• rottingleaf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    This essentially all boils down to “I don’t like new things, and despite it being made more secure, I don’t trust it”

    No, quite the opposite, I like new things, just in my own direction. Which would be simplification. We’ve had this exponential growth of computing power and complexity and expectations in the last 30 years, which can’t go on.

    Again, where you’d use a screwdriver 100 years ago, you’ll still generally use a screwdriver, possibly one as simple as 200 years ago, but with computers we for some reason have to hammer nails with a microscope today.

    A personal computer should be as complex as Amiga 500 tops.

    Wasting 1000 times the energy to try and make it easier to use than that still hasn’t yielded satisfactory results, for a sane person this means stop.

    The rest is just gaslighting.

    How are sandboxes “untrusted crap”?

    What you run in them is untrusted crap.

    yet you seem to prefer X11 over Wayland, and 500 different implementations of the same thing, implemented separately by every app developer,

    Yes, what’s standard in X11 has N different variants with Wayland. Correct.

    rather than using a standardised xdg-portal

    I don’t use it at all.

    If you meant that Wayland is simpler than X11, let’s compare them when Wayland reaches feature parity. Also X11 as a standard is simple enough.

    I also consider Nix and Guix to be better solutions to some of the problems Flatpak and Snap solve, and Flatpak and Snap to fall short of solving others.

    • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Which would be simplification.

      Like I said, much of the new things you’re complaining about is simplification. Flatpak, Wayland, xdg-portals.

      A personal computer should be as complex as Amiga 500 tops.

      Lol. Why stop there? Why not say they should be no more complex than an abacus?

      What you run in them is untrusted crap.

      How?

      And assuming it is… running it without a sandbox is somehow better??

      Yes, what’s standard in X11 has N different variants with Wayland. Correct

      Can you please answer. X11 is far more complex than Wayland. Why do you prefer it if you like simplicity?

      I don’t use it at all.

      You don’t use programs that… do things? Things like follow system theming, give notifications, open/save files, record your screen, open a file picker, etc? I don’t think you’re grasping what portals are.

      If you meant that Wayland is simpler than X11,

      Wayland is simpler than X11, by a long shot.

      let’s compare them when Wayland reaches feature parity.

      It won’t ever, by choice. It’s not meant to. X11 is filled with many mistakes that it should never have had.

      Also X11 as a standard is simple enough.

      The X11 developers say otherwise, and have embraced Wayland.

      I also consider Nix and Guix to be better solutions to some of the problems Flatpak and Snap solve, and Flatpak and Snap to fall short of solving others.

      Christ. I don’t. At all. You want simplicity and are now advocating for Nix and Guix, no Flatpaks, sticking with X11, no xdg-portals?

      Do you have the definitions of “simple” and “complicated” mixed up in your mind?