Why Linux sucks?

I have been a Linux user for 15 years - long. It works very efficiently, often predictably. However, in my opinion, a lot of bad things happen - from the community to the developers. I would like to write about it, but first of all get the information what you think about it.

1) KISS

KISS - Keep It Simple, Stupid. A very simple principle in short is that if we create a program - for example a calculator, it should be as simple as possible, without surprises.

For example, they forgot the creators of the Polish Gadu-Gadu instant messenger, and some versions have built-in radio, youtube, GG Disk, etc. This program became the most hated version of the product - he had a lot of bugs.

The reason is very simple - the simple program is simple, fast and contains fewer errors.

Only unfortunately, creators often forget about it. The most interesting example are web browsers. They worked very well even 20 years ago, although of course the websites were simpler. Through the technology of web pages (Javascript) and the browser side (support for Gamepads, user location, information gathering, OpenGL support, etc.) without a good computer you will be tired of browsing the internet.

2) Ubuntu Unstable

Ubuntu is a recommended distribution for computers for beginners. Very good idea, helped thousands of people to go to Linux.

Of course, Ubuntu is based on Debian. Debian is known for its stability, but it's just one of its branches. Debian is divided into:

• Debian Stable - recommended for servers, old packages, no new releases, but continuous bug fixes.

• Debian Unstable - version for developers, new packages, sometimes have bugs.

• Debian Testing - similar to Debian Unstable with the fact that programs undergo verification to minimize software bugs.

Of course, as the title is called Ubuntu Unstable, Ubuntu is probably using Debian Unstable. That's right. But why Unstable, not testing?

I don’t know, I have a hypothesis that if the system is broken then you have to pay for support - that is the company that makes Ubuntu. Too stable system is unprofitable.

3) Red "I have in the ass of desktop users" Hat.

Red Hat is probably the first company to make money on Linux, it created the base of the desktop Linux. Practically this contribution is invaluable.

Something has changed, I noticed it myself when working on Gnome 3. I do not know what happened, but the Gnome Foundation and Red Hat started to spoil the whole ecosystem created over the years.

Gnome 2 was considered by many to be an ideal environment - quite developed but also nice and functional. Someone decided that it was not clear who the perfect environment and created Gnome 3. But it could not be so bad, right? Oh maybe.

Imagine that you are working on a document, have not written it for a long time, and pop up a window where the only way is to log out and lose data. And for months / years since Gnome's departure such messages popped up. Now they are rather rare, but they can still happen. The message hides the whole screen and can not be turned off ...

Let's take another example - nautilus. I started my computer with MS-DOS. Someone wisely decided that first sort the directories and then the files. But not in Gnome. Of course the feature is included, but I do not know if I know of another graphics environment that

1. Has the option to disable this sort
2. Do not sort at the beginning of directories

You can also show the design of the programs. Not bad, but different from default. What makes non-Gnome apps look different on Gnome, and Gnome apps look different than elsewhere. For some it does not have to be a fault, but there is a disproportion that you will not change.

And you remember the KISS rule? There is a project like systemd. Systemd is a program called "init". As soon as the kernel loads, the init program launches - it loads all the necessary programs (such as printer support, hardware recognition). Someone has come up with the idea that systemd contains dozens of different programs! Worst of all, this solution has been adopted and there are not many distributions that allow other inits to work properly.

4) Drivers

Maybe it sounds like Stallman :) There is software that is not strongly related to the system - for example, Steam, it is not key to the computer. In contrast, drivers are usually. The problem is that on Nvidia we have no influence - let's take Optimus service for Nvidia, it's the worst project ever made. Bumblebee is not perfect, but it saves energy and uses Nvidia cards when needed.

Prime also is not the best, but it works on every graphics card (eg AMD also) and is built into the system.

And Nvidia ... pity talking, choose from them in the control panel on which the card is supposed to work, as we want to move from Intel to Nvidia we have to go through. The company that creates the best graphics cards is doing so poorly software for Linux.
Not to mention that sometimes the installation fails and the user can no longer boot the system. Sometimes even updates are doing it.

My solution is to recommend using open drivers. I understand the performance is low but the problems with these drivers are much less.

5) Feedback

I would like to know your opinion - beginner and advanced users who pissed you off on the system. I have an idea how to fix this, but I will need a lot of people this :)