It's 2019 and Linux still has no unified default installation folder (program files)

>using a initramfs

>Is there a single defensible reason for this?
Yes, Linux sin't windows.

those are symlinks retardo

that makes it even dumber

>Initramfs
Hahaha, don you use bootloaders too?

fuck off OP, you're spreading FUD, it's
/usr/bin and /usr/local/bin for local.

You mean you.

Last time I looked Program Files was also system wide.

>2018
>Linux still has no 'search file' windows/gui
and i'm not even memeing

Being this retarded

Why not just make another folder and hide the various ones into it?

I thought it was /etc

ntoskrnl.exe also does not.

Attached: catfish.png (1182x507, 87K)

oh?

Attached: file.png (1108x699, 85K)

what theme is that?

>In GoboLinux you don't need a package database because the filesystem is the database: each program resides in its own directory, such as /Programs/Xorg-Lib/7.7 and /Programs/GCC/6.2.0.

breeze dark with breezemite decs

Pretty sure 64 bit windows has two different paths.

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

Attached: 1511987484933.jpg (600x450, 107K)

cheers m8

plasma is ready annihilate cuckchan shitposters

No, only two. At least 7 and 8.

what desktop is that?

/nix/store

neither does Windows
>C:\
>C:\ProgramData
>C:\Program Files
>C:\Program Files (x86)
>C:\Users\\AppData\Local

KDE 5

what file manager is/are this/thoses?

you can also use ls and grep.

/bin
btw /usr should point to /
find. you don't have to go text mode, so it's gui.

>find. you don't have to go text mode, so it's gui.
most stupid post of the day, good job.

>wuts /opt
>woots /usr/bin

Attached: brainlet60.jpg (638x558, 64K)

The first one looks like Gnome. The second is KDE

No, Richard, it's 'Linux', not 'GNU/Linux'. The most important contributions that the FSF made to Linux were the creation of the GPL and the GCC compiler. Those are fine and inspired products. GCC is a monumental achievement and has earned you, RMS, and the Free Software Foundation countless kudos and much appreciation. Following are some reasons for you to mull over, including some already answered in your FAQ. One guy, Linus Torvalds, used GCC to make his operating system (yes, Linux is an OS -- more on this later). He named it 'Linux' with a little help from his friends. Why doesn't he call it GNU/Linux? Because he wrote it, with more help from his friends, not you. You named your stuff, I named my stuff -- including the software I wrote using GCC -- and Linus named his stuff. The proper name is Linux because Linus Torvalds says so. Linus has spoken. Accept his authority. To do otherwise is to become a nag. You don't want to be known as a nag, do you? (An operating system) != (a distribution). Linux is an operating system. By my definition, an operating system is that software which provides and limits access to hardware resources on a computer. That definition applies whereever you see Linux in use. However, Linux is usually distributed with a collection of utilities and applications to make it easily configurable as a desktop system, a server, a development box, or a graphics workstation, or whatever the user needs. In such a configuration, we have a Linux (based) distribution. Therein lies your strongest argument for the unwieldy title 'GNU/Linux' (when said bundled software is largely from the FSF). Go bug the distribution makers on that one. Take your beef to Red Hat, Mandrake, and Slackware. At least there you have an argument. Linux alone is an operating system that can be used in various applications without any GNU software whatsoever. Embedded applications come to mind as an obvious example.

Attached: 1504611903976.jpg (750x563, 42K)

Next, even if we limit the GNU/Linux title to the GNU-based Linux distributions, we run into another obvious problem. XFree86 may well be more important to a particular Linux installation than the sum of all the GNU contributions. More properly, shouldn't the distribution be called XFree86/Linux? Or, at a minimum, XFree86/GNU/Linux? Of course, it would be rather arbitrary to draw the line there when many other fine contributions go unlisted. Yes, I know you've heard this one before. Get used to it. You'll keep hearing it until you can cleanly counter it. You seem to like the lines-of-code metric. There are many lines of GNU code in a typical Linux distribution. You seem to suggest that (more LOC) == (more important). However, I submit to you that raw LOC numbers do not directly correlate with importance. I would suggest that clock cycles spent on code is a better metric. For example, if my system spends 90% of its time executing XFree86 code, XFree86 is probably the single most important collection of code on my system. Even if I loaded ten times as many lines of useless bloatware on my system and I never excuted that bloatware, it certainly isn't more important code than XFree86. Obviously, this metric isn't perfect either, but LOC really, really sucks. Please refrain from using it ever again in supporting any argument. Last, I'd like to point out that we Linux and GNU users shouldn't be fighting among ourselves over naming other people's software. But what the heck, I'm in a bad mood now. I think I'm feeling sufficiently obnoxious to make the point that GCC is so very famous and, yes, so very useful only because Linux was developed. In a show of proper respect and gratitude, shouldn't you and everyone refer to GCC as 'the Linux compiler'? Or at least, 'Linux GCC'? Seriously, where would your masterpiece be without Linux? Languishing with the HURD? If there is a moral buried in this rant, maybe it is this:

>install 12 pieces of software
>12 conf files in 8 different places
thanks Linux

Be grateful for your abilities and your incredible success and your considerable fame. Continue to use that success and fame for good, not evil. Also, be especially grateful for Linux' huge contribution to that success. You, RMS, the Free Software Foundation, and GNU software have reached their current high profiles largely on the back of Linux. You have changed the world. Now, go forth and don't be a nag. Thanks for listening.

Unix is different, rakesh. Windows doesn't have origins as a server.

>dolphin at the top
>what file manager is that

You're completely avoiding my point though. Take your shitty attempt to be racist back to Jow Forums.

Since linux is for fats, it needs to spread out over more real estate.

Attached: 1441533490132.jpg (566x377, 36K)

>You're completely avoiding my point though
>Favors windows and doesn't understand linux
>poo in the loo
Wow. Just try not to get lost here, dupinder. Unix didn't start off as a personal computer. It ran an minicomputer, which had to shared with others. So system wide has no context for your wangblows 10, and it's predecessors. Don't step on your own shit on your way out.

Basically everything but Windows is a true multi user OS which is why Microsoft needed something superior and Linux won.

>program files
how long you been using linux ? 1 month? , the actual distribution its ok, much better than winshit to be honest, you only need to backup /etc/ to rebuild your whole system.

>464.5GB Encrypted Hard Drive

Attached: 1508847557419.png (529x529, 318K)

>t.lenart

The Linux youth really believe the localised name (cleverly created with a desktop.ini file in Program Files and Program Files (x86)) are real folders. They've never right-clicked and selected Properties, or dropped to a command line and checked.

The Windows boot loader and WinRE have installed to a separate partition by default since Vista.

The first is for Windows 3.1 programs and malware. The last one is also only for malware. Legit programs only go in the middle two.

This is why registry.

WindowsDoesn'tDoThingsTheUnixWayAndIsThereforeWrong(TM).

Pic related.

It's 2029 and Linux users are still retarded.

Attached: 1522240581085.gif (320x253, 995K)

>WindowsDoesn'tDoThingsTheUnixWayAndIsThereforeWrong
Are you being intentionally stupid? Dos was meant for personal use. Not development. Unix was used by developers, who developed programs that were used system wide(other users using the same machine). Stop shitting in the streets, pajeetard.

its /bin

>program files
>Program files x86
>Appdata
>Appdata local

You are unintentionally stupid. You are far too much a damaged, retarded little child: Windows is not DOS. It's a wonder you have enough brains to operate a keyboard when you can't understand such a simple concept.

DOS has been gone for 25 years ago, you mong. NT is something entirely different. Absolute state of nu-Jow Forums.

You fucking dumb faggots. /usr is a legacy folder. It's still used today, just not for the same reason. USR IS NOT SHORT FOR USER. Windows legacy software, FUCKING DOS, had nothing of the sort. Therefore Program Files CANNOT BE CONSIDERED SYSTEM WIDE IN THIS CONTEXT. Linux/unix != windows. Holy fucking shit, how much clearer do you need this to be? You retards aren't even the same idiot who made that retard ass comment earlier. Cherry picking queers.

/usr/bin you dipshit

DOS != windows since ~98SE

>Windows legacy software
You're starting to catch up. Only another 20 years of your goalpost-shuffling, and you'll be inline with reality, and maybe people will stop mocking your acquired brain injury.

Actually - strictly speaking - Windows 3.11. It was the first version of Windows to completely bypass DOS - but like Windows 9x, it could fall back to DOS-like real mode disk access if something went wrong in protected mode.

> he doesn't /opt/

You still don't get it.

>goalpost-shuffling
Scroll up, retard.

/opt is for binaries and libs from third parties. You don't put your own files there.

You have demonstrated half-a-dozen times up and down this thread that you are in no position to call me - or anyone else here - that. Now be quiet child - the grown-ups are talking.

You have demonstrated that you're a 20 year-old dumb cunt, and that you think you have a refined vernacular. You stink of unearned hubris. Stop being stupid. PLEASE.

>can't tell the difference between DOS and Windows
>but everyone else here are the stupid ones

Attached: 1517528096588.gif (500x384, 290K)

Using initramfs lol

yes, GNU/Linux is a UNIX-like operating system, traditionally designed for
>people who actually know how to use a computer
>mostly use command-line utilities
although it does have a "program files"-like directory in the form of /opt, almost nobody uses it (well, Firefox and Chrome does)

I've always wanted to know the providence of this screenshot. Broken graphics card?

Don't forget windows usually puts per-user stuff in %APPDATA% so really there is 3 for english installs:

> /Program Files/
> /Program Files (x86)/
> /%APPDATA%/

maybe the bootloader got corrupted?

Holy fuck, for the last time; please try to understand. Linux get it's file hierarchy from UNIX. Linux uses LEGACY folders. To compare unix folders to windows folders is idiotic(very much like you). WINDOWS, OR IT'S PREDECESSORS, HAS NEVER NEEDED THE /USR FOLDER. And to quote my earlier post: has no context for your wangblows 10, and it's predecessors. What unix is to linux is what dos is to windows. Stop being a child. You were wrong. Get over it.

There's corruption every few bytes. Yet it got as far as:
1) Getting BOOTMGR into memory (it's a multistage process)
2) Reading and parsing the BCD
3) Detecting that Windows failed to load
4) Actually displaying that menu
Which is what? Tens of thousands of instructions absolute minimum? Every single one of which has to be perfect to get that far? If it is BOOTMGR corruption, it's an incredibly selective one.

Attached: 1520673490582.gif (256x256, 352K)

A bigger sin is Linux still requiring you to use the command line at all these days.

by the way, a file manager could easily set symbolic names for directories like
/usr => /Static Files
/bin => /System Binaries
...

and hide /dev, /proc and /sys
why nobody does this is a mystery to me

Stop moving the goalposts, silly little child. I'm mocking your total lack of understanding of how Windows works. I don't care - nor does anyone else, I'll wager - about the shitty little details of Unix FS naming that you keep spouting in the hope that people will think you're smart.

We don't. And you're not. Now report yourself to your father for the good belting you clearly deserve, but equally-clearly never received.

Why would you need to? Is the root dir your working dir?

If you're using a distro like Ubuntu or Mint, it's very rare that you actually NEED to use command line as a desktop user.

Command line is just often faster and more convenient.

I don't know much about macOS, but I have a faint recollection that it does something similar to this?

Or, symlink everything on your computer and end up with this.

gobolinux.org/at_a_glance.html

How did I fall for this?

I would argue that you require less with distros like ubuntu and software like gnome. If you want a gui expeirence, stick with windows. Cmd is useless.

By being a child - a rigid, controlled lifestyle with no real "freeform" outlets. Throwing tantrums at randoms on the Internet who you think are disagreeing with you is the closest to social release that you can get.

Whether it is because you are retarded (possible, but honestly unlikely), autistic (far more likely given your "I know everything about this one tiny thing, and am totally ignorant of everything else" attitude, and disgustingly poor emotional control), or simply have abusive parents is not my concern.

The bottom line, user, is that you have to broaden your horizons, and learn to control yourself. If you have abusive parents, try Kids Helpline (or simply run away - choose a favoured relative and GO!). Another thing to do is to actually learn something about what you bleat on about. Your "Wangblows" comments, and having less insight to how Windows works than your average 10 year-old, endears you to nobody, and also casts suspicion on anything you say that you DO know something about.

I actually feel quite sorry for you user - in fact, so sorry that I unreservedly apologise for the "acquired brain injury" crack. I didn't know you were so young and underdeveloped. Assuming you are in the 12-15 age group, you may have some potential - but you really need to break out of your autistic urges. It does you - nor anyone around you - no good.

I know you're a young idiot. You want to know how I know? Only young, inexperienced fools make generalizations. Enjoy your autism.

Attached: 1525912235223.gif (252x263, 2.99M)

That's what we have to do already over here on the Windows side of the fence. Get on this:
NT 3.1: User profiles (rough analogue of home directory) are stored in C:\Users
NT 4.0 and Windows 95 (IIRC): User profiles move to under C:\Windows\Users
Windows 2000: Moved to C:\Documents and Settings
Windows Vista: Moved back to C:\Users!
WTF?

*shrugs*
I said my piece.

>*shrugs*
>autistic faggery
k

Clearly, I shouldn't have taught you this new word. For the record, it doesn't mean "everyone and everything who corrects me".

>winbabies still scared of the command line
It's superior to literally everything besides visual tasks. The meme that it's outdated in favor if GUI is perpetuated by tech illiterate morons like yourself who're too scared to let go of their mouse less they realize they cannot navigate their system.

>it's 2019

>It's 2019
>TFW you somehow lost track of more than half a year
FUCK

Attached: 1497749055894.png (781x739, 595K)

>psuedo intellilectual
>poor grammar
k

Humans are visual creatures. This is why computers only took off for the masses when usable GUIs started to appear. Your post, while I have no doubt you believe every word of it, is completely contrary to reality.

It doesn't matter what year it is. It could be 2119, this directory layout will no doubt be the same. Just as Windows has always had a Windows and a System(32) folder.

>It's 2019 and Linux still has no unified default installation folder (program files).
>Is there a single defensible reason for this?

doesn't know how the linux conventional directory layout works or what is its purpose.

kek.

It's OK. You've probably been abused. I've handled kids like you before. Let it all out - then there'll probably be room for more positive emotions.