Skip to main content

Topic: General Unix/Linux Thread (Read 31563 times)

  • Frenzie
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Administrator
General Unix/Linux Thread
There is more to discuss, but opening a new topic for everything might be a bit much. Here's a quick overview of what exists already:



Some other subjects I might talk about include the compose key, Geeqie, Pandoc, qBittorrent, tmux, and VirtualBox. I semi-regularly write something about such matters on my blog.

  • Frenzie
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Administrator
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #50

  • Frenzie
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Administrator
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #51
Unwanted junk in office software: autocomplete and autocorrect.

Here's how to disable it in LibreOffice Calc http://www.efrag.gr/2011/06/remove-autocomplete-from-calc-in-libreoffice/

  • Macallan
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Administrator
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #52

UEFI nonsense.

http://www.preining.info/blog/2014/04/sony-vaio-pro-uefi-booting/

Ewww. The path names look kinda like ARC(S), as found in SGI firmware and Windows NT boot managers. Not all that surprising though, considering where it came from.
Why can't they just use OpenFirmware?! :cry:
Oh, I know why. As a user you'd actually have control over the thing.

  • Macallan
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Administrator
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #53

Unwanted junk in office software: autocomplete and autocorrect.

Ugh, autocomplete is a fucking nuisance in pretty much every instance I've ever seen. Starting with Visual Studio ( where it was somewhat useful since Win32 API names can be kinda long and easy to tpyo but that's about it ) and these days in things like bluefish where it just plain gets in the way without ever suggesting anything useful. Also, automatically adding braces :yuck:

  • Banned Member
  • [*]
  • Banned
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #54
Why not just somebody patch it with a killing code. Is it open source sw or what?

  • Frenzie
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Administrator
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #55
That doesn't mean they'll accept any old patch...

  • Banned Member
  • [*]
  • Banned
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #56
I use OpenOffice anyway. Which is compatible with Android's "Document To Go", IIRC.

  • Frenzie
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Administrator
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #57
Which has the same default behavior. :P

  • Banned Member
  • [*]
  • Banned
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #58
Inono, it didn't take trouble to cope with them for me: my Windows 'edition' is fairly customisable.

  • ersi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #59
No need to patch the behaviour away. The best patch is configurability.

If autocomplete makes sense anywhere, it's exactly in spreadsheet software. I personally use autocomplete wherever possible, if writing in English. In English it makes sense, but in Estonian it doesn't and can't. To satisfy everyone, all you need is the option to switch autocomplete off.

Autocorrect is another matter. This is hardly ever anything else than pure evil, breeding unwanted changes in the text.

  • Frenzie
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Administrator
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #60
No need to patch the behaviour away. The best patch is configurability.

Well, I'd patch it up to more sensible defaults. Off. ;)

If autocomplete makes sense anywhere, it's exactly in spreadsheet software.

Really? It makes sense to write "blabla" in a cell, press enter because you're done and you want to move down to the next cell, and then it says "blablabla" instead? That's fucking evil. It's probably worse than writing "Blabla" and ending up with "blabla" or vice versa.

Perhaps autocomplete would be reasonable if it weren't activated with the same bloody key that's used for next cell/paragraph. Although, even more sensible autocomplete implementations than in Open/LibreOffice annoy me. It's really simple: I type fast. Bothering me with unexpected stuff I didn't type or ask for only slows me down. But hunt & peckers actually respond the exact same way, so it doesn't help anyone.  :faint:

(Seriously, I've never heard of anyone who likes autocomplete. I have once heard a person defend autocorrect because of some silly argument that typing capitals is hard or something.)

  • j7n
  • [*][*][*][*]
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #61
ׂ
  • Last Edit: 2014-04-24, 04:15:08 by j7n

  • Banned Member
  • [*]
  • Banned
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #62
There've been noticed an inconsistency within that piece of reference: First they par Win/Lin -> car/bike, the next paragraph the author seems to have got lost in the trees and switched the par the other way round.:)

  • Frenzie
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Administrator
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #63
Quote
Linux/cars were designed from the ground up for multiple users/passengers. Windows/motorbikes were designed for one user/passenger.

Windows NT was also fundamentally designed as a multiuser OS.

The Firefox example leaves a bad taste, because these days copying Chrome seems to be their primary goal.

  • ersi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #64

If autocomplete makes sense anywhere, it's exactly in spreadsheet software.

Really? It makes sense to write "blabla" in a cell, press enter because you're done and you want to move down to the next cell, and then it says "blablabla" instead? That's fucking evil. It's probably worse than writing "Blabla" and ending up with "blabla" or vice versa.

I don't know what you use spreadsheets for. To me it's not to write any "blablabla" (random or creative prose) in it. It's tables with focused, limited, highly repetitive text and numbers. Highly repetitive means autocomplete makes lots of sense. Also, when there's "Blabla", it should remain "Blabla" throughout, and all occurrences of "blabla" should be best spotted immediately. If the difference between "Blabla" and "blabla" is important, configure the behaviour of the software accordingly.

It's really simple: I type fast. Bothering me with unexpected stuff I didn't type or ask for only slows me down.

Even fast typists should think carefully. Before I type, I think of the end result. The software I use is part of the means to achieve the end result and time must be spent on configuring it so that it would be a better tool instead of an obstacle. This is a no-brainer to me probably precisely because I don't type so fast :)

(Seriously, I've never heard of anyone who likes autocomplete...
You did now. Autocomplete has its uses.


Windows NT was also fundamentally designed as a multiuser OS.
I never got it to work as such, e.g. as a single computer where the members of family or whoever can log on in turn and not screw up each other's settings. Even in NT workstations the multiuser ability looks more like an afterthought, whereas in Linux it works without any headache.

  • Frenzie
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Administrator
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #65
I say that autocomplete and autocorrect should be off by default. Your counterargument is that they're useful if they're set up correctly, which it seems to me implicitly supports the point that the defaults are crappy. As to the point itself, autocomplete is a lot better in Bash and Vim than in LibreOffice. Not being activated by the Enter key might be part of it.

Highly repetitive means autocomplete makes lots of sense.

Perhaps, but I also always end up on youtube.com/blablabla instead of plain youtube.com thanks to autocomplete (but because the addressbar dropdown is broken since Opera 10.50 or so I no longer have it disabled). That kind of repetitiveness occurs plenty in spreadsheets.

Even fast typists should think carefully. Before I type, I think of the end result. The software I use is part of the means to achieve the end result and time must be spent on configuring it so that it would be a better tool instead of an obstacle. This is a no-brainer to me probably precisely because I don't type so fast

I think before I type. The fact that evil software would interfere with what I type by default, however, is something I am forced to rediscover whenever I have to use the type of junk called office software.

  • Banned Member
  • [*]
  • Banned
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #66
Yey, I don't think OpenOffice severely differs in for Linux from that for Windows, huh? You should tinker more!:lol:

  • Banned Member
  • [*]
  • Banned
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #67
My OpenOffice opens very slow here in Windows. Is it so in Linux too?
Or does it just eat much CPU?
What such application works best in Linux?

  • ersi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #68
I say that autocomplete and autocorrect should be off by default. Your counterargument is that they're useful if they're set up correctly, which it seems to me implicitly supports the point that the defaults are crappy.
I agree that the defaults may seem crappy when you need to tinker with them. However, when there are easy options to alter the settings, there's no real crappiness. Personally I haven't found any software, office or otherwise, whose defaults I didn't have to change. And as we grow into experienced users, we should also grow to be more humble when considering what defaults noobs find sensible.

We all would like software be set up out of the box as per our specific needs, but this is just laziness. Realistically, options to make it work as per our needs should be enough. It's also realistic to suggest that experienced users should not complain when they are made to tinker, and noobs should be happy that they are learning stuff, growing with experience.

My OpenOffice opens very slow here in Windows. Is it so in Linux too?
Or does it just eat much CPU?

Yes, but only at startup. Once it's up, it's cool. Office software is the heaviest kind of software. For ordinary mortals, only imaging and video processing are even more heavy.


What such application works best in Linux?
If by "best" you mean fast startup, then use text editors* rather than office software. If by "best" you mean all the necessary word processing filetypes that humans share, then you are stuck with Openoffice and Libreoffice.

* Such as Notepad (on Windows Notepad++ was my favourite). Then in command line interface, once you learn it, you will find editors that surpass Notepad equivalents too in terms of speed and solidity (=non-crashiness).

  • Banned Member
  • [*]
  • Banned
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #69
No, I mean smoothly, most organised, easy to understand etc.

  • ersi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #70
Then you mean the likes of Notepad. Yes, those exist on Linux, of course. They have names like Mousepad, Leafpad, Gedit, etc.

There are also lightweight office replacements, such as Abiword (to do word processing) and Gnumeric (spreadsheets), but I have not tried them properly, because my requirements to office suits are of professional class. I need Powerpoint too.

There have been attempts to develop a full-featured office suit to replace Openoffice (and Libreoffice, which is essentially the same thing). In this area I am most familiar with KOffice http://www.kde.org/applications/office/ but I have not kept up with it at least ten years, even though historically I had serious interest in it.

  • Frenzie
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Administrator
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #71
I agree that the defaults may seem crappy when you need to tinker with them. However, when there are easy options to alter the settings, there's no real crappiness. Personally I haven't found any software, office or otherwise, whose defaults I didn't have to change. And as we grow into experienced users, we should also grow to be more humble when considering what defaults noobs find sensible.

N00bs don't find it sensible when computers randomly do things without being told to do anything. N00bs say, "wtf did the black box just do!?!?!? Help, I lost everything!!!" I say, "relax, you can still undo." To me, it's an extremely annoying default because it might've changed things around before I noticed. That's bad enough -- but to a n00b, it's torture.

Microsoft Office actually does this significantly better. It visually alerts you that it's changing things around and allows you to disable the feature on the spot. Out of all of their silly GUI experiments over the years, I'd say that's one of the best.

PS Alternatively to disabling by default, I think the Tab key would make a more sensible default. Just. not. Enter.

  • ersi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #72
@Josh
The KOffice project is called Calligra these days. This is how behind I am in this area.

@Frenzie
Besides the noobs argument - which goes roughly this way, "There are no sensible defaults for noobs. Noobs have to learn everything from scratch whatever the defaults are. And patiently." - there's also the continuity argument, which goes like this: "If the new version changes anything, it sucks. If it provides continuity/familiarity (and intuitive improvement - but this is already arguable), it's okay." Word processing on computers is definitely subject to the continuity argument. My shift from MS Office to Open- and Libreoffice would have taken far more time if the latter office suits didn't provide continuity and familiarity - and if the former didn't experiment so much. I hate experiments. Therefore I say easily no thanks to MS Office.

  • Frenzie
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Administrator
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #73
Adding a little visual hint remains continuous. It's not comparable to shuffling things around or removing them. It's a bit like what Clippy used to do, but without the annoyingness factor. That being said, I believe the Office interface was fairly continuous until that ribbon came about. And it's not like they've removed the ribbon from the latest versions or anything.

My opinions about the ribbon are mixed at best, but besides the disaster that is Windows 8 I don't think MS is that bad at continuity.

  • j7n
  • [*][*][*][*]
Re: General Unix/Linux Thread
Reply #74
ׂ
  • Last Edit: 2014-04-24, 04:14:52 by j7n