Comment by scaramanga
20 hours ago
Switched in, ooh i dunno, '98 or '99. Quality is about where it was then relatively speaking. Sure things have improved, mainly just systemd, and we got ACPI and later power management stuff for laptops.
Prior to that windows was better on laptops due to having the proprietary drivers or working ACPI. But it was pretty poor quality in terms of reliability, and the main problem of the included software being incredibly bare bones, combined with the experience of finding and installing software was so awful (especially if you've not got an unlimited credit card to pay for "big professional solutions").
Every time the year of the Linux desktop arrives, I'm baffled, since not much has changed on this end.
This is a strange statement for me, because I'd say that since '99 almost everything has changed. Maybe your definition of quality is a bit different than mine.
I tried to use Linux back in high school. I had a Pentium 4 computer which was pretty fast for its time. However, I had a dialip windows soft modem. You remember the driver situation. I had to boot to Windows to check my email.
Also, I was basically a child and had no idea what I was doing (I still don't but that's besides the point). Things have definitely gotten better.
> Every time the year of the Linux desktop arrives, I'm baffled, since not much has changed on this end.
It's Critic's Disease: When a band moves to a major label, they "suddenly" put out their critically acclaimed masterpiece, when before nobody would review a thing they did and mocked their fanatic fans.
"Now, they've matured."
Let them have it, though. People need to rationalize their past hostility to the right thing in some way in order to progress. If you want people to say that they were ever wrong, you'll die waiting. The situation became completely intolerable where they were insisting on staying no matter what because they weren't stuck-up nerds who care about stupid stuff that no one cares about. They were finally humiliated enough to move.
They'll end up moving to weird semi-commercial distributions that market specifically to them, too, and ridicule people who criticize those distributions for being stuck-up nerds who care about stupid stuff no one cares about. As long as it doesn't break Debian, I'm cool.
I'm sorry, but no. I ran Slackware 96, Red Hat 4.2, Mandrake 5.0, a bunch of Ubuntus from 12.04 onward, and Fedora now. It is absolutely, qualitatively different now than it was at the turn of the century.
In the Red Hat 4.2 days, it was something that I was able to use because I was a giant nerd, but I'd never ever ever have recommended it to a normal person. By Ubuntu 12.04, 15 years later, it was good enough that I'd recommend it to someone who didn't do any gaming and didn't need to use any of the desktop apps that were still then semi-common. In 2026, it's fine for just about anyone unless you are playing particular (albeit very popular) games.