Every now and then a new article "Why you should go Linux". I get it, I like Linux too but every case is different. I want to use Linux but I have to use Digital Audio Workstation. So in my case, I shouldn't dump Windows (and thousand of $$ I've spent on audio software).
I know people desperately want to believe that Linux is "there", but it really isn't. And will probably never be. It’s still too confusing for the average user (many distros, many desktop environments, Wayland vs X, systemd vs init, snap vs flatpak).
> It’s still too confusing for the average user (many distros, many desktop environments, Wayland vs X, systemd vs init, snap vs flatpak).
Users don't need to know about any of that, except for picking a distro and just using whatever is there.
Regarding DAW - I get sticking with Windows if you have thousands invested in it. Even so, there's quite a bit of professional software out there with native support (like Bitwig) or flawless Wine support.
I'm fairly proficient when it comes to Windows, but the diversity in install methods for Fedora threw me for a loop, too. It seemed easier at first -- get all your software from trusted sources in the default package manager, just like an app store! But then there's the question of RPM vs. Snap vs. Flatpak vs. downloading an installer from their website, some versions being further behind than others, the method you use having implications for where/how programs are installed and maintained, etc. It adds cognitive friction and makes troubleshooting harder; I'm not even sure if there's a reliable way to see a list of all programs installed on your machine (regardless of method) or how to easily uninstall them. I don't regret switching, but it is an obstacle, and more consistently than the initial question of which distro to use.
I've been a full-time Linux user since 1998, and over the years I've invested uncountable hours doing all kinds of tweaking and fixing. But with time that has gotten less and less (probably due to both Linux and me maturing), to the point that I now basically use my laptop as an appliance.
I run Aurora, an immutable Linux distro. It auto-updates the core OS without me even noticing (just remember to reboot your laptop every couple of weeks). It has a software center to install GUI apps (all Flatpak, I think) and comes with brew to install command line apps. Things pretty much just work, and for the occasional small issue, I generally manage to just shrug.
To be fair, one thing still lingers just above my annoyance threshold: connecting/disconnecting monitors while my laptop is suspended will sometimes lead to a black screen when resuming, requiring a reboot. A gentle wink from the bad/good old days. :-)
It's the evergreen of ios vs android.
Want to have something that "just works" you'll get exactly that. You want freedom of choice, here you go with all the freedom you can get.
If you want someone that tailors the experience, you'll have to pay with money and freedom.
They absolutely do, the moment you have any problem you are on your own. I spent half a day troubleshooting why nvidia drivers were not loading (mint was not signing them and secure boot silently kicked the module out), and I'm many times more proficient at technology than an average person.
I bought a brand new Dell laptop with Windows 11 25H2 at the end of November 2025. The first patches released by Microsoft in December did not install. WTF!!!
If you go online, you will see a whole YouTube videos and articles on how to fix the issue. Let me tell you, after a considerable amount of time, I gave up.
I'm running Ubuntu 24.04 on my desktop, and I can't remember the last time I had issues applying patches.
Windows has problems all the time. There is widespread knowledge on how to troubleshoot and fix these problems.
Similar problems will have very different solutions for Linux. The knowledge of how to resolve them is much less widespread. I’ve had very good success in asking ChatGPT how to resolve Linux issues, probably better success then I would on Windows because the error messages on Linux are much more detailed.
A lot of the time the "solution" to problems on Windows is to reinstall/in-place upgrade because, as you said, Windows errors tend to be more generic so you can browse Google all you want but none of the instructions people provide will be of much help. So I'm not sure "widespread knowledge" is a point in favor of Windows when the errors frequently aren't specific enough to be reliably actionable.
Windows has a "check the Internet for solutions" option that never works. You can just let Claude code loose on your system and have it go fix your shit for you instead of copy and pasting anything.
Until they run into one of the many problems that force them to know it. Hell, just googling for "How do I do X in Ubuntu" leads to 20 different random forum threads (because Ubuntu doesn't have any official answer or support for you), with solutions that don't work, because it's random people posting random comments of "what worked for them" over 15 years.
I'm an expert and I can't even figure it out half the time. Regular users are screwed.
Compared to Bitwig, since that's what I use on both Macs and Windows PCs. Distro was Ubuntu Studio, which is tooted as an OS "configured for best performance for various purposes: Audio, Graphics, Video, Photography and Publishing", and comes with Jack.
Not really sure... drivers maybe, or sound server ? When it's time to make music I don't want to waste time troubleshooting things so after a few attempts at fixing this I just got back to Windows.
Even if they pick a distro and decide to install it, more often than not the install process is still overly convoluted even in just making installation media.
Going to a distro website and trying to find where to get it (ubuntu has a habit of leading with literally anything else other than regular desktop distro on their front page). Finding a download page, and having it just spit out an iso file, with no explanation on what to do with it, or 'how to install' link in sight (debian, it's very nice that there's a big download button, but like...then what. where's the explanation link. it's buried under other downloads, but that's not very intuitive). Getting to a 'how to install' page and having it be intimidatingly long, perhaps even needlessly. Sites, pages and explainers being laid out in confounding ways, and install process sometimes laid out in a bit of an overcomplicated way. (debian has an installation guide that's presented perhaps in the most intimidating way possible to a new unwitting user, and also buried under click on a click on a click. somehow writing the iso is not even among the first dozen of pages there. ubuntu mate gives you links to iso downloads, and yet the installation process is buried under 'faq' (again, not very intuitive or straightforward), that faq only has a bunch of oddly laid out 'making installation media' pages, and the rest of actual installation process is just somewhere else.)
That's before someone even gets to the actual install process. Somehow all of that stuff hasn't gotten more streamlined or user friendly. If you try to see how one would go about getting and installing any distro, you'd quickly see that it's very confusing and convoluted, way more than it has to be, or needs to be to appeal and be simple for new users.
There's glimmers of hope, like fedora which has its media writer, which is gonna hold your hand through the whole thing. Even that links out to github for a download, despite clicking on a seemingly specific 'windows/mac or linux' button. It's a little buried too, below iso downloads, when it really should be brought up more forward, and explain a little bit better on how it's gonna guide you thru the whole thing.
It really should be an app that's gonna guide you thru it, or a dead simple 1-2-3 step tutorial that's gonna guide you thru writing an image (download writer, download iso, write an image - laying it out more than that is just overcomplicating it really, at least in the initial quick install guide), with a clear, visible link to it - and yet somehow even this is too high of a bar for many distros to clear.
What has done a number on the ease of installing linux is how compact discs have just went away, because having a compact disc, burning it, or having it be just sent to users was making that step of the process simpler. Sure, writing to a USB is easy, but the expectation that everyone's just gonna have a spare usb is naive (and you're never gonna hear that you actually need to buy a usb stick in any of those guides lol), and there's just a little more opportunity to fuck up there (overwriting other disks, unless the writer app is laid out nicely and fail-proof). Distros might as well start selling usb sticks with installers on them. If someone's gonna be brand new to the whole thing and they're gonna have to buy a usb stick anyway, they might as well buy it from the distro with the distro on it already.
Some distros may want to get real about how a new user would even navigate their websites in order to get the thing. Like just trying to go thru that process themselves and see what's that experience like.
> There's glimmers of hope, like fedora which has its media writer, which is gonna hold your hand through the whole thing. Even that links out to github for a download, despite clicking on a seemingly specific 'windows/mac or linux' button. It's a little buried too, below iso downloads, when it really should be brought up more forward, and explain a little bit better on how it's gonna guide you thru the whole thing.
> It really should be an app that's gonna guide you thru it, or a dead simple 1-2-3 step tutorial that's gonna guide you thru writing an image (download writer, download iso, write an image - laying it out more than that is just overcomplicating it really, at least in the initial quick install guide), with a clear, visible link to it - and yet somehow even this is too high of a bar for many distros to clear.
Sorry, but this is just ridiculously nit-picky. How much more hand-holding do you need? Everything you want is literally there. Are you complaining that Fedora also addresses Linux users, at all?
Fact is, installing an operating system is a bit of an involved process. Realistically, people wouldn't even start with the docs, but some YouTube tutorial... But man... Fedora tries so hard! The site is ultra clean and on-point. Docs are friendly and very much 1-2-3 structured, they maintain a fucking media writer to do all the complicated shit like choosing a mirror and checking signatures, a simple installer where all complexity is hidden and you can just hit 'next'. What the hell do you want more?
MacOS and Windows don't even consider OS installation and only show you where you can find their OS preinstalled. Lol.
(I do have to agree with you on ubuntu.com tho. Haven't opened their site in a while and... jesus christ, what a mess!)
Fedora is the better example there. (i literally say that it's the glimmer of hope there lol.) It's an actual utility slash app that will do everything, and not just a file that's just thrown at you with no pointers.
(Though even fedora's download page could use a more clearer "How to install" link next to the iso links there. cause even clicking on Documentation there isn't gonna lead you to an installation tutorial or even let you easily find one there without digging. and even what's written where is either not that great or just doesn't exist lol. like, i would just straight up disagree on docs being friendly in regards to install process. though maybe that's not even necessary cause you're just gonna boot into the installer that'll take you through it. and again, it links out to github instead of actually downloading it right there, which only adds unnecessary confusion. how hard could it be to actually split links per platform? this is again the sort of thing where some people there might presume that 'users will just figure it out', that they will hunt out the correct file there on a page that looks nothing like previous one and is more geared towards devs, even though it could've been streamlined further. putting media writer higher up on the page is a nitpick, lack of a prominent installation guide is not, cause it's not linked to, and it also seemingly doesn't even exist. there's https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora/f36/install-guid... but not for a more recent version, i guess it just got lost in the shuffle.)
Some Linux distros aren't really doing as good as they could be at making things more accessible to a wider audience and less proficient users. And so the install base stays where it is. I don't think it's extremely nit picky to point out that just linking to an iso and expecting people to just figure it out without even clearly linking to a tutorial is not very accessible. And it really could be as simple as just actually having a link that says "How to install" or "Installation guide", and it's baffling when that stuff is buried. People could use trying to look at these things from a perspective of a new user who's not familiar with these things, and not just from someone who's in the know. Cause it's not actually intuitive or accessible having to dig around a website, trying to guess which of the links would take you there. (other downloads? documentation? support? none of these are an actual guide, and sometimes you won't even find a link to a guide there either.) There seems to be an assumption that just giving an iso file is enough, and that assumption is incorrect.
For example, Debian does kind of a bad job there cause it just throws an iso there and leaves you to poke at other links and guess, the installation guide there is buried under a bunch of clicks for some reason. Ubuntu is pretty good (though im still baffled why won't they feature their desktop version even more prominently on their front page. now that's an actual nitpick), and it actually outlines 'how to install' right there next to the download, and has an actual link to a more comprehensive tutorial too, that's laid out pretty nicely as well. (that's pretty much perfect really. though some other flavors of ubuntu might not be as great there.) Compare https://www.debian.org/releases/forky/amd64/ and https://ubuntu.com/tutorials/install-ubuntu-desktop (both also first results from google on 'distro name how to install'). Debian's idea of a guide is kind of diabolical in comparison. It looks intimidating, it's plainly a pain in the ass to navigate, it's not laid out well whether you a new user or even if you know what's up, it's easier to just give up on that page and look elsewhere for something better formatted. But hey, maybe Debian isn't even really meant to be all that accessible or to be for the kinds of users that ubuntu might cater to. Or rather, it just won't be, if it's gonna be like that.
Windows is quite easy to install. They have a media writer too and their installer is pretty straightforward. It'll even do an in place upgrade that will just work. They clearly have considered OS installation, and have a couple of different tools available for it. They also still sell usb sticks with an installer on it.
To be honest, I don't think Debian and Fedora are even targeting total beginners and that's fine with me. I love Fedora, but I wouldn't recommend it as a first ever Linux distro.
But yeah, I have to take back my rage somewhat, since I realized the Fedora docs are not once mentioning what actually to do with a "boot medium". Granted the installer is pretty self-explanatory, it's a bit odd the rebooting hint is omitted.
I disagree on the GitHub thing. It's an easy way to maintain and safely distribute the binaries. It's likely a thing of maintenance capacity and I won't fault anyone for that. All this shit is free... And lots of it is work in progress.
Also quite frankly, if someone can't be bothered to pick the right binary for their OS, the whole process of installing a new OS is maybe a bit too advanced to do unsupervised. Let's be real, this level of curiosity and engagement is required to install and run Linux. I don't think it should be pushed onto anyone not up for the challenge. In my experience, that doesn't end well.
Again, all this shit is free. Fedora, although backed by Redhat, does not profit at all by anyone installing Fedora. They don't nudge you towards commercial products, don't collect or sell your data, no subscriptions, no ads... nothing (in contrast with Ubuntu, which actually does these things). Any voice of entitlement just hurts me a little, seeing how much they try.
Reaper is just as good as FL Studio or Logic Pro. VSTs are really your biggest hurdle. Depending on how they are compiled, they may rely on platform specific code. Most big plugin makers have VSTs for all platforms though and your license works on all.
The pathway is there should you choose, one day. Linux is quite good now. That being said, I know a lot of niche plugins that some guy wrote that only works on windows because that’s all he/she has access to. Some 8-bit synth bitcrushers come to mind.
Also Steinburg made VST 3 sdk open source so you have a path to a free music production studio.
"as good as" (debatable in the first place) isn't enough justification to switch. Everyone has their own workflows, settings etc that they used over many years, which they are not going to give up, just to "switch to Linux". This is about real loss in productivity.
Yes but readers may be reading and think that Linux isn’t capable. It is. There’s plenty of DAWs available. You can also use WINE with proton to run FL Studio on Linux. My suggestion is just that, a suggestion to explore the possible.
If we just learn one thing and never change then we wind up being left behind. While FL Studio and Logic, Cubase and Ableton are what most people know. There’s ways of running ALL of them on Linux.
> While FL Studio and Logic, Cubase and Ableton are what most people know. There’s ways of running ALL of them on Linux.
As I just managed to get VR working with HP Reverb G2 in my Linux environment, quite literally the only reason I have Windows still installed on my computer is because of Ableton, and not being able to run that properly on even workstation hardware.
How exactly do I get Ableton running with an external USB soundcard and everything running exactly like it runs on Linux? I'm quite literally ready to give you money if you manage to give me an answer that actually leads to me being able to run Ableton on Arch Linux, because for years I have tried, and waited for the moment it's possible. So please do tell, how do I get it running?
Thanks, I've seen that repository before, but when I last saw it it boiled down to basically "create a prefix with these winecfg values" and not much more, but it seems a lot more fleshed out now, will give it another go.
Would be great if we'd eventually get some PipeWireASIO thing, sounds like a missing piece of the puzzle still, although not strictly required I suppose.
This doesn't work like everyone makes it out to. The first problem is overcoming the plethora of build errors. Then if you're lucky enough to actually get Ableton launched and working, you'll run into weird issues like Ableton crashing as soon as you attempt to add a MIDI track. When you find a work-around for that, you then run into random crashing in the middle of playback with absolutely atrocious latency despite the claims of "low latency". It's not worth it. I gave up
I've tried to passthrough Behringer audio interface, as well as HX Stomp (to, of course, avoid dual-boot) and it stuttered like crazy. Maybe there is a way to make it more "realtime" but it's not the default, at least in VirtualBox.
Yeah passing through usb devices to a VM for audio seems to be a dark art like working with a bunch of analog equipment. Everything has to be tuned. I do understand why a bare metal windows and/or mac computer is always in a studio, one can skip the head ache. Even if main DAW is Linux.
That's not wine, and I'd rather keep dual booting that running Windows VMs that barely can keep up. Have you tried doing music production inside a Windows VM before?
Yes Ableton, VST and usb. I have used the Coreweave windows VM with Nvidia to run everything audio and video, though haven't routed USB devices to it.
Cognitively it's easier to just buy a second PC for windows. But threadripper pro etc have so many cores and pcie lanes it's easy to run multiple OS VMs with dedicated GPUs at close to native speed in one box.
You can't, I've tried. The "passthrough" is bullshit, it doesn't fucking work and I wish people would stop recommending this time wasting "advice". That's not even the main issue as 90% of your VSTs will probably not work either and latency will be through the roof.
And that is unfortunately the place where I spent my big bucks.
I do however use Linux for my work, and have for more than a decade. If all the plugins (plus FL Studio, I've tried Reaper but it might be not for me) worked, I'd switch my personal desktop in a heartbeat. It's honestly the only thing locking me to Win10. Maybe I'll try a Mac through work (we get to keep the machines).
And yes, I've tried running FL using Wine, and it works surprisingly well! Just not _well enough_, and some plugins do not work at all. Most do, and that's great, but not enough for me at least.
I still remember the first time I stumbled across Logic Pro X. For the price of $200 I got a complete package that contains about 200 plugins and instruments. The DAW itself was maybe 7% of the full contents of that package.
That is unbeatable value for money in the DAW market and that was before Logic Pro 11 came out and added a ton of new plugins.
It's not the apps, it's the drivers. I've got expensive high quality audio hardware (RME Fireface 800) that doesn't have Linux drivers. Oh sure, I could invest $2000 to get a newer version, but that would just mean a steep learning curve to get drivers, hardware, and DAW working anywhere near as seamlessly as my Windows setup.
It's not that I'm a Windows fan, I'm just looking for the most cost- and time-effective solutions. I'd rather spend my time recording and making music than sweating over driver and software issues.
> So in my case, I shouldn't dump Windows (and thousand of $$ I've spent on audio software).
If you mean that there's no Linux replacement for Digital Audio Workstation, then I agree: switching is not for you. But if what worries you are the $$ you have spent, you are just another victim of the sunk cost fallacy. The earlier you realize your mistake, the earlier you are ready to evaluate the options without biases.
The thousands of $$ on audio software are spent because they actually provide the exact output needed. Think of them as a precision-tooled machine part critical to the production flow in a factory. Sure, you can replace it with a cheaper alternative but the cheaper part will likely have rough edges and the errors caused by those rough edges will cascade into your final production output...
most interesting part is to guess how many here complaining about a poor ecosystem on Linux audio, actually work professionally on the field
Surge-XT, Vitalium and/or PlugData or Cardinal can get you so far on the synthesis world that maybe not even a full dedicated lifetime can explore everything you can do with it... Ardour isn't a shinning pot for MIDI editor generational features but if you actually know music-theory, it works pretty solid for writing. the in-line editor makes very much sense, just like sheet music can hold an orchestra info. on a sigle page
I am a linux user for 26 years. And used windows since 3.11 up to 2005. After that point I just helped people with windows, never worked with it.
I had this friend while my kid went to school with his kid, he was a musician.
He absolutely was frightened of even handling me the mouse of his windows 7 setup in case I break his DAW, cherry audio tools and midi mixers just by me showing him a website.
Also helped to switch some dlls (hi didn't know how to kill background task to release dll to be replaced) and edit windows registry cause he needed an upgrade for some pirated software.
I have seen many more nightmarish stuff hapenning in windows, even on holy sacred windows xp.
On the other hand my mother has been using debian xfce in her acer touch screen laptop for 15 years. No issues. Many elder people got in shock when windows 8 made all those changes.
So whenever windows users talk about linux confusion I smirk.
I see this mentioned again and again, but I don't buy it.
For power users or users with niche use cases, sure there might be specialized software that lock you into Windows or Mac.
But for most casual home users, I think Linux would be perfectly adequate, and familiarity being the only real detractor.
Assuming someone can help install a friendly Linux distribution (and that the hardware is compatible), then what are the big blockers? Gaming maybe, for those where it is relevant.
But looking at all my not so tech savvy family members and friends, a browser, online versions of MS Office (or Libreoffice for sure), maybe Spotify or the like, would really be enough. Being able to install apps via an (actually useful) app store is a big win in itself.
Looking at those friends/family members, it is not like they are able to support their Windows machines either when something goes wrong or needs to be changed - I (or someone else technical) always need to help out anyway, fixing driver issues, installing software, changing any non-trivial settings, and so on. And I could just as well do that on Linux - and whether I need to pull up a terminal is irrelevant.
Ableton + Serum + many custom VSTs user here. You're spot on. This is actually the biggest reason I can't switch. In fact Steve Duda (creator of Serum) has said many times that he doesn't ever plan to support Linux. That's not a deal-breaker necessarily, but the fact we paid lots of money for this stuff makes it a bit unreasonable to switch to Linux.
I have Windows only audio and 3d software. I ended up with a windows VM with GPU passthrough on Linux. It sits on its own m2 drive for the rare occasion I need to dual boot. So Windows has been become legacy software for me. (IClone and CC).
And Steam Deck is there.
But I think the desktop interface is legacy for anyone under the age of 25, I get a kick out of watching them navigate a desktop.
I guess it depends on your needs. 90% of my working life is a terminal to run terraform, emacs to write code, and slack to chat with colleagues. In each of the companies I've worked over the past 10 years I've had a google workspace account, and I think I've never even touched microsoft office in all that time.
Yes there are options. In practice you pick one distro, the one your friend recommends, or that the IT department gives you.
There are probably fields in which you cannot use Linux software, but for your average joe? It's not impossible, and it's not that confusing with a little patience.
It's unacceptable that Meta did something like this.
But this doesn’t change the fact that she shouldn’t share anything personal on social media. Consider social media the new "streets". A street with dim lights or an alley that you go at 3am and shout something or showing your images/videos to strangers there. This is exactly what you should keep in mind before you share anything personal on social media.
And either way, who wants to be an unpaid Meta employee that provides any kind of content for free?
Even if you don't care much about your own privacy, sharing too much or too widely can lead to a loss of privacy for everyone.
Much of privacy law is based on a "reasonable" expectation of privacy. What counts as "reasonable" can change depending on what people in general believe it to be.
Here's an essay [1] by an appeals court judge from 2012 for some more on this.
I'll lay odds that the Meta employee that made the decision to do this, has an HN account. I notice how quickly this story is descending through the pages. It's already off the front page.
Generally when I post something unflattering about Tesla, Meta or Airbnb it gets flagged. Just a pattern I've noticed. The Tesla ones get flagged the fastest!
So you don't know why exactly this story was "taking a dive", but regardless you're going to assume the Meta employee responsible for the feature has an HN account and is somehow causing it?
Way to interpolate. Kudos to your reach! I just was pointing out that it's likely that the employee responsible was here. The diving is highly unlikely to be triggered by a single employee (unless it was that "employee").
No, but if it was flagged, it's possible that it was by Meta employees. I can't see why it would be flagged, otherwise. I'll bet there's enough for a good flash mob, like the Elon stans that always flag down stories critical of him.
>Way to interpolate. Kudos to your reach! I just was pointing out that it's likely that the employee responsible was here. The diving is highly unlikely to be triggered by a single employee (unless it was that "employee").
Sorry, I thought you were the OP, which made the claim of
>Way to interpolate. Kudos to your reach! I just was pointing out that it's likely that the employee responsible was here. The diving is highly unlikely to be triggered by a single employee (unless it was that "employee").
It's always so wild to see the denial of what is almost certainly going on. "Article critical of tech company X or tech celebrity Y gets quickly buried in flags" is a tale as old as time here. It is not a huge leap of faith to suppose that the flagging activity often comes from employees or fans who have an interest in burying criticism. But if you mention it, people act as though you are talking crazy. That Meta employees, with a strong incentive to see Meta succeed, would NEVER stoop to flagging an article critical of Meta or demonstrating Meta's wrongdoing. My goodness! How could one even imagine that could happen??
Technically, no we don't know this is going on. Only HN's admins can know this. But come on...
Agree with both - it's a shitty thing for the company to do.
But I do not understand why someone who's so passionate about the issues raised in the post would do something as silly as post this on a Meta-owned property at all. The end result is blindingly obvious, and anyone who doesn't expect exactly this is living in a bizarre fantasy-world, where social media (and moreso Meta-owned social media) isn't inherently evil and run/maintained by evil people (and yes, I understand the irony).
According to article, the whole authorization system is flawed. But we haven’t invent a new one and the one we’ve got never meant to be private, it is just a way to separate users from each other. We need something unique, a "primary key" for our DB, and that’s email or phone or username that has to be stored somewhere. A server, someone else’s computer, call it what you want. It has good privacy between users, but the admin can see everything, because otherwise management of the service would be impossible.
There is no anonymity, there is always someone you have to trust in the chain of WAN networking (DNS,ISP,VPN). If you want anonymity and privacy, you selfhost (examining the code is also a prerequisite). There is no other way to do it.
> but the admin can see everything, because otherwise management of the service would be impossible.
It depends on what service you’re offering. There are many cases where you can have end-to-end encryption so that you can know who your users are, host their data but cannot do anything with it.
Firefox holds about 2.25% of the global browser market share. There is absolutely no "criticality" at all. Google won and also they are the ones who pay for your favorite browser to remain somewhat alive.
Firefox exists as long as uBlock exists. It’s a niche product and the only (thin) argument about using it is “don’t let Google become a monopoly" (the very same company that keeps Mozilla alive).
Its terrible management decisions, its questionable telemetry and at the end of the day, its performance are the reasons why it will never catch up and it will never get new users.
Whats the fascination with Doom? I keep seeing running Doom on this and that and now Rats playing Doom. I mean ok, Doom runs on everything and now rats playing doom. So what?
Doom has some star power and is instantly recognizable to pretty much anyone, not just video game fans. Its engine is Free software that's easily adaptable to pretty much any input or output method. In this case Doom might also have made a better candidate than another first person shooter because you can't aim up or down in Doom, so there's no need to account for that in the rats' input.
Doom pioneered the FPS genre in the USA. So it has a cultural significance. I used to go to my friends house to play it. You deal with a whole range of aspects such as grapchics, sound, networking,.. Etc. So it's a fun challange for hackers to try to get it to work in the most strange of ways. In addition it's a simple goal (with a complex path). So it helps with the focus, and most importantly the fun programming challenges involved in making the game work.
one of the first widely known "3d" shooters. Doesn't require much in the way of hardware and there are lots of open source implementations , tools and mods for it. And it's a meme
Every article I read about iOS 26 and Tahoe, is just another reminder that I should never ever update my devices.
I don’t think that there is going back for Apple, the company is already too enshittified to get back to a company with a vision. They got drowned by AI, the releases and features are subpar to competition. I do care about detail when I’m buying premium products and Apple just doesn’t cut it any more.
reply