Your pet peeve, technical or otherwise.

[PlainName]

I wish to associate myself with the comment by Siwastaja 

[eugenenine]

Linux isn't any better - you don't get a choice where to install anything. Unless you compile from source yourself, everything gets dumped together. But Microsoft should know a lot better, and did at one time.

Some Linux aren't any better you mean.  Other Linux let you pass a basedir= to the Slackbuild specifying where you want the install.

[PlainName]

Can't they just have a dialog with "Install folder: " and point/click selection of destination?

[rdl]

That's the way games do it. I've never had any problems. As a matter of fact, I've moved entire game folders from drive to to drive after installing and they still work fine. Maybe Windows 7 takes care of everything behind the scenes, I don't know but it's a non-issue.

[Siwastaja]

That's the way games do it. I've never had any problems. As a matter of fact, I've moved entire game folders from drive to to drive after installing and they still work fine. Maybe Windows 7 takes care of everything behind the scenes, I don't know but it's a non-issue.

It doesn't (take care of anything behind the scenes), but clearly the games are properly designed.

My pet peeves are programs that pollute the file tree or operating system in one way or another and are unable to work without "installation" which does random, unwanted and undocumented things to the system, and if you move the folder, they stop working.

Surprisingly many Windows programs are designed to just work putting the files somewhere, installers doing just that; cheers to them.

This being said, dynamic linking hell seems to apply to both Windows and linux distros.

On the unix tradition, this works in a completely different manner; so different that it isn't very fruitful to try to compare directly. The one which you are used to "feels" the only right way to do it. Strangely, I feel both are viable ways.

The very classic Windows way, "everything in one folder per program, including config" is quite good, but it has been broken a long time ago when programmers were encouraged to use The Registry for config storage; not that different from the unix tradition "put all config under /etc/", resulting in a strange mix of traditional Windows and Unix ways. In Unix, the idea is that all binaries of all programs are in one place, all config of all programs are in another place, all documentation of all programs in yet another... Which is again broken by the fact that there are multiple such places, think about /bin/, /usr/bin/, /usr/local/bin; and by the fact you have to come up with a place for files not easily classified under those traditional types.

[rdl]

I have an entire folder called "portable" and almost every program I use is in there. None have ever been installed. Games however often require their own specific version of the MSVC++ runtime. I think there's around 15 copies on my game machine. It would be nice if these were contained in the game folder without requiring installation. But yeah, most Windows software will just run, no install needed.

I used to create a restore point, install something, then restore and see if it still worked. Almost always it did. One way to keep the registry unpolluted I guess.

Interestingly, writing to the registry seems built-in or maybe done by Windows itself in some cases, because it will happen even if a program folder is copied from a completely different machine once the executable is run.

[Nominal Animal]

Note that in most Linux distributions, the package manager not only forces a specific location, but it tracks them too.

For example, on Debian or Debian-derivatives like Ubuntu or Mint using Debian packaging, one can say for example
    dpkg-query -L $(dpkg-query -S $(which foo) | cut -d ':' -f 1)
to find out what other files are in the same package that provided command foo; or just
    dpkg-query -S $(which foo)
to find the names of the package(s) that provide existing command foo.

However, you most definitely can create Debian (and RPM) packages that use only the libraries provided within the package, in the same directory (or more preferably, a subdirectory), wherever it is compiled or installed to.  In fact, it is trivial for non-SUID, non-filesystem-capability-using binaries; and you don't even have to recompile the libraries.  All you need is to write a small wrapper that extracts its own absolute path, set the LD_LIBRARY_PATH to that directory (or suitable subdirectory), containing the libraries needed, and then execute the actual binary.  (Privileged programs that change UIDs or use filesystem capabilities do need to be relinked, with DT_RUNPATH ELF dynamic section attribute naming the correct location, and -z nodeflib option so that standard ELF cache locations are not used as a back-up location to search in.)
(I've ranted before about how it is possible and not difficult to make portable Linux applications – that Just Work across most/all Linux distributions –, so I won't repeat that here.  If anyone wants a practical example, though, just ask.)

You can also run binaries in a chroot environment (even bind-mounting existing filesystems or their leaf-parts to the chroot), but overall, a virtual machine is a better choice for that use case (since you probably want to protect the "parent" system from any shenanigans those binaries might do).

It is the same old story: with Linux, you can do whatever you want, but either you do it yourself, or you get someone to do it for you.  Ain't no free lunch.
By this I mean that if you want to use Linux as a tool in a production environment, you should have someone – paid, contracted, whatever – to do your support for you.
In an optimum situation, that someone or those someones also continually optimize the Linux environment you use for your workflow(s), too.

But try and get pointy-haired bosses to go for this!  At least, I myself am not enough of a salesman to get through the PHBs, even showing past proof of it working.
It seems like whenever you mention Linux, they think "no cost".  No, there is always a cost, and one should compare the cost to the tool you get for that (ongoing) cost, in terms longer than a quarter year.

[Ed.Kloonk]

Web 2.0 text that you can't select and copy, at least in part.

[SilverSolder]

Web 2.0 text that you can't select and copy, at least in part.

Be grateful that you can still do screen shots...

[eugenenine]

or the web sites that now prevent cursor key scrolling

[james_s]

Web sites that nag you to install the app EVERY SINGLE TIME you visit with a mobile browser, even if the app is not supported on your version of the mobile OS.

Apps that drop support for older versions of iOS even when they were working perfectly. I do not need or want my phone to be updated to a newer, slower operating system with new bugs every year, and I an ticked off that ebay blocked their perfectly working app requiring a new version that requires a new OS. The effect is I spent a lot less time browsing ebay, save a lot of money, and sell much less on there too since these activities are much less convenient now. I used to browse the ebay app any time I was waiting somewhere and had time to kill, the mobile web experience is crap.

[Red Squirrel]

I realized I've been agreeing with pretty much all web related stuff people say, so to cover all bases:

Web 2.0.

That's my pet peeve.     Seriously though, Most modern designs just simply suck, they are less usable and more annoying than the more old school counterparts, while also taking up way more resources.   So many websites now are just filled with annoyances and every time they update they only make it worse.  Just look at Digikey.  it's a disaster now.

If you really want to push your system to it's limits try opening more than one Facebook tab.   If I can manage to do Alt F1 to get into a console and killall firefox I can recover, but usually once the cursor starts to feel like molasses, it's game over and I have choice but to do a hard reboot.

[SilverSolder]

Basically, the Javascript engine in modern browsers is now so powerful that it acts like a virtual machine, running programs locally in your browser.   That is the real problem, because now we have a lot of bad programmers writing terrible code that executes inefficiently,  compared to old style HTML.

It isn't just the web designers that are the problem.   We also have companies like Adobe that have to justify their cloud subscriptions...  so they develop and sell web design tools that create reams of Javascript to turn a 100 byte web page into a 10 terabyte monstrosity, which can only be maintained using their tools. 

There is no cost to either the web designers or Adobe for doing this,  since it is us, the poor sap users, that have to pay the price of under-performing web sites.  If customers protest (e.g. like they do with the new Digikey site) the management is told that the web designers are professionals that use all the latest tools, and the customers are a bunch of old fuddy duddys that are fondly remembering the days of their youth around a no longer permitted camp fire...    Then they show the manager how easy it is to like their company on Facebook when using Digikey on a tiny screen phone, and the manager goes away again, pacified, thinking about his/her next promotion.

Of course, it needn't be like this.   There is no law of nature that says you can't make an excellent and well performing web site even if the tools have too much unsaturated fat in them...   So the main blame goes to the web designers that are slaves to modern fashion and don't bother to understand how the site is actually used and how their technology works, followed by tool makers like Adobe that tend to fool people into thinking that their tools are so good that the designers no longer have to think about how they work...    And of course a dunce prize for company management teams that let all this happen on their watch.

[james_s]

I bristle every time I hear someone say that a website needs updating because it looks dated. To me "dated" means it is clean and functional, and a redesign now inevitably means it will be bloated and buggy with half the information density and a bunch of useless crap that nobody asked for. I hate fashion because it overrides logic. You can watch the evolution of any product, it will start out primitive and then keep getting better and better until the development peaks, all the real problems have been solved and it is as close to perfection as it's going to get. But development doesn't just stop, they keep finding ways to screw with it in order to justify their own existence and inevitably it gets worse from all this constant tinkering and meddling. We use Slack for communication at work and it was mature and fully developed years ago and worked almost perfectly. This has not stopped them from constantly tinkering and making changes, moving things around in the UI for no apparent reason, adding annoying features that nobody asked for and then occasionally changing them again some months later after everyone complains. It drives me crazy, it's a tool, once it works just leave it alone and stop screwing with it. Some people can never just finish a project and go make something else, they have their one pet project that is always a project because they can never make up their minds and just call it finished.

[SilverSolder]

Consider what would happen if a car maker decided to reverse the position of the gas pedal vs. the brake in their cars...  because their designer thought it looks better with the skinny pedal on the other side!  It would be pandemonium.

But in the software / web industry, making major changes to the GUI is considered cost free - and it pretty much is, to the people making the changes...

Some industries won't accept it.  If you change the GUI on a financial trading workstation, the sales manager will be phoned the next day and asked to remove this useless garbage from their premises!

[PlainName]

Consider what would happen if a car maker decided to reverse the position of the gas pedal vs. the brake in their cars

Not a lot, really. First, that's essentially what it was like here in Britland in the 70's and 80's when we have British bikes (Triumph, BSA, etc) with the gearshift on the right, and Jap bikes (Honda, Yamaha, etc) with the gearshift on the left. Only a couple of times did I try to brake with the gearshift, and maybe once changed gear with the brake. But at that age I would have done stupid things like that anyway

Second, it's only because it's always like it is that there's a problem for anything different. If the norm were to be random then it would just be the norm and no-one would blink at it.

I am not saying that standardisation isn't desirable, just noting that we have survived without, and whilst it would be a bugger, it wouldn't be such a big one as might be imagined.

[CatalinaWOW]

I bristle every time I hear someone say that a website needs updating because it looks dated. To me "dated" means it is clean and functional, and a redesign now inevitably means it will be bloated and buggy with half the information density and a bunch of useless crap that nobody asked for. I hate fashion because it overrides logic. You can watch the evolution of any product, it will start out primitive and then keep getting better and better until the development peaks, all the real problems have been solved and it is as close to perfection as it's going to get. But development doesn't just stop, they keep finding ways to screw with it in order to justify their own existence and inevitably it gets worse from all this constant tinkering and meddling. We use Slack for communication at work and it was mature and fully developed years ago and worked almost perfectly. This has not stopped them from constantly tinkering and making changes, moving things around in the UI for no apparent reason, adding annoying features that nobody asked for and then occasionally changing them again some months later after everyone complains. It drives me crazy, it's a tool, once it works just leave it alone and stop screwing with it. Some people can never just finish a project and go make something else, they have their one pet project that is always a project because they can never make up their minds and just call it finished.

This is inevitable, because it is far easier to tinker with something that is working and desirable than it is to invent something new that is desirable.

[SilverSolder]

Consider what would happen if a car maker decided to reverse the position of the gas pedal vs. the brake in their cars

Not a lot, really. [...]

Maybe if you are designing a new Edsel...   

[james_s]

Consider what would happen if a car maker decided to reverse the position of the gas pedal vs. the brake in their cars

Not a lot, really. First, that's essentially what it was like here in Britland in the 70's and 80's when we have British bikes (Triumph, BSA, etc) with the gearshift on the right, and Jap bikes (Honda, Yamaha, etc) with the gearshift on the left. Only a couple of times did I try to brake with the gearshift, and maybe once changed gear with the brake. But at that age I would have done stupid things like that anyway

Second, it's only because it's always like it is that there's a problem for anything different. If the norm were to be random then it would just be the norm and no-one would blink at it.

I am not saying that standardisation isn't desirable, just noting that we have survived without, and whilst it would be a bugger, it wouldn't be such a big one as might be imagined.

I suppose it depends on how ingrained something is. Muscle memory is very hard to override, for a while my brother had a car that was almost identical to mine except his had an automatic and mine had a manual gearbox. I drove his a few times and had to wedge my left foot behind my right leg to keep from reflexively stabbing for the clutch, which results in catching the edge of the wide brake pedal used in slushbox equipped cars and slamming on the brakes.

[PlainName]

Muscle memory is very hard to override

Sure is! And you really want muscle memory when driving so you're not half-focused on how to operate it.

Periodically I drive a motor with a push-button parking brake. Often it is only overnight but nevertheless it doesn't catch me out very often. But get back in my own motor and I'm forever trying to find the parking brake button! I think it's the strangeness of the different motor that keeps one mentally awake, but get back into familiar surroundings and you kind of relax your guard, but something at a low level is still saying 'that control is the other way around'.

[JohnPen]

Two experiences with different vehicles that caused some confusion.  Many years back in the UK  I purchased a Simca 1500. This had a different gear change to the normal in the UK as the original french version was a column change.  In the UK it had been changed to a floor change but  a different gear change order it was reversed  I cant remember where reverse gear was.
----------1 3--------------------3 1
----------2 4   ----------------  4 2 .
Being a lot younger then I did not find it a problem and fortunately it had a Porsche type gearbox that the recommended check for it's condition was to drive at 30 mph in a higher gear and then quickly change in to first  gear keeping the clutch disengaged.    Yes it really worked with no problem but I wouldn't recommend that as a habit it did however protect one from possible gear change errors while adapting.   My second  confusion was arriving to pick up an American hire car (automatic) in Ottowa at night and being unable to release the handbrake or even find it.  I had not come across the 'Foot operated' version before and it was pitch black in the car park so I could not even see it.  A quick visit back to the pick up office and all became clear.  Nowadays electric handbrakes are automated as well but I do miss the option of using a handbrake manually especially when parking on steep inclines. Perhaps I will eventually trust them.

[SilverSolder]

Some cars with the automatic handbrakes let you activate them manually by pushing/pulling the release button.  It can increase the trust factor when parking on a hill! 

[Sal Ammoniac]

Frameless windows, like Windows Explorer windows on the latest version of Windows 10, that blend into white backgrounds so that you can't tell where one window ends and another begins.

[eugenenine]

Consider what would happen if a car maker decided to reverse the position of the gas pedal vs. the brake in their cars

Not a lot, really. First, that's essentially what it was like here in Britland in the 70's and 80's when we have British bikes (Triumph, BSA, etc) with the gearshift on the right, and Jap bikes (Honda, Yamaha, etc) with the gearshift on the left. Only a couple of times did I try to brake with the gearshift, and maybe once changed gear with the brake. But at that age I would have done stupid things like that anyway

Second, it's only because it's always like it is that there's a problem for anything different. If the norm were to be random then it would just be the norm and no-one would blink at it.

I am not saying that standardisation isn't desirable, just noting that we have survived without, and whilst it would be a bugger, it wouldn't be such a big one as might be imagined.

I suppose it depends on how ingrained something is. Muscle memory is very hard to override, for a while my brother had a car that was almost identical to mine except his had an automatic and mine had a manual gearbox. I drove his a few times and had to wedge my left foot behind my right leg to keep from reflexively stabbing for the clutch, which results in catching the edge of the wide brake pedal used in slushbox equipped cars and slamming on the brakes.

it was many years after I was married that my arm would still reach for the non existent gearshift in my wife's car when I felt the rpm at certain speeds.

[Ed.Kloonk]

it was many years after I was married that my arm would still reach for the non existent gearshift in my wife's car when I felt the rpm at certain speeds.

When I put my car in park after driving home, my poor car's windscreen wiper/washer wand wishes that I would stop forgetting that I'm not driving my truck with it's column shift.

One of these days, it will have had enough..