Efficient sustainable software... where is the debate ?
by jopema from LinuxQuestions.org on (#6GNES)
Dear forum.
Iam a engineer, inventor and designer. I do my mechanical constructions in freecad and robot/plc programming in codesys, robotstudio, labview or customer demanded software.
I would love to use a efficient linux OS but it is not possible. To run linux I either need unlimited bloated download and/or harddisk space for ubuntu/Debian/anymajorlinux or unlimited time hacking in terminal to get a windowmanager behave acceptable in puppy linux. I cant install anti x because of the selfbespoken political corruption of the software engineer which makes me worried they designed backdoors in anti x to fight their unidentified "fascists" not realizing calling everyone fascist is...fascism.
At the moment nothing can beat the time and efficiency of windows xp/11 (yes we run win xp on the most important computers as these always must work) running in a sandboxed 10gb partition calling portable programs and sensitive data from external hardrives. Reinstalling unattended win11 every third month is less work than getting a linux working acceptable. I loved the early versions of ubuntu but somewhere around 12.04 they lost their way and I gave up ubuntu.
Iam curious where the debate of efficient sustainable software is now that linux have become what linux was supposed to be THE alternative to. We are now in the moment where windows tiny11core /ghost spectre is a better alternative to any linux in any aspect and why is it so ? Yes you are free criticise me and tiny11 core/ghost spectre but please keep in mind i would never install these "as is" just as i would never trust any linux/windows installation. It may surprise you im doing most programming on 15 year old laptops with 2gb ram as my laptops frequently gets run over by a robot, autocarrier, turning lathes etc. We buy cheap old laptops in droves as the CPU and ram is more than enough for industrial usage and i can bring two extra. Ssd drives even survives falling into water, the data is important, not the tool. No IT department will ever get access to our important computers, they keep themselves busy with their "policies" on the new expensive laptops we never use to keep all of us happy, including our customers.
I have no intention trolling or criticising linux, my salty comments here is to wake enough energy and interest in you so you post your opinion here below to correct me (as in all "democracy").
With this post i honestly wonder why noone reflects over the fact linux today is a worse alternative than windows and why everyone is following the linux mass hysteria of forever growing in-efficiency and resource usage without reflection ? I have great respect for the hard work of linux coders but despite all linux flavors available there is no real alternative beside slitaz, puppy linux or tiny core linux(which are beautiful but unavailable for a user with modest linux skills as me). Why is there no "green thinking" around software when everything else must be sustainable and efficient ?
Kindly let me hear your thoughts...and if you know of a linux flavor that existed more than five years with at least linux kernel 6 using a wellnknown package manager, under 1 GB download size and below 5 GB install size(better than windows), kindly let me know but please include your opinion on the linux evolution topic elaborated here above.
My apologies for lots of text
Iam a engineer, inventor and designer. I do my mechanical constructions in freecad and robot/plc programming in codesys, robotstudio, labview or customer demanded software.
I would love to use a efficient linux OS but it is not possible. To run linux I either need unlimited bloated download and/or harddisk space for ubuntu/Debian/anymajorlinux or unlimited time hacking in terminal to get a windowmanager behave acceptable in puppy linux. I cant install anti x because of the selfbespoken political corruption of the software engineer which makes me worried they designed backdoors in anti x to fight their unidentified "fascists" not realizing calling everyone fascist is...fascism.
At the moment nothing can beat the time and efficiency of windows xp/11 (yes we run win xp on the most important computers as these always must work) running in a sandboxed 10gb partition calling portable programs and sensitive data from external hardrives. Reinstalling unattended win11 every third month is less work than getting a linux working acceptable. I loved the early versions of ubuntu but somewhere around 12.04 they lost their way and I gave up ubuntu.
Iam curious where the debate of efficient sustainable software is now that linux have become what linux was supposed to be THE alternative to. We are now in the moment where windows tiny11core /ghost spectre is a better alternative to any linux in any aspect and why is it so ? Yes you are free criticise me and tiny11 core/ghost spectre but please keep in mind i would never install these "as is" just as i would never trust any linux/windows installation. It may surprise you im doing most programming on 15 year old laptops with 2gb ram as my laptops frequently gets run over by a robot, autocarrier, turning lathes etc. We buy cheap old laptops in droves as the CPU and ram is more than enough for industrial usage and i can bring two extra. Ssd drives even survives falling into water, the data is important, not the tool. No IT department will ever get access to our important computers, they keep themselves busy with their "policies" on the new expensive laptops we never use to keep all of us happy, including our customers.
I have no intention trolling or criticising linux, my salty comments here is to wake enough energy and interest in you so you post your opinion here below to correct me (as in all "democracy").
With this post i honestly wonder why noone reflects over the fact linux today is a worse alternative than windows and why everyone is following the linux mass hysteria of forever growing in-efficiency and resource usage without reflection ? I have great respect for the hard work of linux coders but despite all linux flavors available there is no real alternative beside slitaz, puppy linux or tiny core linux(which are beautiful but unavailable for a user with modest linux skills as me). Why is there no "green thinking" around software when everything else must be sustainable and efficient ?
Kindly let me hear your thoughts...and if you know of a linux flavor that existed more than five years with at least linux kernel 6 using a wellnknown package manager, under 1 GB download size and below 5 GB install size(better than windows), kindly let me know but please include your opinion on the linux evolution topic elaborated here above.
My apologies for lots of text