AMD's Ryzen CPU Series will Need Modern Linux Kernel for Proper Support

[notb]

Nice straw man there. Did you really think that it would go unnoticed? But, I'll bite anyway: people don't need to be professionals in a given field to know a couple of things about said profession. For instance, you don't need to be a chef to know about which tools — or even brands — chefs use. There, I've rebutted your attempt at using a straw man.

Straw? Why?

The chefs example was just very bad. A person interested in cooking might want to get tools a pro cook would use, because it's most likely well tested and high quality. Maybe not a restaurant-grade stoves, but the smaller stuff (pans, mixers etc) - why not?
I don't think anyone sensible would buy a datacenter-grade server for private files at home - even if he'd like the performance/security a commercial server offers.

It goes without saying that you'd know about it if you actually had experience with — or were curious about — Linux. I mean, how could you miss the whole init system switch that occurred in this decade?

I find it very rude / disturbing / boring, when you keep implying that people who criticize Linux must have little knowledge or experience with it.

As for the init system - ROTFL. So many people are trying to convince me that Linux is very GUI-friendly and that a situation when accessing terminal/config files is the only choice is very rare. And here you are, randomly mentioning a feature that a typical user should be forbidden to touch, ever (let alone be interested in).

 

[WaroDaBeast]

404 SARCASM NOT FOUND

More like error 424.

Straw? Why?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

The chefs example was just very bad. A person interested in cooking might want to get tools a pro cook would use, because it's most likely well tested and high quality. Maybe not a restaurant-grade stoves, but the smaller stuff (pans, mixers etc) - why not?
I don't think anyone sensible would buy a datacenter-grade server for private files at home - even if he'd like the performance/security a commercial server offers.

Let me remind you that your argument was that one needs to be a professional to know what professionals use.

Now, you're arguing that non-professionals need professional tools, as a reply to my comment. I never even so much as insinuated anything about buying or using professional grade stuff. Again, what I was talking about was knowledge. For instance, I know that chefs use kitchen torches despite not being a chef myself. In the same way, I know what a vise and a rivet gun are despite not working in woodworking or construction, or any field where they're needed.

I find it very rude / disturbing / boring, when you keep implying that people who criticize Linux must have little knowledge or experience with it.

I'm not doing it because you're criticizing Linux, I'm doing it because I keep rebutting your claims, after which you decide to use logical fallacies (cf. your first quote's reply in this comment) to keep the debate going.

As for the init system - ROTFL. So many people are trying to convince me that Linux is very GUI-friendly and that a situation when accessing terminal/config files is the only choice is very rare. And here you are, randomly mentioning a feature that a typical user should be forbidden to touch, ever (let alone be interested in).

You are forbidden to touch anything critical under Linux, unless you possess the appropriate rights to do so. Any time you try to modify a system setting, you'll need a password. If you don't have that password, you can't change anything. Even if I don't lock my user session, other people can't add or delete printers or apps, let alone mess with system settings. That's something that Windows doesn't even do.

So no, typical users are not going to touch systemd. The only reason why I mentioned it was because it's relevant. It made a lot of noise, so people reading news on IT website have heard about it.


I would also add that your attitude isn't coherent. One the one hand, you keep preaching simplicity and a lack of interest for operating systems' internals. On the other hand, you still argue that you know what's best, in spite of it all. Cognitive dissonance truly is a remarkable thing.

 

[yesyesloud]

Hey... I'd like to point out that Arch isn't a hobbyist's distro just in case it was somewhat implied otherwise. It has repositories spread all over the world, especially at universities, where I first got in touch with it.

On the other hand, Ubuntu is more of an amateur distro, jk, it's an all-purpose user-friendly 1 really important in spreading the Debian seed and Linux above all. Love it.

Keeping it a little on-topic, go for Manjaro and you'll have the best of both worlds as exhaustively mentioned (stability and non-fossilized software), with ryzen support given that you can easily download/manage your kernels through a dedicated GUI (unlike 'buntus) as it's a rolling distro for dummies.

Oh, Manjaro also isn't developed for hobbyists only, it's usually among distrowatch's top 5 (ranked 3rd at the moment of this post, right before Ubuntu).

Almost any distribution on distrowatch's top 50 is heavily maintained... Can't call that your eventual walk in the park.

Also, the windows guy said there's no office suite taking a stand against MS bloated crap. I call bull once again. I've seen entire universities and government departments using Libre - they tend to do a bit more with it than home users, although most office workers aren't usually that much more skilled than the average joe, meaning you don't have to be a savant to get Libre kicking.

And stop avoiding the fact that WPS is glorious. Billions use it already. I ditched MS Office for it myself.

Weren't it for games, I would have ditched Windows altogether long ago. If only Sony didn't protect their source code so tight, someone could leak the PS4 BSD-based OS packages (Unix/Linux compliant) including their OpenGL variant and we'd have AAA games on Linux way more often . Seriously, PS4 is an APU PC, I hope someone gets to reverse-engineer the hell out of its software (may the leak gods aid the bypassing saints).

 

[notb]

You are forbidden to touch anything critical under Linux, unless you possess the appropriate rights to do so. Any time you try to modify a system setting, you'll need a password. If you don't have that password, you can't change anything. Even if I don't lock my user session, other people can't add or delete printers or apps, let alone mess with system settings. That's something that Windows doesn't even do.

Again you're trying to look like a Linux guru which is kind of sad - especially the part with root password.

A home PC owner choosing to use Linux will have full system rights. There will be no "other people" - including an admin who'll take care of root tasks. This is not about a server environment.

Some distros' (e.g. Arch) setups don't even mention that using a root account for everyday tasks is unsafe - this would make countless people use them in root all the time (it's been like that with Windows since the begining). Obviously, the fact that these people would have easy access to important system files is a risk, but that's half of the story. Novice users will be *persuaded* to modify key config scripts by the community (both online tutorials and forums), because that's the recommended way to fix things, improve usability/performance/battery life or whatever - and this is already pretty disturbing.

This is what I'm interested in: whether Linux is a viable alternative to Windows for a general usage. We all know it's a better option for experienced power users.

So no, typical users are not going to touch systemd. The only reason why I mentioned it was because it's relevant. It made a lot of noise, so people reading news on IT website have heard about it.

Why would a Linux user read Linux news (or anything IT-related for that matter)?
Are all Windows users tracking Windows news?

I think it's time to ditch this off-topic plot as it only makes a mess in the thread.
I've tried to point out that Linux is not enough user-friendly to become a serious mainstream OS, but in return you're only telling us that to evaluate this properly one should be interested in OS internals, track IT news and - clearly - be a Linux enthusiast.
This is all just getting silly and pointless.

 

[yesyesloud]

Some distros' (e.g. Arch) setups don't even mention that using a root account for everyday tasks is unsafe - this would make countless people use them in root all the time

Just wrong to begin with. I've never seen a Linux system that hasn't displayed a big ass warning message at the very first time a user tried to go root. Vanilla Arch is no exception.

Besides, dummies won't even get to set up Arch, whereas its friendly derivatives will often warn clueless people about the dangers of root (not that most Manjaro users didn't come from Ubuntu, meaning they likely knew it).

Who goes root for everyday tasks other than safely updating/installing software anyway?

Windows, on the other hand, is full of software requiring full administrative privileges all the time for no sane excuse.

I think it's time to ditch this off-topic plot as it only makes a mess in the thread.
I've tried to point out that Linux is not enough user-friendly to become a serious mainstream OS, but in return you're only telling us that to evaluate this properly one should be interested in OS internals, track IT news and - clearly - be a Linux enthusiast.
This is all just getting silly and pointless.

Maybe it's gone a little off-topic...

But hey, isn't Ryzen on Linux the main subject? Windows doesn't support ryzen properly right now. Linux does.

You may need a distro running a younger kernel, but who is gonna install anything old on an utterly new build?

It's not like you're just upgrading your CPU on your "old" AM4 board, keeping your old OS.

 

[notb]

Just wrong to begin with. I've never seen a Linux system that hasn't displayed a big ass warning message at the very first time a user tried to go root. Vanilla Arch is no exception.

I'll setup an Arch VM as soon as I'm near my PC. Maybe something has change since the last time I've seen it.

Besides, dummies won't even get to set up Arch, whereas its friendly derivatives will often warn clueless people about the dangers of root (not that most Manjaro users didn't come from Ubuntu, meaning they likely knew it).

I think you're wrong here. "Dummies" will go for popular, mainstream distros - Arch being one of the more popular as a clean and lightweight option (compared to Mint, Ubuntu, Debian or Fedora).
Niche distributions (even if easier to use) are mostly used by "distro hoppers" - people trying new things all the time.

What was the first distribution you've set up on your PC? And why?
Mine was Slackware. Why? Because it seemed raw, secure and very different to Windows. And once you're fairly used to one environment, you'll be looking for a real change / adventure / challenge. That's why we try all these weird distributions.
If people moving from Windows were after a stable, sensible, GUI-operated OS, they would all just use Fedora.

Who goes root for everyday tasks other than safely updating/installing software anyway?

Someone who doesn't care about safety, so possibly not a big issue among current Linux users. However, that's how a huge part (if not majority) of Windows machines are used. The reason why these PCs continue to work is that even on and admin account it's pretty difficult to f..k things up. Windows is well defended against it's administrator.
Even if something risky is possible, you'll get a ton of warnings on the way.
If we want Linux to be a proper alternative to Windows, it must not only teach these irresponsible people what a root account is, but also persuade them to use it properly. I think it fails to do so. Ubuntu blocks the root account by default, which is fine until the users gets into first issue solved by a "open a terminal and write su" tutorial.

But hey, isn't Ryzen on Linux the main subject? Windows doesn't support ryzen properly right now. Linux does.

Yeah. So if owning a Ryzen is the main reason why you buy a Ryzen, Linux is clearly a better OS option.

You may need a distro running a younger kernel, but who is gonna install anything old on an utterly new build?

I don't know. But people tend to use old kernels because of some (pretty rare) compatibility issues in new ones, so this has to be taken into consideration.
Plus, not every PC is connected to the Internet and not every Linux is set up using the latest package.
Actually, people still use Linux CD/DVD they've owned for a while.
Sure, this seems like a tiny minority, but hey... who am I to judge? The community has decided that a CPU is great for everyone because it wins 3D rendering benchmarks.

 

[WaroDaBeast]

Again you're trying to look like a Linux guru which is kind of sad - especially the part with root password.

How?

A home PC owner choosing to use Linux will have full system rights. There will be no "other people" - including an admin who'll take care of root tasks. This is not about a server environment.

Now, you're just asking to be talked to in a condescending way. You've just implied that Linux is only used in server environments... *rolls eyes*

But anyway, this could be about a user in a work environment, with stupid and/or ill-intentioned colleagues. Or just relatives, at home.

Some distros' (e.g. Arch) setups don't even mention that using a root account for everyday tasks is unsafe - this would make countless people use them in root all the time (it's been like that with Windows since the begining).

Do you really think people want to spend a couple of days to install an OS (at least, that's how long an inexperienced would take)? I don't think many people have that kind of patience.

Obviously, the fact that these people would have easy access to important system files is a risk, but that's half of the story. Novice users will be *persuaded* to modify key config scripts by the community (both online tutorials and forums), because that's the recommended way to fix things, improve usability/performance/battery life or whatever - and this is already pretty disturbing.

Anyone who thinks it's not risky to mess with stuff you don't understand after having read random comments from total strangers has it coming. I mean, you don't try to fix your car, or your fridge, or you toaster if you have no idea what you're doing and heard someone passing by tell their friends that sticking your microwave in the freezer will fix both.

This is what I'm interested in: whether Linux is a viable alternative to Windows for a general usage. We all know it's a better option for experienced power users.

http://bfy.tw/AkJp

Or you could stick to Ubuntu, 'cause it's really user friendly.

Why would a Linux user read Linux news (or anything IT-related for that matter)?
Are all Windows users tracking Windows news?

A syllogistic fallacy. We could expect no less from you! What is this, now? I'm hesitating between straw man and ad hominem. Or maybe it's both?

But, let me ask you a question: who the hell acts surprised (as you did) by this on a friggin' tech forum? Who would do it after having heavily participated themselves to a thread on a piece of news on Linux, at that? So... you happen to read Linux news, but I can't? Pah, hypocrisy at its finest.

I think it's time to ditch this off-topic plot as it only makes a mess in the thread.
I've tried to point out that Linux is not enough user-friendly to become a serious mainstream OS, but in return you're only telling us that to evaluate this properly one should be interested in OS internals, track IT news and - clearly - be a Linux enthusiast.

Yes, yes! Having more knowledge and experience in a field is going to let you give more insightful remarks! Who would've thought?

This is all just getting silly and pointless.

I don't think it's pointless. People reading this will see that's there's more to Linux than "My x months old laptop didn't work under a 1-year-old Linux distro."

That and they'll have a good laugh at your debating skills (or rather, the lack thereof). The art of killing two birds with one stone!