When Windows feels better than Linux

In an attempt of Linux trying to be better than windows, there are apparently a few significant features being left out that ended up making it feels inferior to the latter. They maybe not that important but it really is annoying to know that they’re missing, considering that those features help in expediting many personal computing operation.

The first thing I noticed missing in Linux is the “click-twice-to-rename”. In windows you don’t have to right-click and select rename in order to rename a file/folder. Just by clicking the icon twice will activate the renaming process, thus saving great deal of time.

Another feature that I noticed is missing is the automatic focus to the specific file when we opened a file browser such as nautilus from within an application. For example it is just natural for one to right-click on an icon of a downloaded file from within Firefox’s download list and select “open in file manager”, hoping the focus will be for the said file, but no, it is not. It is quite time-consuming to look for that one file from the swarm of them in the file manager window. Wouldn’t it be more convenient if it works just like in windows, right?

Actually there are still more I’d like to point out too but I’ll save them for future posts for now. If you also think there are also other things Linux could learn, please let me know by leaving your comments here. You may also write your own article about it and linking it back to this post as a mean for sharing.

How often I should have major upgrades f…

How often I should have major upgrades for my OS? Even if there are free annual major upgrades for my system, I won’t be happy either if it involves huge downloads every time that happens. Yes, I’m referring to a certain specific free Linux distro where the company that maintains it promised the user that the major OS upgrades will be available every 6 months or so, more or less. Luckily transferring user preferences and settings in Linux is not as tricky as in Windows because no system registry is involved, which means things won’t be too disastrous even if the upgrades didn’t run smoothly. The worst you’d do is most probably to fresh install the system, recreate your user account and manually patching/transferring all your previous settings to your current installation. But then again it doesn’t change the fact that I hate mandatory huge downloads like system upgrades as I mentioned above. If that’s the case (inevitable huge downloads) I rather getting major upgrades only after every 2 or 3 years than doing it twice or even once every year. I know major upgrades always associated with major security concerns but for something that “as big as an OS”, I think having to do it each year is too much to the point of annoying. Yeah, I might be able to skip it but chances are newer apps might only be optimized for the upgraded system only, rendering most users would feel like being ‘forced’ to do the upgrades. Besides I think annual major upgrades for free OS doesn’t really makes sense since there’s nothing to sell in the first place. At least in Windows world, although only having major upgrades once every 2 years or so, it does makes more sense as those upgrades are something they’re selling, something they (Microsoft) are making money from.

Linux should learn more from Windows too…

Linux should learn more from Windows too; ie. to use proper, corresponding icon for its executable files. Executable files are programs that comes with applications, together with their own set of icons. The problem is the icons are only available for applications menu and desktops but why not the executable files as well? I remember having a hard time browsing the usr/bin folder searching for the executable file of Transmission (the bittorent client) by looking at file names instead of trying to notice the familiar Transmission icon. Yeah I found it but I can do it much faster in Windows thanks to the usage of corresponding icon for Windows applications. Besides in Windows applications are usually sorted out properly in their own program directories with proper application naming (Program Files/App name) instead of dumping all cryptically named executable files in only one place. Besides why the heck the system still use almost-cryptic acronymic naming of directories like ‘usr’ instead of ‘user’ or ‘bin’ instead of ‘binary’ or ‘lib’ instead of ‘library’? (And strangely enough they can use four-letter words for some other directories like ‘home’ and ‘root’?). And what the heck the ‘sda’ is actually? (yeah, I know what ‘sda’ is but that one is just me exaggerating to show you how cryptic directory naming in Linux can be). Linux is already decades in development yet the developers still refuse to abandon UNIX system convention? C’mon, it’s just a matter of a few additional letters so it shouldn’t hurt for that much of extra work. And isn’t modern Linux is supposed to be a hybrid and pragmatic standalone system instead of being heavily and strictly modeled after UNIX? It’s been decades since the first version of Linux being coded so today it should be made less like UNIX now while still remaining POSIX-compliant. Heck, even Mac OS X and Windows NT* are completely POSIX-compliant but managed to exist as a completely different system. In other words, modern Linux should be partially modeled after other systems as well if it wants to ‘seize’ the OS market domination from Windows.

*WinNT may or may not fully POSIX-compliant but I don’t fuss over the details. Nobody really care whether I’m correct or not because there’ll always be people disagreeing with me whether I’m right or wrong.

Don’t you think the new look of Windows…

Don’t you think the new look of Windows Media Player in Win7 looks very much like a touchscreen smartphone? If I’m to get a new smartphone, I’d like to have one that looks like this.

It took me 10 years to completely switch…

It took me 10 years to completely switch to Linux, and it took me only 1 year to master Windows. Guess that justified which one is more beginner friendly.