You are not logged in.

#101 2017-12-18 14:36:36

Trilby
Forum Fellow
From: Earth, unfortunately
Registered: 2011-11-29
Posts: 18,301

Re: Anybody using Arch as their daily driver?

mrunion, different people have different reasons for even using a computer in the first place.  While I don't "game" on my computer (in the sense of these modern games needing steam, or valve, or whatever) I can appreciate that for some people gaming is the primary purpose of their computer.  In that case, if Windows really does meet that goal better, use it.


"UNIX is simple and coherent..." - Dennis Ritchie, "GNU's Not UNIX" -  Richard Stallman

Online

#102 2017-12-19 01:42:03

NoSuck
Member
Registered: 2015-03-04
Posts: 103
Website

Re: Anybody using Arch as their daily driver?

I love video games, but I also find it hard to disagree with this eleven-year-old boy.

Moshe Kai Cavalin wrote:

I feel it's a waste of time playing video games because it's not helping humanity in any way.

Regardless, the whole gaming argument against Linux reveals something deeper.  It's not about video games.  Linux could flawlessly run every Windows game except for one, and lazy people would still use that as an excuse.

Offline

#103 2017-12-19 01:47:23

Alad
Wiki Admin/IRC Op/TU
From: The Land of The Bloat
Registered: 2014-05-04
Posts: 1,728
Website

Re: Anybody using Arch as their daily driver?

Linux could flawlessly run every Windows game except for one, and lazy people would still use that as an excuse.

Linux cannot run Solitaire?!? How useless is that... hmm

Last edited by Alad (2017-12-19 01:47:50)


Mods are just community members who have the occasionally necessary option to move threads around and edit posts. -- Trilby
Honest Alad's Package Emporium—Now with added bugs! (Closed until further notice)

Offline

#104 2017-12-20 18:47:50

applebaps
Member
From: Alaska
Registered: 2017-10-19
Posts: 28
Website

Re: Anybody using Arch as their daily driver?

NoSuck wrote:

Regardless, the whole gaming argument against Linux reveals something deeper.  It's not about video games.  Linux could flawlessly run every Windows game except for one, and lazy people would still use that as an excuse.

I feel like this attitude is a big part of why gaming on Linux still sucks after all these years.  Someone highly valuing a particular piece of software, including a particular video game they really like, and wanting to use the OS that best runs that piece of software, isn't being lazy or making excuses.  Sometimes stuff just *doesn't work* on Linux, particularly video games.  You can try to hack it or change settings in Wine or whatever as much as you like, but as long as the GPU drivers aren't up to snuff, as long as the game itself isn't written in a way that makes it possible, the end user (even a power user) doesn't have total control over whether something is going to work or not.  You're calling people lazy, and mrunion is saying they have "priorities out of order", simply because YOU don't share their interest or their priorities, as if there's some objective standard for tastes and hobbies.

I dunno, that's just really rude and exclusionary imo.  Granted, these problems aren't a high priority for Arch users in general, and the attitude is "well if it's a priority for you, then learn how and fix it."  And that's fine, on paper I agree, but not everyone has the time.  Why should we be forced into using a subpar OS or told we're just being lazy or judged by the community for not wanting to dedicate our entire lives to reverse-engineering a piece of proprietary software on our off time?  Users should have the ability to vent about the problems with an OS without being talked down to.

edit: I realized I'm coming across a little hot here, so before you go quoting, know that mrunion and I are workin things out farther down the page, here tongue

Last edited by applebaps (2017-12-21 18:13:34)

Offline

#105 2017-12-20 19:48:09

Awebb
Member
Registered: 2010-05-06
Posts: 4,971

Re: Anybody using Arch as their daily driver?

NoSuck wrote:

I love video games, but I also find it hard to disagree with this eleven-year-old boy.

Moshe Kai Cavalin wrote:

I feel it's a waste of time playing video games because it's not helping humanity in any way.

What a childish attitude.

Offline

#106 2017-12-21 13:49:51

mrunion
Member
From: Jonesborough, TN
Registered: 2007-01-26
Posts: 1,885
Website

Re: Anybody using Arch as their daily driver?

To clarify what I meant in case it's misunderstood:

If your priority is to switch to Linux, needing Windows to run video games should not be the reason you don't just drop Windows and do without the games. Buy a console and play games.

If your priority is Windows so you can play games, then deal with dual booting, etc.

I was specifically responding to the few people truly believing they want to switch to Linux but it's the games holding them back -- unless you are developing games to make your living and need Windows to do that, you are deluding yourself by blaming the games as the reason for not switching. It's the priority of your desires that keep you from switching.

Did that make more sense?

And I am a staunch proponent of make whatever decision you want -- it's your machine, your OS, etc. I'm not being judgmental, just opinionated.


Matt

"It is very difficult to educate the educated."

Offline

#107 2017-12-21 17:28:46

applebaps
Member
From: Alaska
Registered: 2017-10-19
Posts: 28
Website

Re: Anybody using Arch as their daily driver?

I can definitely see your point, thank you for clarifying.  I agree that if a person's goal is "switch to Linux", then they turn around and start hemming and hawing about why they can't do it, that's a bit silly.  And yeah at that point it's not about the actual excuse, it's about them looking for reasons not to switch.  And on the flipside, if someone's primary goal is to play games, then they should use the system best suited to that purpose.  I'm 100% on board there.

I'd also like to clarify in return, since I think I'm coming across as a teensy bit entitled in my anger, haha.  Arch does everything I want an OS to do and nothing I don't want it to, with the one major exception of certain games being difficult or impossible to run.  It's by far my favorite computing experience of the OSes I've used, and it even does run the *majority* of the games I want to play.  The only thing that even comes close is Windows 7, which mainly gets as high in my estimation as it does because of its crazy-good compatibility and out-of-the-box functionality for 90% of video games, and how it's "stable" and "minimal" (for Windows, anyway).  It's certainly more user-centric than 10.  I dunno, I probably sound like a nutjob to tech industry pros putting Arch and Win7 in the same sentence but that's my experience/perspective as a power user.

So, when in my original post I complained that "I wish I could use Arch more than I do," that's 100% really what I meant.  I want one system to be able to handle all applications, like Windows used to be able to do for me.  They're very different OSes, obviously, with different priorities.  But I already do dual-boot (or did until recently), and I'm currently investigating doing a GPU passthrough setup to run Windows in VM, since what tends to happen in practice (at least for me) with dual-booting is that you tend to forget about one or the other OS for a few weeks at a time, and if you want to use a particular piece of software, rebooting just to do 1 thing is a bit annoying.  It would just be nice if I could boot up and do everything I want to do in one environment, and I'd like that environment to be Arch.  That's all smile  I guess Arch has spoiled me. 

While my goal was initially simply "switch to Linux (oh god get me out of here)" as a reaction to Windows 10, that goal shifted and became "do everything I want to do on Linux", which in my head at least is a slightly different goal.  It's not "Linux for the sake of Linux", it's "trying to make Linux work."  My goals/purposes do include video games, but they also include things like system maintenance, system minimalism, and the ability to customize things directly and control everything 100%.  When I'm looking for a primary OS (as a power user, not as a pro dev/tech person), I'm looking primarily for a base on which to build, and it's my feeling that Arch offers a better base for my purposes than Windows but is just missing some paint and electrical outlets, so to speak.  Whereas, even though the surface stuff is in place effortlessly in Windows, its foundation doesn't work for me as well.  It's not as future-proof, it doesn't have my interests in mind, and I don't have any guarantee that the company won't ... do exactly what they did with W10, for instance.

As for buying a console to play games, though, even as someone who owns several consoles I find it hard to believe that anyone can make that statement without some serious asterisks attached in the current console gaming climate, haha.  I'd rather not derail us into a console wars type thing, buuuuuuut consoles these days are miles from the "turn it on and play games instantly" of yesteryear.  They.... have problems.  Serious problems.  And there are MANY types of games that simply do not work, could never work, in a console environment.

Last edited by applebaps (2017-12-21 21:29:26)

Offline

#108 2017-12-22 00:38:30

verndog
Member
Registered: 2007-09-21
Posts: 29

Re: Anybody using Arch as their daily driver?

Alad wrote:

There's always some problem, and nothing is quite plug and play out of the box. (...)

You make it sound like you're sharing some revolutionary point of view...

https://itvision.altervista.org/why.lin … rrent.html

(ignore the author and reader comments in that article, just click all the links posted there)

I'm not sure if the above quote was tongue in cheek, but there must be over 300 links. Its hard to avoid the authors comments, but someone needs to get a life...or that he his life.

Last edited by verndog (2017-12-22 00:39:08)

Offline

#109 2017-12-22 17:37:42

applebaps
Member
From: Alaska
Registered: 2017-10-19
Posts: 28
Website

Re: Anybody using Arch as their daily driver?

verndog wrote:
Alad wrote:

There's always some problem, and nothing is quite plug and play out of the box. (...)

You make it sound like you're sharing some revolutionary point of view...

https://itvision.altervista.org/why.lin … rrent.html

(ignore the author and reader comments in that article, just click all the links posted there)

I'm not sure if the above quote was tongue in cheek, but there must be over 300 links. Its hard to avoid the authors comments, but someone needs to get a life...or that he his life.

I can't speak for anyone else but I really appreciated seeing this link and knowing that I'm not going crazy and that others also see the problems.  I think it's important to be able to criticise ourselves and improve, and we can't do that unless we're aware of problems that need fixing.  I didn't click ALL the links, but I followed enough of them through to see that it wasn't just a bunch of whinging but was legit critique.

Offline

#110 2018-01-30 09:34:34

null
Member
Registered: 2009-05-06
Posts: 347

Re: Anybody using Arch as their daily driver?

Just replaced FreeBSD with Arch at work. Everything now happens in half the time. Except maybe boot, that's down to about a quarter. Also no more graphics fragments popping up on the screen. Nice smile

(Nothing against FreeBSD. We use it at all our servers and webhosting with FreeBSD jails is just awesome. But as a desktop? I really tried it but the whole Linux on desktop experience is so much smoother..)


⚑★⚓

Offline

#111 2018-02-12 22:45:21

tydynrain
Member
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Registered: 2017-10-26
Posts: 31

Re: Anybody using Arch as their daily driver?

Arch is absolutely my daily driver. I have 3 separate Arch installs; 2 on separate laptop hard drives used in (surprisingly) my 2010 Dell Latitude E6410, and 1 installed on a 2012  s5-1414 HP Pavilion dekstop. I do have Windows 10 and Ubuntu 17.10 installed on one of the laptop hard drives (triple-booted with Arch), and also Gentoo (Gentoo is soooooo much more complex than Arch, and I have as yet to successfully get it booting to a GUI) on the other laptop hard drive (dual-booted with Arch), though I rarely use anything other than Arch, as everything else just frustrates the fuck out of me sooner or later.

Last edited by tydynrain (2018-02-12 22:47:40)


Registered Linux User: #623501 | Arch Linux Principles: Simplicity - Modernity - Pragmatism - User Centrality - Versatility => KISS

"Open source isn’t an exclusive club; it’s made by people just like you. 'Open Source' is just a fancy term for treating the world’s problems as fixable." - From GitHub.com's 'How to Contribute to Open Source' guide.

Offline

#112 2018-02-13 18:32:10

Alad
Wiki Admin/IRC Op/TU
From: The Land of The Bloat
Registered: 2014-05-04
Posts: 1,728
Website

Re: Anybody using Arch as their daily driver?

Gentoo is soooooo much more complex than Arch, and I have as yet to successfully get it booting to a GUI

Doesn't Gentoo have a 1-size-fits-all handbook so - provided sufficient time - my cat could install it? Though I imagine it's tricky to get all the kernel options right (unless you use one of their templates, I guess).


Mods are just community members who have the occasionally necessary option to move threads around and edit posts. -- Trilby
Honest Alad's Package Emporium—Now with added bugs! (Closed until further notice)

Offline

#113 2018-02-13 21:43:18

tydynrain
Member
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Registered: 2017-10-26
Posts: 31

Re: Anybody using Arch as their daily driver?

Alad wrote:

Gentoo is soooooo much more complex than Arch, and I have as yet to successfully get it booting to a GUI

Doesn't Gentoo have a 1-size-fits-all handbook so - provided sufficient time - my cat could install it? Though I imagine it's tricky to get all the kernel options right (unless you use one of their templates, I guess).

Well, there is a handbook for each architecture, and several profiles from which you can choose, which determines what is masked or unmasked, and what can be installed. As an example, even though I downloaded the systemd stage 3 tarball, and choose a systemd profile, I still had to remove OpenRC, which seemed kind of silly. Also, to install various software that I use, I had to mask and unmask certain packages, which got me into a seeming conflict between profiles. Everything that works in Arch to boot to a GUI in Arch does not (for me at least) work in Gentoo. I keep Gentoo around because after putting so much time and effort into getting it installed, I'm not as inclined to just wipe it, though I've thought of doing that several times. I'll figure it out eventually. I like the idea of Gentoo, but I'm not crazy about its implementation. I like the Arch way of doing things so much more.  And the time, whether to install, optimize, or compile (for install or upgrade) is notably greater than anything in Arch. Sure, with sufficient time you can get everything up and running the way you want, but is all that effort and time really useful or necessary?

Last edited by tydynrain (2018-02-13 21:47:50)


Registered Linux User: #623501 | Arch Linux Principles: Simplicity - Modernity - Pragmatism - User Centrality - Versatility => KISS

"Open source isn’t an exclusive club; it’s made by people just like you. 'Open Source' is just a fancy term for treating the world’s problems as fixable." - From GitHub.com's 'How to Contribute to Open Source' guide.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB