[malfist]

This type of writing is very grating on the nerves. It's not AI slop, but it feels the same way, where AI slop is trying to trick you into thinking every sentence is the pinnacle insight of human endeavor of all history, this writing stops every single sentence to say "Are you outraged? I'm outraged! You should be outraged! This is outrageous!"

Especially when the outrage is that the user didn't follow instructions to use sudo on an uninstaller that needs to touch root owned files.

[raincole]

The writing style has a name called ragebaiting. The gold:

> Localization files for every language on Earth

Yeah because English is the only one language that matters. Let's fuck up all the non-native speakers to save, I don't know, 50kb of text files? How could one frame this as a bad thing?

> Help documentation with 40+ screenshots in 10 languages

Seriously how Anglocentric could this author be? Even physical products have multi-language manuals nowadays.

[josephcsible]

Isn't the normal convention to ship all the language files in the installer, but for it to only install the ones that are actually used on the system?

[malfist]

In the past I've certainly seen that, but more and more I see all the language files being installed. You never know when someone is going to change their language, add another one, or add a new user.

[MarchApril]

Firefox certainly did this [Firefox release engineering](https://aosabook.org/en/v2/ffreleng.html) but at one point, having >100 almost identical executables (with the text swap out) for each version would eventually got on some nerves.

[josephcsible]

But aren't those things rare enough that it's better to have people doing them rerun the installer, than to take up extra disk space for everyone that most people will never use?

[dcrazy]

No. Language resources are part of the app bundle, which means they are part of the bundle’s code signature. Removing or altering them breaks the signature.

[rsynnott]

The joke is that the software doesn’t work, so providing more languages is strictly worse, as it allows more people to experience the broken software.

[atoav]

Well I once watched an sysadmin with 430 years of experience swear his way through an installation process. Until I, back then a intern, pointed out that maybe reading the install instructions would have been a good idea, since there were some steps in there that would have saved us some time. We scrapped everything and reinstalled following the instructions and 15 minuted later it worked.

I admit that I also often deviate from installation processes, but only when I really know why I want to do that. And I tend to read the instructions first.

But I know people who are snuggly proud about not reading the manual and I really don't get it.

[rmunn]

> But I know people who are snuggly proud about not reading the manual and I really don't get it.

Agreed... but there seem to be more and more products that either don't have manuals, or whose manuals are so badly written that reading them turns out to be a waste of time. I feel like people are being trained not to read manuals anymore, so I understand the people whose first instinct is "that thing is going to be useless, I'm not going to waste my time reading it". But not the ones who are proud of not reading manuals, that doesn't make sense to me either.

[ryandrake]

Installing software should not require a manual. It should require one button click, or one drag action.

[rmunn]

While I agree in the general case (e.g., software aimed at end users), there's also a good reason why the Archlinux Wiki is so good: because installing an OS does require a manual if you want to be able to do any customization at all (yes, you can just install the defaults, but if that's what you wanted, you probably wouldn't be running Arch). And the same applies to systems software not quite as broad in scope as an OS: there can be multiple different customizations you might need to apply, or you might need various dependencies. atoav didn't mention whether the software the sysadmin was installing had a distro package (it might not have even been on a Linux system, no particular reason to assume it was Linux rather than FreeBSD or AIX or Solaris or...), but I kind of assume it didn't, precisely because there were installation instructions. The sysadmin wouldn't have been "swear[ing] his way through an installation process" if the installation process was "sudo apt install some-piece-of-software", after all.

[malfist]

> It should require one button click, or one drag action.

That is way to simplistic to be one size fits all.

[close04]

When all else fails, read the manual. It’s a tried and tested practice among experts worth their salt.

A lit of practices save you 10s each day but when they fail you lose 10 years’ worth of savings.

[rmunn]

Was "430 years" a typo for "30 years" or for "43 years"?

[atoav]

30

[bKHjNaz23wJ]

I didn't really expect much from article after:

> What kind of fucking name is that anyway? “Samsung Magician” - for a disk utility?

That must be a total mystery for someone who never heard of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PartitionMagic

[greazy]

I completely disagree. I loved this article. I could feel the authors frustration and disdain for the software.

It was funny and helpful.