too, but their core competency is in providing services off Windows servers, e.g. Azure. They are big on machine learning too and the data farms that make such artificial intelligence possible. I've not seen any financial statements from Microsoft lately, but I'd be very surprised if their desktop operating systems provide anywhere near half their revenue. It's all coming from the cloud now.
And I had to chuckle at your final comments about Mint updates. It reminded me of the vast array of kernels used by Linux developers. It's very difficult to find any two Linux operating systems that use the same kernel, and I'm not talking just about suffixes. The variance in major kernel release numbers is shocking. Whatever happened to consistency and standardization?
As I recall you never switched over to GPT and EFI booting. That's fine if it works for you. I can, and have, give example of how Linux fails in that regard too. Take the example of where BOTH Ubuntu and Linux Mint identify themselves as Ubuntu in the ESP partition. This is not a problem for Grub, albeit incorrect, but it breaks the Windows boot manager. I know there is no love lost between Micorsoft and Linux, but that does not justify the defect that is present to this very day. Again, not all distros have this problem even when based on Debian/Ubuntu base coding. Some Linux developers went through the trouble and expense of fixing Grub so that there are no conflicts in naming convention. The only Linux Mint developer I had an occasion to talk to about this problem told me he didn't realize Windows can boot into Linux. Well, my friend, that says it all.
Your characterization of Windows in the marketplace isn't exactly how Micorsoft would describe it. The claim to fame out of Redmond certainly is rooted in desktop computers and their Office Suite software. Nothing in the computer world remains static for very long and the people at Microsoft realize this more than you would think. Windows does not and never was intended to have a large presence in the client/server world. That is a niche market and Linux is welcome to it. If you need a server farm or a super-computer to make a living, then more power to you for using what works best. But, I need not remind you (hopefully) that those servers would have nothing to do if it were not for their clients which were predominantly desktop computers. You might find it enlightening to read up a bit on Microsoft's current business plan. It no longer puts an emphasis on desktop computer operating systems. The bulk of its revenue is coming from the Cloud, where there happens to be a heck of a lot of servers. I'm sure Microsoft is using Linux servers too, but their core competency is in providing services off Windows servers, e.g. Azure. They are big on machine learning too and the data farms that make such artificial intelligence possible. I've not seen any financial statements from Microsoft lately, but I'd be very surprised if their desktop operating systems provide anywhere near half their revenue. It's all coming from the cloud now.
And I had to chuckle at your final comments about Mint updates. It reminded me of the vast array of kernels used by Linux developers. It's very difficult to find any two Linux operating systems that use the same kernel, and I'm not talking just about suffixes. The variance in major kernel release numbers is shocking. Whatever happened to consistency and standardization?
Re: Smug As A Bug
Now that you mention it, YES I did have a problem.
During boot-up it showed I was missing a video driver, and suggested one.
Video was working just fine before I installed the suggested driver, then quit working.
It was a royal pain to get into the system and remove that driver.
Then I checked and found out why. The new driver they recommended did not have the Nvidia version on my computer, it only thought it did.
But once I removed it, and ignored this message, all was good. I still get that message by the way, hi hi.
Not on the Silver Yogi I've not used EFI I don't think. I still get Grub2 coming up.
Now on the new computer I bought for Debi that she hated, it is UEFI only.
So I have EFI on that computer, never had any problems there either.
Yes, Windows had dominated the desktop and now the laptop market for many many years, and will probably do so for many more years too. They served an excellent purpose in the early days of computing with many programs so people could actually enjoy their computers without knowing anything about computers. The programs most folks needed for home or office were developed and grew in size and usefulness to keep up with newer demands.
Eventually, internal networks were developed allowing computers in a home or office to talk with each other.
Then, especially in the business world, in-house servers became a must.
But the larger companies needed something better, so went with mainframes and work stations.
Fast forward to the advent of the Internet and the World Wide Web.
Something was needed to control all of those new websites, and server farms, nodes, etc. all began to be developed at astonishing rates. What Micro$oft offered was not sufficient to handle that type of inter-connectivity or storage. This is where Linux picked up the shortfall and became the dominant way of handling everything the Windows computers needed on the back end.
Cloud computing is still in its infancy. Most of the cloud right now is only used for data storage and serving files, not yet developed enough to run the user programs on. When you use a program on the cloud, it is basically loading the latest engine onto your computer first, where it automatically maintains the updates when you log-on to do your work.
I don't know why, but I really think it was the gaming industry that gave the cloud its biggest push into mainstream usage.
People who live on the edge, with the latest and greatest hardware have to keep updating their kernel to get the features of those new hardware items.
Unless you are adding new hardware, there is no reason to update your kernel.
This is one reason why new kernel upgrades are not automatic.
On systems like Linux Mint, the box to install the kernel is not automatically checked when a new version is out.
Works sorta like Windows NT versions
Windows NT was to be known as OS/2 3.0, but decided to use the NT for the N-Ten version of OS/2.
Then only for marketing purposes did they change the meaning of NT to New Technology, before dropping any definition.
Windows NT 3.1 (1993)
Windows NT 3.5 (1994)
Windows NT 3.51 (1995)
Windows NT 4.0 (1996)
Windows NT 5.0 (Windows 2000) (1997-1999)
Windows NT 5.1 (Windows XP) (2001)
Windows NT 5.2 (Windows Server 2003, Windows XP x64) (2003)
Windows NT 6.0 (Windows Vista, Windows Server 2008) (2006)
Windows NT 6.1 (Windows 7, Windows Server 2008 R2) (2009)
Windows NT 6.2 (Windows 8, Windows Server 2012) (2012)
Windows NT 6.3 (Windows 8.1, Windows Server 2012 R2) (2013)
Windows NT 10.0 (Windows 10, Windows Server 2016) (2015)
I'm not sure about this, but I think NT10 has has several kernel upgrades.
Basing this on something I read showing Version NT10.0.14393 as the current kernel version on a posters computer.
Major Linux Kernel Version Releases
0.01 17 September 1991
1.0 14 March 1994
2.0 9 June 1996
3.0 21 July 2011
4.0 12 April 2015
5.0 3 March 2019
5.1 13 December 2020 this is the most current release.
Windows is only ONE operating system. Pretty well fixed in what it looks like and what it does.
Linux on the other hand has hundreds of popular Distro's, and thousands of smaller Distro's.
So in order to compare to Windows, you would have to select only ONE Distro, and which kernels it used.
And realize the user can change how it looks and what it does also, which may require a newer kernel.
You just don't have that flexibility with Windows!
How often has the RedHat kernel changed, or the BSD kernel changed, etc. Not often!
During boot-up it showed I was missing a video driver, and suggested one.
Video was working just fine before I installed the suggested driver, then quit working.
It was a royal pain to get into the system and remove that driver.
Then I checked and found out why. The new driver they recommended did not have the Nvidia version on my computer, it only thought it did.
But once I removed it, and ignored this message, all was good. I still get that message by the way, hi hi.
Not on the Silver Yogi I've not used EFI I don't think. I still get Grub2 coming up.
Now on the new computer I bought for Debi that she hated, it is UEFI only.
So I have EFI on that computer, never had any problems there either.
Yes, Windows had dominated the desktop and now the laptop market for many many years, and will probably do so for many more years too. They served an excellent purpose in the early days of computing with many programs so people could actually enjoy their computers without knowing anything about computers. The programs most folks needed for home or office were developed and grew in size and usefulness to keep up with newer demands.
Eventually, internal networks were developed allowing computers in a home or office to talk with each other.
Then, especially in the business world, in-house servers became a must.
But the larger companies needed something better, so went with mainframes and work stations.
Fast forward to the advent of the Internet and the World Wide Web.
Something was needed to control all of those new websites, and server farms, nodes, etc. all began to be developed at astonishing rates. What Micro$oft offered was not sufficient to handle that type of inter-connectivity or storage. This is where Linux picked up the shortfall and became the dominant way of handling everything the Windows computers needed on the back end.
Cloud computing is still in its infancy. Most of the cloud right now is only used for data storage and serving files, not yet developed enough to run the user programs on. When you use a program on the cloud, it is basically loading the latest engine onto your computer first, where it automatically maintains the updates when you log-on to do your work.
I don't know why, but I really think it was the gaming industry that gave the cloud its biggest push into mainstream usage.
People who live on the edge, with the latest and greatest hardware have to keep updating their kernel to get the features of those new hardware items.
Unless you are adding new hardware, there is no reason to update your kernel.
This is one reason why new kernel upgrades are not automatic.
On systems like Linux Mint, the box to install the kernel is not automatically checked when a new version is out.
Works sorta like Windows NT versions
Windows NT was to be known as OS/2 3.0, but decided to use the NT for the N-Ten version of OS/2.
Then only for marketing purposes did they change the meaning of NT to New Technology, before dropping any definition.
Windows NT 3.1 (1993)
Windows NT 3.5 (1994)
Windows NT 3.51 (1995)
Windows NT 4.0 (1996)
Windows NT 5.0 (Windows 2000) (1997-1999)
Windows NT 5.1 (Windows XP) (2001)
Windows NT 5.2 (Windows Server 2003, Windows XP x64) (2003)
Windows NT 6.0 (Windows Vista, Windows Server 2008) (2006)
Windows NT 6.1 (Windows 7, Windows Server 2008 R2) (2009)
Windows NT 6.2 (Windows 8, Windows Server 2012) (2012)
Windows NT 6.3 (Windows 8.1, Windows Server 2012 R2) (2013)
Windows NT 10.0 (Windows 10, Windows Server 2016) (2015)
I'm not sure about this, but I think NT10 has has several kernel upgrades.
Basing this on something I read showing Version NT10.0.14393 as the current kernel version on a posters computer.
Major Linux Kernel Version Releases
0.01 17 September 1991
1.0 14 March 1994
2.0 9 June 1996
3.0 21 July 2011
4.0 12 April 2015
5.0 3 March 2019
5.1 13 December 2020 this is the most current release.
Windows is only ONE operating system. Pretty well fixed in what it looks like and what it does.
Linux on the other hand has hundreds of popular Distro's, and thousands of smaller Distro's.
So in order to compare to Windows, you would have to select only ONE Distro, and which kernels it used.
And realize the user can change how it looks and what it does also, which may require a newer kernel.
You just don't have that flexibility with Windows!
How often has the RedHat kernel changed, or the BSD kernel changed, etc. Not often!
Re: Smug As A Bug
Every version of Windows 7 OS, for example, uses the same kernel. Every distro of Ubuntu Linux OS, for example, comes with a different kernel. If consistency of Windows kernel usage is a drawback, then I'm pleased to be in the minority of people who favor OS's that consistently work as intended. And, by the way, I don't think I ever was able to install a Linux OS without installing its kernel.
Fedora is a good example of what an alternative to Windows might look like. I use Magia which is derived from Fedora and that would be my go to system if Windows was not available. Magia is free but Fedora is not. That means Fedora isn't committed fully to free and open source distributions, albeit that is what dominates their operating system. Fedora has the financial and engineering resources to produce a product that is enterprise worthy. They are to be congratulated for all the effort they put into their offerings. Those thousands of other Linux distributions are for the most part running at beta level software. They are typically a hodgepodge of bits and pieces of code meshed together under the name of Linux for the sole intent of the developers to promote their desktop brainchild. That approach to programming does indeed have it's followers. Every one of them has some complaints about operating systems that are stable, consistent, and standardized. Yes, you must pay for those three things (as you must do with Fedora), but as I've repeated frequently, even in operating system software you get what you pay for.
Any version of Windows after Windows 7 uses GPT storage formatting and EFI booting. EFI booting takes some study to understand, but it boils down to doing the same simple tasks that MBR BIOS has done for many years. EFI simply does it better. All bootloaders scan the system and pick out software that is bootable. That's it. The booting might be via Grub, via Windows bootloader, rEFInd, or anything else. Grub2 is just one of the ways to boot into an operating system, and it works equally well when detected by MBR or EFI.
I think you have some idea about the problems I've seen with Linux and nVidia graphics cards. That's only part of the story. My laptop and tower have two video cards: Intel native to the motherboard, and a plug in nVidia graphics card. Determining which one to use has always been a manual operation and would require some fiddling with the system parameters. Along comes a company called Optimus which developed software to do this selection automatically. Optimus decides which graphics driver is best for the situation and enables that particular module. That's a very cool feature if you are a gamer and care about such things. Linux, Debian in particular, has no clue about what to do with Optimus. In my case it generally defaults to the nVidia graphics card, which is something many Linux distributions did not like in the past. Thus the boot problems we both have seen. My problems were complicated by the Optimus software, but until recently I had no knowledge of how to turn off Optimus. Now, with Linux Mint and one other distro, there is no problem booting into nVidia with Optimus enabled. I like to think it has something to do with my efforts in those useless tech support forums wherein I kept telling people I have Optimus enabled and they kept answering my posts ignoring that fact. Some developer somewhere finally figured it out. Maybe.
Fedora is a good example of what an alternative to Windows might look like. I use Magia which is derived from Fedora and that would be my go to system if Windows was not available. Magia is free but Fedora is not. That means Fedora isn't committed fully to free and open source distributions, albeit that is what dominates their operating system. Fedora has the financial and engineering resources to produce a product that is enterprise worthy. They are to be congratulated for all the effort they put into their offerings. Those thousands of other Linux distributions are for the most part running at beta level software. They are typically a hodgepodge of bits and pieces of code meshed together under the name of Linux for the sole intent of the developers to promote their desktop brainchild. That approach to programming does indeed have it's followers. Every one of them has some complaints about operating systems that are stable, consistent, and standardized. Yes, you must pay for those three things (as you must do with Fedora), but as I've repeated frequently, even in operating system software you get what you pay for.
Any version of Windows after Windows 7 uses GPT storage formatting and EFI booting. EFI booting takes some study to understand, but it boils down to doing the same simple tasks that MBR BIOS has done for many years. EFI simply does it better. All bootloaders scan the system and pick out software that is bootable. That's it. The booting might be via Grub, via Windows bootloader, rEFInd, or anything else. Grub2 is just one of the ways to boot into an operating system, and it works equally well when detected by MBR or EFI.
I think you have some idea about the problems I've seen with Linux and nVidia graphics cards. That's only part of the story. My laptop and tower have two video cards: Intel native to the motherboard, and a plug in nVidia graphics card. Determining which one to use has always been a manual operation and would require some fiddling with the system parameters. Along comes a company called Optimus which developed software to do this selection automatically. Optimus decides which graphics driver is best for the situation and enables that particular module. That's a very cool feature if you are a gamer and care about such things. Linux, Debian in particular, has no clue about what to do with Optimus. In my case it generally defaults to the nVidia graphics card, which is something many Linux distributions did not like in the past. Thus the boot problems we both have seen. My problems were complicated by the Optimus software, but until recently I had no knowledge of how to turn off Optimus. Now, with Linux Mint and one other distro, there is no problem booting into nVidia with Optimus enabled. I like to think it has something to do with my efforts in those useless tech support forums wherein I kept telling people I have Optimus enabled and they kept answering my posts ignoring that fact. Some developer somewhere finally figured it out. Maybe.
Re: Smug As A Bug
There are some versions of Linux that work differently, more like Windows in a way. They have a separate Driver File their modified kernel looks to, instead of drivers being a part of the kernel. It actually makes sense to do it that way.
But you have to admit, the Windows Registry has been a total nightmare for many since its inception!
That, and their file system that constantly needs defragging because of its daisy-chain method of file storage.
I don't go around looking for problems, but I know from all the years I used Windows myself, I found it to be illogical in many areas.
Plus I had problems with Windows programs when I was in the tri-fold publishing business.
That is why I moved over to Linux, but still kept Windows for some things, up until they came out with the Ultimate Spyware OS named Vista. That pushed many Windows users over to Linux. It's also the time when the LUG groups bloomed as well.
But you have to admit, the Windows Registry has been a total nightmare for many since its inception!
That, and their file system that constantly needs defragging because of its daisy-chain method of file storage.
I don't go around looking for problems, but I know from all the years I used Windows myself, I found it to be illogical in many areas.
Plus I had problems with Windows programs when I was in the tri-fold publishing business.
That is why I moved over to Linux, but still kept Windows for some things, up until they came out with the Ultimate Spyware OS named Vista. That pushed many Windows users over to Linux. It's also the time when the LUG groups bloomed as well.
Re: Smug As A Bug
Your comments about versions of Linux running differently coincide with my own observations. I'd not be so quick to say the kernel changes, but it is possible to add modules to it that may or may not work well. The idea of having a kernel is to provide some known quantity to the basic elements of the operating system. That seems like a good idea until you get to the open source part. Open source gives everybody the license to do as they please to change the standards. I'm not entirely clear on this but I believe any given release of the Linux kernel cannot be modified but it can be recompiled with modifications that are added on. It is indeed odd, or as you would say flexible, that the Linux kernel has been incorporated into an operating system that mimics Windows XP. I've seen the blurb but never attempted to install the OS. Why go backwards?
I can empathize with your views that Window is illogical. Not all minds think the same way. There was a lot of discontent when Vista was released in that it represented a major change in the style in which Windows was written. People simply don't like changes be it for their own good or not. This same kind of rebellion came about with the introduction of Windows 10, and interestingly enough so did those conspiracy theories about spyware being built into the OS. Some people don't mind being spied upon as can be testified to by the number of people still using Facebook.
I can empathize with your views that Window is illogical. Not all minds think the same way. There was a lot of discontent when Vista was released in that it represented a major change in the style in which Windows was written. People simply don't like changes be it for their own good or not. This same kind of rebellion came about with the introduction of Windows 10, and interestingly enough so did those conspiracy theories about spyware being built into the OS. Some people don't mind being spied upon as can be testified to by the number of people still using Facebook.
Re: Smug As A Bug
Interesting, since I've never run across a Distro that made changes to the Linux Kernel.
Many years ago, I had a scanner that required I recompile the Kernel to add the driver.
Thankfully it went flawlessly, and then when the next kernel upgrade came along, the driver was now in it.
I don't see anything wrong with programmers wanting to write their own Distro.
But it is doubtful it would ever become a mainstream Distro.
It is usually better for them to build on top of an existing Distro by adding more bells and whistles.
Like Ubuntu did with Debian, and Linux Mint did with Ubuntu.
Even so, there are thousands of Distro's out there now, and some like to Distro Hop to see how they all work.
Other's like me, like something stable with no added bells or whistles. But I can add those I want usually.
Take msWord as an example:
Why should anyone look under FILE Operations to perform a FORMATTING operation? Not Logical at all!
Page Format belongs under FORMATTING operations, NOT under FILE operations, it has nothing at all to do with handling FILES. And they say msWord is easier to use, Ha!
Well, Vista cost ms a lot of customers, not that they cared much.
I don't know what it is about Windows10 that has turned so many people off either.
I know why in my wife's case, it ran slower than molasses in the dead of winter on a brand new machine that came with it pre-installed. Sad, very sad. Nothing wrong with the machine, I'm running Linux Mint 19.3 on it and it runs like a scared rabbit.
But I guess so many folks are used to playing with their Schmartz-Fonz now they don't mind their computer looking like one.
I HATE the looks of it, and how it works, and the same with Linux Distro's made to work like cell phones too.
Many years ago, I had a scanner that required I recompile the Kernel to add the driver.
Thankfully it went flawlessly, and then when the next kernel upgrade came along, the driver was now in it.
I don't see anything wrong with programmers wanting to write their own Distro.
But it is doubtful it would ever become a mainstream Distro.
It is usually better for them to build on top of an existing Distro by adding more bells and whistles.
Like Ubuntu did with Debian, and Linux Mint did with Ubuntu.
Even so, there are thousands of Distro's out there now, and some like to Distro Hop to see how they all work.
Other's like me, like something stable with no added bells or whistles. But I can add those I want usually.
Take msWord as an example:
Why should anyone look under FILE Operations to perform a FORMATTING operation? Not Logical at all!
Page Format belongs under FORMATTING operations, NOT under FILE operations, it has nothing at all to do with handling FILES. And they say msWord is easier to use, Ha!
Well, Vista cost ms a lot of customers, not that they cared much.
I don't know what it is about Windows10 that has turned so many people off either.
I know why in my wife's case, it ran slower than molasses in the dead of winter on a brand new machine that came with it pre-installed. Sad, very sad. Nothing wrong with the machine, I'm running Linux Mint 19.3 on it and it runs like a scared rabbit.
But I guess so many folks are used to playing with their Schmartz-Fonz now they don't mind their computer looking like one.
I HATE the looks of it, and how it works, and the same with Linux Distro's made to work like cell phones too.
Re: Smug As A Bug
Again, I may be showing my ignorance here, but every Linux kernel I've seen built into an operating system is a recompilation of the original release with mods added into it. Just about every Grub bootloader also has mods to the kernel, but those are not compiled into it. The /boot directory will have an executable file called vmlinuz which is the kernel and all the mods for that particular distro. The mod level number is appended to the original kernel version. My current Ubuntu is running the 5.8.0 kernel but is listed in the boot directory as 5.8.0-38, or the 38th revision of the kernel. When I update that -38 number will change and all the mods will be stored in vmlinuz. Perhaps the reason you never see a kernel change is because you don't do updates?
Microsoft for all it's brilliance does not learn from it's past mistakes. You will recall the infamous Windows ME which filled in the space between XP and Vista. It was a catastrophe that never should have been published. Vista, while it was much improved, was not fully developed either. But Vista was a lot more reliable than that ME trash. Not until Windows 7 came along did Microsoft regain some of it's credibility. I'm short on experience with Windows XP, but I still believe Windows 7 was the best Microsoft ever invented. Window 8 reverted back to something like ME in that it was a turning point in the technology; it too was released to the public prematurely and contained a lot of basic flaws. Windows 10 is the last OS Microsoft will ever build. It's doing very well functionally but as I keep quoting it is now "Wiindows as a service." In my opinion Microsoft produced only three operating systems that were suitable for general consumption; XP, Windows 7, and now Windows as a service. All the others were abominable, which is unfortunate because it gave Microsoft a bad name.
Windows 10 had a bad start because it's minimum hardware requirements really were not enough to run the software as intended. The only people who did not have trouble with it were those who bought new hardware that was certified for use with Windows 10. That was a huge set back for many people because they saw it as a con game to get them to buy new equipment. The truth is Micorsoft had no choice. The leap from Windows 7 to Windows 10 is huge. You simply could not upgrade a Windows 7 machine and expect it to run Windows 10 as intended. There simply was no other way to move on, unfortunately.
As far as making OS's look like smartphones goes, there is some truth to that. You are a dinosaur roaming around in the year 2021 if you have not embraced mobile computing devices. I have read all your arguments and I can't disagree with a single one of them, well perhaps I can't agree fully with Debian, but still you are doing what is right for you. The rest of the world is moving on, and it is very mobile.
Microsoft for all it's brilliance does not learn from it's past mistakes. You will recall the infamous Windows ME which filled in the space between XP and Vista. It was a catastrophe that never should have been published. Vista, while it was much improved, was not fully developed either. But Vista was a lot more reliable than that ME trash. Not until Windows 7 came along did Microsoft regain some of it's credibility. I'm short on experience with Windows XP, but I still believe Windows 7 was the best Microsoft ever invented. Window 8 reverted back to something like ME in that it was a turning point in the technology; it too was released to the public prematurely and contained a lot of basic flaws. Windows 10 is the last OS Microsoft will ever build. It's doing very well functionally but as I keep quoting it is now "Wiindows as a service." In my opinion Microsoft produced only three operating systems that were suitable for general consumption; XP, Windows 7, and now Windows as a service. All the others were abominable, which is unfortunate because it gave Microsoft a bad name.
Windows 10 had a bad start because it's minimum hardware requirements really were not enough to run the software as intended. The only people who did not have trouble with it were those who bought new hardware that was certified for use with Windows 10. That was a huge set back for many people because they saw it as a con game to get them to buy new equipment. The truth is Micorsoft had no choice. The leap from Windows 7 to Windows 10 is huge. You simply could not upgrade a Windows 7 machine and expect it to run Windows 10 as intended. There simply was no other way to move on, unfortunately.
As far as making OS's look like smartphones goes, there is some truth to that. You are a dinosaur roaming around in the year 2021 if you have not embraced mobile computing devices. I have read all your arguments and I can't disagree with a single one of them, well perhaps I can't agree fully with Debian, but still you are doing what is right for you. The rest of the world is moving on, and it is very mobile.
Re: Smug As A Bug
Actually Yogi, I run update, and upgrade, sometimes more than once a week.
The only system I have that seems to get Kernel upgrades is Linux Mint 19.3 for some reason.
Maybe because it is new, or I didn't install the LTS version. I don't know.
However, whenever Linux Mint gets an update notice, also go through and update all of my machines.
Most of the time there are no updates to do on the other machines. Kernel updates are rare!
Debi loves her Win7 machine, even though it is over ten years old now, it still screams, because its original design was as a gaming machine, upper level at the time it was built.
In my case, the Silver Yogi is probably the best and fastest I've ever owned.
Despite the fact the fancy graphics card slot got broken in transit, the on-board graphics are super great.
No complaints at all with the Silver Yogi, you did an excellent build!
LInux Cinnamon looks like a smart-phone, which is why I run the Mate desktop.
Sometimes old school layouts are still the best!
I do think WebGL on Google Chrome has a memory leak!
Something similar to the Mate Panel on an earlier Debian 10 install.
I've run Distribution Upgrade a few times, hoping it would up to the same version as I have on this machine.
But apparently it doesn't work that way. Then too it could be the old computer I have it on too is causing the leak.
The only system I have that seems to get Kernel upgrades is Linux Mint 19.3 for some reason.
Maybe because it is new, or I didn't install the LTS version. I don't know.
However, whenever Linux Mint gets an update notice, also go through and update all of my machines.
Most of the time there are no updates to do on the other machines. Kernel updates are rare!
Debi loves her Win7 machine, even though it is over ten years old now, it still screams, because its original design was as a gaming machine, upper level at the time it was built.
In my case, the Silver Yogi is probably the best and fastest I've ever owned.
Despite the fact the fancy graphics card slot got broken in transit, the on-board graphics are super great.
No complaints at all with the Silver Yogi, you did an excellent build!
LInux Cinnamon looks like a smart-phone, which is why I run the Mate desktop.
Sometimes old school layouts are still the best!
I do think WebGL on Google Chrome has a memory leak!
Something similar to the Mate Panel on an earlier Debian 10 install.
I've run Distribution Upgrade a few times, hoping it would up to the same version as I have on this machine.
But apparently it doesn't work that way. Then too it could be the old computer I have it on too is causing the leak.
Re: Smug As A Bug
I'm not sure how I got the impression, but I thought you hesitated to do upgrades because they typically break working software. LOL Some updates will change the way an old program runs. FireFox browser is a good example of that. Then agian, FireFox in Linux isn't exactly the same as FireFox in Windows. For that reason I no longer use FireFox in my Windows computers. I do have it installed in the laptop that is running the evaluation version of Windows. That came about as a point of principle. One day they sent out a new version of the OS that would not allow any browser to be the system default except the Microsoft Edge one. They did that because nobody trusted Edge after their Internet Explorer experiences and Microsoft needed people to use Edge to debug it. Well I personally complained loudly in their feedback forum as did quite a few other beta testers. The next update magically allowed any browser to be the system default, but they added a note begging you not to do it. LOL I did it just to be ornery, but seldom use it. It was actually kind of cool when Microsoft reacted positively to the masses' demands. As a reward for their generosity I installed Edge in my Windows 7 machine to replace Opera, which went off the deep end once again as it is prone to do. To be honest it works pretty well in Win7. Instead of FIreFox I use WaterFox which is a stripped down version of the Mozilla staple.
At some point in the past, probably around the 19.x release level, Linux Mint went to rolling updates to replace their long standing point release philosophy. A few other distributions of Linux OS's did the same. The rolling releases are frequent and intended to keep your system as current as it is possible to make it. All that would be fine if it were not for the ambiguity of updates, upgrade, and dist-upgrade. Sometimes you don't have a choice of how to upgrade, but it's up to you to know what is going on and react accordingly most of the time. That's one of my greatest disappointments with Linux. They expect the user to know a lot of things in advance.
The specs on that Silver Yogi are set pretty high. They almost match what I built here using the ASUS motherboard. The CPU clock speed is a close match but some of the memory and internal busses are slower. When you are not running resource intensive programs you would never max out the potential of the machine. While I'm disappointed the system didn't arrive in the same condition in which it was sent, I am pleased to know you are happy with it.
I read about memory leaks in Chrome but really don't have a feel for what that all means. I only use it to access Google's cloud and it seems to take up no more memory that any of the other browsers I use. I typically have 4-5 tabs open and am connected to their cloud servers. I also do this site's administration from there on occasion, which is not a Google service. In any case Chrome is a low use application for me so that I'd probably not notice any problems even if they existed.
At some point in the past, probably around the 19.x release level, Linux Mint went to rolling updates to replace their long standing point release philosophy. A few other distributions of Linux OS's did the same. The rolling releases are frequent and intended to keep your system as current as it is possible to make it. All that would be fine if it were not for the ambiguity of updates, upgrade, and dist-upgrade. Sometimes you don't have a choice of how to upgrade, but it's up to you to know what is going on and react accordingly most of the time. That's one of my greatest disappointments with Linux. They expect the user to know a lot of things in advance.
The specs on that Silver Yogi are set pretty high. They almost match what I built here using the ASUS motherboard. The CPU clock speed is a close match but some of the memory and internal busses are slower. When you are not running resource intensive programs you would never max out the potential of the machine. While I'm disappointed the system didn't arrive in the same condition in which it was sent, I am pleased to know you are happy with it.
I read about memory leaks in Chrome but really don't have a feel for what that all means. I only use it to access Google's cloud and it seems to take up no more memory that any of the other browsers I use. I typically have 4-5 tabs open and am connected to their cloud servers. I also do this site's administration from there on occasion, which is not a Google service. In any case Chrome is a low use application for me so that I'd probably not notice any problems even if they existed.