[ogogmad]

> Package managers and compiling-from-source instead of distributing runnable applications directly.

Docker tries to partially address this, right?

> Dependence on CLI, and steep learning curve.

I think this is partially eased by LLMs.

[the__alchemist]

But you can see the theme here: Adding more layers of complexity to patch things. LLMs do seem to do a better job than searching forum posts! I would argue that Docker's point is to patch compatibility barriers in Linux.

[LavenderDay3544]

They shouldn't have to. OS interfaces including commandline ones should be user oriented not bogged down by Unix dogma that was created wwhencomputerss used physical text terminals as their primary I/O device. It's not the 60s anymore and modern PC, servers, and embedded devices aren't ancient mainframes with physical terminal hardware where making everything appear to be a file and using convoluted scripting interfaces like the Unix shell made at least some sense.

[Levitating]

> Docker tries to partially address this, right?

Docker is a good way of turning a 2kb shell script into a 400mb container. It's not a solution.

Flatpak would be a better example.