>>47
fuck, okay already year passed but I replay answer, my conclusion - the best operating system for a laptop in principle, everything twisted on C language + thanks to anon who suggested to me Nyxt browser (LISP)

Harvest good this year

>>92
It's been a short while and fedora has been the best linux experience I've had. Everything just werks even though setting up rpm fusion is kinda annoying. Otherwise it's basically perfect.

Just use arch bro

Linux users think they are cool hackers but really they are just gay

I love being gay and safe from spyware

Linux won’t save you

>>99
I tend to agree, thanks to the corporate involvment in linux development it's pretty hard to see any kind of bright future for the platform, and it may already be compromised beyond recovery, but I do tend to feel that the worst of the bullshit is in userspace rather than in the kernel at the moment. Insidentally this is also why posix generally won't save you, and why posix emulation layers in other systems is a bad idea.

linux will become more convinient and more people will use it, but those aren't useful metrics.

All of this is rather pointless discussion. What /will/ save us? windows 95/98? OS/2 ? BeOS? the BSDs? templeOS?
Or do we need to go the osakaOS route and make a denpaOS?

>>97
When there's an OS thread on /g/, it mostly revolves around which distro is for trannies and which ones are not. But, in actuality, it is as you said.

>>100

What /will/ save us?

I say this at risk of breaking the no politics rule. But no technological innovation is coming to save us. All the "evil" that is currently expressed in technology and in the virtual/computer sphere is nothing more than an extension of the already totalised "evil" in the 3D "real" life [it is no coincidence that every "true" alternative sub-culture, finds its "driving force" from denying (in various ways) the undeniable, ever present, inescapable, absolute, self affirming "I am that I am" current state of things (or mode of social organization, if you will)].
So the only thing that will "save" OS's is the abolition (or at very least the annihilation, even if post-humanistically) of the social and economic constraints that create the necessity for: every present cyber-surveillance through customer OS's (michealshit and bigmacOS), predatory software and applications, actual mind control level social media, etc.

People can posteriorily question if such a liberation is possible or desirable, but that is beating a dead horse at this point.

I'm sorry if this was an uninteresting addition to the discussion.

>>102

I'm sorry if this was an uninteresting addition to the discussion.

As you should. You could have simply type

>>102

I'm sorry if this was an uninteresting addition to the discussion.

As you should. You could have simply typed out "No OS will sawe you". An operating system is a tool, it's like saying "a hammer will save you". Now it sounds like you typed philosophy questions to ChatGPT then shit out whatever your phone auto-suggested. You can make any OS offline and make Windows 10 private and virtualize it when you need it.

>>104

An operating system is a tool, it's like saying "a hammer will save you"

I mean, if you need to hammer in a nail then I guess a hammer will indeed "save you". So I don't think that aspect of the discussion is that unjustified. The point was to try an understand why (!) an hammer that would save us is impossible to be built.

You can make any OS offline and make Windows 10 private and virtualize it when you need it.

Even if you do so, windows 10 remains a crappy operation system, and the problems which surround user experience, software development and compatibility, etc. do not disappear just because even when the privacy angle is minimized. So that to doesn't really solve the problem.

Now it sounds like you typed philosophy questions to ChatGPT then shit out whatever your phone auto-suggested

That's what I get for typing stuff just before going to bed.

what would one recommend to run on an old t43 with a pentium that was meant to run windows xp

>>106
Antix or anything that you install the graphical environment to yourself

>>106
obligatory "install 9front on it" post

>>107
Antix is perfect, thank you. <3

antix was featured in a super bowl add recently some ai company

antix is just a more obnoxious debian flavored void linux.

>>111
more obnoxious to what?

>>108
i wish i had hardware that i could install 9front on but oh well

I've been using windows 11 for too long i want to switch but i don't got the money or room for a proper storage solution... I miss using Arch I miss being able to use gcc without a ssh connection I miss systemd

I miss systemd

WHAT! anyway.

not being able to switch for lack of storage to transfer and back up does suck a lot. stuff like games can be redownloaded, as can most stuff that was originally summoned (this can be hard though with entropy effecting summon circle stability)
if you have very large personal datafiles (ie videos and the like) and you don't already have removable mass storage the switching or not it's probably best to have external backup to save you from losing literally everything anyway.

>>114
systemd is so good its like way way way better than all the other options imo I can use anything really but its just sooooo goood

I hate Linux cultists

>>116
This goes into circlejerk territory but i find so many "Hardcore Linux users" online have a quite frankly harmful shallow depth of knowledge gonna use some use-ability nightmare setup and then not know how to package manage. so i give up on talking about Linux usually

>>115
>>117
I haven't seen good arguments in favor of it, I mostly just don't like being told what i can and can't do with my system, for that same reason if someone likes systemd then go for it. or windows. or mac, etc.

circle jerking can be it's own reward. to wit, pfetch-like installers are all cringe. it might maybe (if you are retarded) be useful in vm and server situations. is cat /proc/version too hard? huh?

also tiling window managers. i don't get it. god invented pointing devices because we are visual animals. our eyes move faster than we can process and anyone with half decent hand eye coordination can use pointing devices faster than remembering one of 2 dozen hotkeys. if you use a tile window manager stop dipping your damn toes in and go full chording wm with emacs! i honestly have no idea how people deal with set sized windows and positions. arbitraily sized and position windows that fluctuate on a moment to moment basis! it's the one true way!

>>115

Regardless of whether you like systemd or not, the issue is that it tries to choke out the rest of the ecosystem by bundling all sorts of unrelated functions in itself, and making unilateral decisions that should be made by distro maintainers... behaves more corpo than redhat or canonical. Their way or the highway

Multitasking and graphical desktop environments were a mistake. Everyone has ADHD now.

>>120
I agree.

>>119
well i mean a lot of systemd is worked on by redhat but i mean even just a regular user of linux it's so much better than the other "alternatives" that there's not much competition in my mind and the "all sorts of unrelated functions in itself" is part of why it's so useful

>>122
it ain't the 70s anymore and the Unix philosophy isn't that important especially outside of low-level areas (i.e kernel space)

>>123
i think this idea comes from the fact that linux generally is terrible at "unix philosophy" in general, not because "unix philosophy" isn't good or useful. like /dev/ and /proc/ aren't really useful, except through specific command interfaces, you can't just echo and read from them to do useful things for the most part. shell scripting is fractured, every service invents it's own config methods some even inventing their own bespoke language for doing so. some distros try to be cleaner about it but there's only so much that can be done without ripping out the whole foundation and starting from scratch. Even the original unix team knew that the unix kernal was not able to maintain it's "unix philosophy" in a distributed network environment, which is why they threw it away and started plan9.

plan9/9front is like the only thing that actually does unix philosophy and the ease it provides when actually embraced from top to bottom is incredible. All the problems plan9 could be solved by forcing the unix philosophy on more hardware, not by aquiessing to the non-unix demands of the hardware. for example, in a fully plan9 world, i could from my laptop pipe the display of my tv connected to a blue ray player to my phone. instant reverse screen cast with nothing but file pipeing. of course we don't live in the world where it can run on all hardware, and where device drivers are borderline impossible to create without vendor support.

>>124
(not who you were replying to)
people often say this but, not to say plan9 is bad or anything, there are plenty of formulations of linux which can fit quite nicely into the unix philosophy way of doing things. perhaps it's lacking in the networking department sure, I'll grant that, but that doesn't mean it should be dismissed entirely. KISS linux is the obvious example of a unix philosophy adherent distro, although it's not very commonly used, the philosophy of extremely minimal system with lots of small shell scripts tying everything together is very unixy in a good way. You can see the benefits of this system because it was designed to be maintainable by a single user, and when the lead maintainer left to become an olive farmer in greece or whatever without telling anyone, everything was maintained just fine. You can set up pretty much any linux (or BSD for that matter) to run with this kind of setup, very minimal with lots of small shell scripts tying things together, and it works very well in my experience.

>>123
the unix philosophy is not now nor was it ever particular relevant to kernel space. it was primarily intended for userland programs. people simplify the unix philosophy to "write programs that do one thing and do it well" but they're forgetting the two other pieces: "Write programs to work together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a universal interface."

>>126
this isn't strictly correct. the kernel maps devices into userspace. the "unix philosophy" then demands that it should do so in a way that works with streamed text interfaces, ie "everything is a file"

>>127
plan9 philisophy is superior to that, why lunix lags behind & so backwards? are it's developer-architects retarded?
Let's ask Linus (from Tech Tips)!

>>128

are it's developer-architects retarded?

Yes

>>130
what the actual fuck is this shit

>>131
no fucking clue, it'd take someone way braver or stupider than me to click that link to maybe find out (and or be added to some kind of watchlist)

>>130
>>131
>>132

@mail.com

I'm an email provider! ahh email provider

>>133
What was it? You guys saved it so I could see it, right? You're not afraid of links in CURRENT_YEAR + 10, right? Right??

>>134
it was literally just an ip address

My laptop is now OS-less and I have no other computer to make a bootable USB with. Oops!

>>136
How are you postig this

>>137
I don't know.

>>137
A phone, most likely

>>137
I was on my Apple iPhone by Apple. My laptop is no longer OS-less, though! Back on Microsoft Windows 11 by Microsoft!

>>140
what a classic blunder. if the computer is already osless there is nothing left to lose, so there's no better time to move to templeOS

based templeOS user spotted

>>142
I hate how templeOS and Terry Davis are just a butt of jokes. please give some respect man

>>143
wdym...i genuinely love terry davis and i want him to come back :(