| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 23 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 52:08:05 |
| Calls: | 583 |
| Files: | 1,139 |
| Messages: | 111,532 |
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 04:52:22 -0400, Joel W. Crump wrote:
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer. It's too expensive.
And lacking in expandability and versatility. All ApplerCOs machines are basically just glorified laptops now.
And the OS may have licensed the rCLUnixrCY trademark, but it doesnrCOt work the
way people expect traditional rCLUnixrCY systems to work.
Ask one of the original Bell Labs crew, Ken rCLMr UnixrCY Thompson: he has given up on Apple and switched to Linux.
On 2025-08-24 02:32, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 04:52:22 -0400, Joel W. Crump wrote:
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer.-a It's too expensive.
And lacking in expandability and versatility. All ApplerCOs machines are
basically just glorified laptops now.
And the OS may have licensed the rCLUnixrCY trademark, but it doesnrCOt work
the
way people expect traditional rCLUnixrCY systems to work.
Ask one of the original Bell Labs crew, Ken rCLMr UnixrCY Thompson: he has >> given up on Apple and switched to Linux.
Sorry, Linux fans:
Pretty much everyone disagrees with you.
On 8/24/25 05:32, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 04:52:22 -0400, Joel W. Crump wrote:
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer.-a It's too expensive.
And lacking in expandability and versatility...
Although when one reads of anti-Apple folks who replace their GPU card multiple times
and then have to replace their fried motherboard from
their DIY'ing...
...there's certainly a whole bunch of folk who would benefit from an "appliance" that reduces the odds of them fat-fingering breaking it.
On 2025-08-24 02:32, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 04:52:22 -0400, Joel W. Crump wrote:
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer.-a It's too expensive.
And lacking in expandability and versatility. All ApplerCOs machines are
basically just glorified laptops now.
And the OS may have licensed the rCLUnixrCY trademark, but it doesnrCOt work
the
way people expect traditional rCLUnixrCY systems to work.
Ask one of the original Bell Labs crew, Ken rCLMr UnixrCY Thompson: he has >> given up on Apple and switched to Linux.
Sorry, Linux fans:
Pretty much everyone disagrees with you.
On 8/24/2025 12:47 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-24 02:32, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 04:52:22 -0400, Joel W. Crump wrote:
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer.-a It's too expensive.
And lacking in expandability and versatility. All ApplerCOs machines are >>> basically just glorified laptops now.
And the OS may have licensed the rCLUnixrCY trademark, but it doesnrCOt >>> work the
way people expect traditional rCLUnixrCY systems to work.
Ask one of the original Bell Labs crew, Ken rCLMr UnixrCY Thompson: he has >>> given up on Apple and switched to Linux.
Sorry, Linux fans:
Pretty much everyone disagrees with you.
But they are Windows users, more often than not, so ...
On 8/24/2025 5:32 AM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer.-a It's too expensive.
And lacking in expandability and versatility. All ApplerCOs machines are
basically just glorified laptops now.
And the OS may have licensed the rCLUnixrCY trademark, but it doesnrCOt work
the
way people expect traditional rCLUnixrCY systems to work.
Ask one of the original Bell Labs crew, Ken rCLMr UnixrCY Thompson: he has >> given up on Apple and switched to Linux.
Right, it's a freakin' joke, if you ask me, there are *selected*
functions of macOS software that outshine the competition, but the
typical home user is better off with something else, because of the ridiculous expense of the Apple platform, even if they like macOS, it's
just throwing money down the toilet.-a Maybe they have money to burn, I could understand that, but it would never click with me even if I did
have a billion dollars, because my brain doesn't work that way to prefer Apple's quirkware.
On 8/24/2025 9:45 AM, -hh wrote:
On 8/24/25 05:32, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 04:52:22 -0400, Joel W. Crump wrote:
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer.-a It's too expensive.
And lacking in expandability and versatility...
Although when one reads of anti-Apple folks who replace their GPU card
multiple times
Incorrect.-a The CPU video isn't a "GPU card", it's a basic way to get a single video output through the motherboard.-a Adding the NVIDIA card
better supported 4K and gave me a second output.-a And replacing that
wasn't because of a hardware failure but a software sabotage by NVIDIA.
and then have to replace their fried motherboard from their DIY'ing...
...there's certainly a whole bunch of folk who would benefit from an
"appliance" that reduces the odds of them fat-fingering breaking it.
Yeah, but my problem was a freak accident in truth, bad karma getting
me, DYI PCs are usually OK, and if you want a preassembled system,
Apple's are not the best value, unless you just *have* to have macOS.
On 2025-08-24 11:01, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 12:47 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-24 02:32, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 04:52:22 -0400, Joel W. Crump wrote:
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer.-a It's too expensive. >>>>And lacking in expandability and versatility. All ApplerCOs machines are >>>> basically just glorified laptops now.
And the OS may have licensed the rCLUnixrCY trademark, but it doesnrCOt >>>> work the
way people expect traditional rCLUnixrCY systems to work.
Ask one of the original Bell Labs crew, Ken rCLMr UnixrCY Thompson: he has >>>> given up on Apple and switched to Linux.
Sorry, Linux fans:
Pretty much everyone disagrees with you.
But they are Windows users, more often than not, so ...
Pretty much all the people who leave Windows...
...get Macs.
On 8/24/2025 2:17 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-24 11:01, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 12:47 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-24 02:32, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 04:52:22 -0400, Joel W. Crump wrote:
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer.-a It's too expensive. >>>>>And lacking in expandability and versatility. All ApplerCOs machines are >>>>> basically just glorified laptops now.
And the OS may have licensed the rCLUnixrCY trademark, but it doesnrCOt >>>>> work the
way people expect traditional rCLUnixrCY systems to work.
Ask one of the original Bell Labs crew, Ken rCLMr UnixrCY Thompson: he has
given up on Apple and switched to Linux.
Sorry, Linux fans:
Pretty much everyone disagrees with you.
But they are Windows users, more often than not, so ...
Pretty much all the people who leave Windows...
...get Macs.
The Mac I bought to try out ended up getting completely wiped andIn what way?
Windows 7 put on it, though I did try using Boot Camp, but was
unsatisfied with that setup.-a I actually liked Snow Leopard when I first got it, tried numerous Apple-native apps, tried out its Unix components, thought it was cool, but it wore off.-a I'm just not wired for Apple.
the
typical home user is better off with something else [than a Mac], because of the
ridiculous expense of the Apple platform, even if they like macOS,
it's just throwing money down the toilet.-a Maybe they have money to
burn, I could understand that, but it would never click with me even
if I did have a billion dollars, because my brain doesn't work that
way to prefer Apple's quirkware.
"Ridiculous expense"? Please.
Yes: my MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,200CAD, but based on my experience,
this is a computer I can easily use for the next 5 years.
That's $37 a month.
Even if a decent laptop with Linux cost me a third of that (and I very
much doubt you can find one as good for that number), the difference is about $25/month.
That's hardly a huge barrier to entry.
But please elaborate:
What makes Apple's technology so "quirky" in your estimation?
[For a] preassembled system,
Apple's are not the best value, unless you just *have* to have macOS.
You cannot separate the value of the hardware from the value of the
software it runs.
The Mac I bought to try out ended up getting completely wiped and
Windows 7 put on it, though I did try using Boot Camp, but was
unsatisfied with that setup.-a I actually liked Snow Leopard when I
first got it, tried numerous Apple-native apps, tried out its Unix
components, thought it was cool, but it wore off.-a I'm just not wired
for Apple.
In what way?
More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", because you replaced
it with Windows, what makes you more "wired" for that?
On 8/24/2025 2:24 PM, Alan wrote:
[For a] preassembled system, Apple's are not the best value, unless
you just *have* to have macOS.
You cannot separate the value of the hardware from the value of the
software it runs.
So you want macOS, I get it, that's fine, you do you.-a But you're paying through the *nose*, for the so-called privilege.
On 8/24/25 16:39, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 2:24 PM, Alan wrote:
[For a] preassembled system, Apple's are not the best value, unless
you just *have* to have macOS.
You cannot separate the value of the hardware from the value of the
software it runs.
So you want macOS, I get it, that's fine, you do you.-a But you're
paying through the *nose*, for the so-called privilege.
Except for how you've utterly missed the Sam Vimes theory of boots.
On 8/24/2025 2:24 PM, Alan wrote:
[For a] preassembled system, Apple's are not the best value, unless
you just *have* to have macOS.
You cannot separate the value of the hardware from the value of the
software it runs.
So you want macOS, I get it, that's fine, you do you.-a But you're paying through the *nose*, for the so-called privilege.
On 8/24/2025 2:38 PM, Alan wrote:
The Mac I bought to try out ended up getting completely wiped and
Windows 7 put on it, though I did try using Boot Camp, but was
unsatisfied with that setup.-a I actually liked Snow Leopard when I
first got it, tried numerous Apple-native apps, tried out its Unix
components, thought it was cool, but it wore off.-a I'm just not wired
for Apple.
In what way?
More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", because you
replaced it with Windows, what makes you more "wired" for that?
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky.-a Linux requires comprehension, which I have, but I'm not disliking using Windows again, for now.-a I haven't made my decision about replacing it with Linux on this mini PC.
On 8/24/2025 2:23 PM, Alan wrote:
the typical home user is better off with something else [than a Mac],
because of the ridiculous expense of the Apple platform, even if they
like macOS, it's just throwing money down the toilet.-a Maybe they
have money to burn, I could understand that, but it would never click
with me even if I did have a billion dollars, because my brain
doesn't work that way to prefer Apple's quirkware.
"Ridiculous expense"? Please.
Yes: my MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,200CAD, but based on my
experience, this is a computer I can easily use for the next 5 years.
That's $37 a month.
Even if a decent laptop with Linux cost me a third of that (and I very
much doubt you can find one as good for that number), the difference
is about $25/month.
That's hardly a huge barrier to entry.
The point is, for that price, you could've gotten more hardware with
another platform.-a It's like buying a Hyundai over a Honda, is it
literally as good, maybe not in someone's OCD mind, but it's clearly a better value financially.
But please elaborate:
What makes Apple's technology so "quirky" in your estimation?
It has the potential to be a great Unix platform, but ends up being justYour claim was that it is "quirky".
a proprietary GUI by dull minds at a cult company, when all is said and done, at exorbitant prices.-a It's a money pit, even more than Windows systems are.
As for Ken Thompson, he is now 82 years old and works for Google. That
tells you all you need to know about his state of mind.
[For a] preassembled system, Apple's are not the best value, unless
you just *have* to have macOS.
You cannot separate the value of the hardware from the value of the
software it runs.
So you want macOS, I get it, that's fine, you do you.-a But you're
paying through the *nose*, for the so-called privilege.
I notice you can't refute the point I made.
The value is in the WHOLE SYSTEM.
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 13:35:38 -0400, Nick Charles wrote:
As for Ken Thompson, he is now 82 years old and works for Google. That
tells you all you need to know about his state of mind.
Resorting to ad-hominem attacks to try to discredit a well-regarded
authority with a long-standing reputation is ... a sign of desperation, letrCOs face it.
More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", because you
replaced it with Windows, what makes you more "wired" for that?
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky.-a Linux requires comprehension,
which I have, but I'm not disliking using Windows again, for now.-a I
haven't made my decision about replacing it with Linux on this mini PC.
Unresponsive.
In what way is Windows any more WYSIWYG than macOS?
On 8/24/2025 5:30 PM, Alan wrote:
[For a] preassembled system, Apple's are not the best value,
unless you just *have* to have macOS.
You cannot separate the value of the hardware from the value
of the software it runs.
So you want macOS, I get it, that's fine, you do you. But
you're paying through the *nose*, for the so-called privilege.
I notice you can't refute the point I made.
The value is in the WHOLE SYSTEM.
I'm getting that with Windows 11 on a mini PC from China, though.
Is it as fast as a new Mac, no, but it's surprisingly usable. I'mNot you...
watching a video from Amazon Prime on my TV with the sound in my
headphones, just like I had with my big desktop I destroyed. Who
needs Apple.
Your claim was that it is "quirky".But please elaborate:
What makes Apple's technology so "quirky" in your estimation?
It has the potential to be a great Unix platform, but ends up being
just a proprietary GUI by dull minds at a cult company, when all is
said and done, at exorbitant prices.-a It's a money pit, even more than
Windows systems are.
Justify that claim.
On 8/24/2025 2:23 PM, Alan wrote:
the
typical home user is better off with something else [than a Mac], because of the
ridiculous expense of the Apple platform, even if they like macOS,
it's just throwing money down the toilet.-a Maybe they have money to
burn, I could understand that, but it would never click with me even
if I did have a billion dollars, because my brain doesn't work that
way to prefer Apple's quirkware.
"Ridiculous expense"? Please.
Yes: my MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,200CAD, but based on my experience,
this is a computer I can easily use for the next 5 years.
That's $37 a month.
Even if a decent laptop with Linux cost me a third of that (and I very
much doubt you can find one as good for that number), the difference is
about $25/month.
That's hardly a huge barrier to entry.
The point is, for that price, you could've gotten more hardware with
another platform. It's like buying a Hyundai over a Honda, is it
literally as good, maybe not in someone's OCD mind, but it's clearly a better value financially.
But please elaborate:
What makes Apple's technology so "quirky" in your estimation?
It has the potential to be a great Unix platform, but ends up being just
a proprietary GUI by dull minds at a cult company, when all is said and done, at exorbitant prices. It's a money pit, even more than Windows systems are.
The Apple-centric software *largely* sucks (although selected apps are
great, Microsoft Office and Adobe's stuff are better than on Windows,
imo), the Unix features are incomplete.
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky.
On 8/24/2025 5:31 PM, Alan wrote:
More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", because you
replaced it with Windows, what makes you more "wired" for that?
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky.-a Linux requires
comprehension, which I have, but I'm not disliking using Windows
again, for now.-a I haven't made my decision about replacing it with
Linux on this mini PC.
Unresponsive.
In what way is Windows any more WYSIWYG than macOS?
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during Snow Leopard,
but then again it hasn't really changed fundamentally, it's
counterintuitive to me.-a They are on a lower intellectual level than Microsoft, and definitely the GNU/Linux realm.-a People who click with
macOS are willing to pay for the privilege, but damn it's pricey, the hardware options not competitive with Windows devices.
On 2025-08-24, Joel W. Crump <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/24/2025 2:23 PM, Alan wrote:
the
typical home user is better off with something else [than a Mac], because of the
ridiculous expense of the Apple platform, even if they like macOS,
it's just throwing money down the toilet.-a Maybe they have money to
burn, I could understand that, but it would never click with me even
if I did have a billion dollars, because my brain doesn't work that
way to prefer Apple's quirkware.
"Ridiculous expense"? Please.
Yes: my MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,200CAD, but based on my experience,
this is a computer I can easily use for the next 5 years.
That's $37 a month.
Even if a decent laptop with Linux cost me a third of that (and I very
much doubt you can find one as good for that number), the difference is
about $25/month.
That's hardly a huge barrier to entry.
The point is, for that price, you could've gotten more hardware with
another platform. It's like buying a Hyundai over a Honda, is it
literally as good, maybe not in someone's OCD mind, but it's clearly a
better value financially.
With the exception of storage and "maybe" RAM, more doesn't equate equally between
platforms.
The efficiency of the OS and application software plays a big part so just because you have
a higher clocked CPU and more memory for the same amount of money doesn't mean something like
Photoshop will run better on the higher hardware spec with Windows vs Mac.
And on that same note, Alan is correct in that the user experience is a combination
of software and hardware. One without the other is useless.
You really seem to have a lot of freaky, obtuse issues with computers that you are either
unable to accurately describe or are fantasizing about.
Maybe you should find another hobby?
Just a suggestion.
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 18:16:39 -0400, Joel W. Crump wrote:
The Apple-centric software *largely* sucks (although selected apps are
great, Microsoft Office and Adobe's stuff are better than on Windows,
imo), the Unix features are incomplete.
There was a thing called rCLthe Unix philosophyrCY. Though perhaps we should nowadays call it rCLthe *nix philosophyrCY.
One of its principles is rCLmechanism, not policyrCY. The OS kernel and core userland should, as far as possible, not prejudge the ways in which users, developers and admins may want to deploy the system; let them configure
it, and build higher custom layers on top of it, to do whatever they want.
Consider how *nix display servers like X11, and now Wayland, conform to
this philosophy, by being separate modular, replaceable layers that
operate entirely in userland. And they are not GUIs in themselves: the
actual GUIs are additional higher layers on top of them, that are modular
and replaceable in themselves.
Consider how Apple breaks this philosophy, by inextricably binding itsparticular conception of a GUI tightly into its OS kernel.
On 8/24/2025 6:18 PM, pothead wrote:
On 2025-08-24, Joel W. Crump <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/24/2025 2:23 PM, Alan wrote:
the
typical home user is better off with something else [than a Mac],
because of the
ridiculous expense of the Apple platform, even if they like macOS,
it's just throwing money down the toilet.-a Maybe they have money to >>>>> burn, I could understand that, but it would never click with me even >>>>> if I did have a billion dollars, because my brain doesn't work that
way to prefer Apple's quirkware.
"Ridiculous expense"? Please.
Yes: my MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,200CAD, but based on my experience, >>>> this is a computer I can easily use for the next 5 years.
That's $37 a month.
Even if a decent laptop with Linux cost me a third of that (and I very >>>> much doubt you can find one as good for that number), the difference is >>>> about $25/month.
That's hardly a huge barrier to entry.
The point is, for that price, you could've gotten more hardware with
another platform.-a It's like buying a Hyundai over a Honda, is it
literally as good, maybe not in someone's OCD mind, but it's clearly a
better value financially.
With the exception of storage and "maybe" RAM, more doesn't equate
equally between
platforms.
The efficiency of the OS and application software plays a big part so
just because you have
a higher clocked CPU and more memory for the same amount of money
doesn't mean something like
Photoshop will run better on the higher hardware spec with Windows vs
Mac.
I guess.-a But Apple is still weird, even if it somehow makes such great
use of their paltry offerings of hardware.
And on that same note, Alan is correct in that the user experience is
a combination
of software and hardware. One without the other is useless.
You really seem to have a lot of freaky, obtuse issues with computers
that you are either
unable to accurately describe or are fantasizing about.
Maybe you should find another hobby?
Just a suggestion.
Au contraire, I get results.-a Everyone makes mistakes, everyone hasNothing killed my MacBook Pro except extreme old age, and even then, I
karma, that's what killed my computer, but I bounced back hard.
The Apple-centric software *largely* sucks (although selected apps are
great, Microsoft Office and Adobe's stuff are better than on Windows,
imo), the Unix features are incomplete.
There was a thing called rCLthe Unix philosophyrCY. Though perhaps we should nowadays call it rCLthe *nix philosophyrCY.
One of its principles is rCLmechanism, not policyrCY. The OS kernel and core userland should, as far as possible, not prejudge the ways in which users, developers and admins may want to deploy the system; let them configure
it, and build higher custom layers on top of it, to do whatever they want.
Consider how *nix display servers like X11, and now Wayland, conform to
this philosophy, by being separate modular, replaceable layers that
operate entirely in userland. And they are not GUIs in themselves: the
actual GUIs are additional higher layers on top of them, that are modular
and replaceable in themselves.
Consider how Apple breaks this philosophy, by inextricably binding its particular conception of a GUI tightly into its OS kernel.
On 8/24/2025 2:38 PM, Alan wrote:
The Mac I bought to try out ended up getting completely wiped and
Windows 7 put on it, though I did try using Boot Camp, but was
unsatisfied with that setup. I actually liked Snow Leopard when I
first got it, tried numerous Apple-native apps, tried out its Unix
components, thought it was cool, but it wore off. I'm just not wired
for Apple.
In what way?
More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", because you replaced
it with Windows, what makes you more "wired" for that?
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky. Linux requires comprehension,
which I have, but I'm not disliking using Windows again, for now. I
haven't made my decision about replacing it with Linux on this mini PC.
More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", because you
replaced it with Windows, what makes you more "wired" for that?
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky.-a Linux requires
comprehension, which I have, but I'm not disliking using Windows
again, for now.-a I haven't made my decision about replacing it with
Linux on this mini PC.
Unresponsive.
In what way is Windows any more WYSIWYG than macOS?
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during Snow
Leopard, but then again it hasn't really changed fundamentally, it's
counterintuitive to me.-a They are on a lower intellectual level than
Microsoft, and definitely the GNU/Linux realm.-a People who click with
macOS are willing to pay for the privilege, but damn it's pricey, the
hardware options not competitive with Windows devices.
IN WHAT SPECIFIC WAYS?
HOW was it supposedly "counterintuitive"?
See: I can list some ways that Windows as it stands TODAY is downright
user hostile.
1. Windows 10 created a new application called "Settings"...
...but you still needed to use the Control Panel for some things.
And that is still true (albeit to a lesser degree) of Windows 11.
2. How do you change the scrolling direction of the mouse wheel
(assuming your mouse has one).
I could go on, but believe me there are others that astound me all the
time.
And overall, the fluidity--the look and feel--of the interface is just terrible! The pointer doesn't move as smoothly. The rendering
of... ...everything in the UI looks terrible.
On 8/24/2025 6:24 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
The Apple-centric software *largely* sucks (although selected apps are
great, Microsoft Office and Adobe's stuff are better than on Windows,
imo), the Unix features are incomplete.
There was a thing called rCLthe Unix philosophyrCY. Though perhaps we should >> nowadays call it rCLthe *nix philosophyrCY.
One of its principles is rCLmechanism, not policyrCY. The OS kernel and core >> userland should, as far as possible, not prejudge the ways in which
users,
developers and admins may want to deploy the system; let them configure
it, and build higher custom layers on top of it, to do whatever they
want.
Consider how *nix display servers like X11, and now Wayland, conform to
this philosophy, by being separate modular, replaceable layers that
operate entirely in userland. And they are not GUIs in themselves: the
actual GUIs are additional higher layers on top of them, that are modular
and replaceable in themselves.
Consider how Apple breaks this philosophy, by inextricably binding its
particular conception of a GUI tightly into its OS kernel.
It's a minor concern, ultimately, I do like the modular nature of Unix
and GNU/Linux in terms of creating a GUI, it's terrific, but Microsoft
and Apple haven't failed to be as advanced as such, there's nothing to
say there are limitations on what can be developed for them.
On 8/24/2025 5:34 PM, Alan wrote:
Your claim was that it is "quirky".But please elaborate:
What makes Apple's technology so "quirky" in your estimation?
It has the potential to be a great Unix platform, but ends up being
just a proprietary GUI by dull minds at a cult company, when all is
said and done, at exorbitant prices.-a It's a money pit, even more
than Windows systems are.
Justify that claim.
The Apple-centric software *largely* sucks (although selected apps are great, Microsoft Office and Adobe's stuff are better than on Windows,You claim it is "quirky".
imo), the Unix features are incomplete.-a It's a total bizarro world to
me, compared to Windows or Linux.
On 8/24/2025 6:27 PM, Alan wrote:
More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", because you
replaced it with Windows, what makes you more "wired" for that?
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky.-a Linux requires
comprehension, which I have, but I'm not disliking using Windows
again, for now.-a I haven't made my decision about replacing it with >>>>> Linux on this mini PC.
Unresponsive.
In what way is Windows any more WYSIWYG than macOS?
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during Snow
Leopard, but then again it hasn't really changed fundamentally, it's
counterintuitive to me.-a They are on a lower intellectual level than
Microsoft, and definitely the GNU/Linux realm.-a People who click with
macOS are willing to pay for the privilege, but damn it's pricey, the
hardware options not competitive with Windows devices.
IN WHAT SPECIFIC WAYS?
HOW was it supposedly "counterintuitive"?
See: I can list some ways that Windows as it stands TODAY is downright
user hostile.
1. Windows 10 created a new application called "Settings"...
...but you still needed to use the Control Panel for some things.
And that is still true (albeit to a lesser degree) of Windows 11.
2. How do you change the scrolling direction of the mouse wheel
(assuming your mouse has one).
I could go on, but believe me there are others that astound me all the
time.
And overall, the fluidity--the look and feel--of the interface is just
terrible! The pointer doesn't move as smoothly. The rendering
of... ...everything in the UI looks terrible.
I hear you, with the way Windows settings have evolved, not beingSo, you're comparing which version of File Explorer to an OS that came
entirely coherent, but File Explorer is light years better than Finder
as I experienced it under Snow Leopard.-a Edge is better than Safari, AFAIK.-a Apple is just the duller minds of the industry.
Joel W. Crump <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/24/2025 2:38 PM, Alan wrote:
The Mac I bought to try out ended up getting completely wiped and
Windows 7 put on it, though I did try using Boot Camp, but was
unsatisfied with that setup. I actually liked Snow Leopard when I
first got it, tried numerous Apple-native apps, tried out its Unix
components, thought it was cool, but it wore off. I'm just not wired
for Apple.
In what way?
More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", because you replaced >>> it with Windows, what makes you more "wired" for that?
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky. Linux requires comprehension,
which I have, but I'm not disliking using Windows again, for now. I
haven't made my decision about replacing it with Linux on this mini PC.
You say that your experience of Mac was using Snow Leopard: that
version was current 16 years ago. You're a very long way out of date
to be passing comments about modern macOS.
In what way was that ancient version quirky? Do you mean "different
from Windows"? Perhaps it required too much of a mental gear-shift
to become properly accustomed to the Mac way of going about things.
To be fair, it did take me a couple of days to be comfortable with it
when I first migrated to Mac from Windows via Mandrake Linux.
Apple is still weird, even if it somehow makes such
great use of their paltry offerings of hardware.
HOW is it weird? I'm guessing by "weird" you really mean, "does
something in a way /I/ don't like.
And what makes their offerings "paltry" exactly?
I get results [from using computers].-a Everyone makes mistakes, everyone has
karma, that's what killed my computer, but I bounced back hard.
Nothing killed my MacBook Pro except extreme old age, and even then, I
could have fixed it, if I'd wanted to.
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky. Linux requires comprehension,
which I have, but I'm not disliking using Windows again, for now. I
haven't made my decision about replacing it with Linux on this mini PC.
You say that your experience of Mac was using Snow Leopard: that
version was current 16 years ago. You're a very long way out of date
to be passing comments about modern macOS.
In what way was that ancient version quirky? Do you mean "different
from Windows"? Perhaps it required too much of a mental gear-shift
to become properly accustomed to the Mac way of going about things.
To be fair, it did take me a couple of days to be comfortable with it
when I first migrated to Mac from Windows via Mandrake Linux.
File Explorer is light years better than Finder
as I experienced it under Snow Leopard.-a Edge is better than Safari,
AFAIK.-a Apple is just the duller minds of the industry.
So, you're comparing which version of File Explorer to an OS that came
out 16 years ago; Windows 7?
HOW is "Edge better than Safari"? How can you possibly say "AFAIK" about
it?
On 8/24/2025 6:45 PM, Alan wrote:
Apple is still weird, even if it somehow makes such great use of
their paltry offerings of hardware.
HOW is it weird? I'm guessing by "weird" you really mean, "does
something in a way /I/ don't like.
It's not a matter of what I like, it's functionality.-a Microsoft puts
the special touch of forethought to make it intuitive.
And what makes their offerings "paltry" exactly?
Are you kidding?-a Do the comparisons of devices offered.-a You'll see it fast.-a Apple is expensive.
I get results [from using computers].-a Everyone makes mistakes,
everyone has karma, that's what killed my computer, but I bounced
back hard.
Nothing killed my MacBook Pro except extreme old age, and even then, I
could have fixed it, if I'd wanted to.
I will salvage the parts from my dead computer, when I have real moneySo you've had to buy two computers...
to spend on a fresh motherboard.-a But for now, the mini PC has replaced it.
On 8/24/2025 6:49 PM, Sn!pe wrote:
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky.-a Linux requires comprehension,
which I have, but I'm not disliking using Windows again, for now.-a I
haven't made my decision about replacing it with Linux on this mini PC.
You say that your experience of Mac was using Snow Leopard: that
version was current 16 years ago.-a You're a very long way out of date
to be passing comments about modern macOS.
Fair point - but I'm less than confident in Apple's ability to keep pace
of development.
In what way was that ancient version quirky?-a Do you mean "different
from Windows"?-a Perhaps it required too much of a mental gear-shift
to become properly accustomed to the Mac way of going about things.
To be fair, it did take me a couple of days to be comfortable with it
when I first migrated to Mac from Windows via Mandrake Linux.
Apple just doesn't have great coders.-a Microsoft and Adobe make good software for them, so do other smaller developers, but Finder in Snow Leopard was laughable.How do you KNOW Apple doesn't have "great coders"?
On 8/24/2025 6:57 PM, Alan wrote:
File Explorer is light years better than Finder as I experienced it
under Snow Leopard.-a Edge is better than Safari, AFAIK.-a Apple is
just the duller minds of the industry.
So, you're comparing which version of File Explorer to an OS that came
out 16 years ago; Windows 7?
I'm not going to believe Apple has done anything big with it, since
then, they're lazy.
HOW is "Edge better than Safari"? How can you possibly say "AFAIK"
about it?
Based on my experience, at least, I could be out of date regardingSo you're comparing a version of Safari from 16 years ago with a browser
Safari, but I doubt it's improved.
In what way was that ancient version quirky? Do you mean "different
from Windows"? Perhaps it required too much of a mental gear-shift
to become properly accustomed to the Mac way of going about things.
To be fair, it did take me a couple of days to be comfortable with it
when I first migrated to Mac from Windows via Mandrake Linux.
And I bet you've never looked back. :-)
You say that your experience of Mac was using Snow Leopard: that
version was current 16 years ago. You're a very long way out of date
to be passing comments about modern macOS.
Fair point - but I'm less than confident in Apple's ability to keep pace
of development.
In what way was that ancient version quirky? Do you mean "different
from Windows"? Perhaps it required too much of a mental gear-shift
to become properly accustomed to the Mac way of going about things.
To be fair, it did take me a couple of days to be comfortable with it
when I first migrated to Mac from Windows via Mandrake Linux.
Apple just doesn't have great coders.
Microsoft and Adobe make good software for them, so do other smaller developers, but Finder in Snow Leopard was laughable.
On 8/24/2025 6:24 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
Consider how *nix display servers like X11, and now Wayland, conform to
this philosophy, by being separate modular, replaceable layers that
operate entirely in userland.
It's a minor concern, ultimately, I do like the modular nature of Unix
and GNU/Linux in terms of creating a GUI, it's terrific, but Microsoft
and Apple haven't failed to be as advanced as such, there's nothing to
say there are limitations on what can be developed for them.
And what makes their offerings "paltry" exactly?
Are you kidding?-a Do the comparisons of devices offered.-a You'll see
it fast.-a Apple is expensive.
More expensive, yes. Stipulated.
In what way are the devices they offer "paltry".
Or do you just not know what the word actually means?
I get results [from using computers].-a Everyone makes mistakes,
everyone has karma, that's what killed my computer, but I bounced
back hard.
Nothing killed my MacBook Pro except extreme old age, and even then,
I could have fixed it, if I'd wanted to.
I will salvage the parts from my dead computer, when I have real money
to spend on a fresh motherboard.-a But for now, the mini PC has
replaced it.
So you've had to buy two computers...
...so what is their combined cost?
On 8/24/2025 6:57 PM, Alan wrote:
HOW is "Edge better than Safari"? How can you possibly say "AFAIK"
about it?
Based on my experience, at least, I could be out of date regarding
Safari, but I doubt it's improved.
... Finder in Snow Leopard was laughable.
To be fair, it did take me a couple of days to be comfortable with it
when I first migrated to Mac from Windows via Mandrake Linux.
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 23:49:54 +0100, Sn!pe wrote:
To be fair, it did take me a couple of days to be comfortable with it
when I first migrated to Mac from Windows via Mandrake Linux.
Does the Mac still have that weird GUI window-layering bug?
Try this: open windows A1 and A2 in app A, and another window B1 in app B. Stack them like this, from front to back:
A1
B1
A2
Now when you close window A1, you would expect window B1 to be at the
front, right? Instead, it is A2 that comes to the front!
On 8/24/2025 4:55 PM, -hh wrote:
On 8/24/25 16:39, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 2:24 PM, Alan wrote:
[For a] preassembled system, Apple's are not the best value, unless >>>>> you just *have* to have macOS.
You cannot separate the value of the hardware from the value of the
software it runs.
So you want macOS, I get it, that's fine, you do you.-a But you're
paying through the *nose*, for the so-called privilege.
Except for how you've utterly missed the Sam Vimes theory of boots.
Explain, if you would.
So you want macOS, I get it, that's fine, you do you. But you're
paying through the *nose*, for the so-called privilege.
Except for how you've utterly missed the Sam Vimes theory of boots.
Explain, if you would.
I've already provided the Wiki page today, in another post here.
But maybe this would be more your speed: <https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=Sam+Vimes+theory+of+boots&l=1>
So you want macOS, I get it, that's fine, you do you.-a But you're
paying through the *nose*, for the so-called privilege.
Except for how you've utterly missed the Sam Vimes theory of boots.
Explain, if you would.
I've already provided the Wiki page today, in another post here.
But maybe this would be more your speed: <https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=Sam+Vimes+theory+of+boots&l=1>
-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
So you want macOS, I get it, that's fine, you do you. But you're
paying through the *nose*, for the so-called privilege.
Except for how you've utterly missed the Sam Vimes theory of boots.
Explain, if you would.
I've already provided the Wiki page today, in another post here.
But maybe this would be more your speed:
<https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=Sam+Vimes+theory+of+boots&l=1>
PMFJI In a nutshell: buy cheap, buy twice.
On 8/24/2025 8:26 PM, -hh wrote:
So you want macOS, I get it, that's fine, you do you. But you're
paying through the *nose*, for the so-called privilege.
Except for how you've utterly missed the Sam Vimes theory of boots.
Explain, if you would.
I've already provided the Wiki page today, in another post here.
But maybe this would be more your speed: <https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=Sam+Vimes+theory+of+boots&l=1>
Ah, OK, the LSD-mind level, clever theory on economic efficiency, which
I probably would "utterly miss" given that money is just a meaningless
thing to me, I don't waste it deliberately, I spend it intelligently,
but this endless mind wrenching with budgeting is irrelevant to me, I
wing it, and I get by, despite not being rich. If I need/want it, I buy
it, simple. That's how I recovered so easily from destroying my
computer, I looked and lo and behold there was an answer, I tapped on my phone screen and Amazon hooked me up. Boom.
On 8/24/2025 7:18 PM, Alan wrote:
And what makes their offerings "paltry" exactly?
Are you kidding?-a Do the comparisons of devices offered.-a You'll see
it fast.-a Apple is expensive.
More expensive, yes. Stipulated.
In what way are the devices they offer "paltry".
Or do you just not know what the word actually means?
Let's say the default configuration comes with 16 GB RAM, the next step
up will be 24 rather than 32, for a large sum.-a It's lame.
I get results [from using computers].-a Everyone makes mistakes,
everyone has karma, that's what killed my computer, but I bounced
back hard.
Nothing killed my MacBook Pro except extreme old age, and even then,
I could have fixed it, if I'd wanted to.
I will salvage the parts from my dead computer, when I have real
money to spend on a fresh motherboard.-a But for now, the mini PC has
replaced it.
So you've had to buy two computers...
...so what is their combined cost?
It was the result of bad judgment in accepting a pirated TV show videoI note you don't give me an actual cost...
file, a chain of events that destroyed a perfectly good computer.-a But I can deal with it.-a The mini PC was about $200, came with Win11 Pro, not
as bad as I thought too, I was gonna take a look and quickly put Linux
on it, but now I'm not so sure, with 24H2's improvements in performance.
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 19:17:39 -0400, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 6:57 PM, Alan wrote:
HOW is "Edge better than Safari"? How can you possibly say "AFAIK"
about it?
Based on my experience, at least, I could be out of date regarding
Safari, but I doubt it's improved.
Safari is the poor cousin of web browsers. Go to MDN (which I do a lot for web development), and look at the compatibility matrices for various web features, and see how often you find a whole bunch of red -- usually the
only red entries -- in the column for Safari.
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 19:13:26 -0400, Joel W. Crump wrote:
... Finder in Snow Leopard was laughable.
Apple are still fond of the rCLspatial file browserrCY concept, arenrCOt they.
This means that, when you double-click a folder, and there is already a window open showing its contents, then that window comes to the front, instead of a new one opening.
Everybody else finds this very irritating.
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 23:49:54 +0100, Sn!pe wrote:
To be fair, it did take me a couple of days to be comfortable with it
when I first migrated to Mac from Windows via Mandrake Linux.
Does the Mac still have that weird GUI window-layering bug?
Try this: open windows A1 and A2 in app A, and another window B1 in app B. Stack them like this, from front to back:
A1
B1
A2
Now when you close window A1, you would expect window B1 to be at the
front, right? Instead, it is A2 that comes to the front!
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 23:49:54 +0100, Sn!pe wrote:I neither know nor care about that.
To be fair, it did take me a couple of days to be comfortable with itDoes the Mac still have that weird GUI window-layering bug?
when I first migrated to Mac from Windows via Mandrake Linux.
Try this: open windows A1 and A2 in app A, and another window B1 in app
B.
Stack them like this, from front to back:
A1 B1 A2
Now when you close window A1, you would expect window B1 to be at the
front, right? Instead, it is A2 that comes to the front!
On 8/24/2025 7:18 PM, Alan wrote:
And what makes their offerings "paltry" exactly?
Are you kidding?-a Do the comparisons of devices offered.-a You'll see
it fast.-a Apple is expensive.
More expensive, yes. Stipulated.
In what way are the devices they offer "paltry".
Or do you just not know what the word actually means?
Let's say...
It's not a matter of what I like, it's functionality. Microsoft puts the special touch of forethought to make it intuitive.
And yet you cannot articulate a single example.
Got it.
On 8/24/25 16:39, Joel W. Crump wrote:
So you want macOS, I get it, that's fine, you do you.-a But you're
paying through the *nose*, for the so-called privilege.
Except for how you've utterly missed the Sam Vimes theory of boots.
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 01:15:04 +0100, Sn!pe wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 23:49:54 +0100, Sn!pe wrote:I neither know nor care about that.
To be fair, it did take me a couple of days to be comfortable with itDoes the Mac still have that weird GUI window-layering bug?
when I first migrated to Mac from Windows via Mandrake Linux.
Try this: open windows A1 and A2 in app A, and another window B1 in app
B.
Stack them like this, from front to back:
A1 B1 A2
Now when you close window A1, you would expect window B1 to be at the
front, right? Instead, it is A2 that comes to the front!
I suppose Apple is assuming all its users can be persuaded to embrace the same attitude ...
I neither know nor care about that.
I suppose Apple is assuming all its users can be persuaded to embrace the same attitude ...
Joel W. Crump <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/24/2025 8:26 PM, -hh wrote:
So you want macOS, I get it, that's fine, you do you. But you're
paying through the *nose*, for the so-called privilege.
Except for how you've utterly missed the Sam Vimes theory of boots.
Explain, if you would.
I've already provided the Wiki page today, in another post here.
But maybe this would be more your speed:
<https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=Sam+Vimes+theory+of+boots&l=1>
Ah, OK, the LSD-mind level, clever theory on economic efficiency, which
I probably would "utterly miss" given that money is just a meaningless
thing to me, I don't waste it deliberately, I spend it intelligently,
but this endless mind wrenching with budgeting is irrelevant to me, I
wing it, and I get by, despite not being rich. If I need/want it, I buy
it, simple. That's how I recovered so easily from destroying my
computer, I looked and lo and behold there was an answer, I tapped on my
phone screen and Amazon hooked me up. Boom.
If that is truly your attitude to money, why do you say:
"So you want macOS, I get it, that's fine, you do you. But
you're paying through the *nose*, for the so-called privilege." ?
There appears to be some degree of inconsistency in this.
In what way are the devices they offer "paltry".
Or do you just not know what the word actually means?
Let's say...
...that you snipped this exchange, because you had nothing?
It's not a matter of what I like, it's functionality.-a Microsoft
puts the special touch of forethought to make it intuitive.
And yet you cannot articulate a single example.
Got it.
Well?
On 8/24/2025 9:22 PM, Alan wrote:
In what way are the devices they offer "paltry".
Or do you just not know what the word actually means?
Let's say...
...that you snipped this exchange, because you had nothing?
You're the one playing that game, you snipped what I said, because it demonstrates you "have nothing" to contradict the point, Apple is pricey
It's not a matter of what I like, it's functionality.-a Microsoft
puts the special touch of forethought to make it intuitive.
And yet you cannot articulate a single example.
Got it.
Well?
The way Finder is operated is not robust.
On 8/24/25 05:32, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 04:52:22 -0400, Joel W. Crump wrote:
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer. It's too expensive.
And lacking in expandability and versatility...
Although when one reads of anti-Apple folks who replace their GPU card multiple times and then have to replace their fried motherboard from
their DIY'ing...
...there's certainly a whole bunch of folk who would benefit from an "appliance" that reduces the odds of them fat-fingering breaking it.
-hh
On 2025-08-24 02:44, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 5:32 AM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:"Ridiculous expense"? Please.
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer.-a It's too expensive.
And lacking in expandability and versatility. All ApplerCOs machines are >>> basically just glorified laptops now.
And the OS may have licensed the rCLUnixrCY trademark, but it doesnrCOt work
the way people expect traditional rCLUnixrCY systems to work.
Ask one of the original Bell Labs crew, Ken rCLMr UnixrCY Thompson: he has >>> given up on Apple and switched to Linux.
Right, it's a freakin' joke, if you ask me, there are *selected*
functions of macOS software that outshine the competition, but the
typical home user is better off with something else, because of the
ridiculous expense of the Apple platform, even if they like macOS, it's
just throwing money down the toilet.-a Maybe they have money to burn, I
could understand that, but it would never click with me even if I did
have a billion dollars, because my brain doesn't work that way to
prefer Apple's quirkware.
Yes: my MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,200CAD, but based on my experience,
this is a computer I can easily use for the next 5 years.
That's $37 a month.
Even if a decent laptop with Linux cost me a third of that (and I very
much doubt you can find one as good for that number), the difference is
about $25/month.
That's hardly a huge barrier to entry.
But please elaborate:
What makes Apple's technology so "quirky" in your estimation?
On 2025-08-24 14:56, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 13:35:38 -0400, Nick Charles wrote:
As for Ken Thompson, he is now 82 years old and works for Google.
That tells you all you need to know about his state of mind.
Resorting to ad-hominem attacks to try to discredit a well-regarded
authority with a long-standing reputation is ... a sign of desperation,
letrCOs face it.
While I disagree with the nature of the attack, the previous poster just
used a different logical fallacy:
Appeal to authority.
On 8/24/2025 5:31 PM, Alan wrote:
More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", because you
replaced it with Windows, what makes you more "wired" for that?
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky.-a Linux requires comprehension, >>> which I have, but I'm not disliking using Windows again, for now.-a I
haven't made my decision about replacing it with Linux on this mini PC.
Unresponsive.
In what way is Windows any more WYSIWYG than macOS?
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during Snow Leopard,
but then again it hasn't really changed fundamentally, it's
counterintuitive to me. They are on a lower intellectual level than Microsoft, and definitely the GNU/Linux realm. People who click with
macOS are willing to pay for the privilege, but damn it's pricey, the hardware options not competitive with Windows devices.
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 18:12:53 -0400, "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in <F7MqQ.193548$%RW3.158951@fx14.iad>:
On 8/24/2025 5:31 PM, Alan wrote:
Unresponsive.More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", because you
replaced it with Windows, what makes you more "wired" for that?
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky.-a Linux requires comprehension, >>>> which I have, but I'm not disliking using Windows again, for now.-a I
haven't made my decision about replacing it with Linux on this mini PC. >>>
In what way is Windows any more WYSIWYG than macOS?
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during Snow Leopard,
but then again it hasn't really changed fundamentally, it's
counterintuitive to me. They are on a lower intellectual level than
Microsoft, and definitely the GNU/Linux realm. People who click with
macOS are willing to pay for the privilege, but damn it's pricey, the
hardware options not competitive with Windows devices.
Well, we bought a Mac Studio, which is a low-end UNIX(r) workstation,
not comparable to a Windows desktop.
However, for $4K more, I bought this Linux workstation from System76,
and it runs rings around the Mac for my workloads.
When it comes to computers, I like to buy one that will last for a while, giving it some future-proofing. For example, my Linux workstation has
two 10Gbase-T Ethernet ports, one of which I use to talk to my NAS
at 10Gbits/s.
Hugh posted a link that you should read about "boots theory":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory
Going back to the Mac, I think Thunderbolt supports 40Gbits/s connections. (Someone please correct me if I'm wrong -- it may be faster now.)
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 11:23:05 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote in <108flaa$2vcpq$2@dont-email.me>:
On 2025-08-24 02:44, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 5:32 AM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:"Ridiculous expense"? Please.
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer.-a It's too expensive. >>>>And lacking in expandability and versatility. All ApplerCOs machines are >>>> basically just glorified laptops now.
And the OS may have licensed the rCLUnixrCY trademark, but it doesnrCOt work
the way people expect traditional rCLUnixrCY systems to work.
Ask one of the original Bell Labs crew, Ken rCLMr UnixrCY Thompson: he has >>>> given up on Apple and switched to Linux.
Right, it's a freakin' joke, if you ask me, there are *selected*
functions of macOS software that outshine the competition, but the
typical home user is better off with something else, because of the
ridiculous expense of the Apple platform, even if they like macOS, it's
just throwing money down the toilet.-a Maybe they have money to burn, I
could understand that, but it would never click with me even if I did
have a billion dollars, because my brain doesn't work that way to
prefer Apple's quirkware.
Yes: my MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,200CAD, but based on my experience,
this is a computer I can easily use for the next 5 years.
That's $37 a month.
Even if a decent laptop with Linux cost me a third of that (and I very
much doubt you can find one as good for that number), the difference is
about $25/month.
That's hardly a huge barrier to entry.
But please elaborate:
What makes Apple's technology so "quirky" in your estimation?
They put the window buttons on the wrong side of the titlebar.
;)
Seriously, though, there's nothing wrong with higher end Macs for
what you get. I wouldn't wish a Mac mini on my worst enemy, though.
Someone said Macs weren't extendable -- but they are, with Thunderbolt,
which is basically "external PCIE".
Same guy said Macs "weren't really Unix" (paraphrased), but has never explained what he means by that, and I daresay he's never used a MacI don't know what "docker" is, and what in Linux context are "containers"?
command line -- which is bash, in a POSIX+ environment.
There's something to be said about people with no knowledge or
experience with a system making claims about it. I'll not say it
personally, but leave it to others to decide.
But having said all that: Linux is still a better environment
for _my_ needs, which includes a recent installation of a document
management system, using docker. (Do Macs have docker? Do they even
have containers? Beats me.)
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 18:16:39 -0400, Joel W. Crump wrote:
The Apple-centric software *largely* sucks (although selected apps are
great, Microsoft Office and Adobe's stuff are better than on Windows,
imo), the Unix features are incomplete.
There was a thing called rCLthe Unix philosophyrCY. Though perhaps we should nowadays call it rCLthe *nix philosophyrCY.
One of its principles is rCLmechanism, not policyrCY. The OS kernel and core userland should, as far as possible, not prejudge the ways in which users, developers and admins may want to deploy the system; let them configure
it, and build higher custom layers on top of it, to do whatever they want.
Consider how *nix display servers like X11, and now Wayland, conform to
this philosophy, by being separate modular, replaceable layers that
operate entirely in userland. And they are not GUIs in themselves: the actual GUIs are additional higher layers on top of them, that are modular and replaceable in themselves.
Consider how Apple breaks this philosophy, by inextricably binding its particular conception of a GUI tightly into its OS kernel.
On 2025-08-24 15:47, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 6:24 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
The Apple-centric software *largely* sucks (although selected apps are >>>> great, Microsoft Office and Adobe's stuff are better than on Windows,
imo), the Unix features are incomplete.
There was a thing called rCLthe Unix philosophyrCY. Though perhaps we should
nowadays call it rCLthe *nix philosophyrCY.
One of its principles is rCLmechanism, not policyrCY. The OS kernel and core
userland should, as far as possible, not prejudge the ways in which
users,
developers and admins may want to deploy the system; let them configure
it, and build higher custom layers on top of it, to do whatever they
want.
Consider how *nix display servers like X11, and now Wayland, conform to
this philosophy, by being separate modular, replaceable layers that
operate entirely in userland. And they are not GUIs in themselves: the
actual GUIs are additional higher layers on top of them, that are modular >>> and replaceable in themselves.
Consider how Apple breaks this philosophy, by inextricably binding its
particular conception of a GUI tightly into its OS kernel.
It's a minor concern, ultimately, I do like the modular nature of Unix
and GNU/Linux in terms of creating a GUI, it's terrific, but Microsoft
and Apple haven't failed to be as advanced as such, there's nothing to
say there are limitations on what can be developed for them.
Do you want to buy a car where you can pick which engine you use?
Have you actually created your own GUI?
On 2025-08-24 21:36, vallor wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 18:12:53 -0400, "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com>
wrote in <F7MqQ.193548$%RW3.158951@fx14.iad>:
On 8/24/2025 5:31 PM, Alan wrote:
Unresponsive.More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", because you
replaced it with Windows, what makes you more "wired" for that?
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky.-a Linux requires comprehension, >>>>> which I have, but I'm not disliking using Windows again, for now.-a I >>>>> haven't made my decision about replacing it with Linux on this mini PC. >>>>
In what way is Windows any more WYSIWYG than macOS?
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during Snow Leopard,
but then again it hasn't really changed fundamentally, it's
counterintuitive to me. They are on a lower intellectual level than
Microsoft, and definitely the GNU/Linux realm. People who click with
macOS are willing to pay for the privilege, but damn it's pricey, the
hardware options not competitive with Windows devices.
Well, we bought a Mac Studio, which is a low-end UNIX(r) workstation,
not comparable to a Windows desktop.
However, for $4K more, I bought this Linux workstation from System76,
and it runs rings around the Mac for my workloads.
I'm sorry.
Are you saying you spent $4K more than you spend on a Mac Studio...
...or that you spent $4K on another machine?
When it comes to computers, I like to buy one that will last for a while,
giving it some future-proofing. For example, my Linux workstation has
two 10Gbase-T Ethernet ports, one of which I use to talk to my NAS
at 10Gbits/s.
And what do you do with the other one?
--
Hugh posted a link that you should read about "boots theory":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory
Going back to the Mac, I think Thunderbolt supports 40Gbits/s connections. >> (Someone please correct me if I'm wrong -- it may be faster now.)
I think 40Gbits/s is correct.
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during Snow Leopard,
but then again it hasn't really changed fundamentally, it's
counterintuitive to me. They are on a lower intellectual level than
Microsoft, and definitely the GNU/Linux realm. People who click with
macOS are willing to pay for the privilege, but damn it's pricey, the
hardware options not competitive with Windows devices.
Well, we bought a Mac Studio, which is a low-end UNIX(r) workstation,
not comparable to a Windows desktop.
However, for $4K more, I bought this Linux workstation from System76,
and it runs rings around the Mac for my workloads.
When it comes to computers, I like to buy one that will last for a while, giving it some future-proofing. For example, my Linux workstation has
two 10Gbase-T Ethernet ports, one of which I use to talk to my NAS
at 10Gbits/s.
Hugh posted a link that you should read about "boots theory":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory
On 2025-08-24 02:32, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 04:52:22 -0400, Joel W. Crump wrote:
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer.-a It's too expensive.
And lacking in expandability and versatility. All ApplerCOs machines are
basically just glorified laptops now.
And the OS may have licensed the rCLUnixrCY trademark, but it doesnrCOt work
the
way people expect traditional rCLUnixrCY systems to work.
Ask one of the original Bell Labs crew, Ken rCLMr UnixrCY Thompson: he has >> given up on Apple and switched to Linux.
Sorry, Linux fans:
Pretty much everyone disagrees with you.
On 2025-08-24 15:53, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 6:27 PM, Alan wrote:So, you're comparing which version of File Explorer to an OS that came
More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", because you >>>>>>> replaced it with Windows, what makes you more "wired" for that?
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky.-a Linux requires
comprehension, which I have, but I'm not disliking using Windows
again, for now.-a I haven't made my decision about replacing it
with Linux on this mini PC.
Unresponsive.
In what way is Windows any more WYSIWYG than macOS?
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during Snow
Leopard, but then again it hasn't really changed fundamentally, it's
counterintuitive to me.-a They are on a lower intellectual level than >>>> Microsoft, and definitely the GNU/Linux realm.-a People who click
with macOS are willing to pay for the privilege, but damn it's
pricey, the hardware options not competitive with Windows devices.
IN WHAT SPECIFIC WAYS?
HOW was it supposedly "counterintuitive"?
See: I can list some ways that Windows as it stands TODAY is
downright user hostile.
1. Windows 10 created a new application called "Settings"...
...but you still needed to use the Control Panel for some things.
And that is still true (albeit to a lesser degree) of Windows 11.
2. How do you change the scrolling direction of the mouse wheel
(assuming your mouse has one).
I could go on, but believe me there are others that astound me all
the time.
And overall, the fluidity--the look and feel--of the interface is
just terrible! The pointer doesn't move as smoothly. The rendering
of... ...everything in the UI looks terrible.
I hear you, with the way Windows settings have evolved, not being
entirely coherent, but File Explorer is light years better than Finder
as I experienced it under Snow Leopard.-a Edge is better than Safari,
AFAIK.-a Apple is just the duller minds of the industry.
out 16 years ago; Windows 7?
HOW is "Edge better than Safari"? How can you possibly say "AFAIK" about
it?
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 16:55:27 -0400, -hh wrote:
On 8/24/25 16:39, Joel W. Crump wrote:
So you want macOS, I get it, that's fine, you do you.-a But you're
paying through the *nose*, for the so-called privilege.
Except for how you've utterly missed the Sam Vimes theory of boots.
If Macs really did last longer and have better build quality than other
PCs, you might have a point. As it is, you donrCOt.
Remember, Apple has even given up on any kind of future upgradeability of basic things like RAM on its current machines; they are all just glorified laptops now.
On 2025-08-24 6:57 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-24 15:53, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 6:27 PM, Alan wrote:So, you're comparing which version of File Explorer to an OS that came
More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", because you >>>>>>>> replaced it with Windows, what makes you more "wired" for that? >>>>>>>Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky.-a Linux requires
comprehension, which I have, but I'm not disliking using Windows >>>>>>> again, for now.-a I haven't made my decision about replacing it >>>>>>> with Linux on this mini PC.
Unresponsive.
In what way is Windows any more WYSIWYG than macOS?
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during Snow
Leopard, but then again it hasn't really changed fundamentally,
it's counterintuitive to me.-a They are on a lower intellectual
level than Microsoft, and definitely the GNU/Linux realm.-a People
who click with macOS are willing to pay for the privilege, but damn >>>>> it's pricey, the hardware options not competitive with Windows
devices.
IN WHAT SPECIFIC WAYS?
HOW was it supposedly "counterintuitive"?
See: I can list some ways that Windows as it stands TODAY is
downright user hostile.
1. Windows 10 created a new application called "Settings"...
...but you still needed to use the Control Panel for some things.
And that is still true (albeit to a lesser degree) of Windows 11.
2. How do you change the scrolling direction of the mouse wheel
(assuming your mouse has one).
I could go on, but believe me there are others that astound me all
the time.
And overall, the fluidity--the look and feel--of the interface is
just terrible! The pointer doesn't move as smoothly. The rendering
of... ...everything in the UI looks terrible.
I hear you, with the way Windows settings have evolved, not being
entirely coherent, but File Explorer is light years better than
Finder as I experienced it under Snow Leopard.-a Edge is better than
Safari, AFAIK.-a Apple is just the duller minds of the industry.
out 16 years ago; Windows 7?
HOW is "Edge better than Safari"? How can you possibly say "AFAIK"
about it?
For one, Edge uses the Chromium engine which provides for better compatibility with websites.
It also provides some very decent AI
functionality that is completely absent from Safari.
That said, I have
never had any serious troubles with Safari in the recent times I've used
it. I think that most people will see no problem whatsoever with Safari
in their daily use.
On 2025-08-24 12:47 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-24 02:32, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 04:52:22 -0400, Joel W. Crump wrote:
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer.-a It's too expensive.
And lacking in expandability and versatility. All ApplerCOs machines are >>> basically just glorified laptops now.
And the OS may have licensed the rCLUnixrCY trademark, but it doesnrCOt >>> work the
way people expect traditional rCLUnixrCY systems to work.
Ask one of the original Bell Labs crew, Ken rCLMr UnixrCY Thompson: he has >>> given up on Apple and switched to Linux.
Sorry, Linux fans:
Pretty much everyone disagrees with you.
Honestly, MacOS is a more polished experience than Linux can ever hope
to be. Nevertheless, Linux is a more liberating experience than MacOS
can ever hope to be.
On 2025-08-25 05:56, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-24 6:57 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-24 15:53, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 6:27 PM, Alan wrote:So, you're comparing which version of File Explorer to an OS that
More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", because you >>>>>>>>> replaced it with Windows, what makes you more "wired" for that? >>>>>>>>Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky.-a Linux requires
comprehension, which I have, but I'm not disliking using Windows >>>>>>>> again, for now.-a I haven't made my decision about replacing it >>>>>>>> with Linux on this mini PC.
Unresponsive.
In what way is Windows any more WYSIWYG than macOS?
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during Snow
Leopard, but then again it hasn't really changed fundamentally,
it's counterintuitive to me.-a They are on a lower intellectual
level than Microsoft, and definitely the GNU/Linux realm.-a People >>>>>> who click with macOS are willing to pay for the privilege, but
damn it's pricey, the hardware options not competitive with
Windows devices.
IN WHAT SPECIFIC WAYS?
HOW was it supposedly "counterintuitive"?
See: I can list some ways that Windows as it stands TODAY is
downright user hostile.
1. Windows 10 created a new application called "Settings"...
...but you still needed to use the Control Panel for some things.
And that is still true (albeit to a lesser degree) of Windows 11.
2. How do you change the scrolling direction of the mouse wheel
(assuming your mouse has one).
I could go on, but believe me there are others that astound me all
the time.
And overall, the fluidity--the look and feel--of the interface is
just terrible! The pointer doesn't move as smoothly. The rendering
of... ...everything in the UI looks terrible.
I hear you, with the way Windows settings have evolved, not being
entirely coherent, but File Explorer is light years better than
Finder as I experienced it under Snow Leopard.-a Edge is better than
Safari, AFAIK.-a Apple is just the duller minds of the industry.
came out 16 years ago; Windows 7?
HOW is "Edge better than Safari"? How can you possibly say "AFAIK"
about it?
For one, Edge uses the Chromium engine which provides for better
compatibility with websites.
Who says so? I've yet to see a single problem on any site I've used.
It also provides some very decent AI functionality that is completely
absent from Safari.
You mean it forces you to use Copilot.
On 2025-08-25 05:49, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-24 12:47 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-24 02:32, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 04:52:22 -0400, Joel W. Crump wrote:
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer.-a It's too expensive. >>>>And lacking in expandability and versatility. All ApplerCOs machines are >>>> basically just glorified laptops now.
And the OS may have licensed the rCLUnixrCY trademark, but it doesnrCOt >>>> work the
way people expect traditional rCLUnixrCY systems to work.
Ask one of the original Bell Labs crew, Ken rCLMr UnixrCY Thompson: he has >>>> given up on Apple and switched to Linux.
Sorry, Linux fans:
Pretty much everyone disagrees with you.
Honestly, MacOS is a more polished experience than Linux can ever hope
to be. Nevertheless, Linux is a more liberating experience than MacOS
can ever hope to be.
People usually aren't looking for "liberating experience[s]" from things they simply want to use day-to-day.
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 16:55:27 -0400, -hh wrote:
On 8/24/25 16:39, Joel W. Crump wrote:
So you want macOS, I get it, that's fine, you do you.-a But you're
paying through the *nose*, for the so-called privilege.
Except for how you've utterly missed the Sam Vimes theory of boots.
If Macs really did last longer and have better build quality than other
PCs, you might have a point. As it is, you donrCOt.
Remember, Apple has even given up on any kind of future upgradeability of basic things like RAM on its current machines; they are all just glorified laptops now.Since something like 80% of the domestic PC market (Mac+Windows) is
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 09:45:48 -0400, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote in <108f52c$2r00q$2@dont-email.me>:
On 8/24/25 05:32, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 04:52:22 -0400, Joel W. Crump wrote:
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer. It's too expensive.
And lacking in expandability and versatility...
Although when one reads of anti-Apple folks who replace their GPU card
multiple times and then have to replace their fried motherboard from
their DIY'ing...
...there's certainly a whole bunch of folk who would benefit from an
"appliance" that reduces the odds of them fat-fingering breaking it.
-hh
There's also this matter of "expandable", which Macs _do_ have,
with the advent of "external pcie", aka "thunderbolt".
Honestly, MacOS is a more polished experience than Linux can ever hope
to be.
Nevertheless, Linux is a more liberating experience than MacOS
can ever hope to be.
-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
But maybe this would be more your speed:
<https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=Sam+Vimes+theory+of+boots&l=1>
PMFJI In a nutshell: buy cheap, buy twice.
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 18:12:53 -0400, "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in <F7MqQ.193548$%RW3.158951@fx14.iad>:
On 8/24/2025 5:31 PM, Alan wrote:
Unresponsive.More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", because you
replaced it with Windows, what makes you more "wired" for that?
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky.-a Linux requires comprehension, >>>> which I have, but I'm not disliking using Windows again, for now.-a I
haven't made my decision about replacing it with Linux on this mini PC. >>>
In what way is Windows any more WYSIWYG than macOS?
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during Snow Leopard,
but then again it hasn't really changed fundamentally, it's
counterintuitive to me. They are on a lower intellectual level than
Microsoft, and definitely the GNU/Linux realm. People who click with
macOS are willing to pay for the privilege, but damn it's pricey, the
hardware options not competitive with Windows devices.
Well, we bought a Mac Studio, which is a low-end UNIX(r) workstation,
not comparable to a Windows desktop.
However, for $4K more, I bought this Linux workstation from System76,
and it runs rings around the Mac for my workloads.
When it comes to computers, I like to buy one that will last for a while, giving it some future-proofing. For example, my Linux workstation has
two 10Gbase-T Ethernet ports, one of which I use to talk to my NAS
at 10Gbits/s.
Hugh posted a link that you should read about "boots theory":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory
Going back to the Mac, I think Thunderbolt supports 40Gbits/s connections. (Someone please correct me if I'm wrong -- it may be faster now.)
Sn!pe wrote:
-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
But maybe this would be more your speed:
<https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=Sam+Vimes+theory+of+boots&l=1>
PMFJI In a nutshell: buy cheap, buy twice.
Of course, since computers improve fairly rapidly, buying a cheap
computer every few years may be just as cost-effective as buying an
expensive computer less frequently.
Nevertheless, a lot of people don't care about changing the
components in their machine as much as they used to. They should,
especially since the 8GB of RAM their Mac came with is probably not
going to be enough going forward and neither is the 256GB of
storage. Still, many would rather just buy a new machine, as stupid
as that is.
Case in point, I traded-in a 2017 Mac laptop last year for a $150 credit...that's a 7 year useful life. In contrast, I also had a 2016
Dell laptop that went tits-up in 2019 with a swollen battery, and its replacement died in 2021 with a failed USB-C port ...
Because in case you hadn't noticed, laptops passed the point of being
the "good enough" for general office productivity a good decade ago, and
the Enterprise IT support strategy was that instead of trying to do any upgrades to them, to just image & replace entire machines.
Even people who are rather technical are losing interest in the
constant maintenance necessary to run Linux or to keep Windows
running.
On 8/25/25 00:36, vallor wrote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory
Yup; it was a good narrative for understanding lifecycle costs.
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 13:13:07 -0400, -hh wrote:
Case in point, I traded-in a 2017 Mac laptop last year for a $150
credit...that's a 7 year useful life. In contrast, I also had a 2016
Dell laptop that went tits-up in 2019 with a swollen battery, and its
replacement died in 2021 with a failed USB-C port ...
I have had a range of laptops, both new and second-hand. I think there was Dell and Compaq among them. None of them suffered the kind of faults you mention.
Speaking of batteries, Apple is gluing them in now, isnrCOt it? So you couldnrCOt even replace them if you wanted to.
Because in case you hadn't noticed, laptops passed the point of being
the "good enough" for general office productivity a good decade ago, and
the Enterprise IT support strategy was that instead of trying to do any
upgrades to them, to just image & replace entire machines.
What happened to the market addressed by the old Mac Pro? Seems Apple has given up on that altogether.
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 18:37:28 -0400, -hh wrote:
On 8/25/25 00:36, vallor wrote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory
Yup; it was a good narrative for understanding lifecycle costs.
If Apple made boots, they wouldnrCOt last as long as real boots, and cost even more.
None of them did that. ThatrCOs the point.
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 13:13:07 -0400, -hh wrote:
Case in point, I traded-in a 2017 Mac laptop last year for a $150
credit...that's a 7 year useful life. In contrast, I also had a 2016
Dell laptop that went tits-up in 2019 with a swollen battery, and its
replacement died in 2021 with a failed USB-C port ...
I have had a range of laptops, both new and second-hand. I think there was Dell and Compaq among them. None of them suffered the kind of faults you mention.
Speaking of batteries, Apple is gluing them in now, isnrCOt it? So you couldnrCOt even replace them if you wanted to.
Markets change; "Film at 11". The customer volume isn't there anymore.Because in case you hadn't noticed, laptops passed the point of being
the "good enough" for general office productivity a good decade ago, and
the Enterprise IT support strategy was that instead of trying to do any
upgrades to them, to just image & replace entire machines.
What happened to the market addressed by the old Mac Pro? Seems Apple has given up on that altogether.
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 15:53:56 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote in <108g564$3215v$9@dont-email.me>:And yet for most consumer goods, choice is extremely limited and
On 2025-08-24 15:47, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 6:24 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
The Apple-centric software *largely* sucks (although selected apps are >>>>> great, Microsoft Office and Adobe's stuff are better than on Windows, >>>>> imo), the Unix features are incomplete.
There was a thing called rCLthe Unix philosophyrCY. Though perhaps we should
nowadays call it rCLthe *nix philosophyrCY.
One of its principles is rCLmechanism, not policyrCY. The OS kernel and core
userland should, as far as possible, not prejudge the ways in which
users,
developers and admins may want to deploy the system; let them configure >>>> it, and build higher custom layers on top of it, to do whatever they
want.
Consider how *nix display servers like X11, and now Wayland, conform to >>>> this philosophy, by being separate modular, replaceable layers that
operate entirely in userland. And they are not GUIs in themselves: the >>>> actual GUIs are additional higher layers on top of them, that are modular >>>> and replaceable in themselves.
Consider how Apple breaks this philosophy, by inextricably binding its >>>> particular conception of a GUI tightly into its OS kernel.
It's a minor concern, ultimately, I do like the modular nature of Unix
and GNU/Linux in terms of creating a GUI, it's terrific, but Microsoft
and Apple haven't failed to be as advanced as such, there's nothing to
say there are limitations on what can be developed for them.
Do you want to buy a car where you can pick which engine you use?
Have you actually created your own GUI?
Terrible analogy.
My car's NAV system has different themes to chose from. Almost
nobody will use them, but some people do.
Choice is good.
On 2025-08-25 9:58 a.m., Alan wrote:Interesting.
On 2025-08-25 05:56, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-24 6:57 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-24 15:53, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 6:27 PM, Alan wrote:So, you're comparing which version of File Explorer to an OS that
More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", because >>>>>>>>>> you replaced it with Windows, what makes you more "wired" for >>>>>>>>>> that?
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky.-a Linux requires
comprehension, which I have, but I'm not disliking using
Windows again, for now.-a I haven't made my decision about
replacing it with Linux on this mini PC.
Unresponsive.
In what way is Windows any more WYSIWYG than macOS?
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during Snow
Leopard, but then again it hasn't really changed fundamentally, >>>>>>> it's counterintuitive to me.-a They are on a lower intellectual >>>>>>> level than Microsoft, and definitely the GNU/Linux realm.-a People >>>>>>> who click with macOS are willing to pay for the privilege, but
damn it's pricey, the hardware options not competitive with
Windows devices.
IN WHAT SPECIFIC WAYS?
HOW was it supposedly "counterintuitive"?
See: I can list some ways that Windows as it stands TODAY is
downright user hostile.
1. Windows 10 created a new application called "Settings"...
...but you still needed to use the Control Panel for some things.
And that is still true (albeit to a lesser degree) of Windows 11.
2. How do you change the scrolling direction of the mouse wheel
(assuming your mouse has one).
I could go on, but believe me there are others that astound me all >>>>>> the time.
And overall, the fluidity--the look and feel--of the interface is >>>>>> just terrible! The pointer doesn't move as smoothly. The rendering >>>>>> of... ...everything in the UI looks terrible.
I hear you, with the way Windows settings have evolved, not being
entirely coherent, but File Explorer is light years better than
Finder as I experienced it under Snow Leopard.-a Edge is better than >>>>> Safari, AFAIK.-a Apple is just the duller minds of the industry.
came out 16 years ago; Windows 7?
HOW is "Edge better than Safari"? How can you possibly say "AFAIK"
about it?
For one, Edge uses the Chromium engine which provides for better
compatibility with websites.
Who says so? I've yet to see a single problem on any site I've used.
I've read developers complaining about it but I'm with you, I have yet
to experience a problem. I don't have a Mac anymore, but I have no doubt that if I purchased one again, there would be no issue.
It also provides some very decent AI functionality that is completely
absent from Safari.
You mean it forces you to use Copilot.
No, it doesn't.
On 8/25/2025 12:36 AM, vallor wrote:
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during Snow Leopard,
but then again it hasn't really changed fundamentally, it's
counterintuitive to me.-a They are on a lower intellectual level than
Microsoft, and definitely the GNU/Linux realm.-a People who click with
macOS are willing to pay for the privilege, but damn it's pricey, the
hardware options not competitive with Windows devices.
Well, we bought a Mac Studio, which is a low-end UNIX(r) workstation,
not comparable to a Windows desktop.
However, for $4K more, I bought this Linux workstation from System76,
and it runs rings around the Mac for my workloads.
When it comes to computers, I like to buy one that will last for a while,
giving it some future-proofing.-a For example, my Linux workstation has
two 10Gbase-T Ethernet ports, one of which I use to talk to my NAS
at 10Gbits/s.
Hugh posted a link that you should read about "boots theory":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory
I accept that people are willing to pay Apple's prices because they like Apple's products, but it isn't even close comparing said prices to the competition.Really?
On 2025-08-25 9:59 a.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-25 05:49, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-24 12:47 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-24 02:32, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 04:52:22 -0400, Joel W. Crump wrote:
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer.-a It's too expensive. >>>>>And lacking in expandability and versatility. All ApplerCOs machines are >>>>> basically just glorified laptops now.
And the OS may have licensed the rCLUnixrCY trademark, but it doesnrCOt >>>>> work the
way people expect traditional rCLUnixrCY systems to work.
Ask one of the original Bell Labs crew, Ken rCLMr UnixrCY Thompson: he has
given up on Apple and switched to Linux.
Sorry, Linux fans:
Pretty much everyone disagrees with you.
Honestly, MacOS is a more polished experience than Linux can ever
hope to be. Nevertheless, Linux is a more liberating experience than
MacOS can ever hope to be.
People usually aren't looking for "liberating experience[s]" from
things they simply want to use day-to-day.
I don't disagree. Additionally, the number of people who actually want
to learn how the computer works is quickly shrinking. In most cases,
whether they are kids or adults and especially because of how popular smartphones are, they just expect the system to be polished, easy to use
and hands free in terms of maintenance. Even people who are rather
technical are losing interest in the constant maintenance necessary to
run Linux or to keep Windows running. Bravo to the exception who have
never had problems with either Linux or Windows.
CrudeSausage wrote:
Honestly, MacOS is a more polished experience than Linux can ever hope
to be.
Well, they have only one rock to polish. It had better be shiney.
But if one doesn't like that particular rock, one must go elsewhere.
Nevertheless, Linux is a more liberating experience than MacOS
can ever hope to be.
Freedom and choice are good things, no doubt.
I accept that people are willing to pay Apple's prices because they
like Apple's products, but it isn't even close comparing said prices
to the competition.
Really?
Show me a Windows laptop with:
A 1TB SSD
16GB of RAM
A 2560x1664 display
And which gets Geekbench scores of 3,157 (single core) and 12,020 (multi-core).
Oh, and will run literally all DAY on a single charge.
And show me what it costs.
My MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,199 (plus tax of course)
See just how much you'd "save"...
On 2025-08-25 12:45, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-25 9:58 a.m., Alan wrote:Interesting.
On 2025-08-25 05:56, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-24 6:57 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-24 15:53, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 6:27 PM, Alan wrote:came out 16 years ago; Windows 7?
More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", because >>>>>>>>>>> you replaced it with Windows, what makes you more "wired" for >>>>>>>>>>> that?
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky.-a Linux requires
comprehension, which I have, but I'm not disliking using
Windows again, for now.-a I haven't made my decision about >>>>>>>>>> replacing it with Linux on this mini PC.
Unresponsive.
In what way is Windows any more WYSIWYG than macOS?
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during Snow >>>>>>>> Leopard, but then again it hasn't really changed fundamentally, >>>>>>>> it's counterintuitive to me.-a They are on a lower intellectual >>>>>>>> level than Microsoft, and definitely the GNU/Linux realm.
People who click with macOS are willing to pay for the
privilege, but damn it's pricey, the hardware options not
competitive with Windows devices.
IN WHAT SPECIFIC WAYS?
HOW was it supposedly "counterintuitive"?
See: I can list some ways that Windows as it stands TODAY is
downright user hostile.
1. Windows 10 created a new application called "Settings"...
...but you still needed to use the Control Panel for some things. >>>>>>>
And that is still true (albeit to a lesser degree) of Windows 11. >>>>>>>
2. How do you change the scrolling direction of the mouse wheel >>>>>>> (assuming your mouse has one).
I could go on, but believe me there are others that astound me
all the time.
And overall, the fluidity--the look and feel--of the interface is >>>>>>> just terrible! The pointer doesn't move as smoothly. The
rendering of... ...everything in the UI looks terrible.
I hear you, with the way Windows settings have evolved, not being >>>>>> entirely coherent, but File Explorer is light years better than
Finder as I experienced it under Snow Leopard.-a Edge is better
than Safari, AFAIK.-a Apple is just the duller minds of the industry. >>>>> So, you're comparing which version of File Explorer to an OS that
HOW is "Edge better than Safari"? How can you possibly say "AFAIK"
about it?
For one, Edge uses the Chromium engine which provides for better
compatibility with websites.
Who says so? I've yet to see a single problem on any site I've used.
I've read developers complaining about it but I'm with you, I have yet
to experience a problem. I don't have a Mac anymore, but I have no
doubt that if I purchased one again, there would be no issue.
It also provides some very decent AI functionality that is
completely absent from Safari.
You mean it forces you to use Copilot.
No, it doesn't.
What "AI functionality" is there in Edge that isn't tied to using Copilot?
I'm genuinely asking.
On 2025-08-25 02:39, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/25/2025 12:36 AM, vallor wrote:Really?
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during Snow Leopard, >>>> but then again it hasn't really changed fundamentally, it's
counterintuitive to me.-a They are on a lower intellectual level than
Microsoft, and definitely the GNU/Linux realm.-a People who click with >>>> macOS are willing to pay for the privilege, but damn it's pricey, the
hardware options not competitive with Windows devices.
Well, we bought a Mac Studio, which is a low-end UNIX(r) workstation,
not comparable to a Windows desktop.
However, for $4K more, I bought this Linux workstation from System76,
and it runs rings around the Mac for my workloads.
When it comes to computers, I like to buy one that will last for a
while,
giving it some future-proofing.-a For example, my Linux workstation has
two 10Gbase-T Ethernet ports, one of which I use to talk to my NAS
at 10Gbits/s.
Hugh posted a link that you should read about "boots theory":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory
I accept that people are willing to pay Apple's prices because they
like Apple's products, but it isn't even close comparing said prices
to the competition.
Show me a Windows laptop with:
A 1TB SSD
16GB of RAM
A 2560x1664 display
And which gets Geekbench scores of 3,157 (single core) and 12,020 (multi-core).
Oh, and will run literally all DAY on a single charge.
And show me what it costs.
My MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,199 (plus tax of course)
See just how much you'd "save"...
On 2025-08-25 12:55, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-25 9:59 a.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-25 05:49, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-24 12:47 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-24 02:32, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 04:52:22 -0400, Joel W. Crump wrote:
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer.-a It's too expensive. >>>>>>And lacking in expandability and versatility. All ApplerCOs machines >>>>>> are
basically just glorified laptops now.
And the OS may have licensed the rCLUnixrCY trademark, but it doesnrCOt >>>>>> work the
way people expect traditional rCLUnixrCY systems to work.
Ask one of the original Bell Labs crew, Ken rCLMr UnixrCY Thompson: he >>>>>> has
given up on Apple and switched to Linux.
Sorry, Linux fans:
Pretty much everyone disagrees with you.
Honestly, MacOS is a more polished experience than Linux can ever
hope to be. Nevertheless, Linux is a more liberating experience than
MacOS can ever hope to be.
People usually aren't looking for "liberating experience[s]" from
things they simply want to use day-to-day.
I don't disagree. Additionally, the number of people who actually want
to learn how the computer works is quickly shrinking. In most cases,
whether they are kids or adults and especially because of how popular
smartphones are, they just expect the system to be polished, easy to
use and hands free in terms of maintenance. Even people who are rather
technical are losing interest in the constant maintenance necessary to
run Linux or to keep Windows running. Bravo to the exception who have
never had problems with either Linux or Windows.
And let's be very honest: for ordinary consumers, you shouldn't have to learn how a device you use works. That is the evolution of a device and
its utility.
On 8/25/25 20:40, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 18:37:28 -0400, -hh wrote:
On 8/25/25 00:36, vallor wrote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory
Yup; it was a good narrative for understanding lifecycle costs.
If Apple made boots, they wouldnrCOt last as long as real boots, and cost
even more.
How does this comment then explain market data which shows the opposite, namely that iPhones & Macs have longer ownership cycles in real life?
On 8/25/25 01:34, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
None of them did that. ThatrCOs the point.
Think you're reaching pretty far back there buddy, back to when Unix
didn't have any GUI...
On 8/25/25 20:45, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
Markets change; "Film at 11". The customer volume isn't there anymore.
What happened to the market addressed by the old Mac Pro? Seems Apple
has given up on that altogether.
My understanding is that the movie studios have moved over to clusters.
That means regardless of the OS run, it isn't being done on desktops.
On 2025-08-26 6:27 p.m., Alan wrote:And what I'm saying is that if you WANT to use AI functionality in Edge,
On 2025-08-25 12:45, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-25 9:58 a.m., Alan wrote:Interesting.
On 2025-08-25 05:56, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-24 6:57 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-24 15:53, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 6:27 PM, Alan wrote:
More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", because >>>>>>>>>>>> you replaced it with Windows, what makes you more "wired" >>>>>>>>>>>> for that?
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky.-a Linux requires >>>>>>>>>>> comprehension, which I have, but I'm not disliking using >>>>>>>>>>> Windows again, for now.-a I haven't made my decision about >>>>>>>>>>> replacing it with Linux on this mini PC.
Unresponsive.
In what way is Windows any more WYSIWYG than macOS?
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during Snow >>>>>>>>> Leopard, but then again it hasn't really changed fundamentally, >>>>>>>>> it's counterintuitive to me.-a They are on a lower intellectual >>>>>>>>> level than Microsoft, and definitely the GNU/Linux realm.
People who click with macOS are willing to pay for the
privilege, but damn it's pricey, the hardware options not
competitive with Windows devices.
IN WHAT SPECIFIC WAYS?
HOW was it supposedly "counterintuitive"?
See: I can list some ways that Windows as it stands TODAY is
downright user hostile.
1. Windows 10 created a new application called "Settings"...
...but you still needed to use the Control Panel for some things. >>>>>>>>
And that is still true (albeit to a lesser degree) of Windows 11. >>>>>>>>
2. How do you change the scrolling direction of the mouse wheel >>>>>>>> (assuming your mouse has one).
I could go on, but believe me there are others that astound me >>>>>>>> all the time.
And overall, the fluidity--the look and feel--of the interface >>>>>>>> is just terrible! The pointer doesn't move as smoothly. The
rendering of... ...everything in the UI looks terrible.
I hear you, with the way Windows settings have evolved, not being >>>>>>> entirely coherent, but File Explorer is light years better than >>>>>>> Finder as I experienced it under Snow Leopard.-a Edge is better >>>>>>> than Safari, AFAIK.-a Apple is just the duller minds of the industry. >>>>>> So, you're comparing which version of File Explorer to an OS that >>>>>> came out 16 years ago; Windows 7?
HOW is "Edge better than Safari"? How can you possibly say "AFAIK" >>>>>> about it?
For one, Edge uses the Chromium engine which provides for better
compatibility with websites.
Who says so? I've yet to see a single problem on any site I've used.
I've read developers complaining about it but I'm with you, I have
yet to experience a problem. I don't have a Mac anymore, but I have
no doubt that if I purchased one again, there would be no issue.
It also provides some very decent AI functionality that is
completely absent from Safari.
You mean it forces you to use Copilot.
No, it doesn't.
What "AI functionality" is there in Edge that isn't tied to using
Copilot?
I'm genuinely asking.
What I'm saying is that you are not obligated to use any of the AI functionality. It's tied to search, and you can use AI to produce some
nice images related to a description you write, but it is otherwise no better than any other browser.
On 8/26/2025 6:40 PM, Alan wrote:
I accept that people are willing to pay Apple's prices because they
like Apple's products, but it isn't even close comparing said prices
to the competition.
Really?
Show me a Windows laptop with:
A 1TB SSD
16GB of RAM
A 2560x1664 display
And which gets Geekbench scores of 3,157 (single core) and 12,020
(multi-core).
Oh, and will run literally all DAY on a single charge.
And show me what it costs.
My MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,199 (plus tax of course)
See just how much you'd "save"...
How about this: https://www.amazon.com/Dell-Inspiron-Plus-Laptop-14- inch/dp/B0D73XHQGH?th=1
On 2025-08-26 6:40 p.m., Alan wrote:Sorry, that's CAD.
On 2025-08-25 02:39, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/25/2025 12:36 AM, vallor wrote:Really?
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during Snow
Leopard,
but then again it hasn't really changed fundamentally, it's
counterintuitive to me.-a They are on a lower intellectual level than >>>>> Microsoft, and definitely the GNU/Linux realm.-a People who click with >>>>> macOS are willing to pay for the privilege, but damn it's pricey, the >>>>> hardware options not competitive with Windows devices.
Well, we bought a Mac Studio, which is a low-end UNIX(r) workstation,
not comparable to a Windows desktop.
However, for $4K more, I bought this Linux workstation from System76,
and it runs rings around the Mac for my workloads.
When it comes to computers, I like to buy one that will last for a
while,
giving it some future-proofing.-a For example, my Linux workstation has >>>> two 10Gbase-T Ethernet ports, one of which I use to talk to my NAS
at 10Gbits/s.
Hugh posted a link that you should read about "boots theory":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory
I accept that people are willing to pay Apple's prices because they
like Apple's products, but it isn't even close comparing said prices
to the competition.
Show me a Windows laptop with:
A 1TB SSD
Most of them.
16GB of RAM
That's a minimum for PC laptops.
A 2560x1664 display
Mid-range gaming laptops have the two above and this as well.
And which gets Geekbench scores of 3,157 (single core) and 12,020
(multi-core).
Oh, and will run literally all DAY on a single charge.
Admittedly, the gaming laptops won't. However, gaming laptops do more
than a Mac laptop can anyway by the mere fact that they can game. If you want to compare apples to apples, the Surface and similar machines get similar performance to the Macs as well as similar battery life.
Admittedly though, I's rather a Mac at that point.
And show me what it costs.
My MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,199 (plus tax of course)
See just how much you'd "save"...
I can show you comparables if you tell me whether the price you set is
USD or CAD.
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 18:47:26 -0400, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 6:24 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
Consider how *nix display servers like X11, and now Wayland, conform to
this philosophy, by being separate modular, replaceable layers that
operate entirely in userland.
It's a minor concern, ultimately, I do like the modular nature of Unix
and GNU/Linux in terms of creating a GUI, it's terrific, but Microsoft
and Apple haven't failed to be as advanced as such, there's nothing to
say there are limitations on what can be developed for them.
Yes there are. Look at how Microsoft has completely failed at adapting Windows to any kind of mobile device, from Windows Phone up to the present gaming handhelds.
Apple created entirely separate OSes for its phones and
its tablets
On 2025-08-26 18:52, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/26/2025 6:40 PM, Alan wrote:
I accept that people are willing to pay Apple's prices because they
like Apple's products, but it isn't even close comparing said prices
to the competition.
Really?
Show me a Windows laptop with:
A 1TB SSD
16GB of RAM
A 2560x1664 display
And which gets Geekbench scores of 3,157 (single core) and 12,020
(multi-core).
Oh, and will run literally all DAY on a single charge.
And show me what it costs.
My MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,199 (plus tax of course)
See just how much you'd "save"...
How about this: https://www.amazon.com/Dell-Inspiron-Plus-Laptop-14-
inch/dp/B0D73XHQGH?th=1
Hmmm, let's see:
With a 1TB SSD
Admittedly 32GB of RAM
Slightly higher resolution display
Only gets two thirds my machine's single core score and is pretty much
equal in multicore
Weighs more than my MacBook (30% more)
And...
...and this is the kicker...
...is just $250 less expensive.
Which is a little less than 12% cheaper.
Sorry, but your "isn't even close" claim doesn't hold up.
$250 over even a 2 year life is just an additional $10 a month.
On 2025-08-24 21:11, vallor wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 11:23:05 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote in
<108flaa$2vcpq$2@dont-email.me>:
On 2025-08-24 02:44, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 5:32 AM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:"Ridiculous expense"? Please.
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer.-a It's too
expensive.
And lacking in expandability and versatility. All ApplerCOs machines >>>>> are basically just glorified laptops now.
And the OS may have licensed the rCLUnixrCY trademark, but it doesnrCOt >>>>> work the way people expect traditional rCLUnixrCY systems to work.
Ask one of the original Bell Labs crew, Ken rCLMr UnixrCY Thompson: he >>>>> has given up on Apple and switched to Linux.
Right, it's a freakin' joke, if you ask me, there are *selected*
functions of macOS software that outshine the competition, but the
typical home user is better off with something else, because of the
ridiculous expense of the Apple platform, even if they like macOS,
it's just throwing money down the toilet.-a Maybe they have money to
burn, I could understand that, but it would never click with me even
if I did have a billion dollars, because my brain doesn't work that
way to prefer Apple's quirkware.
Yes: my MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,200CAD, but based on my
experience,
this is a computer I can easily use for the next 5 years.
That's $37 a month.
Even if a decent laptop with Linux cost me a third of that (and I very
much doubt you can find one as good for that number), the difference
is about $25/month.
That's hardly a huge barrier to entry.
But please elaborate:
What makes Apple's technology so "quirky" in your estimation?
They put the window buttons on the wrong side of the titlebar.
;)
Seriously, though, there's nothing wrong with higher end Macs for what
you get. I wouldn't wish a Mac mini on my worst enemy, though.
And why is that?
Someone said Macs weren't extendable -- but they are, with Thunderbolt,
which is basically "external PCIE".
"Basically"? It is exactly and literally external PCIe.
Same guy said Macs "weren't really Unix" (paraphrased), but has neverI don't know what "docker" is, and what in Linux context are
explained what he means by that, and I daresay he's never used a Mac
command line -- which is bash, in a POSIX+ environment.
There's something to be said about people with no knowledge or
experience with a system making claims about it. I'll not say it
personally, but leave it to others to decide.
But having said all that: Linux is still a better environment for _my_
needs, which includes a recent installation of a document management
system, using docker. (Do Macs have docker? Do they even have
containers? Beats me.)
"containers"?
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 22:12:52 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote in <108grck$37ilo$2@dont-email.me>:
On 2025-08-24 21:11, vallor wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 11:23:05 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote in
<108flaa$2vcpq$2@dont-email.me>:
On 2025-08-24 02:44, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 5:32 AM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:"Ridiculous expense"? Please.
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer.-a It's too
expensive.
And lacking in expandability and versatility. All ApplerCOs machines >>>>>> are basically just glorified laptops now.
And the OS may have licensed the rCLUnixrCY trademark, but it doesnrCOt >>>>>> work the way people expect traditional rCLUnixrCY systems to work. >>>>>>
Ask one of the original Bell Labs crew, Ken rCLMr UnixrCY Thompson: he >>>>>> has given up on Apple and switched to Linux.
Right, it's a freakin' joke, if you ask me, there are *selected*
functions of macOS software that outshine the competition, but the
typical home user is better off with something else, because of the
ridiculous expense of the Apple platform, even if they like macOS,
it's just throwing money down the toilet.-a Maybe they have money to >>>>> burn, I could understand that, but it would never click with me even >>>>> if I did have a billion dollars, because my brain doesn't work that
way to prefer Apple's quirkware.
Yes: my MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,200CAD, but based on my
experience,
this is a computer I can easily use for the next 5 years.
That's $37 a month.
Even if a decent laptop with Linux cost me a third of that (and I very >>>> much doubt you can find one as good for that number), the difference
is about $25/month.
That's hardly a huge barrier to entry.
But please elaborate:
What makes Apple's technology so "quirky" in your estimation?
They put the window buttons on the wrong side of the titlebar.
;)
Seriously, though, there's nothing wrong with higher end Macs for what
you get. I wouldn't wish a Mac mini on my worst enemy, though.
And why is that?
Because both Mac mini's we've owned over the years have been slugs.
Someone said Macs weren't extendable -- but they are, with Thunderbolt,
which is basically "external PCIE".
"Basically"? It is exactly and literally external PCIe.
Same guy said Macs "weren't really Unix" (paraphrased), but has neverI don't know what "docker" is, and what in Linux context are
explained what he means by that, and I daresay he's never used a Mac
command line -- which is bash, in a POSIX+ environment.
There's something to be said about people with no knowledge or
experience with a system making claims about it. I'll not say it
personally, but leave it to others to decide.
But having said all that: Linux is still a better environment for _my_
needs, which includes a recent installation of a document management
system, using docker. (Do Macs have docker? Do they even have
containers? Beats me.)
"containers"?
Containers are a kind of lightweight virtual space that still runs on
the same kernel as the rest of the host. They can have their own uid's,gid's, network addresses, chroots, etc.
Docker is a way to run things easily within containers. It's all the rage for lightweight virtualized setups.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docker_(software)
vallor wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 22:12:52 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote inwhat , what's this , there's something you don't know
<108grck$37ilo$2@dont-email.me>:
On 2025-08-24 21:11, vallor wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 11:23:05 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote in
<108flaa$2vcpq$2@dont-email.me>:
On 2025-08-24 02:44, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 5:32 AM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:"Ridiculous expense"? Please.
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer.-a It's too
expensive.
And lacking in expandability and versatility. All ApplerCOs machines >>>>>>> are basically just glorified laptops now.
And the OS may have licensed the rCLUnixrCY trademark, but it doesnrCOt >>>>>>> work the way people expect traditional rCLUnixrCY systems to work. >>>>>>>
Ask one of the original Bell Labs crew, Ken rCLMr UnixrCY Thompson: he >>>>>>> has given up on Apple and switched to Linux.
Right, it's a freakin' joke, if you ask me, there are *selected*
functions of macOS software that outshine the competition, but the >>>>>> typical home user is better off with something else, because of the >>>>>> ridiculous expense of the Apple platform, even if they like macOS, >>>>>> it's just throwing money down the toilet.-a Maybe they have money to >>>>>> burn, I could understand that, but it would never click with me
even if I did have a billion dollars, because my brain doesn't work >>>>>> that way to prefer Apple's quirkware.
Yes: my MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,200CAD, but based on my
experience,
this is a computer I can easily use for the next 5 years.
That's $37 a month.
Even if a decent laptop with Linux cost me a third of that (and I
very much doubt you can find one as good for that number), the
difference is about $25/month.
That's hardly a huge barrier to entry.
But please elaborate:
What makes Apple's technology so "quirky" in your estimation?
They put the window buttons on the wrong side of the titlebar.
;)
Seriously, though, there's nothing wrong with higher end Macs for
what you get. I wouldn't wish a Mac mini on my worst enemy, though.
And why is that?
Because both Mac mini's we've owned over the years have been slugs.
Someone said Macs weren't extendable -- but they are, with
Thunderbolt,
which is basically "external PCIE".
"Basically"? It is exactly and literally external PCIe.
Same guy said Macs "weren't really Unix" (paraphrased), but has neverI don't know what "docker" is, and what in Linux context are
explained what he means by that, and I daresay he's never used a Mac
command line -- which is bash, in a POSIX+ environment.
There's something to be said about people with no knowledge or
experience with a system making claims about it. I'll not say it
personally, but leave it to others to decide.
But having said all that: Linux is still a better environment for
_my_
needs, which includes a recent installation of a document management
system, using docker. (Do Macs have docker? Do they even have
containers? Beats me.)
"containers"?
Containers are a kind of lightweight virtual space that still runs on
the same kernel as the rest of the host. They can have their own
uid's,gid's, network addresses, chroots, etc.
Docker is a way to run things easily within containers. It's all the
rage for lightweight virtualized setups.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docker_(software)
On Aug 24, 2025 at 7:37:45rC>PM EDT, "Lawrence D-|Oliveiro"
<ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Apple created entirely separate OSes for its phones and its tablets
What? You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. iOS is a
fork of MacOS (OS X at the time).
iPads ran iOS until version 13. Then iOS was forked into iPadOS because Apple started adding multiple window management, which would be silly on
a phone.
They are all Unix.
On Tue, 26 Aug 2025 09:06:17 -0400, -hh wrote:
On 8/25/25 01:34, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
None of them did that. ThatrCOs the point.
Think you're reaching pretty far back there buddy, back to when Unix
didn't have any GUI...
Precisely the point. Once X11 came along, it was embraced as a common GUI standard among *all* the Unix vendors, even those who had put some effort into developing quite advanced proprietary concepts of their own (e.g. SunrCOs NeWS).
So you see, a core part of what made for a rCLUnixrCY system was, from quite early on, modularity and replaceability that extended to the GUI.
I think Steve JobsrCO NeXT was an exception. Funnily enough, that struggled to make an impact. His was very much a voice in the wildnerness, until his company was acquired by a moribund Apple, and he returned as rCLiCEOrCY of the
merged organization.
On 2025-08-26 19:34, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-26 6:27 p.m., Alan wrote:And what I'm saying is that if you WANT to use AI functionality in Edge,
On 2025-08-25 12:45, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-25 9:58 a.m., Alan wrote:Interesting.
On 2025-08-25 05:56, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-24 6:57 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-24 15:53, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 6:27 PM, Alan wrote:So, you're comparing which version of File Explorer to an OS that >>>>>>> came out 16 years ago; Windows 7?
More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", because >>>>>>>>>>>>> you replaced it with Windows, what makes you more "wired" >>>>>>>>>>>>> for that?
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky.-a Linux requires >>>>>>>>>>>> comprehension, which I have, but I'm not disliking using >>>>>>>>>>>> Windows again, for now.-a I haven't made my decision about >>>>>>>>>>>> replacing it with Linux on this mini PC.
Unresponsive.
In what way is Windows any more WYSIWYG than macOS?
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during Snow >>>>>>>>>> Leopard, but then again it hasn't really changed
fundamentally, it's counterintuitive to me.-a They are on a >>>>>>>>>> lower intellectual level than Microsoft, and definitely the >>>>>>>>>> GNU/Linux realm. People who click with macOS are willing to >>>>>>>>>> pay for the privilege, but damn it's pricey, the hardware >>>>>>>>>> options not competitive with Windows devices.
IN WHAT SPECIFIC WAYS?
HOW was it supposedly "counterintuitive"?
See: I can list some ways that Windows as it stands TODAY is >>>>>>>>> downright user hostile.
1. Windows 10 created a new application called "Settings"... >>>>>>>>>
...but you still needed to use the Control Panel for some things. >>>>>>>>>
And that is still true (albeit to a lesser degree) of Windows 11. >>>>>>>>>
2. How do you change the scrolling direction of the mouse wheel >>>>>>>>> (assuming your mouse has one).
I could go on, but believe me there are others that astound me >>>>>>>>> all the time.
And overall, the fluidity--the look and feel--of the interface >>>>>>>>> is just terrible! The pointer doesn't move as smoothly. The >>>>>>>>> rendering of... ...everything in the UI looks terrible.
I hear you, with the way Windows settings have evolved, not
being entirely coherent, but File Explorer is light years better >>>>>>>> than Finder as I experienced it under Snow Leopard.-a Edge is >>>>>>>> better than Safari, AFAIK.-a Apple is just the duller minds of >>>>>>>> the industry.
HOW is "Edge better than Safari"? How can you possibly say
"AFAIK" about it?
For one, Edge uses the Chromium engine which provides for better
compatibility with websites.
Who says so? I've yet to see a single problem on any site I've used.
I've read developers complaining about it but I'm with you, I have
yet to experience a problem. I don't have a Mac anymore, but I have
no doubt that if I purchased one again, there would be no issue.
It also provides some very decent AI functionality that is
completely absent from Safari.
You mean it forces you to use Copilot.
No, it doesn't.
What "AI functionality" is there in Edge that isn't tied to using
Copilot?
I'm genuinely asking.
What I'm saying is that you are not obligated to use any of the AI
functionality. It's tied to search, and you can use AI to produce some
nice images related to a description you write, but it is otherwise no
better than any other browser.
it is going to be Microsoft's AI you use.
On 2025-08-26 19:37, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-26 6:40 p.m., Alan wrote:Sorry, that's CAD.
On 2025-08-25 02:39, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/25/2025 12:36 AM, vallor wrote:Really?
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during Snow
Leopard,
but then again it hasn't really changed fundamentally, it's
counterintuitive to me.-a They are on a lower intellectual level than >>>>>> Microsoft, and definitely the GNU/Linux realm.-a People who click with >>>>>> macOS are willing to pay for the privilege, but damn it's pricey, the >>>>>> hardware options not competitive with Windows devices.
Well, we bought a Mac Studio, which is a low-end UNIX(r) workstation, >>>>> not comparable to a Windows desktop.
However, for $4K more, I bought this Linux workstation from System76, >>>>> and it runs rings around the Mac for my workloads.
When it comes to computers, I like to buy one that will last for a
while,
giving it some future-proofing.-a For example, my Linux workstation has >>>>> two 10Gbase-T Ethernet ports, one of which I use to talk to my NAS
at 10Gbits/s.
Hugh posted a link that you should read about "boots theory":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory
I accept that people are willing to pay Apple's prices because they
like Apple's products, but it isn't even close comparing said prices
to the competition.
Show me a Windows laptop with:
A 1TB SSD
Most of them.
16GB of RAM
That's a minimum for PC laptops.
A 2560x1664 display
Mid-range gaming laptops have the two above and this as well.
And which gets Geekbench scores of 3,157 (single core) and 12,020
(multi-core).
Oh, and will run literally all DAY on a single charge.
Admittedly, the gaming laptops won't. However, gaming laptops do more
than a Mac laptop can anyway by the mere fact that they can game. If
you want to compare apples to apples, the Surface and similar machines
get similar performance to the Macs as well as similar battery life.
Admittedly though, I's rather a Mac at that point.
And show me what it costs.
My MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,199 (plus tax of course)
See just how much you'd "save"...
I can show you comparables if you tell me whether the price you set is
USD or CAD.
On 2025-08-26 9:30 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-26 19:37, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-26 6:40 p.m., Alan wrote:Sorry, that's CAD.
On 2025-08-25 02:39, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/25/2025 12:36 AM, vallor wrote:Really?
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during Snow
Leopard,
but then again it hasn't really changed fundamentally, it's
counterintuitive to me.-a They are on a lower intellectual level than >>>>>>> Microsoft, and definitely the GNU/Linux realm.-a People who click >>>>>>> with
macOS are willing to pay for the privilege, but damn it's pricey, >>>>>>> the
hardware options not competitive with Windows devices.
Well, we bought a Mac Studio, which is a low-end UNIX(r) workstation, >>>>>> not comparable to a Windows desktop.
However, for $4K more, I bought this Linux workstation from System76, >>>>>> and it runs rings around the Mac for my workloads.
When it comes to computers, I like to buy one that will last for a >>>>>> while,
giving it some future-proofing.-a For example, my Linux workstation >>>>>> has
two 10Gbase-T Ethernet ports, one of which I use to talk to my NAS >>>>>> at 10Gbits/s.
Hugh posted a link that you should read about "boots theory":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory
I accept that people are willing to pay Apple's prices because they >>>>> like Apple's products, but it isn't even close comparing said
prices to the competition.
Show me a Windows laptop with:
A 1TB SSD
Most of them.
16GB of RAM
That's a minimum for PC laptops.
A 2560x1664 display
Mid-range gaming laptops have the two above and this as well.
And which gets Geekbench scores of 3,157 (single core) and 12,020
(multi-core).
Oh, and will run literally all DAY on a single charge.
Admittedly, the gaming laptops won't. However, gaming laptops do more
than a Mac laptop can anyway by the mere fact that they can game. If
you want to compare apples to apples, the Surface and similar
machines get similar performance to the Macs as well as similar
battery life. Admittedly though, I's rather a Mac at that point.
And show me what it costs.
My MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,199 (plus tax of course)
See just how much you'd "save"...
I can show you comparables if you tell me whether the price you set
is USD or CAD.
Here you go: <https://www.bestbuy.ca/en-ca/product/samsung-galaxy-book4- edge-16-touchscreen-copilot-pc-laptop-snapdragon-x-elite-16gb-ram-1tb- ssd-exclusive-retail-partner/17937877>
It actually costs less. As far as I know, the Snapdragon X Elite is on
par with the M3 (the M3 being better at single core but the X Elite
being better at multi-core). Still, I would rather get the Mac myself
since the AI stuff doesn't mean a thing to me.
On 8/26/2025 9:29 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-26 18:52, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/26/2025 6:40 PM, Alan wrote:
I accept that people are willing to pay Apple's prices because they >>>>> like Apple's products, but it isn't even close comparing said
prices to the competition.
Really?
Show me a Windows laptop with:
A 1TB SSD
16GB of RAM
A 2560x1664 display
And which gets Geekbench scores of 3,157 (single core) and 12,020
(multi-core).
Oh, and will run literally all DAY on a single charge.
And show me what it costs.
My MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,199 (plus tax of course)
See just how much you'd "save"...
How about this: https://www.amazon.com/Dell-Inspiron-Plus-Laptop-14-
inch/dp/B0D73XHQGH?th=1
Hmmm, let's see:
With a 1TB SSD
Admittedly 32GB of RAM
Slightly higher resolution display
Only gets two thirds my machine's single core score and is pretty much
equal in multicore
Weighs more than my MacBook (30% more)
And...
...and this is the kicker...
...is just $250 less expensive.
Which is a little less than 12% cheaper.
Sorry, but your "isn't even close" claim doesn't hold up.
$250 over even a 2 year life is just an additional $10 a month.
According to Google's conversion of Canadian money to American, it's
about $375 USD less, actually - and does have more RAM and a little more screen resolution, and isn't out of the ballpark CPU-wise.-a Face it,
your love for Apple is making you make excuses for their overpriced crapware.-a They're lame as fuck.-a You may like your laptop, that's fine, but it's overpriced, there's no denying it.
On 2025-08-26 9:17 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-26 19:34, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-26 6:27 p.m., Alan wrote:And what I'm saying is that if you WANT to use AI functionality in
On 2025-08-25 12:45, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-25 9:58 a.m., Alan wrote:Interesting.
On 2025-08-25 05:56, CrudeSausage wrote:I've read developers complaining about it but I'm with you, I have
On 2025-08-24 6:57 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-24 15:53, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 6:27 PM, Alan wrote:So, you're comparing which version of File Explorer to an OS
More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", >>>>>>>>>>>>>> because you replaced it with Windows, what makes you more >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "wired" for that?
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky.-a Linux requires >>>>>>>>>>>>> comprehension, which I have, but I'm not disliking using >>>>>>>>>>>>> Windows again, for now.-a I haven't made my decision about >>>>>>>>>>>>> replacing it with Linux on this mini PC.
Unresponsive.
In what way is Windows any more WYSIWYG than macOS?
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during >>>>>>>>>>> Snow Leopard, but then again it hasn't really changed
fundamentally, it's counterintuitive to me.-a They are on a >>>>>>>>>>> lower intellectual level than Microsoft, and definitely the >>>>>>>>>>> GNU/Linux realm. People who click with macOS are willing to >>>>>>>>>>> pay for the privilege, but damn it's pricey, the hardware >>>>>>>>>>> options not competitive with Windows devices.
IN WHAT SPECIFIC WAYS?
HOW was it supposedly "counterintuitive"?
See: I can list some ways that Windows as it stands TODAY is >>>>>>>>>> downright user hostile.
1. Windows 10 created a new application called "Settings"... >>>>>>>>>>
...but you still needed to use the Control Panel for some things. >>>>>>>>>>
And that is still true (albeit to a lesser degree) of Windows 11. >>>>>>>>>>
2. How do you change the scrolling direction of the mouse >>>>>>>>>> wheel (assuming your mouse has one).
I could go on, but believe me there are others that astound me >>>>>>>>>> all the time.
And overall, the fluidity--the look and feel--of the interface >>>>>>>>>> is just terrible! The pointer doesn't move as smoothly. The >>>>>>>>>> rendering of... ...everything in the UI looks terrible.
I hear you, with the way Windows settings have evolved, not >>>>>>>>> being entirely coherent, but File Explorer is light years
better than Finder as I experienced it under Snow Leopard. >>>>>>>>> Edge is better than Safari, AFAIK.-a Apple is just the duller >>>>>>>>> minds of the industry.
that came out 16 years ago; Windows 7?
HOW is "Edge better than Safari"? How can you possibly say
"AFAIK" about it?
For one, Edge uses the Chromium engine which provides for better >>>>>>> compatibility with websites.
Who says so? I've yet to see a single problem on any site I've used. >>>>>
yet to experience a problem. I don't have a Mac anymore, but I have >>>>> no doubt that if I purchased one again, there would be no issue.
It also provides some very decent AI functionality that is
completely absent from Safari.
You mean it forces you to use Copilot.
No, it doesn't.
What "AI functionality" is there in Edge that isn't tied to using
Copilot?
I'm genuinely asking.
What I'm saying is that you are not obligated to use any of the AI
functionality. It's tied to search, and you can use AI to produce
some nice images related to a description you write, but it is
otherwise no better than any other browser.
Edge, it is going to be Microsoft's AI you use.
Why would Microsoft be forced to provide access to a competitor's AI if
they have their own? It only makes sense that a proprietary company like Microsoft which believes you should use their proprietary browser and proprietary search engine should also expect you to use their
proprietary AI.
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 22:12:52 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote in <108grck$37ilo$2@dont-email.me>:
On 2025-08-24 21:11, vallor wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 11:23:05 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote in
<108flaa$2vcpq$2@dont-email.me>:
On 2025-08-24 02:44, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 5:32 AM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:"Ridiculous expense"? Please.
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer.-a It's too
expensive.
And lacking in expandability and versatility. All ApplerCOs machines >>>>>> are basically just glorified laptops now.
And the OS may have licensed the rCLUnixrCY trademark, but it doesnrCOt >>>>>> work the way people expect traditional rCLUnixrCY systems to work. >>>>>>
Ask one of the original Bell Labs crew, Ken rCLMr UnixrCY Thompson: he >>>>>> has given up on Apple and switched to Linux.
Right, it's a freakin' joke, if you ask me, there are *selected*
functions of macOS software that outshine the competition, but the
typical home user is better off with something else, because of the
ridiculous expense of the Apple platform, even if they like macOS,
it's just throwing money down the toilet.-a Maybe they have money to >>>>> burn, I could understand that, but it would never click with me even >>>>> if I did have a billion dollars, because my brain doesn't work that
way to prefer Apple's quirkware.
Yes: my MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,200CAD, but based on my
experience,
this is a computer I can easily use for the next 5 years.
That's $37 a month.
Even if a decent laptop with Linux cost me a third of that (and I very >>>> much doubt you can find one as good for that number), the difference
is about $25/month.
That's hardly a huge barrier to entry.
But please elaborate:
What makes Apple's technology so "quirky" in your estimation?
They put the window buttons on the wrong side of the titlebar.
;)
Seriously, though, there's nothing wrong with higher end Macs for what
you get. I wouldn't wish a Mac mini on my worst enemy, though.
And why is that?
Because both Mac mini's we've owned over the years have been slugs.
Someone said Macs weren't extendable -- but they are, with Thunderbolt,
which is basically "external PCIE".
"Basically"? It is exactly and literally external PCIe.
Same guy said Macs "weren't really Unix" (paraphrased), but has neverI don't know what "docker" is, and what in Linux context are
explained what he means by that, and I daresay he's never used a Mac
command line -- which is bash, in a POSIX+ environment.
There's something to be said about people with no knowledge or
experience with a system making claims about it. I'll not say it
personally, but leave it to others to decide.
But having said all that: Linux is still a better environment for _my_
needs, which includes a recent installation of a document management
system, using docker. (Do Macs have docker? Do they even have
containers? Beats me.)
"containers"?
Containers are a kind of lightweight virtual space that still runs on
the same kernel as the rest of the host. They can have their own uid's,gid's, network addresses, chroots, etc.
Docker is a way to run things easily within containers. It's all the rage for lightweight virtualized setups.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docker_(software)
On Tue, 26 Aug 2025 20:24:12 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote in <OuOdnXFT8NzI5zP1nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com>:
vallor wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 22:12:52 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote inwhat , what's this , there's something you don't know
<108grck$37ilo$2@dont-email.me>:
On 2025-08-24 21:11, vallor wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 11:23:05 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote in
<108flaa$2vcpq$2@dont-email.me>:
On 2025-08-24 02:44, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 5:32 AM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:"Ridiculous expense"? Please.
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer.-a It's too
expensive.
And lacking in expandability and versatility. All ApplerCOs machines >>>>>>>> are basically just glorified laptops now.
And the OS may have licensed the rCLUnixrCY trademark, but it doesnrCOt
work the way people expect traditional rCLUnixrCY systems to work. >>>>>>>>
Ask one of the original Bell Labs crew, Ken rCLMr UnixrCY Thompson: he >>>>>>>> has given up on Apple and switched to Linux.
Right, it's a freakin' joke, if you ask me, there are *selected* >>>>>>> functions of macOS software that outshine the competition, but the >>>>>>> typical home user is better off with something else, because of the >>>>>>> ridiculous expense of the Apple platform, even if they like macOS, >>>>>>> it's just throwing money down the toilet.-a Maybe they have money to >>>>>>> burn, I could understand that, but it would never click with me
even if I did have a billion dollars, because my brain doesn't work >>>>>>> that way to prefer Apple's quirkware.
Yes: my MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,200CAD, but based on my
experience,
this is a computer I can easily use for the next 5 years.
That's $37 a month.
Even if a decent laptop with Linux cost me a third of that (and I
very much doubt you can find one as good for that number), the
difference is about $25/month.
That's hardly a huge barrier to entry.
But please elaborate:
What makes Apple's technology so "quirky" in your estimation?
They put the window buttons on the wrong side of the titlebar.
;)
Seriously, though, there's nothing wrong with higher end Macs for
what you get. I wouldn't wish a Mac mini on my worst enemy, though.
And why is that?
Because both Mac mini's we've owned over the years have been slugs.
Someone said Macs weren't extendable -- but they are, with
Thunderbolt,
which is basically "external PCIE".
"Basically"? It is exactly and literally external PCIe.
Same guy said Macs "weren't really Unix" (paraphrased), but has never >>>>> explained what he means by that, and I daresay he's never used a Mac >>>>> command line -- which is bash, in a POSIX+ environment.I don't know what "docker" is, and what in Linux context are
There's something to be said about people with no knowledge or
experience with a system making claims about it. I'll not say it
personally, but leave it to others to decide.
But having said all that: Linux is still a better environment for
_my_
needs, which includes a recent installation of a document management >>>>> system, using docker. (Do Macs have docker? Do they even have
containers? Beats me.)
"containers"?
Containers are a kind of lightweight virtual space that still runs on
the same kernel as the rest of the host. They can have their own
uid's,gid's, network addresses, chroots, etc.
Docker is a way to run things easily within containers. It's all the
rage for lightweight virtualized setups.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docker_(software)
About MacOS? There are things there that I definitely don't
know -- or didn't know, and had to learn about.
(Like setting a custom schedule for timemachine backups. Had
to get a third-party app for that.)
In the case of docker, it appears one runs colima, and one
can get that through brew.
I have brew.
Note that Docker on Linux is just one packaging of Linux container technology. There are a great many other ways to do containers on Linux, while other platforms, it seems, are pretty much stuck on Docker.
On Wed, 27 Aug 2025 01:36:35 +0000, Tyrone wrote:
On Aug 24, 2025 at 7:37:45rC>PM EDT, "Lawrence D-|Oliveiro"
<ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Apple created entirely separate OSes for its phones and its tablets
What? You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. iOS is a
fork of MacOS (OS X at the time).
Completely different GUI, therefore completely different kernel. The GUI
is not a separate, modular layer, remember.
iPads ran iOS until version 13. Then iOS was forked into iPadOS because
Apple started adding multiple window management, which would be silly on
a phone.
The distinction is what is silly. Remember, Android invented rCLphabletsrCY.
They are all Unix.
They all license the rCLUnixrCY trademark, that doesnrCOt mean they follow the
rCL*nixrCY philosophy, as I have pointed out.
On Tue, 26 Aug 2025 09:36:47 -0400, -hh wrote:
On 8/25/25 20:45, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
Markets change; "Film at 11". The customer volume isn't there anymore.
What happened to the market addressed by the old Mac Pro? Seems Apple
has given up on that altogether.
No, itrCOs just that Apple has given up on it.
My understanding is that the movie studios have moved over to clusters.
That means regardless of the OS run, it isn't being done on desktops.
True. ItrCOs being done, not on rCLdesktopsrCY, but on rCLworkstationsrCY. Linux
workstations, in fact.
Do you know what a rCLworkstationrCY is? ItrCOs what a rCLdesktoprCY wants to be
when it grows up.
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 09:04:14 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
Nevertheless, a lot of people don't care about changing the
components in their machine as much as they used to. They should,
especially since the 8GB of RAM their Mac came with is probably not
going to be enough going forward and neither is the 256GB of
storage. Still, many would rather just buy a new machine, as stupid
as that is.
Another thing is, Apple has completely given up on the market segment addressed by the old Mac Pro. They have nothing with that kind of expandability any more.
Show me a Windows laptop with:
A 1TB SSD
16GB of RAM
A 2560x1664 display
And which gets Geekbench scores of 3,157 (single core) and 12,020
(multi-core).
Oh, and will run literally all DAY on a single charge.
And show me what it costs.
My MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,199 (plus tax of course)
See just how much you'd "save"...
How about this: https://www.amazon.com/Dell-Inspiron-Plus-Laptop-14-
inch/dp/B0D73XHQGH?th=1
Hmmm, let's see:
With a 1TB SSD
Admittedly 32GB of RAM
Slightly higher resolution display
Only gets two thirds my machine's single core score and is pretty
much equal in multicore
Weighs more than my MacBook (30% more)
And...
...and this is the kicker...
...is just $250 less expensive.
Which is a little less than 12% cheaper.
Sorry, but your "isn't even close" claim doesn't hold up.
$250 over even a 2 year life is just an additional $10 a month.
According to Google's conversion of Canadian money to American, it's
about $375 USD less, actually - and does have more RAM and a little
more screen resolution, and isn't out of the ballpark CPU-wise.-a Face
it, your love for Apple is making you make excuses for their
overpriced crapware.-a They're lame as fuck.-a You may like your laptop,
that's fine, but it's overpriced, there's no denying it.
Your claim that, "it isn't even close comparing"
Sorry... ...but why can't you just admit you were wrong?
On 2025-08-27 00:58, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
Note that Docker on Linux is just one packaging of Linux container
technology. There are a great many other ways to do containers on Linux,
while other platforms, it seems, are pretty much stuck on Docker.
<https://github.com/apple/container>
<https://www.macforce.com/blog/apples-linux-container-revolution-a-complete-guide-for-mac-users>
<https://4sysops.com/archives/install-apple-container-cli-running-containers-natively-on-macos-15-sequoia-and-macos-26-tahoe/>
'Meet Containerization
Meet Containerization, an open source project written in Swift to create
and run Linux containers on your Mac. Learn how Containerization
approaches Linux containers securely and privately. Discover how the open-sourced Container CLI tool utilizes the Containerization package to provide simple, yet powerful functionality to build, run, and deploy
Linux Containers on Mac.'
<https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2025/346/>
On 8/27/2025 9:28 AM, Alan wrote:
Show me a Windows laptop with:
A 1TB SSD
16GB of RAM
A 2560x1664 display
And which gets Geekbench scores of 3,157 (single core) and 12,020 >>>>>> (multi-core).
Oh, and will run literally all DAY on a single charge.
And show me what it costs.
My MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,199 (plus tax of course)
See just how much you'd "save"...
How about this: https://www.amazon.com/Dell-Inspiron-Plus-
Laptop-14- inch/dp/B0D73XHQGH?th=1
Hmmm, let's see:
With a 1TB SSD
Admittedly 32GB of RAM
Slightly higher resolution display
Only gets two thirds my machine's single core score and is pretty
much equal in multicore
Weighs more than my MacBook (30% more)
And...
...and this is the kicker...
...is just $250 less expensive.
Which is a little less than 12% cheaper.
Sorry, but your "isn't even close" claim doesn't hold up.
$250 over even a 2 year life is just an additional $10 a month.
According to Google's conversion of Canadian money to American, it's
about $375 USD less, actually - and does have more RAM and a little
more screen resolution, and isn't out of the ballpark CPU-wise.-a Face
it, your love for Apple is making you make excuses for their
overpriced crapware.-a They're lame as fuck.-a You may like your
laptop, that's fine, but it's overpriced, there's no denying it.
Your claim that, "it isn't even close comparing"
Sorry... ...but why can't you just admit you were wrong?
The price difference seems substantial to me, but admittedly, if you
really want macOS, the price may not be the most important factor.
On 2025-08-26 6:42 p.m., Alan wrote:Exactly.
On 2025-08-25 12:55, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-25 9:59 a.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-25 05:49, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-24 12:47 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-24 02:32, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 04:52:22 -0400, Joel W. Crump wrote:
But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer.-a It's too
expensive.
And lacking in expandability and versatility. All ApplerCOs
machines are
basically just glorified laptops now.
And the OS may have licensed the rCLUnixrCY trademark, but it doesnrCOt
work the
way people expect traditional rCLUnixrCY systems to work.
Ask one of the original Bell Labs crew, Ken rCLMr UnixrCY Thompson: >>>>>>> he has
given up on Apple and switched to Linux.
Sorry, Linux fans:
Pretty much everyone disagrees with you.
Honestly, MacOS is a more polished experience than Linux can ever
hope to be. Nevertheless, Linux is a more liberating experience
than MacOS can ever hope to be.
People usually aren't looking for "liberating experience[s]" from
things they simply want to use day-to-day.
I don't disagree. Additionally, the number of people who actually
want to learn how the computer works is quickly shrinking. In most
cases, whether they are kids or adults and especially because of how
popular smartphones are, they just expect the system to be polished,
easy to use and hands free in terms of maintenance. Even people who
are rather technical are losing interest in the constant maintenance
necessary to run Linux or to keep Windows running. Bravo to the
exception who have never had problems with either Linux or Windows.
And let's be very honest: for ordinary consumers, you shouldn't have
to learn how a device you use works. That is the evolution of a device
and its utility.
Learning how your machine works is always a benefit, but while it was a necessity in the 80s and 90s, it became more of a burden after that.
Most people just want to get things done with their computers, they
don't feel like learning a set of commands, no matter how powerful those commands are.
My MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,199 (plus tax of course)
See just how much you'd "save"...
How about this: https://www.amazon.com/Dell-Inspiron-Plus-
Laptop-14- inch/dp/B0D73XHQGH?th=1
Hmmm, let's see:
With a 1TB SSD
Admittedly 32GB of RAM
Slightly higher resolution display
Only gets two thirds my machine's single core score and is pretty
much equal in multicore
Weighs more than my MacBook (30% more)
And...
...and this is the kicker...
...is just $250 less expensive.
Which is a little less than 12% cheaper.
Sorry, but your "isn't even close" claim doesn't hold up.
$250 over even a 2 year life is just an additional $10 a month.
According to Google's conversion of Canadian money to American, it's
about $375 USD less, actually - and does have more RAM and a little
more screen resolution, and isn't out of the ballpark CPU-wise.
Face it, your love for Apple is making you make excuses for their
overpriced crapware.-a They're lame as fuck.-a You may like your
laptop, that's fine, but it's overpriced, there's no denying it.
Your claim that, "it isn't even close comparing"
Sorry... ...but why can't you just admit you were wrong?
The price difference seems substantial to me, but admittedly, if you
really want macOS, the price may not be the most important factor.
Is 13% more expensive really "not even close"?
On 2025-08-27 10:02, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/27/2025 9:28 AM, Alan wrote:
Show me a Windows laptop with:
A 1TB SSD
16GB of RAM
A 2560x1664 display
And which gets Geekbench scores of 3,157 (single core) and 12,020 >>>>>>> (multi-core).
Oh, and will run literally all DAY on a single charge.
And show me what it costs.
My MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,199 (plus tax of course)
See just how much you'd "save"...
How about this: https://www.amazon.com/Dell-Inspiron-Plus-
Laptop-14- inch/dp/B0D73XHQGH?th=1
Hmmm, let's see:
With a 1TB SSD
Admittedly 32GB of RAM
Slightly higher resolution display
Only gets two thirds my machine's single core score and is pretty
much equal in multicore
Weighs more than my MacBook (30% more)
And...
...and this is the kicker...
...is just $250 less expensive.
Which is a little less than 12% cheaper.
Sorry, but your "isn't even close" claim doesn't hold up.
$250 over even a 2 year life is just an additional $10 a month.
According to Google's conversion of Canadian money to American, it's
about $375 USD less, actually - and does have more RAM and a little
more screen resolution, and isn't out of the ballpark CPU-wise. Face
it, your love for Apple is making you make excuses for their
overpriced crapware. They're lame as fuck. You may like your
laptop, that's fine, but it's overpriced, there's no denying it.
Your claim that, "it isn't even close comparing"
Sorry... ...but why can't you just admit you were wrong?
The price difference seems substantial to me, but admittedly, if you
really want macOS, the price may not be the most important factor.
Is 13% more expensive really "not even close"?
On 2025-08-27 09:03, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-26 9:30 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-26 19:37, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-26 6:40 p.m., Alan wrote:Sorry, that's CAD.
On 2025-08-25 02:39, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/25/2025 12:36 AM, vallor wrote:Really?
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during Snow >>>>>>>> Leopard,
but then again it hasn't really changed fundamentally, it's
counterintuitive to me.-a They are on a lower intellectual level >>>>>>>> than
Microsoft, and definitely the GNU/Linux realm.-a People who click >>>>>>>> with
macOS are willing to pay for the privilege, but damn it's
pricey, the
hardware options not competitive with Windows devices.
Well, we bought a Mac Studio, which is a low-end UNIX(r)
workstation,
not comparable to a Windows desktop.
However, for $4K more, I bought this Linux workstation from
System76,
and it runs rings around the Mac for my workloads.
When it comes to computers, I like to buy one that will last for >>>>>>> a while,
giving it some future-proofing.-a For example, my Linux
workstation has
two 10Gbase-T Ethernet ports, one of which I use to talk to my NAS >>>>>>> at 10Gbits/s.
Hugh posted a link that you should read about "boots theory":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory
I accept that people are willing to pay Apple's prices because
they like Apple's products, but it isn't even close comparing said >>>>>> prices to the competition.
Show me a Windows laptop with:
A 1TB SSD
Most of them.
16GB of RAM
That's a minimum for PC laptops.
A 2560x1664 display
Mid-range gaming laptops have the two above and this as well.
And which gets Geekbench scores of 3,157 (single core) and 12,020
(multi-core).
Oh, and will run literally all DAY on a single charge.
Admittedly, the gaming laptops won't. However, gaming laptops do
more than a Mac laptop can anyway by the mere fact that they can
game. If you want to compare apples to apples, the Surface and
similar machines get similar performance to the Macs as well as
similar battery life. Admittedly though, I's rather a Mac at that
point.
And show me what it costs.
My MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,199 (plus tax of course)
See just how much you'd "save"...
I can show you comparables if you tell me whether the price you set
is USD or CAD.
Here you go: <https://www.bestbuy.ca/en-ca/product/samsung-galaxy-
book4- edge-16-touchscreen-copilot-pc-laptop-snapdragon-x-elite-16gb-
ram-1tb- ssd-exclusive-retail-partner/17937877>
It actually costs less. As far as I know, the Snapdragon X Elite is on
par with the M3 (the M3 being better at single core but the X Elite
being better at multi-core). Still, I would rather get the Mac myself
since the AI stuff doesn't mean a thing to me.
So to get what I've got...
...you're paying nearly as much.
Which was my point.
The PP had insisted:
"but it [Apple's prices] isn't even close comparing said prices to the competition."
:-)
On 2025-08-27 08:59, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-26 9:17 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-26 19:34, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-26 6:27 p.m., Alan wrote:And what I'm saying is that if you WANT to use AI functionality in
On 2025-08-25 12:45, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-25 9:58 a.m., Alan wrote:Interesting.
On 2025-08-25 05:56, CrudeSausage wrote:I've read developers complaining about it but I'm with you, I have >>>>>> yet to experience a problem. I don't have a Mac anymore, but I
On 2025-08-24 6:57 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-24 15:53, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 6:27 PM, Alan wrote:So, you're comparing which version of File Explorer to an OS >>>>>>>>> that came out 16 years ago; Windows 7?
More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because you replaced it with Windows, what makes you more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "wired" for that?
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky.-a Linux requires >>>>>>>>>>>>>> comprehension, which I have, but I'm not disliking using >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Windows again, for now.-a I haven't made my decision about >>>>>>>>>>>>>> replacing it with Linux on this mini PC.
Unresponsive.
In what way is Windows any more WYSIWYG than macOS?
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during >>>>>>>>>>>> Snow Leopard, but then again it hasn't really changed >>>>>>>>>>>> fundamentally, it's counterintuitive to me.-a They are on a >>>>>>>>>>>> lower intellectual level than Microsoft, and definitely the >>>>>>>>>>>> GNU/Linux realm. People who click with macOS are willing to >>>>>>>>>>>> pay for the privilege, but damn it's pricey, the hardware >>>>>>>>>>>> options not competitive with Windows devices.
IN WHAT SPECIFIC WAYS?
HOW was it supposedly "counterintuitive"?
See: I can list some ways that Windows as it stands TODAY is >>>>>>>>>>> downright user hostile.
1. Windows 10 created a new application called "Settings"... >>>>>>>>>>>
...but you still needed to use the Control Panel for some >>>>>>>>>>> things.
And that is still true (albeit to a lesser degree) of Windows >>>>>>>>>>> 11.
2. How do you change the scrolling direction of the mouse >>>>>>>>>>> wheel (assuming your mouse has one).
I could go on, but believe me there are others that astound >>>>>>>>>>> me all the time.
And overall, the fluidity--the look and feel--of the
interface is just terrible! The pointer doesn't move as >>>>>>>>>>> smoothly. The rendering of... ...everything in the UI looks >>>>>>>>>>> terrible.
I hear you, with the way Windows settings have evolved, not >>>>>>>>>> being entirely coherent, but File Explorer is light years >>>>>>>>>> better than Finder as I experienced it under Snow Leopard. >>>>>>>>>> Edge is better than Safari, AFAIK.-a Apple is just the duller >>>>>>>>>> minds of the industry.
HOW is "Edge better than Safari"? How can you possibly say
"AFAIK" about it?
For one, Edge uses the Chromium engine which provides for better >>>>>>>> compatibility with websites.
Who says so? I've yet to see a single problem on any site I've used. >>>>>>
have no doubt that if I purchased one again, there would be no issue. >>>>>>
It also provides some very decent AI functionality that is
completely absent from Safari.
You mean it forces you to use Copilot.
No, it doesn't.
What "AI functionality" is there in Edge that isn't tied to using
Copilot?
I'm genuinely asking.
What I'm saying is that you are not obligated to use any of the AI
functionality. It's tied to search, and you can use AI to produce
some nice images related to a description you write, but it is
otherwise no better than any other browser.
Edge, it is going to be Microsoft's AI you use.
Why would Microsoft be forced to provide access to a competitor's AI
if they have their own? It only makes sense that a proprietary company
like Microsoft which believes you should use their proprietary browser
and proprietary search engine should also expect you to use their
proprietary AI.
They wouldn't.
But in a thread about Linux and choice, isn't the insistence that Edge
is superior because it integrates Copilot as its AI a little contradictory?
On 2025-08-27 9:29 a.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-27 08:59, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-26 9:17 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-26 19:34, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-26 6:27 p.m., Alan wrote:And what I'm saying is that if you WANT to use AI functionality in
On 2025-08-25 12:45, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-25 9:58 a.m., Alan wrote:Interesting.
On 2025-08-25 05:56, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-24 6:57 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-24 15:53, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 6:27 PM, Alan wrote:So, you're comparing which version of File Explorer to an OS >>>>>>>>>> that came out 16 years ago; Windows 7?
I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during >>>>>>>>>>>>> Snow Leopard, but then again it hasn't really changed >>>>>>>>>>>>> fundamentally, it's counterintuitive to me.-a They are on a >>>>>>>>>>>>> lower intellectual level than Microsoft, and definitely the >>>>>>>>>>>>> GNU/Linux realm. People who click with macOS are willing to >>>>>>>>>>>>> pay for the privilege, but damn it's pricey, the hardware >>>>>>>>>>>>> options not competitive with Windows devices.More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because you replaced it with Windows, what makes you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more "wired" for that?
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky.-a Linux requires >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> comprehension, which I have, but I'm not disliking using >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Windows again, for now.-a I haven't made my decision about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> replacing it with Linux on this mini PC.
Unresponsive.
In what way is Windows any more WYSIWYG than macOS? >>>>>>>>>>>>>
IN WHAT SPECIFIC WAYS?
HOW was it supposedly "counterintuitive"?
See: I can list some ways that Windows as it stands TODAY is >>>>>>>>>>>> downright user hostile.
1. Windows 10 created a new application called "Settings"... >>>>>>>>>>>>
...but you still needed to use the Control Panel for some >>>>>>>>>>>> things.
And that is still true (albeit to a lesser degree) of >>>>>>>>>>>> Windows 11.
2. How do you change the scrolling direction of the mouse >>>>>>>>>>>> wheel (assuming your mouse has one).
I could go on, but believe me there are others that astound >>>>>>>>>>>> me all the time.
And overall, the fluidity--the look and feel--of the
interface is just terrible! The pointer doesn't move as >>>>>>>>>>>> smoothly. The rendering of... ...everything in the UI looks >>>>>>>>>>>> terrible.
I hear you, with the way Windows settings have evolved, not >>>>>>>>>>> being entirely coherent, but File Explorer is light years >>>>>>>>>>> better than Finder as I experienced it under Snow Leopard. >>>>>>>>>>> Edge is better than Safari, AFAIK.-a Apple is just the duller >>>>>>>>>>> minds of the industry.
HOW is "Edge better than Safari"? How can you possibly say >>>>>>>>>> "AFAIK" about it?
For one, Edge uses the Chromium engine which provides for
better compatibility with websites.
Who says so? I've yet to see a single problem on any site I've >>>>>>>> used.
I've read developers complaining about it but I'm with you, I
have yet to experience a problem. I don't have a Mac anymore, but >>>>>>> I have no doubt that if I purchased one again, there would be no >>>>>>> issue.
It also provides some very decent AI functionality that is
completely absent from Safari.
You mean it forces you to use Copilot.
No, it doesn't.
What "AI functionality" is there in Edge that isn't tied to using >>>>>> Copilot?
I'm genuinely asking.
What I'm saying is that you are not obligated to use any of the AI
functionality. It's tied to search, and you can use AI to produce
some nice images related to a description you write, but it is
otherwise no better than any other browser.
Edge, it is going to be Microsoft's AI you use.
Why would Microsoft be forced to provide access to a competitor's AI
if they have their own? It only makes sense that a proprietary
company like Microsoft which believes you should use their
proprietary browser and proprietary search engine should also expect
you to use their proprietary AI.
They wouldn't.
But in a thread about Linux and choice, isn't the insistence that Edge
is superior because it integrates Copilot as its AI a little
contradictory?
Edge is superior to Chrome because of its AI functionality. However, if
it doesn't matter to you at all, the difference between both browsers is trivial. I'd still give the advantage to Edge because it supports
certain extensions Chrome blacklisted, and I find its security features
to be superior.
On 2025-08-27 14:51, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-27 9:29 a.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-27 08:59, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-26 9:17 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-26 19:34, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-26 6:27 p.m., Alan wrote:And what I'm saying is that if you WANT to use AI functionality in
On 2025-08-25 12:45, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-25 9:58 a.m., Alan wrote:Interesting.
On 2025-08-25 05:56, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-24 6:57 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-24 15:53, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 6:27 PM, Alan wrote:So, you're comparing which version of File Explorer to an OS >>>>>>>>>>> that came out 16 years ago; Windows 7?
IN WHAT SPECIFIC WAYS?I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Snow Leopard, but then again it hasn't really changed >>>>>>>>>>>>>> fundamentally, it's counterintuitive to me.-a They are on a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> lower intellectual level than Microsoft, and definitely >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the GNU/Linux realm. People who click with macOS are >>>>>>>>>>>>>> willing to pay for the privilege, but damn it's pricey, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the hardware options not competitive with Windows devices. >>>>>>>>>>>>>More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because you replaced it with Windows, what makes you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more "wired" for that?
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky.-a Linux requires >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> comprehension, which I have, but I'm not disliking using >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Windows again, for now.-a I haven't made my decision >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about replacing it with Linux on this mini PC.
Unresponsive.
In what way is Windows any more WYSIWYG than macOS? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
HOW was it supposedly "counterintuitive"?
See: I can list some ways that Windows as it stands TODAY >>>>>>>>>>>>> is downright user hostile.
1. Windows 10 created a new application called "Settings"... >>>>>>>>>>>>>
...but you still needed to use the Control Panel for some >>>>>>>>>>>>> things.
And that is still true (albeit to a lesser degree) of >>>>>>>>>>>>> Windows 11.
2. How do you change the scrolling direction of the mouse >>>>>>>>>>>>> wheel (assuming your mouse has one).
I could go on, but believe me there are others that astound >>>>>>>>>>>>> me all the time.
And overall, the fluidity--the look and feel--of the >>>>>>>>>>>>> interface is just terrible! The pointer doesn't move as >>>>>>>>>>>>> smoothly. The rendering of... ...everything in the UI looks >>>>>>>>>>>>> terrible.
I hear you, with the way Windows settings have evolved, not >>>>>>>>>>>> being entirely coherent, but File Explorer is light years >>>>>>>>>>>> better than Finder as I experienced it under Snow Leopard. >>>>>>>>>>>> Edge is better than Safari, AFAIK.-a Apple is just the duller >>>>>>>>>>>> minds of the industry.
HOW is "Edge better than Safari"? How can you possibly say >>>>>>>>>>> "AFAIK" about it?
For one, Edge uses the Chromium engine which provides for >>>>>>>>>> better compatibility with websites.
Who says so? I've yet to see a single problem on any site I've >>>>>>>>> used.
I've read developers complaining about it but I'm with you, I >>>>>>>> have yet to experience a problem. I don't have a Mac anymore, >>>>>>>> but I have no doubt that if I purchased one again, there would >>>>>>>> be no issue.
It also provides some very decent AI functionality that is >>>>>>>>>> completely absent from Safari.
You mean it forces you to use Copilot.
No, it doesn't.
What "AI functionality" is there in Edge that isn't tied to using >>>>>>> Copilot?
I'm genuinely asking.
What I'm saying is that you are not obligated to use any of the AI >>>>>> functionality. It's tied to search, and you can use AI to produce >>>>>> some nice images related to a description you write, but it is
otherwise no better than any other browser.
Edge, it is going to be Microsoft's AI you use.
Why would Microsoft be forced to provide access to a competitor's AI
if they have their own? It only makes sense that a proprietary
company like Microsoft which believes you should use their
proprietary browser and proprietary search engine should also expect
you to use their proprietary AI.
They wouldn't.
But in a thread about Linux and choice, isn't the insistence that
Edge is superior because it integrates Copilot as its AI a little
contradictory?
Edge is superior to Chrome because of its AI functionality. However,
if it doesn't matter to you at all, the difference between both
browsers is trivial. I'd still give the advantage to Edge because it
supports certain extensions Chrome blacklisted, and I find its
security features to be superior.
What actual "AI functionality" does it give you?
It lets you access Copilot...
...without having to type in the URL to Copilot.
It uses "AI" to identify dubious websites...
...which Chrome can do; just not calling it AI.
What is the actual VALUE here?
The point of this is obviously to make Macs the universal
development platform. You can aleady do Mac/iPhone/iPad development
on a Mac (of course) AND you can already do Windows development on a
Mac. Windows Arm runs in a standard VM and Visual Studio runs just
fine. I have done this. A Mac is already the ultimate "2 in 1"
computer.
So - again - Linux is not "taking over Macs". That would be silly
since MacOS is already Unix.
Of course, running Linux on a Mac is not new. What is new is the way
Apple is making it much easier/faster to do. Which comes from Apple
having VAST experience in working with Unix.
But these endless, petty price comparisons look even more ridiculous
when you consider that Macs can easily run Windows.
chrisv wrote:
CrudeSausage wrote:
Nevertheless, Linux is a more liberating experience than MacOS
can ever hope to be.
Freedom and choice are good things, no doubt.
Absolutely they are.
But declaring a device intended to have utility for ordinary folks
superior just because it offers more choice is absurd.
On Wed, 27 Aug 2025 14:17:45 +0000, Tyrone wrote:
The point of this is obviously to make Macs the universal
development platform. You can aleady do Mac/iPhone/iPad development
on a Mac (of course) AND you can already do Windows development on a
Mac. Windows Arm runs in a standard VM and Visual Studio runs just
fine. I have done this. A Mac is already the ultimate "2 in 1"
computer.
But itrCOs still a chore to install the necessary development packages. HomeBrew does its best, but itrCOs still a poor second to properly
integrated package management.
So - again - Linux is not "taking over Macs". That would be silly
since MacOS is already Unix.
rCLUnixrCY is just a trademark. Linux is technically not rCLUnixrCY, but it is
how a system is supposed to work when people think of the term rCLUnixrCY. Apple canrCOt match that.
Of course, running Linux on a Mac is not new. What is new is the way
Apple is making it much easier/faster to do. Which comes from Apple
having VAST experience in working with Unix.
They had that experience 20 years ago. WhatrCOs changed?
Linux is becoming more and more dominant, thatrCOs whatrCOs changed.
On 2025-08-28 00:12, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 27 Aug 2025 14:17:45 +0000, Tyrone wrote:
The point of this is obviously to make Macs the universal
development platform. You can aleady do Mac/iPhone/iPad development
on a Mac (of course) AND you can already do Windows development on a
Mac. Windows Arm runs in a standard VM and Visual Studio runs just
fine. I have done this. A Mac is already the ultimate "2 in 1"
computer.
But itrCOs still a chore to install the necessary development packages.
HomeBrew does its best, but itrCOs still a poor second to properly
integrated package management.
So - again - Linux is not "taking over Macs". That would be silly
since MacOS is already Unix.
rCLUnixrCY is just a trademark. Linux is technically not rCLUnixrCY, but it is
how a system is supposed to work when people think of the term rCLUnixrCY. >> Apple canrCOt match that.
Of course, running Linux on a Mac is not new. What is new is the way
Apple is making it much easier/faster to do. Which comes from Apple
having VAST experience in working with Unix.
They had that experience 20 years ago. WhatrCOs changed?
Linux is becoming more and more dominant, thatrCOs whatrCOs changed.
Yeah!
In the last two years it's gone from 3.12% share to 3.98%.
Any day now.
EfnuEfnuEfnu
On 2025-08-28 10:53 a.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-28 00:12, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 27 Aug 2025 14:17:45 +0000, Tyrone wrote:Yeah!
The point of this is obviously to make Macs the universal
development platform. You can aleady do Mac/iPhone/iPad development
on a Mac (of course) AND you can already do Windows development on a
Mac. Windows Arm runs in a standard VM and Visual Studio runs just
fine. I have done this. A Mac is already the ultimate "2 in 1"
computer.
But itrCOs still a chore to install the necessary development packages.
HomeBrew does its best, but itrCOs still a poor second to properly
integrated package management.
So - again - Linux is not "taking over Macs". That would be silly
since MacOS is already Unix.
rCLUnixrCY is just a trademark. Linux is technically not rCLUnixrCY, but it is
how a system is supposed to work when people think of the term rCLUnixrCY. >>> Apple canrCOt match that.
Of course, running Linux on a Mac is not new. What is new is the way
Apple is making it much easier/faster to do. Which comes from Apple
having VAST experience in working with Unix.
They had that experience 20 years ago. WhatrCOs changed?
Linux is becoming more and more dominant, thatrCOs whatrCOs changed.
In the last two years it's gone from 3.12% share to 3.98%.
Any day now.
EfnuEfnuEfnu
There is no denying that Linux owns the server market. Neither Windows
nor Mac OS can deliver the kind of advantages a mere Linux server
can. Nevertheless, Microsoft seems to be the one making the most money
using a Linux server software through Azure.
The time has come to admit that Linux will probably never be the
default operating system on most of our computers. Nevertheless, Linux
will likely have the greatest _influence_ over our computers going
forward since its developers have traditionally been better at trying
new things and taking risks.
On Wed, 27 Aug 2025 01:36:35 +0000, Tyrone wrote:
On Aug 24, 2025 at 7:37:45rC>PM EDT, "Lawrence D-|Oliveiro"
<ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Apple created entirely separate OSes for its phones and its tablets
What? You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. iOS is a
fork of MacOS (OS X at the time).
Completely different GUI, therefore completely different kernel. The GUI
is not a separate, modular layer, remember.
iPads ran iOS until version 13. Then iOS was forked into iPadOS because
Apple started adding multiple window management, which would be silly on
a phone.
The distinction is what is silly. Remember, Android invented rCLphabletsrCY.
They are all Unix.
They all license the rCLUnixrCY trademark, that doesnrCOt mean they follow the
rCL*nixrCY philosophy, as I have pointed out.
On 2025-08-28 10:53 a.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-28 00:12, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 27 Aug 2025 14:17:45 +0000, Tyrone wrote:
The point of this is obviously to make Macs the universal
development platform. You can aleady do Mac/iPhone/iPad development
on a Mac (of course) AND you can already do Windows development on a
Mac. Windows Arm runs in a standard VM and Visual Studio runs just
fine. I have done this. A Mac is already the ultimate "2 in 1"
computer.
But itrCOs still a chore to install the necessary development packages.
HomeBrew does its best, but itrCOs still a poor second to properly
integrated package management.
So - again - Linux is not "taking over Macs". That would be silly
since MacOS is already Unix.
rCLUnixrCY is just a trademark. Linux is technically not rCLUnixrCY, but it is
how a system is supposed to work when people think of the term rCLUnixrCY. >>> Apple canrCOt match that.
Of course, running Linux on a Mac is not new. What is new is the way
Apple is making it much easier/faster to do. Which comes from Apple
having VAST experience in working with Unix.
They had that experience 20 years ago. WhatrCOs changed?
Linux is becoming more and more dominant, thatrCOs whatrCOs changed.
Yeah!
In the last two years it's gone from 3.12% share to 3.98%.
Any day now.
EfnuEfnuEfnu
There is no denying that Linux owns the server market. Neither Windows
nor Mac OS can deliver the kind of advantages a mere Linux server can. Nevertheless, Microsoft seems to be the one making the most money using
a Linux server software through Azure.
The time has come to admit that Linux will probably never be the default operating system on most of our computers. Nevertheless, Linux willI think that's an awfully bold claim to be making.
likely have the greatest _influence_ over our computers going forward
since its developers have traditionally been better at trying new things
and taking risks.
On 2025-08-28 00:12, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
Linux is becoming more and more dominant, thatrCOs whatrCOs changed.
Yeah!
In the last two years it's gone from 3.12% share to 3.98%.
Any day now.
EfnuEfnuEfnu
On 2025-08-28 12:12, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-28 10:53 a.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-28 00:12, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
Linux is becoming more and more dominant, thatrCOs whatrCOs changed.
Yeah!
In the last two years it's gone from 3.12% share to 3.98%.
Any day now.
EfnuEfnuEfnu
There is no denying that Linux owns the server market. Neither Windows
nor Mac OS can deliver the kind of advantages a mere Linux server can.
Nevertheless, Microsoft seems to be the one making the most money
using a Linux server software through Azure.
Where the chief "advantage" is cost, yes.
There is no denying that Linux owns the server market.
The time has come to admit that Linux will probably never be the default operating system on most of our computers.
On 8/28/2025 2:31 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-28 12:12, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-28 10:53 a.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-28 00:12, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
Linux is becoming more and more dominant, thatrCOs whatrCOs changed.
Yeah!
In the last two years it's gone from 3.12% share to 3.98%.
Any day now.
EfnuEfnuEfnu
There is no denying that Linux owns the server market. Neither
Windows nor Mac OS can deliver the kind of advantages a mere Linux
server can. Nevertheless, Microsoft seems to be the one making the
most money using a Linux server software through Azure.
Where the chief "advantage" is cost, yes.
Wrong, idiot, you're so desperate to make a point about your lameIn what way is it "much more designed to function"?
platform, that you say something so stupid, no, Windows servers have
their place, but Linux is much more designed to function in the average server purposes, that is undeniable, you are a moron.
On 8/28/2025 10:53 AM, Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-28 00:12, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
Linux is becoming more and more dominant, thatrCOs whatrCOs changed.
Yeah!
In the last two years it's gone from 3.12% share to 3.98%.
Any day now.
EfnuEfnuEfnu
You really can be a jackass, your gaywad platform is only more popular because of retards willing to pay crApple for the so-called privilege of running their crapware hardware and software.-a And you're proud of being one of the dummies.-a Congrats.
On 8/28/2025 10:53 AM, Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-28 00:12, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
Linux is becoming more and more dominant, thatrCOs whatrCOs changed.
Yeah!
In the last two years it's gone from 3.12% share to 3.98%.
Any day now.
EfnuEfnuEfnu
You really can be a jackass, your gaywad platform is only more popular because of retards willing to pay crApple for the so-called privilege of running their crapware hardware and software.
-aAnd you're proud of being
one of the dummies.-a Congrats.
On Thu, 28 Aug 2025 12:12:40 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
There is no denying that Linux owns the server market.
And workstations as well.
The time has come to admit that Linux will probably never be the default
operating system on most of our computers.
It already is. Remember, Android computers outnumber Windows about 4:1.
On 2025-08-28 19:19, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/28/2025 10:53 AM, Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-28 00:12, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
Linux is becoming more and more dominant, thatrCOs whatrCOs changed.
Yeah!
In the last two years it's gone from 3.12% share to 3.98%.
Any day now.
EfnuEfnuEfnu
You really can be a jackass, your gaywad platform is only more popular
because of retards willing to pay crApple for the so-called privilege
of running their crapware hardware and software.-a And you're proud of
being one of the dummies.-a Congrats.
Spoken like a 13 year old nerd who's never gotten laid!
On 2025-08-28 19:23, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/28/2025 2:31 PM, Alan wrote:In what way is it "much more designed to function"?
On 2025-08-28 12:12, CrudeSausage wrote:
There is no denying that Linux owns the server market. Neither
Windows nor Mac OS can deliver the kind of advantages a mere Linux
server can. Nevertheless, Microsoft seems to be the one making the
most money using a Linux server software through Azure.
Where the chief "advantage" is cost, yes.
Wrong, idiot, you're so desperate to make a point about your lame
platform, that you say something so stupid, no, Windows servers have
their place, but Linux is much more designed to function in the
average server purposes, that is undeniable, you are a moron.
What does it have that macOS would not that makes it better as a server?
On 2025-08-28 19:19, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/28/2025 10:53 AM, Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-28 00:12, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
Linux is becoming more and more dominant, thatrCOs whatrCOs changed.
Yeah!
In the last two years it's gone from 3.12% share to 3.98%.
Any day now.
EfnuEfnuEfnu
You really can be a jackass, your gaywad platform is only more popular
because of retards willing to pay crApple for the so-called privilege
of running their crapware hardware and software.-a And you're proud of
being one of the dummies.-a Congrats.
Spoken like a 13 year old nerd who's never gotten laid!
On 8/27/2025 10:31 AM, Alan wrote:
Your claim that, "it isn't even close comparing"My MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,199 (plus tax of course)
See just how much you'd "save"...
How about this: https://www.amazon.com/Dell-Inspiron-Plus-
Laptop-14- inch/dp/B0D73XHQGH?th=1
Hmmm, let's see:
With a 1TB SSD
Admittedly 32GB of RAM
Slightly higher resolution display
Only gets two thirds my machine's single core score and is pretty >>>>>> much equal in multicore
Weighs more than my MacBook (30% more)
And...
...and this is the kicker...
...is just $250 less expensive.
Which is a little less than 12% cheaper.
Sorry, but your "isn't even close" claim doesn't hold up.
$250 over even a 2 year life is just an additional $10 a month.
According to Google's conversion of Canadian money to American,
it's about $375 USD less, actually - and does have more RAM and a
little more screen resolution, and isn't out of the ballpark CPU-
wise. Face it, your love for Apple is making you make excuses for
their overpriced crapware.-a They're lame as fuck.-a You may like
your laptop, that's fine, but it's overpriced, there's no denying it. >>>>
Sorry... ...but why can't you just admit you were wrong?
The price difference seems substantial to me, but admittedly, if you
really want macOS, the price may not be the most important factor.
Is 13% more expensive really "not even close"?
It's over 23%, according to my math, based on ~$1590 USD equivalent for
your price.-a But again, you may be willing to pay it, and that's fine.
[macOS] is only more popular
because of retards willing to pay crApple for the so-called privilege
of running their crapware hardware and software.
Apple is more popular than Linux because everything the company tells
you that you can do with the hardware can actually be done, easily. With Linux, I'm sure that there is a way to get the same things accomplished,
but not easily and not without a load of compromises. Between Apple and Linux, the latter's only advantage is price.
-aAnd you're proud of being one of the dummies.-a Congrats.
I don't have an Apple computer at the moment, but when I did, the
experience was seamless. My MacBook just knew when I wanted it to
connect to the computer and when I needed it to be connected to the
iPhone instead, like if I moved to the bathroom. Just connecting the
AirPods to the computer (either the laptop or the phone) was immediate
and painless, something no distribution can ever offer with any choice
of device. Additionally, the experience is elegant not only when you use
the machine, but even when you're away from it. The absolute beauty of
what it puts on screen while you're not using the machine speaks for
itself. Additionally, the machine works around you rather than demanding that you work for it. In other words, whether you are at a desk, at a
bus stop or in a cafe, you know that the machine will not only work as expected but allow you to do so as long as you want because of its
stellar battery life and excellent processor. With most hardware running Linux, you either get battery life or decent processing. You get nothing which could be defined as elegant and there should be no expectation
that even waking from suspend will work without issue. Face it, you wish
you had an Apple but you're cheering on Linux because it's the only
thing you can afford in your degenerate existence.
On 2025-08-28 9:12 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-28 19:19, Joel W. Crump wrote:
[macOS] is only more
popular because of retards willing to pay crApple for the so-called
privilege of running their crapware hardware and software.-a And
you're proud of being one of the dummies.-a Congrats.
Spoken like a 13 year old nerd who's never gotten laid!
How horrible of you to suggest! Joel constantly lets his "girlfriend" sodomize him! I imagine that the "girl" in question lets him do the sodomizing at least once a year as well.
On 8/27/25 10:44, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/27/2025 10:31 AM, Alan wrote:
My MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,199 (plus tax of course)
See just how much you'd "save"...
How about this: https://www.amazon.com/Dell-Inspiron-Plus-
Laptop-14- inch/dp/B0D73XHQGH?th=1
The price difference seems substantial to me, but admittedly, if you
really want macOS, the price may not be the most important factor.
Is 13% more expensive really "not even close"?
It's over 23%, according to my math, based on ~$1590 USD equivalent
for your price.-a But again, you may be willing to pay it, and that's
fine.
But by how much should the Dell get handicapped in this comparison
attempt because it weighs-a 2.7lbs vs 3.9lbs = 44% more?
This isn't a desktop, so such mobility relevant metrics do matter.
Particularly since this was obvious because the baseline was the "Air" model, not the standard MBP (and at 3.4lbs, heavier) version.
So it seems to me that another Windows candidate needs to be identified
in lieu of this particular Dell.-a How about finding an example that's at least within 10-15% of the Air's weight bogey?-a While (of course) still also meeting useful battery life & other mentioned hardware specs too.
On 8/29/2025 10:25 AM, -hh wrote:
On 8/27/25 10:44, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/27/2025 10:31 AM, Alan wrote:
My MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,199 (plus tax of course)
See just how much you'd "save"...
How about this: https://www.amazon.com/Dell-Inspiron-Plus-
Laptop-14- inch/dp/B0D73XHQGH?th=1
[snip for brevity]
The price difference seems substantial to me, but admittedly, ifIs 13% more expensive really "not even close"?
you really want macOS, the price may not be the most important factor. >>>>
It's over 23%, according to my math, based on ~$1590 USD equivalent
for your price.-a But again, you may be willing to pay it, and that's
fine.
But by how much should the Dell get handicapped in this comparison
attempt because it weighs-a 2.7lbs vs 3.9lbs = 44% more?
This isn't a desktop, so such mobility relevant metrics do matter.
Particularly since this was obvious because the baseline was the "Air"
model, not the standard MBP (and at 3.4lbs, heavier) version.
So it seems to me that another Windows candidate needs to be
identified in lieu of this particular Dell.-a How about finding an
example that's at least within 10-15% of the Air's weight bogey?
While (of course) still also meeting useful battery life & other
mentioned hardware specs too.
I don't think you're likely to find a Windows laptop that can in every respect compare to the Air - they are exceptionally light, that being
said though, the specs were not *that* impressive, I agree the Apple
Silicon rocks, but that's only one aspect of the whole product.
I canExcept we're not directly having a preference for MacOS for this is
understand one having a preference for macOS and Apple products, but
price does matter at the end of the day, all Macs are pricey.
On 2025-08-25 01:42, vallor wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 15:53:56 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
...
Do you want to buy a car where you can pick which engine you use?
Have you actually created your own GUI?
Terrible analogy.
My car's NAV system has different themes to chose from.-a Almost
nobody will use them, but some people do.
Choice is good.
And yet for most consumer goods, choice is extremely limited and
personal customization after purchase is essentially nil.
How about this: https://www.amazon.com/Dell-Inspiron-Plus-Laptop-14- inch/dp/B0D73XHQGH?th=1
On 8/28/2025 9:12 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-28 19:19, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/28/2025 10:53 AM, Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-28 00:12, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
Linux is becoming more and more dominant, thatrCOs whatrCOs changed.
Yeah!
In the last two years it's gone from 3.12% share to 3.98%.
Any day now.
EfnuEfnuEfnu
You really can be a jackass, your gaywad platform is only more
popular because of retards willing to pay crApple for the so-called
privilege of running their crapware hardware and software.-a And
you're proud of being one of the dummies.-a Congrats.
Spoken like a 13 year old nerd who's never gotten laid!
I was in a bad mood, I confess, but I've certainly gotten laid plenty of times.-a I understand that people's minds work in a variety of ways, andObjectively, they are not.
to some, Macs are the bee's knees, and that's fine for them.-a But objectively, they are overpriced.
I was in a bad mood, I confess, but I've certainly gotten laid plenty
of times.-a I understand that people's minds work in a variety of ways,
and to some, Macs are the bee's knees, and that's fine for them.-a But
objectively, they are overpriced.
Objectively, they are not.
They are not overpriced precisely BECAUSE they are the "bee's knees" for some people.
Your tacit (you're not out of grade school, so you might need to look it
up) assumption is that anyone who doesn't find them to be overprice must have something WRONG with their mind.
As for you being in a bad mood, we call get those.
But what you turn to for language WHEN you are in a bad mood speaks
volumes about you, child.
How about this: https://www.amazon.com/Dell-Inspiron-Plus-Laptop-14-
inch/dp/B0D73XHQGH?th=1
It's down to $1000.
On 8/29/25 16:22, Joel W. Crump wrote:
How about this: https://www.amazon.com/Dell-Inspiron-Plus-Laptop-14-
inch/dp/B0D73XHQGH?th=1
It's down to $1000.
So what?-a Let us know when its down to 3 lbs.
people who run Linux tend to be more motivated.
https://www.makeuseof.com/macos-better-than-linux-for-windows-users/
Heh. This author here, while making a rational-enough case in a way, exposes why proprietary OSes are the refuge of the lazy, here I am using Windows 11 24H2 on a four-thread CPU, it's a bit sluggish, so I'll
probably Linux this thing, but that's because I'm not so challenged by
the terminal command line, I used PowerShell already today to install nativefier (a free way to make Web apps, cross-platform, I was using it under Debian, too, saving me $5 a month compared to WebCatalog), so even
in Winblows there are instances where brain use comes in handy. But no, buying a fucking Mac is not the answer. It's too expensive. It's a
cult of Steve Jobs' ghost, of corporate greed, walled garden as it were.
Fuck them. It's ironic, but Windows actually beats macOS because of
how expensive Macs are, and how its Unix functions aren't nearly as good
as just using Linux - the macOS-specific stuff is hit-or-miss, where
WinAPI apps are pretty consistently functional.
Suffice to say, I'm still the most impressed, overall, with GNU/Linux
such as Debian, but Winblows isn't so terrible in a way.
I don't think you're likely to find a Windows laptop that can in
every respect compare to the Air ...
On 2025-08-28 19:23, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/28/2025 2:31 PM, Alan wrote:In what way is it "much more designed to function"?
On 2025-08-28 12:12, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-28 10:53 a.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-28 00:12, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
Yeah!
Linux is becoming more and more dominant, thatrCOs whatrCOs changed. >>>>>
In the last two years it's gone from 3.12% share to 3.98%.
Any day now.
EfnuEfnuEfnu
There is no denying that Linux owns the server market. Neither
Windows nor Mac OS can deliver the kind of advantages a mere Linux
server can. Nevertheless, Microsoft seems to be the one making the
most money using a Linux server software through Azure.
Where the chief "advantage" is cost, yes.
Wrong, idiot, you're so desperate to make a point about your lame
platform, that you say something so stupid, no, Windows servers have
their place, but Linux is much more designed to function in the
average server purposes, that is undeniable, you are a moron.
What does it have that macOS would not that makes it better as a server?
On 8/28/2025 9:45 PM, CrudeSausage wrote:
[macOS] is only more popular because of retards willing to pay
crApple for the so-called privilege of running their crapware
hardware and software.
Apple is more popular than Linux because everything the company tells
you that you can do with the hardware can actually be done, easily.
With Linux, I'm sure that there is a way to get the same things
accomplished, but not easily and not without a load of compromises.
Between Apple and Linux, the latter's only advantage is price.
I've never had a problem getting things done with Linux, but then again
I'm not lazy.
-aAnd you're proud of being one of the dummies.-a Congrats.
I don't have an Apple computer at the moment, but when I did, the
experience was seamless. My MacBook just knew when I wanted it to
connect to the computer and when I needed it to be connected to the
iPhone instead, like if I moved to the bathroom. Just connecting the
AirPods to the computer (either the laptop or the phone) was immediate
and painless, something no distribution can ever offer with any choice
of device. Additionally, the experience is elegant not only when you
use the machine, but even when you're away from it. The absolute
beauty of what it puts on screen while you're not using the machine
speaks for itself. Additionally, the machine works around you rather
than demanding that you work for it. In other words, whether you are
at a desk, at a bus stop or in a cafe, you know that the machine will
not only work as expected but allow you to do so as long as you want
because of its stellar battery life and excellent processor. With most
hardware running Linux, you either get battery life or decent
processing. You get nothing which could be defined as elegant and
there should be no expectation that even waking from suspend will work
without issue. Face it, you wish you had an Apple but you're cheering
on Linux because it's the only thing you can afford in your degenerate
existence.
You're the degenerate, you pretend to be a Christian while calling
people racial slurs, being a homo/transphobe, you're ridiculous.
And
you're exaggerating beyond belief about Linux's drawbacks, if one is
lazy AF, you might have a point, people who run Linux tend to be more motivated.
On 8/29/2025 8:44 AM, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-28 9:12 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-28 19:19, Joel W. Crump wrote:
[macOS] is only more popular because of retards willing to pay
crApple for the so-called privilege of running their crapware
hardware and software.-a And you're proud of being one of the
dummies.-a Congrats.
Spoken like a 13 year old nerd who's never gotten laid!
How horrible of you to suggest! Joel constantly lets his "girlfriend"
sodomize him! I imagine that the "girl" in question lets him do the
sodomizing at least once a year as well.
I've had sex ..
On 8/29/2025 10:25 AM, -hh wrote:
On 8/27/25 10:44, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/27/2025 10:31 AM, Alan wrote:
My MacBook Air (M3) cost me $2,199 (plus tax of course)
See just how much you'd "save"...
How about this: https://www.amazon.com/Dell-Inspiron-Plus-
Laptop-14- inch/dp/B0D73XHQGH?th=1
[snip for brevity]
The price difference seems substantial to me, but admittedly, ifIs 13% more expensive really "not even close"?
you really want macOS, the price may not be the most important factor. >>>>
It's over 23%, according to my math, based on ~$1590 USD equivalent
for your price.-a But again, you may be willing to pay it, and that's
fine.
But by how much should the Dell get handicapped in this comparison
attempt because it weighs-a 2.7lbs vs 3.9lbs = 44% more?
This isn't a desktop, so such mobility relevant metrics do matter.
Particularly since this was obvious because the baseline was the "Air"
model, not the standard MBP (and at 3.4lbs, heavier) version.
So it seems to me that another Windows candidate needs to be
identified in lieu of this particular Dell.-a How about finding an
example that's at least within 10-15% of the Air's weight bogey?
While (of course) still also meeting useful battery life & other
mentioned hardware specs too.
I don't think you're likely to find a Windows laptop that can in every respect compare to the Air - they are exceptionally light, that being
said though, the specs were not *that* impressive, I agree the Apple
Silicon rocks, but that's only one aspect of the whole product.-a I can understand one having a preference for macOS and Apple products, but
price does matter at the end of the day, all Macs are pricey.
On 8/29/25 16:22, Joel W. Crump wrote:
How about this: https://www.amazon.com/Dell-Inspiron-Plus-Laptop-14-
inch/dp/B0D73XHQGH?th=1
It's down to $1000.
So what?-a Let us know when its down to 3 lbs.
Joel W. Crump wrote:
people who run Linux tend to be more motivated.
Because they have to be.
Desktop Linux mainly appeals to young geeks with
little/no money. Nothing wrong with that. I used to be one.
But that was 25 years ago. Now I am older and I have money. Because I have a >career, not just "a job".
I am no longer interested in "compiling the latest
kernel". I am perfectly fine with paying someone else to do that for me. >That's why I moved on from Linux to Windows to Macs.
Because I have more important things to do.
Even you - after you trashed your Linux box due to complete technical >ineptitude - are now running Windows 11. See how nice it is to just buy a >computer and have it work without jumping through hoops?
Tyrone wrote:
Joel W. Crump wrote:
people who run Linux tend to be more motivated.
Because they have to be.
Yes, because Windows doesn't require any thinking. It comes
pre-installed and has all the industry support.
Desktop Linux mainly appeals to young geeks with
little/no money. Nothing wrong with that. I used to be one.
But that was 25 years ago. Now I am older and I have money. Because I have a
career, not just "a job".
It's got nothing to do with money. It's got everything to do with
people already having experience with Windows. And, yes, all the
industry support does result in a somewhat slicker, prettier
experience.
I am no longer interested in "compiling the latest
kernel". I am perfectly fine with paying someone else to do that for me.
That's why I moved on from Linux to Windows to Macs.
Because I have more important things to do.
An insignificant fraction of Linux users compile their kernel. If
they compile anything at all, it's because they are a software
developer.
Even you - after you trashed your Linux box due to complete technical
ineptitude - are now running Windows 11. See how nice it is to just buy a
computer and have it work without jumping through hoops?
Other than needing to install it yourself, it requires no more, and
possibly less, hoops than Windows does. Many users don't require much
more than a Web browser, and Linux is more private and secure. See
how nice it is to have a computer and have it work without having your
data harvested?
On 2025-08-28 9:12 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-28 19:23, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/28/2025 2:31 PM, Alan wrote:In what way is it "much more designed to function"?
On 2025-08-28 12:12, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-28 10:53 a.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-28 00:12, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
Yeah!
Linux is becoming more and more dominant, thatrCOs whatrCOs changed. >>>>>>
In the last two years it's gone from 3.12% share to 3.98%.
Any day now.
EfnuEfnuEfnu
There is no denying that Linux owns the server market. Neither
Windows nor Mac OS can deliver the kind of advantages a mere Linux
server can. Nevertheless, Microsoft seems to be the one making the
most money using a Linux server software through Azure.
Where the chief "advantage" is cost, yes.
Wrong, idiot, you're so desperate to make a point about your lame
platform, that you say something so stupid, no, Windows servers have
their place, but Linux is much more designed to function in the
average server purposes, that is undeniable, you are a moron.
What does it have that macOS would not that makes it better as a server?
Linux doesn't have the overhead that MacOS would have for server
purposes.
You can do pretty much everything in the Linux console whereas
Apple doesn't usually prioritize that part of their operating system.
Besides, we've been in this situation before. I recall when Apple triedBut you didn't have to.
to push its Gx series servers in the mid-2000s. Absolutely no one wanted them because the performance was laughable whereas the cost was
enormous. If I remember correctly, the company also expected you to do everything through a GUI.
On 8/28/2025 9:12 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-28 19:23, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/28/2025 2:31 PM, Alan wrote:In what way is it "much more designed to function"?
On 2025-08-28 12:12, CrudeSausage wrote:
There is no denying that Linux owns the server market. Neither
Windows nor Mac OS can deliver the kind of advantages a mere Linux
server can. Nevertheless, Microsoft seems to be the one making the
most money using a Linux server software through Azure.
Where the chief "advantage" is cost, yes.
Wrong, idiot, you're so desperate to make a point about your lame
platform, that you say something so stupid, no, Windows servers have
their place, but Linux is much more designed to function in the
average server purposes, that is undeniable, you are a moron.
What does it have that macOS would not that makes it better as a server?
I didn't even think you were including Mac servers, they exist, that'sYou're ducking.
about the most you can say about them, their share is nonexistent
though, Windows servers are not uncommon, but Linux is where most of
that market is.
On 8/29/2025 4:27 PM, Alan wrote:
I was in a bad mood, I confess, but I've certainly gotten laid plenty
of times.-a I understand that people's minds work in a variety of
ways, and to some, Macs are the bee's knees, and that's fine for
them.-a But objectively, they are overpriced.
Objectively, they are not.
They are not overpriced precisely BECAUSE they are the "bee's knees"
for some people.
Your tacit (you're not out of grade school, so you might need to look
it up) assumption is that anyone who doesn't find them to be overprice
must have something WRONG with their mind.
As for you being in a bad mood, we call get those.
But what you turn to for language WHEN you are in a bad mood speaks
volumes about you, child.
If you assumed I implied something being wrong with your mind, that was
not intended by me,
but in fact I don't think that is what is behind the
inferiority of Apple's software.
Their patrons are fairly intelligent,Maybe, maybe not.
in fact.-a You just could get a better computer for the money.
On 2025-08-27 3:41 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-27 14:51, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-27 9:29 a.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-27 08:59, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-26 9:17 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-26 19:34, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-26 6:27 p.m., Alan wrote:And what I'm saying is that if you WANT to use AI
On 2025-08-25 12:45, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-25 9:58 a.m., Alan wrote:Interesting.
On 2025-08-25 05:56, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-24 6:57 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-24 15:53, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 6:27 PM, Alan wrote:So, you're comparing which version of File
More specifically, if you're "not
wired for Apple", because you
replaced it with Windows, what
makes you more "wired" for that?
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is
quirky. Linux requires
comprehension, which I have, but I'm
not disliking using Windows again,
for now. I haven't made my decision
about replacing it with Linux on
this mini PC.
Unresponsive.
In what way is Windows any more
WYSIWYG than macOS?
I could be out of date, I guess, having
used macOS during Snow Leopard, but then
again it hasn't really changed
fundamentally, it's counterintuitive to
me. They are on a lower intellectual
level than Microsoft, and definitely the
GNU/Linux realm. People who click with
macOS are willing to pay for the
privilege, but damn it's pricey, the
hardware options not competitive with
Windows devices.
IN WHAT SPECIFIC WAYS?
HOW was it supposedly "counterintuitive"?
See: I can list some ways that Windows as
it stands TODAY is downright user hostile.
1. Windows 10 created a new application
called "Settings"...
...but you still needed to use the Control
Panel for some things.
And that is still true (albeit to a lesser
degree) of Windows 11.
2. How do you change the scrolling
direction of the mouse wheel (assuming
your mouse has one).
I could go on, but believe me there are
others that astound me all the time.
And overall, the fluidity--the look and
feel--of the interface is just terrible!
The pointer doesn't move as smoothly. The
rendering of... ...everything in the UI
looks terrible.
I hear you, with the way Windows settings
have evolved, not being entirely coherent,
but File Explorer is light years better than
Finder as I experienced it under Snow
Leopard. Edge is better than Safari, AFAIK.
Apple is just the duller minds of the
industry.
Explorer to an OS that came out 16 years ago;
Windows 7?
HOW is "Edge better than Safari"? How can you
possibly say "AFAIK" about it?
For one, Edge uses the Chromium engine which
provides for better compatibility with websites.
Who says so? I've yet to see a single problem on
any site I've used.
I've read developers complaining about it but I'm
with you, I have yet to experience a problem. I
don't have a Mac anymore, but I have no doubt that
if I purchased one again, there would be no issue.
It also provides some very decent AI
functionality that is completely absent from
Safari.
You mean it forces you to use Copilot.
No, it doesn't.
What "AI functionality" is there in Edge that isn't
tied to using Copilot?
I'm genuinely asking.
What I'm saying is that you are not obligated to use any
of the AI functionality. It's tied to search, and you
can use AI to produce some nice images related to a
description you write, but it is otherwise no better
than any other browser.
functionality in Edge, it is going to be Microsoft's AI
you use.
Why would Microsoft be forced to provide access to a
competitor's AI if they have their own? It only makes sense
that a proprietary company like Microsoft which believes you
should use their proprietary browser and proprietary search
engine should also expect you to use their proprietary AI.
They wouldn't.
But in a thread about Linux and choice, isn't the insistence
that Edge is superior because it integrates Copilot as its AI
a little contradictory?
Edge is superior to Chrome because of its AI functionality.
However, if it doesn't matter to you at all, the difference
between both browsers is trivial. I'd still give the advantage
to Edge because it supports certain extensions Chrome
blacklisted, and I find its security features to be superior.
What actual "AI functionality" does it give you?
Well, I'm a fan of Microsoft Designer. If I want to create a
picture really quickly, it provides me with some stellar results as
long as my description is detailed. The search engine also has a
summarizing feature that I like as much as the one in Brave. Of
course, I don't use AI that much. If I do, it's only because I'm
looking for something quickly.
We were discussing EDGE. How is that relevant?It lets you access Copilot...
...without having to type in the URL to Copilot.
It uses "AI" to identify dubious websites...
...which Chrome can do; just not calling it AI.
What is the actual VALUE here?
All I can tell you for sure is that Apple seems to be sweating
because they've been stagnating for a while whereas Microsoft is
adding a lot of value to its products with AI. Apple was forced to
sign with OpenAI when they failed to create their own "intelligence"
within a respectable time frame.
On 2025-08-30 08:29, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-28 9:12 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-28 19:23, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/28/2025 2:31 PM, Alan wrote:In what way is it "much more designed to function"?
On 2025-08-28 12:12, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-28 10:53 a.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-28 00:12, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
Yeah!
Linux is becoming more and more dominant, thatrCOs whatrCOs changed. >>>>>>>
In the last two years it's gone from 3.12% share to 3.98%.
Any day now.
EfnuEfnuEfnu
There is no denying that Linux owns the server market. Neither
Windows nor Mac OS can deliver the kind of advantages a mere Linux >>>>>> server can. Nevertheless, Microsoft seems to be the one making the >>>>>> most money using a Linux server software through Azure.
Where the chief "advantage" is cost, yes.
Wrong, idiot, you're so desperate to make a point about your lame
platform, that you say something so stupid, no, Windows servers have
their place, but Linux is much more designed to function in the
average server purposes, that is undeniable, you are a moron.
What does it have that macOS would not that makes it better as a server?
Linux doesn't have the overhead that MacOS would have for server
purposes.
What overhead would that be?
You can do pretty much everything in the Linux console whereas Apple
doesn't usually prioritize that part of their operating system.
It doesn't put it forward to ordinary users...
...but it still exists.
Besides, we've been in this situation before. I recall when AppleBut you didn't have to.
tried to push its Gx series servers in the mid-2000s. Absolutely no
one wanted them because the performance was laughable whereas the cost
was enormous. If I remember correctly, the company also expected you
to do everything through a GUI.
On 2025-08-27 19:18, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-27 3:41 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-27 14:51, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-27 9:29 a.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-27 08:59, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-26 9:17 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-26 19:34, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-26 6:27 p.m., Alan wrote:And what I'm saying is that if you WANT to use AI
On 2025-08-25 12:45, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-25 9:58 a.m., Alan wrote:Interesting.
On 2025-08-25 05:56, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-24 6:57 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-24 15:53, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 6:27 PM, Alan wrote:So, you're comparing which version of File
More specifically, if you're "not
wired for Apple", because you
replaced it with Windows, what
makes you more "wired" for that?
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is
quirky.-a Linux requires comprehension, which I have, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but I'm
not disliking using Windows again,
for now.-a I haven't made my decision
about replacing it with Linux on
this mini PC.
Unresponsive.
In what way is Windows any more
WYSIWYG than macOS?
I could be out of date, I guess, having
used macOS during Snow Leopard, but then
again it hasn't really changed fundamentally, it's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> counterintuitive to
me.-a They are on a lower intellectual
level than Microsoft, and definitely the
GNU/Linux realm. People who click with
macOS are willing to pay for the
privilege, but damn it's pricey, the
hardware options not competitive with
Windows devices.
IN WHAT SPECIFIC WAYS?
HOW was it supposedly "counterintuitive"?
See: I can list some ways that Windows as
it stands TODAY is downright user hostile.
1. Windows 10 created a new application
called "Settings"...
...but you still needed to use the Control
Panel for some things.
And that is still true (albeit to a lesser
degree) of Windows 11.
2. How do you change the scrolling
direction of the mouse wheel (assuming
your mouse has one).
I could go on, but believe me there are
others that astound me all the time.
And overall, the fluidity--the look and
feel--of the interface is just terrible!
The pointer doesn't move as smoothly. The
rendering of... ...everything in the UI looks terrible. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I hear you, with the way Windows settings
have evolved, not being entirely coherent,
but File Explorer is light years better than
Finder as I experienced it under Snow
Leopard. Edge is better than Safari, AFAIK.
Apple is just the duller minds of the
industry.
Explorer to an OS that came out 16 years ago;
Windows 7?
HOW is "Edge better than Safari"? How can you
possibly say "AFAIK" about it?
For one, Edge uses the Chromium engine which
provides for better compatibility with websites.
Who says so? I've yet to see a single problem on
any site I've used.
I've read developers complaining about it but I'm
with you, I have yet to experience a problem. I
don't have a Mac anymore, but I have no doubt that
if I purchased one again, there would be no issue.
It also provides some very decent AI
functionality that is completely absent from
Safari.
You mean it forces you to use Copilot.
No, it doesn't.
What "AI functionality" is there in Edge that isn't
tied to using Copilot?
I'm genuinely asking.
What I'm saying is that you are not obligated to use any
of the AI functionality. It's tied to search, and you
can use AI to produce some nice images related to a
description you write, but it is otherwise no better
than any other browser.
functionality in Edge, it is going to be Microsoft's AI
you use.
Why would Microsoft be forced to provide access to a
competitor's AI if they have their own? It only makes sense
that a proprietary company like Microsoft which believes you
should use their proprietary browser and proprietary search
engine should also expect you to use their proprietary AI.
They wouldn't.
But in a thread about Linux and choice, isn't the insistence
that Edge is superior because it integrates Copilot as its AI
a little contradictory?
Edge is superior to Chrome because of its AI functionality.
However, if it doesn't matter to you at all, the difference
between both browsers is trivial. I'd still give the advantage
to Edge because it supports certain extensions Chrome
blacklisted, and I find its security features to be superior.
What actual "AI functionality" does it give you?
Well, I'm a fan of Microsoft Designer. If I want to create a
picture really quickly, it provides me with some stellar results as
long as my description is detailed. The search engine also has a
summarizing feature that I like as much as the one in Brave. Of
course, I don't use AI that much. If I do, it's only because I'm
looking for something quickly.
Microsoft Designer is available at designer.microsoft.com, and doesn't
seem to require Edge at all.
We were discussing EDGE. How is that relevant?It lets you access Copilot...
...without having to type in the URL to Copilot.
It uses "AI" to identify dubious websites...
...which Chrome can do; just not calling it AI.
What is the actual VALUE here?
All I can tell you for sure is that Apple seems to be sweating
because they've been stagnating for a while whereas Microsoft is
adding a lot of value to its products with AI. Apple was forced to
sign with OpenAI when they failed to create their own "intelligence"
within a respectable time frame.
How is Edge a better browser because of "its AI functionality".
Stick to the topic, please.
people who run Linux tend to be more motivated.
Because they have to be. Desktop Linux mainly appeals to young geeks with little/no money. Nothing wrong with that. I used to be one.
But that was 25 years ago. Now I am older and I have money. Because I have a career, not just "a job". I am no longer interested in "compiling the latest kernel". I am perfectly fine with paying someone else to do that for me. That's why I moved on from Linux to Windows to Macs.
Because I have more important things to do.
Even you - after you trashed your Linux box due to complete technical ineptitude - are now running Windows 11. See how nice it is to just buy a computer and have it work without jumping through hoops?
On 8/30/2025 12:41 AM, Tyrone wrote:
people who run Linux tend to be more motivated.
Because they have to be.-a Desktop Linux mainly appeals to young geeks
with
little/no money. Nothing wrong with that. I used to be one.
But that was 25 years ago.-a Now I am older and I have money. Because I
have a
career, not just "a job".-a I am no longer interested in "compiling the
latest
kernel".-a I am perfectly fine with paying someone else to do that for me. >> That's why I moved on from Linux to Windows to Macs.
Because I have more important things to do.
I gave away a $200 Windows license to switch to Linux, and I've donated money to a distro.
Even you - after you trashed your Linux box due to complete technical
ineptitude - are now running Windows 11. See how nice it is to just buy a
computer and have it work without jumping through hoops?
I sweated in the heat, genius, it's not "technical ineptitude".-a I was
kind of strung out on DXM and careless, but I know how to put together computers.
I sweated in the heat, genius, it's not "technical ineptitude".-a I was
kind of strung out on DXM and careless, but I know how to put together
computers.
Plugging a plugging into the wall socket is not putting it together.
On Fri, 29 Aug 2025 12:52:31 -0400, -hh wrote:
[Joel wrote]:
I don't think you're likely to find a Windows laptop that can in
every respect compare to the Air ...
Some might disagree <https://www.zdnet.com/article/i-found-the-ultimate-macbook-air-alternative-for-windows-users-and-its-priced-well/> ...
On 2025-08-30 1:30 p.m., Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/30/2025 12:41 AM, Tyrone wrote:
people who run Linux tend to be more motivated.
Because they have to be.-a Desktop Linux mainly appeals to young geeks
with
little/no money. Nothing wrong with that. I used to be one.
But that was 25 years ago.-a Now I am older and I have money. Because
I have a
career, not just "a job".-a I am no longer interested in "compiling
the latest
kernel".-a I am perfectly fine with paying someone else to do that for
me.
That's why I moved on from Linux to Windows to Macs.
Because I have more important things to do.
I gave away a $200 Windows license to switch to Linux, and I've
donated money to a distro.
How can you donate something you don't have?
Even you - after you trashed your Linux box due to complete technical
ineptitude - are now running Windows 11. See how nice it is to just
buy a
computer and have it work without jumping through hoops?
I sweated in the heat, genius, it's not "technical ineptitude".-a I was
kind of strung out on DXM and careless, but I know how to put together
computers.
Plugging a plugging into the wall socket is not putting it together.
On 8/30/25 04:23, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
[Joel wrote]:
I don't think you're likely to find a Windows laptop that can in
every respect compare to the Air ...
Some might disagree
<https://www.zdnet.com/article/i-found-the-ultimate-macbook-air-
alternative-for-windows-users-and-its-priced-well/> ...
A decent find, albeit with a 20% lower single core Geekbench score.
There's also some potential 'compatibility' concerns with it being ARM based, as the MS-Windows ecosystem isn't all that keen there: might want
to look into how much performance is effectively lost by which Windows
Apps which have to run in an emulated Intel CPU mode or whatnot.
On 8/30/25 04:23, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 29 Aug 2025 12:52:31 -0400, -hh wrote:
[Joel wrote]:
I don't think you're likely to find a Windows laptop that can in
every respect compare to the Air ...
Some might disagree
<https://www.zdnet.com/article/i-found-the-ultimate-macbook-air-alternative-for-windows-users-and-its-priced-well/> ...
A decent find, albeit with a 20% lower single core Geekbench score.
There's also some potential 'compatibility' concerns with it being
ARM based ...
On Sat, 30 Aug 2025 14:16:44 -0400, -hh wrote:
On 8/30/25 04:23, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 29 Aug 2025 12:52:31 -0400, -hh wrote:
[Joel wrote]:
I don't think you're likely to find a Windows laptop that can in
every respect compare to the Air ...
Some might disagree
<https://www.zdnet.com/article/i-found-the-ultimate-macbook-air-alternative-for-windows-users-and-its-priced-well/> ...
A decent find, albeit with a 20% lower single core Geekbench score.
As if your typical user who is the target market for an Apple product
would even know what a rCLGeekbench scorerCY was ...
Because Apple make a clean break over, whereas MS is still supportingThere's also some potential 'compatibility' concerns with it being
ARM based ...
Apple made the transition OK, seemingly; why do you think Microsoft
might be having trouble with the same thing?
On 8/30/2025 12:41 AM, Tyrone wrote:
people who run Linux tend to be more motivated.
Because they have to be. Desktop Linux mainly appeals to young geeks with >> little/no money. Nothing wrong with that. I used to be one.
But that was 25 years ago. Now I am older and I have money. Because I have a
career, not just "a job". I am no longer interested in "compiling the latest
kernel". I am perfectly fine with paying someone else to do that for me.
That's why I moved on from Linux to Windows to Macs.
Because I have more important things to do.
I gave away a $200 Windows license to switch to Linux, and I've donated money to a distro.
On 2025-08-30, Joel W. Crump <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/30/2025 12:41 AM, Tyrone wrote:
people who run Linux tend to be more motivated.
Because they have to be. Desktop Linux mainly appeals to young geeks with >>> little/no money. Nothing wrong with that. I used to be one.
But that was 25 years ago. Now I am older and I have money. Because I have a
career, not just "a job". I am no longer interested in "compiling the latest
kernel". I am perfectly fine with paying someone else to do that for me. >>> That's why I moved on from Linux to Windows to Macs.
Because I have more important things to do.
I gave away a $200 Windows license to switch to Linux, and I've donated
money to a distro.
You paid $200 for a Windows license?
You can get it legally for ~$20.
Too many red pills mixed with the blue ones?
On 2025-08-30 12:16 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-27 19:18, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-27 3:41 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-27 14:51, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-27 9:29 a.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-27 08:59, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-26 9:17 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-26 19:34, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-26 6:27 p.m., Alan wrote:And what I'm saying is that if you WANT to use AI
On 2025-08-25 12:45, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-25 9:58 a.m., Alan wrote:Interesting.
On 2025-08-25 05:56, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-24 6:57 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-24 15:53, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/24/2025 6:27 PM, Alan wrote:So, you're comparing which version of File
More specifically, if you're "not
wired for Apple", because you
replaced it with Windows, what
makes you more "wired" for that?
Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is
quirky.-a Linux requires comprehension, which I have, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but I'm
not disliking using Windows again,
for now.-a I haven't made my decision
about replacing it with Linux on
this mini PC.
Unresponsive.
In what way is Windows any more
WYSIWYG than macOS?
I could be out of date, I guess, having
used macOS during Snow Leopard, but then
again it hasn't really changed fundamentally, it's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> counterintuitive to
me.-a They are on a lower intellectual
level than Microsoft, and definitely the
GNU/Linux realm. People who click with
macOS are willing to pay for the
privilege, but damn it's pricey, the
hardware options not competitive with
Windows devices.
IN WHAT SPECIFIC WAYS?
HOW was it supposedly "counterintuitive"?
See: I can list some ways that Windows as
it stands TODAY is downright user hostile.
1. Windows 10 created a new application
called "Settings"...
...but you still needed to use the Control
Panel for some things.
And that is still true (albeit to a lesser
degree) of Windows 11.
2. How do you change the scrolling
direction of the mouse wheel (assuming
your mouse has one).
I could go on, but believe me there are
others that astound me all the time.
And overall, the fluidity--the look and
feel--of the interface is just terrible!
The pointer doesn't move as smoothly. The
rendering of... ...everything in the UI looks terrible. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I hear you, with the way Windows settings
have evolved, not being entirely coherent,
but File Explorer is light years better than
Finder as I experienced it under Snow
Leopard. Edge is better than Safari, AFAIK.
Apple is just the duller minds of the
industry.
Explorer to an OS that came out 16 years ago;
Windows 7?
HOW is "Edge better than Safari"? How can you
possibly say "AFAIK" about it?
For one, Edge uses the Chromium engine which
provides for better compatibility with websites.
Who says so? I've yet to see a single problem on
any site I've used.
I've read developers complaining about it but I'm
with you, I have yet to experience a problem. I
don't have a Mac anymore, but I have no doubt that
if I purchased one again, there would be no issue.
It also provides some very decent AI
functionality that is completely absent from
Safari.
You mean it forces you to use Copilot.
No, it doesn't.
What "AI functionality" is there in Edge that isn't
tied to using Copilot?
I'm genuinely asking.
What I'm saying is that you are not obligated to use any
of the AI functionality. It's tied to search, and you
can use AI to produce some nice images related to a
description you write, but it is otherwise no better
than any other browser.
functionality in Edge, it is going to be Microsoft's AI
you use.
Why would Microsoft be forced to provide access to a
competitor's AI if they have their own? It only makes sense
that a proprietary company like Microsoft which believes you
should use their proprietary browser and proprietary search
engine should also expect you to use their proprietary AI.
They wouldn't.
But in a thread about Linux and choice, isn't the insistenceo
that Edge is superior because it integrates Copilot as its AI
a little contradictory?
Edge is superior to Chrome because of its AI functionality.
However, if it doesn't matter to you at all, the difference
between both browsers is trivial. I'd still give the advantage
to Edge because it supports certain extensions Chrome
blacklisted, and I find its security features to be superior.
What actual "AI functionality" does it give you?
Well, I'm a fan of Microsoft Designer. If I want to create a
picture really quickly, it provides me with some stellar results as
long as my description is detailed. The search engine also has a
summarizing feature that I like as much as the one in Brave. Of
course, I don't use AI that much. If I do, it's only because I'm
looking for something quickly.
Microsoft Designer is available at designer.microsoft.com, and doesn't
seem to require Edge at all.
But it does require Windows. It was not available to me from within Linux.
We were discussing EDGE. How is that relevant?It lets you access Copilot...
...without having to type in the URL to Copilot.
It uses "AI" to identify dubious websites...
...which Chrome can do; just not calling it AI.
What is the actual VALUE here?
All I can tell you for sure is that Apple seems to be sweating
because they've been stagnating for a while whereas Microsoft is
adding a lot of value to its products with AI. Apple was forced to
sign with OpenAI when they failed to create their own "intelligence"
within a respectable time frame.
How is Edge a better browser because of "its AI functionality".
Stick to the topic, please.
I've already told you that I mostly avoid the functionality and that I wouldn't be the right source to show _how_ it helps. Nevertheless, I
know how you are and I have no desire to try to convert a Mac zealot the same way I wouldn't try to convert a follower of the pedophile muhammad (piss be upon him).
On 8/30/2025 2:16 PM, -hh wrote:
On 8/30/25 04:23, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
[Joel wrote]:
I don't think you're likely to find a Windows laptop that can in
every respect compare to the Air ...
Some might disagree
<https://www.zdnet.com/article/i-found-the-ultimate-macbook-air-
alternative-for-windows-users-and-its-priced-well/> ...
A decent find, albeit with a 20% lower single core Geekbench score.
There's also some potential 'compatibility' concerns with it being ARM
based, as the MS-Windows ecosystem isn't all that keen there: might
want to look into how much performance is effectively lost by which
Windows Apps which have to run in an emulated Intel CPU mode or whatnot.
Macs run x86-code emulation.
On 2025-08-30 12:11 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-30 08:29, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-28 9:12 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-28 19:23, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/28/2025 2:31 PM, Alan wrote:In what way is it "much more designed to function"?
On 2025-08-28 12:12, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-28 10:53 a.m., Alan wrote:Where the chief "advantage" is cost, yes.
On 2025-08-28 00:12, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
Yeah!
Linux is becoming more and more dominant, thatrCOs whatrCOs changed. >>>>>>>>
In the last two years it's gone from 3.12% share to 3.98%.
Any day now.
EfnuEfnuEfnu
There is no denying that Linux owns the server market. Neither
Windows nor Mac OS can deliver the kind of advantages a mere
Linux server can. Nevertheless, Microsoft seems to be the one
making the most money using a Linux server software through Azure. >>>>>>
Wrong, idiot, you're so desperate to make a point about your lame
platform, that you say something so stupid, no, Windows servers
have their place, but Linux is much more designed to function in
the average server purposes, that is undeniable, you are a moron.
What does it have that macOS would not that makes it better as a
server?
Linux doesn't have the overhead that MacOS would have for server
purposes.
What overhead would that be?
The necessity of a GUI to execute the tasks you would complete in the
Linux console. If you can demonstrate how there is no need for a GUI on
a Mac server compared to a Linux server, you are free to do so.
You can do pretty much everything in the Linux console whereas Apple
doesn't usually prioritize that part of their operating system.
It doesn't put it forward to ordinary users...
...but it still exists.
People who manage servers aren't ordinary users.
I used to DO it.Besides, we've been in this situation before. I recall when AppleBut you didn't have to.
tried to push its Gx series servers in the mid-2000s. Absolutely no
one wanted them because the performance was laughable whereas the
cost was enormous. If I remember correctly, the company also expected
you to do everything through a GUI.
Prove it.
On 2025-08-24, Joel W. Crump <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
https://www.makeuseof.com/macos-better-than-linux-for-windows-users/
Heh. This author here, while making a rational-enough case in a way,
exposes why proprietary OSes are the refuge of the lazy, here I am using
Windows 11 24H2 on a four-thread CPU, it's a bit sluggish, so I'll
probably Linux this thing, but that's because I'm not so challenged by
the terminal command line, I used PowerShell already today to install
nativefier (a free way to make Web apps, cross-platform, I was using it
under Debian, too, saving me $5 a month compared to WebCatalog), so even
in Winblows there are instances where brain use comes in handy. But no,
buying a fucking Mac is not the answer. It's too expensive. It's a
cult of Steve Jobs' ghost, of corporate greed, walled garden as it were.
Fuck them. It's ironic, but Windows actually beats macOS because of
how expensive Macs are, and how its Unix functions aren't nearly as good
as just using Linux - the macOS-specific stuff is hit-or-miss, where
WinAPI apps are pretty consistently functional.
Suffice to say, I'm still the most impressed, overall, with GNU/Linux
such as Debian, but Winblows isn't so terrible in a way.
"Author" writes fluff article pushing his opinion loaded with
suppositions as some sort of objective analysis.
This one make me chuckle. "Most People DonrCOt Want to Install Another
OS". So the article is about Windows replacements, and the #1 reason
that Linux isn't the ideal replacement, is you have to replace
Windows...
I've already told you that I mostly avoid the functionality and that I
wouldn't be the right source to show _how_ it helps. Nevertheless, I
know how you are and I have no desire to try to convert a Mac zealot
the same way I wouldn't try to convert a follower of the pedophile
muhammad (piss be upon him).
OK...but you made a specific claim:
"It also provides some very decent AI functionality that is completely absent from Safari."
I'm still waiting for you to explain what this functionality is beyond building in Copilot.
What differentiates it from just using various AI services?
On 2025-08-30 12:35, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-30 12:11 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-30 08:29, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-28 9:12 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-28 19:23, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/28/2025 2:31 PM, Alan wrote:In what way is it "much more designed to function"?
On 2025-08-28 12:12, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2025-08-28 10:53 a.m., Alan wrote:Where the chief "advantage" is cost, yes.
On 2025-08-28 00:12, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
Yeah!
Linux is becoming more and more dominant, thatrCOs whatrCOs changed. >>>>>>>>>
In the last two years it's gone from 3.12% share to 3.98%.
Any day now.
EfnuEfnuEfnu
There is no denying that Linux owns the server market. Neither >>>>>>>> Windows nor Mac OS can deliver the kind of advantages a mere
Linux server can. Nevertheless, Microsoft seems to be the one >>>>>>>> making the most money using a Linux server software through Azure. >>>>>>>
Wrong, idiot, you're so desperate to make a point about your lame >>>>>> platform, that you say something so stupid, no, Windows servers
have their place, but Linux is much more designed to function in
the average server purposes, that is undeniable, you are a moron.
What does it have that macOS would not that makes it better as a
server?
Linux doesn't have the overhead that MacOS would have for server
purposes.
What overhead would that be?
The necessity of a GUI to execute the tasks you would complete in the
Linux console. If you can demonstrate how there is no need for a GUI
on a Mac server compared to a Linux server, you are free to do so.
Except you can do the tasks on the console from macOS.
You can do pretty much everything in the Linux console whereas Apple
doesn't usually prioritize that part of their operating system.
It doesn't put it forward to ordinary users...
...but it still exists.
People who manage servers aren't ordinary users.
And?
Not prioritizing something doesn't mean it doesn't exist
I used to DO it.Besides, we've been in this situation before. I recall when AppleBut you didn't have to.
tried to push its Gx series servers in the mid-2000s. Absolutely no
one wanted them because the performance was laughable whereas the
cost was enormous. If I remember correctly, the company also
expected you to do everything through a GUI.
Prove it.
I gave away a $200 Windows license to switch to Linux, and I've donated
money to a distro.
You paid $200 for a Windows license?
You can get it legally for ~$20.
Too many red pills mixed with the blue ones?
On 8/30/2025 8:22 PM, pothead wrote:
I gave away a $200 Windows license to switch to Linux, and I've donated
money to a distro.
You paid $200 for a Windows license?
That's the retail price of Windows Pro, yes, I had the money at the time
and while it turned out my existing license was transferable from my
2010 computer (just using the Win7 Pro key I had purchased with its
parts), it doesn't bother me because unlike some cheapskate fuckwads I'm
not afraid of paying my way, even if it's to a company "with a billion dollars" or whatever, they didn't make a billion by not selling their
wares, FFS.
You can get it legally for ~$20.
Those licenses work, and my new mini PC basically has one (the
China-based manufacturer used multiple activation key to activate what
they produced, not a true Microsoft OEM therefore but it is a legit license), but I would never buy from the people selling them, what I got with my new device is OK for what it is, but in its case I didn't
purchase the license myself, so it's not really my responsibility when Microsoft is tolerating the practice.
Too many red pills mixed with the blue ones?
You're free to be a cheapskate all you want, don't judge me for doing
the right thing, sheesh.
On 2025-08-30 14:43, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/30/2025 2:16 PM, -hh wrote:
On 8/30/25 04:23, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
[Joel wrote]:
I don't think you're likely to find a Windows laptop that can in
every respect compare to the Air ...
Some might disagree
<https://www.zdnet.com/article/i-found-the-ultimate-macbook-air-
alternative-for-windows-users-and-its-priced-well/> ...
A decent find, albeit with a 20% lower single core Geekbench score.
There's also some potential 'compatibility' concerns with it being
ARM based, as the MS-Windows ecosystem isn't all that keen there:
might want to look into how much performance is effectively lost by
which Windows Apps which have to run in an emulated Intel CPU mode or
whatnot.
Macs run x86-code emulation.
You should quit when you're this far behind.
I gave away a $200 Windows license to switch to Linux, and I've donated >>>> money to a distro.
You paid $200 for a Windows license?
That's the retail price of Windows Pro, yes, I had the money at the time
and while it turned out my existing license was transferable from my
2010 computer (just using the Win7 Pro key I had purchased with its
parts), it doesn't bother me because unlike some cheapskate fuckwads I'm
not afraid of paying my way, even if it's to a company "with a billion
dollars" or whatever, they didn't make a billion by not selling their
wares, FFS.
You can get it legally for ~$20.
Those licenses work, and my new mini PC basically has one (the
China-based manufacturer used multiple activation key to activate what
they produced, not a true Microsoft OEM therefore but it is a legit
license), but I would never buy from the people selling them, what I got
with my new device is OK for what it is, but in its case I didn't
purchase the license myself, so it's not really my responsibility when
Microsoft is tolerating the practice.
Too many red pills mixed with the blue ones?
You're free to be a cheapskate all you want, don't judge me for doing
the right thing, sheesh.
It's better than being a fool like you Joel.
Why pay $200.00 for something that can be purchased legally for $20?
And seeing as you seem to have troubles with Windows and accused Microsoft of somehow disabling your license, how is that $200 "doing the right thing" license
working out for you?
And seeing you are living on the dole like your buddy snit, it's comforting to
see how you spend the taxpayer's money.
NOT.
On 8/30/2025 8:22 PM, pothead wrote:
I gave away a $200 Windows license to switch to Linux, and I've donated
money to a distro.
You paid $200 for a Windows license?
That's the retail price of Windows Pro, yes, I had the money at the time
and while it turned out my existing license was transferable from my
2010 computer (just using the Win7 Pro key I had purchased with its
parts), it doesn't bother me because unlike some cheapskate fuckwads I'm
not afraid of paying my way, even if it's to a company "with a billion dollars" or whatever, they didn't make a billion by not selling their
wares, FFS.
You can get it legally for ~$20.
Those licenses work, and my new mini PC basically has one (the China-
based manufacturer used multiple activation key to activate what they produced, not a true Microsoft OEM therefore but it is a legit license),
but I would never buy from the people selling them, what I got with my
new device is OK for what it is, but in its case I didn't purchase the license myself, so it's not really my responsibility when Microsoft is tolerating the practice.
Too many red pills mixed with the blue ones?
You're free to be a cheapskate all you want, don't judge me for doingThe irony of someone who complains about the cost of Apple's devices
the right thing, sheesh.
On 2025-08-30 10:03 p.m., Alan wrote:
< snipped for brevity >
I've already told you that I mostly avoid the functionality and that
I wouldn't be the right source to show _how_ it helps. Nevertheless,
I know how you are and I have no desire to try to convert a Mac
zealot the same way I wouldn't try to convert a follower of the
pedophile muhammad (piss be upon him).
OK...but you made a specific claim:
"It also provides some very decent AI functionality that is completely
absent from Safari."
I'm still waiting for you to explain what this functionality is beyond
building in Copilot.
What differentiates it from just using various AI services?
Unsurprisingly, and much like Snit and every other Mac zealot, you
refuse to let things go even after a person provides you with an answer.
I looked it up online since, like I said repeatedly, I don't use the features myself having browsed a certain way since 1994 and being
unwilling to change my habits. Nevertheless, Co-Pilot provides page summarization, text rewriting and voice navigation according to a quick search. With voice navigation, you can have Co-Pilot search for content
you might have lost in a barrage of tabs or even in your history. As far
as I know, Safari does not have this functionality.
I imagine that you'll bring up Siri. I use Siri and it's fantastic for giving you directions to a location. However, my experience with a
simple question this week like "Siri, where is Wembley Stadium located?"
was laughable. In every attempt, it just bombed. As for Apple
Intelligence, we already know that it is lagging significantly behind
what Microsoft offers to a point that they had to sign a deal with
OpenAI to try to bring it up to par.
On 8/30/2025 10:03 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-30 14:43, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 8/30/2025 2:16 PM, -hh wrote:
On 8/30/25 04:23, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
[Joel wrote]:
I don't think you're likely to find a Windows laptop that can in >>>>>>> every respect compare to the Air ...
Some might disagree
<https://www.zdnet.com/article/i-found-the-ultimate-macbook-air-
alternative-for-windows-users-and-its-priced-well/> ...
A decent find, albeit with a 20% lower single core Geekbench score.
There's also some potential 'compatibility' concerns with it being
ARM based, as the MS-Windows ecosystem isn't all that keen there:
might want to look into how much performance is effectively lost by
which Windows Apps which have to run in an emulated Intel CPU mode
or whatnot.
Macs run x86-code emulation.
You should quit when you're this far behind.
Uh, I stand by what I said, you aren't aware of it as an advanced userI'm completely aware that Macs can run x86-code using something called "Rosetta", but that wasn't at issue.
of macOS?!
I find it interesting that you refer to devices running Android as
computers.