• TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 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”

    How are sandboxes “untrusted crap”?

    You talk about complexity being bad, yet you seem to prefer X11 over Wayland, and 500 different implementations of the same thing, implemented separately by every app developer, rather than using a standardised xdg-portal. Surely you see the contradiction there?

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 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
        0
        ·
        4 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?

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

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

          No. AppImage is relatively simple. Flatpak is not. There’s a clear difference between “new shiny” and “new”.

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

          Amiga 500 is quite functional as compared to abacus. Modern PCs not so much as compared to Amiga 500.

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

          It’s not far more complex as a protocol.

          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.

          I don’t, quick googling says this is something connected to giving permissions to Flatpaks or something, which I don’t use.

          Wayland is simpler than X11, by a long shot.

          ColibriOS is simpler than Genera.

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

          As in?

          The X11 developers say otherwise, and have embraced Wayland.

          So what? It’s not a religion to embrace.

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

          In what world is Guix more complex than Flatpaks?

          See, you are trying to do these emotional hints at me saying something stupid, but this is really too much.

          • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            You keep saying that far more complex things are actually simpler. Where are you getting it from? AppImages are more complex than Flatpaks, X11 is otherworldly more complex than Wayland, xdg-portals are far simpler than the cluster fuck that is every Dev just creating their own solution, etc.

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

              X11 is otherworldly more complex than Wayland

              What the actual fuck? This https://www.x.org/releases/X11R7.7/doc/xproto/x11protocol.html is “otherworldly more complex” than this https://wayland.freedesktop.org/docs/html/ ? It’s more complex exactly in the amount needed to make it more specific and with the client-server model.

              AppImages are more complex than Flatpaks

              This is bullshit. Something like AppImages can be done with bloody shell scripts.

              xdg-portals are far simpler than the cluster fuck that is every Dev just creating their own solution, etc.

              Solution for what? Let’s please verify that you even know what xdg-portals are used for, that is, that you know what you are talking about.

              You keep saying that far more complex things are actually simpler.

              You keep ignoring actual questions as if you were above them, you are not.

              Where are you getting it from?

              From knowing what those things are. I just don’t immediately remember any of the details, because there’s too much information in our lives and Wayland, Flatpaks etc are far from the top of the list, and more than that because I expect you to argue in good faith which won’t require putting facts under your nose.

              Also you keep behaving as if someone owed you something in general or if they lost an argument. They don’t.