[–] Master_Foo 2 points 1 point 3 points (+3|-2) ago
access
There are Linux equivalents. The only excuse you have is that you vendor locked yourself. Good job fucknuts.
visual studio
Same story. ProTip: You don't need a fancy IDE to program something. A good ol' text editor will do fine.
[–] NarrativeControl ago
You don't need a fancy IDE to program something. A good ol' text editor will do fine.
Yeah, if your time is worthless. Sounds like a true Linux user.
[–] NarrativeControl 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
Among hundreds of others pieces of software.
For access there's mariadb, for visual studio, there's vim and a bunch of other stuff working together. Linux uses a different paradigm from monolithic software that does everything. Your entire Desktop Environment is basically the equivalent to what Visual Studio tries to accomplish. If you manage to get the hang of it, it will be a smoother experience. But, yes sure, the initial learning curve will be tough. Especially figuring out that there is a completely different approach of doing things in Linux, which isn't obvious, since lots of effort was spend by people to make Linux look and feel somewhat like Windows to ease folks in.
[–] Ghetto_Shitlord ago
Multifunction copiers.
Many app based services.
No "touch mode" and associated apps for the fastest selling category of PC's.
[–] Ghetto_Shitlord 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
App based services, OneDrive as an example.
Linux supports touch, but are apps optimized for it? Is the interface, are screen elements large enough to not be a bother?
Haven't seen too many.
[–] Lucretius 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago (edited ago)
Just because there are linux alternatives, does NOT mean they are adequate. I currently run Linux Mint 19.1 with XFCE, and yet I find I still need to VM a windows platform. The most notable issues with linux apps selection for me are:
The linux graphical file managers (the best are: PCmanFM, 4pane, konqueror, dolphin) are down-right primitive by comparison to bottom of the barrel 3rd party equivalents available in Windows for the last 20 years. And best in class file managers from the Win world (xplorer^2 , directory opus, and Free Commander) are easily 3-4 decades ahead of their nearest equivalents in Linux. This is largely a function of developer's biases… they only build basic functions into gui file managers because they assume anyone doing anything sophisticated will be doing it on the command line.
Libre Office or other equivalents suck if you need to collaborate with people using MS Office. Cloud apps like Office 365 and Google Docs are no solution as they require trusting those organizations with your documents. That's why many of us moved to Linux in the first place: to escape the cloud.
GIMP is no substitute for a real image editor.
[–] Wahaha ago
I find GUI file managers lacking anyway and am using ranger instead. What type of functionality are you missing in Linux GUI file managers, btw? At work I'm only allowed Explorer and that one sucks.
That collaboration with Windows sucks is Microsofts fault for intentionally trying to lock out everyone else, but personally, I find that office applications suck. Both the Windows and the Linux ones. Take Word. Why can't a stupid text editor not start in less than half a second? Instead of looking at libre office, you might want to look at latex stuff instead if you're really into editing text documents. (I'm not, vim is all I need.) There's also stuff for replacing PowerPoint and Excel, but I'm not familiar with them, since I don't need that type of software anyway.
Gimp kind of sucks. These days I'm doing more and more image editing with ImageMagick, directly on the commandline. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbXHbHrfrIs&hd=1
[–] Lucretius 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
So you asked about what I want in a file manager…
So, there are a lot of things that I want in a file manager, and to some degree this is a function of individual tasks that I use it for. I keep several different file managers around for specific tasks in addition to general purpose managers.
General purpose:
The most important feature that really matters is a reconfigurable and customizable interface. Generally, I like to start with a dual pane set up... that means both a directory tree and contents window for each pane like this, not just two contents windows like this. But the key thing is not a specific interface, but rather an interface that is customizable and, at a minimum, supports dual pane. The closest I've found to this in Linux-world is 4pane unfortunately it has consistently not installed stably on LinuxMint for me... although to be fair, I haven't seriously tried recently since updating to 19.1.
Of course bare minimum basic features like click-name-to-rename, recognize and mount all file systems seamlessly, file-meta-data-editing, treat ALL archive formats seamlessly as directories, batch renaming, folder sync and advanced batch copy-move with rule-based file collision resolving, no need to mess with installing codecs separately from the main app, etc... it should go without saying that every graphical file manager should have all that, but unfortunately it does actually have to be said.
Built-in disk and volume management utilities:
This rubs the Linux developer the wrong way... but I'm used to doing all file management operations with the assumption of full administrator privileges. Back when I was in windows world, I would go to some effort to completely disable things like UAC that were meant to protect me from myself. Since, a graphical file manager is seen as a sort of kiddy tool by Linux developers, they are always set up to run without administrator privileges by default and contain things like Thunar's warning ribbon when they are run with admin rights.
It's cool if there are keyboard shortcuts, but it's a graphical file manager, absolutely 100% of the functionality should be accessible easily through on-screen chrome. It's cute if there are context-specific right-click menus but that's no excuse for not having real on-screen controls. This is especially true of built in advanced file management tools like batch renaming, batch file conversion.
Thumbnails for images, videos, and folders containing them is also nice, but that feature can not be aloud to cause the file manager's responsiveness to lag even when the file managers encounters folders with 10,000+ images for the first time. In general, I want a dedicated image manager for that sort of thing.
Search doesn't matter. I have my files organized very very carefully. I have gone to look for a specific file and not found it in the first place I looked for it maybe 15 times in the last 30 years. If the ability to search local files were to disappear from my system tomorrow... years might pass before I even knew.
A good example in the windows world of a quality commercial general-purpose graphical file manager is Directory Opus. A good example of a free one in the windows world is FreeCommander.
Images/Media-files:
Most important: It should have a file system centric approach. I don't want some media-manager that tries to find all of my media all over the system and then re-organize it by date, or tag, or artist, or album, or any of that crap! I keep my media carefully and meticulously organized in FOLDERS!!! I want a media file manager to be a file manager FIRST and have media-specific tools SECOND.
It should cache thumbnails for fast retrieval and in a manner/location that is manageable by the user.
Details like size of thumbnail, and presentation of the file list should be extremely customizable. Over-all window and workspace customization remains important, but is less so in the media/image usage case since the primary purpose of the media file manager is as a launcher/browser of the media rather than a straight manager.
The basic minimum, should go without saying, features of file management should of course all be present.
The ability to merge directory contents from multiple directories is especially useful for a media file manager... That is select multiple directories in the tree-view pane, and then see a merged list of all the files in all of them in the contents pane... which can then be passed to a slide show or whatever.
Integrated viewers for all media files that include full-screen viewing, slide-shows, tiled slideshows, side-by-side and scaled comparisons, etc... and of course all of those fully customizable with standard features like adjustable delays, the ability to optionally auto-play matching audio files to images and videos without their own embedded audio, set files as wallpapers, etc.
Duplicate file finders with advanced rules-based automated management options upon finding a putative duplicate.
Media specific management options should also be available such as batch audio/image/video format conversion, batch volume balancing of audio so that all the files selected have the same average/peak sound intensity, lossless orientation rotation from the file list, multiple launch-with options to refer a media file to different external viewers or editors.
A good example of a commercial media file manager in the windows world is ACDSee, probably the best free one in the windows world is FastStone or XnView MP which also has a Linux version, although again it is sometimes hard to get it to work in a stable manner on LinuxMint.
Most of the sorts of features I list above have been semi-standard in some/all 3rd part graphical file managers in the windows world for more than 20 years. But then you see stuff like 4pane and XnView MP in the Linux world that are billed as advanced file managers, and in the Windows world they would be solid C+ or B efforts respectively, but are best-in-class options in the Linux world.
[–] silverss ago
I find Thunar to be quite adequate.