Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by cxr 1731 days ago
> we need to force the rest of the industry into a more ephemeral mindset

What a despicable position. 5–10 year stability is something the tech industry should be aiming for, minimum—not trying to stamp it out as if someone who achieves it is doing something wrong.

Consider the Dell Chromebook 13 (7310; Lulu). It blew me away last summer to realize that this 2015-era notebook which could be had for $200–300 was still the best option among everything else I evaluated in 2020. Five years to make progress in hardware and yet _every_ other option promised only to be a step backwards. (A phenomenon separately documented here: <https://drewdevault.com/2020/02/18/Fucking-laptops.html>) Manufacturers of course do offer systems today are offering systems with slightly better CPUs or more RAM, but invariably they demand compromising on the ergonomics of either the Lulu's MacBook-quality touchpad, the 67Wh battery that lasts 6–10 hours, the form factor of its 13-inch matte screen and carbon fiber body, the silent fan, or on price—these are companies that expect you fork over at least $1000 more than the putative value of the one already unpacked sitting on the desk—just to have a system that is worse!

Against every signal saying that it would be a mistake, I actually swallowed my reservations about paying the price for a newer system. I was partially reassured by the support lead of one prominent Linux laptop vendor saying that they "promise" that I'd be happy with the purchase, and that it would be better than the Lulu. Sure enough, it gets here; the touchpad is dogshit, the fan is only able to modulate between "screaming loudly" and "screaming very loudly", and I'm left feeling a mixture of horrible dread/remorse while asking myself "is this a joke?" It got packed up and sent back and refunded, and I promptly turned around and spent 1/3 of the refund on a second refurbed Chromebook 13 and left the remaining 2/3 in my bank account.

Aside from the goofy Chromebook keyboard layout, the only downside to these devices? It's that, despite being on par with Purism's flagship notebook at the time (that also sold with a 50+% higher price tag in comparison to this notebook's original retail price), Lulu went largely unnoticed by the community. So newer Ubuntu releases silently broke the graphics, which means upgrading to 18.04 and 20.04 is a non-option. In the midst of this, we get unqualified opinions in the comments here that implicate people who want to stick with 16.04 (because a system that boots is better than one that doesn't) as threatening to "hold back progress" (clearly we've got different definitions of progress) and others cluelessly pontificating that upgrading is "easier and saves you money and pain in the long run" (again, somehow we have a different ideas of how to measure which numbers are bigger than others).

2 comments

"Dell Chromebook 13"

I think there are enough Laptops that don't suck. And Ubuntu should basically run on most laptops. Fingerprint reader? I don't care.

For the older ones, how about a DELL XPS 13? Or Thinkpad? lenovo carbon x1?

You can get a decent latop for 200-800 USD. I love the DELLS XPS 13/14. But sometimes I get greedy and wish I had 16GB instead of 8GB.

RE: your laptop blog, the laptop market mirrors the problems with the modern desktop OS:

- Apple is closed source, trying to abuse its users AND developers with the pointless app store, OSX was a big improvement when released but basically doesn't evolve and breaks all your software with major releases, and seems openly hostile to open source, Java, Docker/containers. Stubbornly sticks to its UNIX variant and doesn't even offer a linux-ish compatbility layer (even worse considering the lack of native container support)

- Windows: where do I start. two desktops? Tiles is horrible. The UI actively hates its users. Security continues to be bad, although not as bad as the XP days. The only saving grace is WSL is basically evolving windows to becoming a UI for a linux core, which is the only actual glimmer of progress. I actually am cheering for Microsoft to get really big in Azure as the anti-AWS and at some point deciding to go all in with Linux and doing Windows as the UI for basically free to chase all that IAAS dollar.

- Linux: still completely fragmented. Treading water on UIs, not solving fundamental problems, still hardware support headaches. But the worst is that Linux, despite winning the IAAS OS wars, won't properly organize on the desktop front.

Here's a list of major entities whose funding of a real desktop on linux for small small fractions of their financial resources to make a secure, supported, easily upgraded/patched/rolled out OS would be in their great interest:

- Intel, AMD, NVidia: allows them to surface all their hardware innovations and features to the desktop without having to lobby/beg/pray Microsoft adds support to their OS. Instead, you make Microsoft chase/feel pressure to keep up.

- Dell/HP/Lenovo: cheaper hardware for their customers. Ability to directly update the OS with support for their specific firmwares and all its foibles. Maybe even support/push/innovate hardware rather than always following Apple?

- Nintendo and Sony (game consoles / set top boxes): They're already in millions of homes. Neither of these companies can handle a full OS, but they can piggyback on Linux.

- anyone with an IAAS cloud (except Microsoft): Why doesn't AWS want to take over the business desktop? Or oracle cloud, or Google compute, or IBM cloud? You are getting all that sweet IAAS money for servers, why not people's desktops?

- US intelligence and military: ransomware is cyber warfare enemy #1. Do you really want your defense being waiting for Microsoft to release a patch? When a huge number of people using their OS don't pay for it and won't upgrade? And for our military applications, do you want a closed source OS, or an open source one that you can audit? The US military should be throwing a billion dollars at Linux every year.

- EU... everything: Who made Linux? A goddamn European. Do you want to wrest technical software leadership from the US and Microsoft? Well, the author and many/most core committers are in the goddamn EU. It is sitting in your backyard. Now add it all the things I said about the US military: you can avoid (software) backdoors because the code is auditable. You can keep US, Russian, China intel from eating your lunch every day. The EU should be throwing a billion a year at Linux.

- China: Same thing as the EU: do you want closed source Microsoft OSs running on your machines? Do you want Google controlling the OS of all the phones your people use, or Apple? China should be throwing a billion at Linux every year too.

What should be happening is that Linux is getting 10 billion a year to improve itself: security, features, support, etc.

But... it doesn't.

I mean, there should be literally 100,000 core committers each getting funded 100k/year for their first and only job. What actually should be happening is probably 100 billion a year between concerned militaries, governments, corporations, etc, basically funding a worldwide army of a million committers.

Torvalds should be eligible for a (quite ironic given his temperment) Nobel peace prize just from what he has already done.