5 ms·

It seems like you should really just buy a MacBook Pro. Sure the software isn't perfect, but it's an order of magnitude closer to perfect than Windows has been

It seems like you should really just buy a MacBook Pro. Sure the software isn't perfect, but it's an order of magnitude closer to perfect than Windows has been lately. You buy it, boot it up, and it works wonderfully. Of course the one day out of the year that it doesn't you go rage comment on how it sucks and it scares Windows users away from Mac, but the rest of the time you'd never consider going back to a typical PC.

ekianjo 11y ago
For developers OSX will almost always be worse than a Linux distro, if only because of package management.
- bluejekyll 11y ago
  Homebrew is pretty good.
- jordanpg 11y ago
  Maybe, but only marginally so. In an age of cheap virtual environments of many flavors, this objection seems minor to me.
- jolux 11y ago
  This is certainly not true. You can basically get any package with Homebrew that you can on Linux, (assuming it's on GitHub, you can get all of them) in fact there's even a port of it to Linux for people that love it on Mac.
  - ekianjo 11y ago
    Homebrew is certainly not as good as a regular package manager you get in Linux. I'm not sure how you can argue otherwise.
    - jolux 11y ago
      How is it not as good? I'm genuinely curious because I've used apt on debian derivatives and rpm on red hat and I prefer brew to both of them. My favorite is actually Nix/Guix but I haven't bothered to set it up on my daily driver.
      - ekianjo 11y ago
        A few reasons: - you have way more packages on any Linux package manager. - Linux package managers do not mess with /usr/local as expected in a UNIX compatible OS. Homebrew does. Linux package managers run as root, not in user-space. - Apparently Homebrew gets broken by Apple software/OS updates. - Linux package managers are an integral part of the OS environment and update process - it's structured this way even for critical system and kernel patches. - Aptitude, for example, gets rid of older versions of packages, while Homebrew keeps all previous versions and simply changes the symlink. Cleanup is also automated in Linux package managers, not Homebrew as far as I know. - Homebrew sometimes pulls up sources to compile software locally, while Linux distros usually pull up binaries (except AUR on Arch or Portage on Gentoo, or Sbopkg on Slackware). While compiling from source is nothing wrong, it can take a lot of time depending on what you are building.
        jordanpg 11y ago
        Most of these things are considered features of homebrew, not bugs.
        ekianjo 11y ago
        Not being a part of the OS is a major issue, though.
        hguant 11y ago
        Nonsense. Absolute rubbish. Being broken is a feature? Changing /usr/local instead of being sane? Leaving old versions of packages lying about instead of cleaning them up? Breaking when the Apple devs wonder if it would be fun to switch things up a bit under the hood without telling anyone? The one thing I can think of that's a "feature" is that brew compiles locally, instead of pulling down a binary, but even that has some draw backs. I'm all for product loyalty, but a spade's a spade.
    - bpicolo 11y ago
      Homebrew is really, really good about about giving you guidance to fix failed installs. "Homebrew failed to do thing...here's exactly the commands you can run to make this thing work now though if you are so inclined." apt fails? Good luck
      - ekianjo 11y ago
        apt is not the only package manager on Linux. At least you have abundant choices as to what you can use. As always on Linux, for about everything, there are tons of ways to do it.
        paddyoloughlin 11y ago
        And homebrew isn't the only package manager on OSX. I actually see this as an argument in favour of OSX, as it is much more straightforward to change package manager than on Linux, where the sane way to change package manager is to change your distribution.
      - deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
      - hguant 11y ago
        This is somewhat untruthful. If apt fails, it tends to leave detailed error reports, and does its best to leave things in a sane state. However, if you're using apt, you're doing it wrong - aptitude is where it's at. Home brew, when things go wrong, goes wrong disastrously in my experience. You're never quite sure where you're left, and you have to spend a fair bit of time picking through what actually failed.
        danieldk 11y ago
        If APT fails catastrophically, your complete system could be in limbo. If Homebrew fails catastrophically (which never happened to me), the rest of your system is fine, you wipe out /usr/local and are up and running again in a couple of minutes (since most large packages are bottled). By the way, aptitude does not really help you in the typical error case: a package (continuously) fails in dpkg-reconfigure, which causes the complete install/upgrade to fail.
    - hysan 11y ago
      Decade old heavy Linux user who got his first Macbook a few months ago. I agree that Homebrew is not as good as most package managers. However, it's good enough and doesn't get in the way. It does what it needs to do and because of that, I don't think it's fair to use that as a reason to claim that OS X is worse than Linux for developers.
      - debaserab2 11y ago
        Oh just wait. It will, I promise. It's nowhere near yum or apt.
        spronkey 11y ago
        Tbh, yum and apt both get in the way for other reasons. Homebrew is nice and straightforward. Very much depends on what development you do though - anything web-related, and you're absolutely fine on a Mac.
    - gst 11y ago
      Maybe not as good, but definitely good enough. (My personal laptop runs Archlinux, my work laptop runs OS X).
    - danieldk 11y ago
      Homebrew is certainly not as good as a regular package manager you get in Linux. It's actually better, for three reasons: - If a library is not in Homebrew (which happens frequently when you are a developer ;)), you just install it into /usr/local/Cellar/<name>/<version> and you can use all the regular Homebrew tools (brew link <name>, brew unlink <name>), etc. - It's much easier to build and distribute your own stuff in Homebrew, by providing a repository of formulae. I have packaged both Debian packages (distributed via Launchpad's PPA) and created Homebrew formulae. Packaging for Homebrew is much easier. - Homebrew is packaging is decoupled from OS packaging/updates. This means that you can update a new application without having to upgrade half of your system. In Linux, you usually have the choice of: stable OS, outdated software. Up to date software, in-flux OS.
      - ekianjo 11y ago
        > This means that you can update a new application without having to upgrade half of your system. In Linux, you usually have the choice of: stable OS, outdated software. Up to date software, in-flux OS. I've never seen an application on Linux asking to update half of my system libraries or something. Please stop using hyperbole, this is not useful for the sake of conversation. On top of that, you can install recent software in many ways (OpenSUSE has specific, updated repositories that can be triggered with one-click on their website, Ubuntu has pretty much the same thing with PPAs) or you can even build everything from source on Arch with AUR and just ensure you have updated libraries as required (which is not half of your system). And if you don't want to update ANY of your system libraries, it's fairly straightforward symlink local versions of libraries instead of system ones.
      - dtech 11y ago
        It might be for a package maintainer or if you aspire to be. As a develop I have no aspiration for that. Homebrew frequently requires you to manually perform steps or edit files. While it might not be directly homebrews fault, that 100% disqualifies it for the label "It's actually better".
- Yaggo 11y ago
  There are many developers who value high several OS X features, such as well-implemented HiDPI mode with custom resolutions, super-easy backup solution, solid energy saving & suspend & resume functionalities (no conflicts with crappy 3D drivers), etc, etc. Those features wouldn't mean much without the possibility to easily¹ run FOSS on unix-like system. ¹) The differences between various package management systems are not significant in this context.
- tlarkworthy 11y ago
  eh? I have a both and I far prefer developing on the MBP just because the computer is so great and I can use it anywhere hassle free. My ubuntu machine is hard to tab around the windows and generally has a bad UI and the fonts are terrible. I actually had an ubuntu machine before I ever used a mac computer, so if anything I should be bias towards the more familiar linux setup. The MBP totally blew me away. Linux package managers may be superior, but I don't actually spend most of my development time installing system packages thankfully. npm, maven, pip are identical experiences on both.
- superuser2 11y ago
  As a developer I work with text all day, a task made thoroughly more pleasant with good font rendering and proper HiDPI support, neither of which are available on Linux. I'll take my 13 inches of Retina display over a pair of 27-inch externals any day. SSH and rsync for remote editing work just fine from an rMBP.
  - salmon30salmon 11y ago
    I feel the same way. Every few months I will have a moment where I think, "I really shouldn't be using this small screen 14 hours a day, lets hook up my 22 inch monitor" and I use it for all of 8 minutes before I switch back. The text rendering is absolutely beautiful.
  - mbrock 11y ago
    It's possible to use HiDPI on Linux, but I guess it depends on what software you use. I've used it for almost a year. I set my DPI in X and GTK. I believe GNOME understands DPI, but I just use ratpoison so I don't know. After turning off hunting, fonts look very nice. Don't bother trying to connect an external monitor with a different DPI though, hehe. I've heard that problem is unsolvable with the X11 paradigm but will be fixed in Wayland (whatever that is).
    - askafriend 11y ago
      I want you to re-read the first paragraph you wrote. That's exactly why I don't use Linux. I don't mean this to be a condescending comment, but really, the contents of your entire first paragraph are just things that I don't want to deal with. It's all just bullshit, and I don't have time to deal with bullshit like that. I really just don't want to even think about stuff like that. Not even a tiny bit, not even for a second.
      - slgeorge 11y ago
        > It's all just bullshit, and I don't have time to deal with bullshit like that It's bullshit to you, but it doesn't make Linux bullshit - others prioritise different aspects. You care about HiDPI - perhaps you are a designer, so it's important. But, you're not everyone. For example, I have no need for HiDPI and I personally have much more focus on the power and control Linux gives me. I wouldn't want HiDPI if I had to give up a proper Window Manager. Your choice is fair enough, but it's no more than a personal preference.
- manyxcxi 11y ago
  BULLSHIT I live in the command line and use a modern toolchain. Package management has no bearing on my development. mvn, npm, composer, gem, and pip all work just fine. Home brew gets you the OS packages and I've yet to run into an even remotely popular package not in a Homebrew repo somewhere. On top of all that- with Vagrant and (or even just) Virtualbox you have whatever flavor of Linux you want running on your desktop. I have found OSX to be the best combination of just works enough OS with all the command line power I need. I can't effing stand Windows anymore and all the Linux desktop distros, though may have some appealing niche characteristics over OS X, there are way more rough edges. I could see one day leaving OS X for a Linux distro, but it won't be any time soon.
  - sirkneeland 11y ago
    I've been on HN for years now and I've never seen someone write "BULLSHIT" in all caps here. Can we not do that?
    - manyxcxi 11y ago
      That's fair enough. I can see how the response starts significantly more aggressive than I meant it to be as a quick response.
    - masteryupa_ 11y ago
      Trash talking laptops and OS choices seem to be a pressure point for HN users, considering how civilised discussion is normally.
    - sosuke 11y ago
      Hmm, I guess the tone of the actual content wasn't abusive or inflammatory so I didn't think about it. OS flame wars are still burning.
  - barrkel 11y ago
    We've just given up on OS X for developers at my workplace. There are just too many little incompatibilities. Especially around clang replacing gcc messing with our C++ code, but also different revisions of various gems - especially browser testing - that cause hiccups. And then there's setting up all the ancillary services like databases etc. - not just once, but repeatedly, and reconfiguration when the arrangement changes. We can reuse many of our actual deployment Puppet scripts for setting up developer Linux machines; not so much for Mac. Various utility scripts need to be written more defensively to run correctly in OS X with its ancient shell and BSD tools. Overall it's just not worth the hassle, particularly when you need to ramp up new developer machines in minimal time.
- pjmlp 11y ago
  Which developers? Not everyone is writing POSIX only code.
  - jfb 11y ago
    Of course, Darwin is a perfectly cromulent POSIX system.
    - pjmlp 11y ago
      My point being that human beings writing native desktop and mobile applications, device drivers, games, vertical integrations, plugins for commercial software are developers as well. UNIX having a cli doesn't do anything to help us.
Symbiote 11y ago
Is it really only one day a year for you? I was given the latest MBP for my new job, which was the first time I'd used a Mac. The external keyboard uses a non standard USB port. That's broken. It's not easy to maximise a window fully. Apparently I'm not supposed to do this, but I don't like being told how I'm supposed to use a computer. Focus follows mouse can't be done. There are very few ways the window manager can be customised. Homebrew lacks many packages. Coming from Debian / Ubuntu, the package repository was always the first place to look when I needed some software. The window manager plus homebrew pushed me to using Kubuntu after a month. It doesn't yet support using a high dpi display at the same time as a normal, external display, but that's all.
- jordanthoms 11y ago
  Mostly true, but you may want to look into Divvy (which makes it very easy to maximize and manage windows) and TotalSpaces2. I'd rather deal with these issues and run a ubuntu VM for some things than deal with the cornucopia of crap that is the PC laptop market but hopefully some day that will change.
  - threatofrain 11y ago
    It is so strange to me that OS X has not adopted some kind of Divvy-like solution. Manipulating windows on OS X is a frustration to me.
  - Symbiote 11y ago
    Fixes like this remind me of installing TweakUI on Windows 98, or dodgy bits of freeware to have multiple desktops on Windows etc. Installing Kubuntu fixed all of the issues at once, and should I decide to fix the issues it introduced at least I'm improving open source software.
    - jordanthoms 11y ago
      Oh absolutely, but there is only one laptop that can run Linux with proper hardware support, 10+ hr battery life, high-quality screen, good build quality: the Chromebook Pixel, and that is limited to 64gb storage and a 12" screen. There's such an extreme lack of decent laptops around that working around the limitations of OSX seems to be the only option for now. Maybe the next version of the Pixel will be more suitable as a general purpose development machine or someone else will make a decent linux laptop (if Google can do it, why can't Dell?)
merb 11y ago
Actually I thought that, however in my company we bought 2 MacBook Pro's (Late 2013), we used two different distributors. Actually one (mine) works totally fine, except that the AC Power Adapter is totally shitty (damnit Apple MagSafe cable sucks). However his laptop had some really aweful bugs even that we are running the complete same version of Apple Mac OS X we even installed the image from my computer. At the last month his OS X gave up totally (currently he used Bootcamp so not a big deal), but at the moment he can't even boot os x
jhildings 11y ago
A pity that the WM totally sucks and does not even support themes or configurable behaviour

ekianjo 11y ago

For developers OSX will almost always be worse than a Linux distro, if only because of package management.

bluejekyll 11y ago
Homebrew is pretty good.
jordanpg 11y ago
Maybe, but only marginally so. In an age of cheap virtual environments of many flavors, this objection seems minor to me.
jolux 11y ago
This is certainly not true. You can basically get any package with Homebrew that you can on Linux, (assuming it's on GitHub, you can get all of them) in fact there's even a port of it to Linux for people that love it on Mac.
- ekianjo 11y ago
  Homebrew is certainly not as good as a regular package manager you get in Linux. I'm not sure how you can argue otherwise.
  - jolux 11y ago
    How is it not as good? I'm genuinely curious because I've used apt on debian derivatives and rpm on red hat and I prefer brew to both of them. My favorite is actually Nix/Guix but I haven't bothered to set it up on my daily driver.
    - ekianjo 11y ago
      A few reasons: - you have way more packages on any Linux package manager. - Linux package managers do not mess with /usr/local as expected in a UNIX compatible OS. Homebrew does. Linux package managers run as root, not in user-space. - Apparently Homebrew gets broken by Apple software/OS updates. - Linux package managers are an integral part of the OS environment and update process - it's structured this way even for critical system and kernel patches. - Aptitude, for example, gets rid of older versions of packages, while Homebrew keeps all previous versions and simply changes the symlink. Cleanup is also automated in Linux package managers, not Homebrew as far as I know. - Homebrew sometimes pulls up sources to compile software locally, while Linux distros usually pull up binaries (except AUR on Arch or Portage on Gentoo, or Sbopkg on Slackware). While compiling from source is nothing wrong, it can take a lot of time depending on what you are building.
      - jordanpg 11y ago
        Most of these things are considered features of homebrew, not bugs.
        ekianjo 11y ago
        Not being a part of the OS is a major issue, though.
        hguant 11y ago
        Nonsense. Absolute rubbish. Being broken is a feature? Changing /usr/local instead of being sane? Leaving old versions of packages lying about instead of cleaning them up? Breaking when the Apple devs wonder if it would be fun to switch things up a bit under the hood without telling anyone? The one thing I can think of that's a "feature" is that brew compiles locally, instead of pulling down a binary, but even that has some draw backs. I'm all for product loyalty, but a spade's a spade.
  - bpicolo 11y ago
    Homebrew is really, really good about about giving you guidance to fix failed installs. "Homebrew failed to do thing...here's exactly the commands you can run to make this thing work now though if you are so inclined." apt fails? Good luck
    - ekianjo 11y ago
      apt is not the only package manager on Linux. At least you have abundant choices as to what you can use. As always on Linux, for about everything, there are tons of ways to do it.
      - paddyoloughlin 11y ago
        And homebrew isn't the only package manager on OSX. I actually see this as an argument in favour of OSX, as it is much more straightforward to change package manager than on Linux, where the sane way to change package manager is to change your distribution.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
    - hguant 11y ago
      This is somewhat untruthful. If apt fails, it tends to leave detailed error reports, and does its best to leave things in a sane state. However, if you're using apt, you're doing it wrong - aptitude is where it's at. Home brew, when things go wrong, goes wrong disastrously in my experience. You're never quite sure where you're left, and you have to spend a fair bit of time picking through what actually failed.
      - danieldk 11y ago
        If APT fails catastrophically, your complete system could be in limbo. If Homebrew fails catastrophically (which never happened to me), the rest of your system is fine, you wipe out /usr/local and are up and running again in a couple of minutes (since most large packages are bottled). By the way, aptitude does not really help you in the typical error case: a package (continuously) fails in dpkg-reconfigure, which causes the complete install/upgrade to fail.
  - hysan 11y ago
    Decade old heavy Linux user who got his first Macbook a few months ago. I agree that Homebrew is not as good as most package managers. However, it's good enough and doesn't get in the way. It does what it needs to do and because of that, I don't think it's fair to use that as a reason to claim that OS X is worse than Linux for developers.
    - debaserab2 11y ago
      Oh just wait. It will, I promise. It's nowhere near yum or apt.
      - spronkey 11y ago
        Tbh, yum and apt both get in the way for other reasons. Homebrew is nice and straightforward. Very much depends on what development you do though - anything web-related, and you're absolutely fine on a Mac.
  - gst 11y ago
    Maybe not as good, but definitely good enough. (My personal laptop runs Archlinux, my work laptop runs OS X).
  - danieldk 11y ago
    Homebrew is certainly not as good as a regular package manager you get in Linux. It's actually better, for three reasons: - If a library is not in Homebrew (which happens frequently when you are a developer ;)), you just install it into /usr/local/Cellar/<name>/<version> and you can use all the regular Homebrew tools (brew link <name>, brew unlink <name>), etc. - It's much easier to build and distribute your own stuff in Homebrew, by providing a repository of formulae. I have packaged both Debian packages (distributed via Launchpad's PPA) and created Homebrew formulae. Packaging for Homebrew is much easier. - Homebrew is packaging is decoupled from OS packaging/updates. This means that you can update a new application without having to upgrade half of your system. In Linux, you usually have the choice of: stable OS, outdated software. Up to date software, in-flux OS.
    - ekianjo 11y ago
      > This means that you can update a new application without having to upgrade half of your system. In Linux, you usually have the choice of: stable OS, outdated software. Up to date software, in-flux OS. I've never seen an application on Linux asking to update half of my system libraries or something. Please stop using hyperbole, this is not useful for the sake of conversation. On top of that, you can install recent software in many ways (OpenSUSE has specific, updated repositories that can be triggered with one-click on their website, Ubuntu has pretty much the same thing with PPAs) or you can even build everything from source on Arch with AUR and just ensure you have updated libraries as required (which is not half of your system). And if you don't want to update ANY of your system libraries, it's fairly straightforward symlink local versions of libraries instead of system ones.
    - dtech 11y ago
      It might be for a package maintainer or if you aspire to be. As a develop I have no aspiration for that. Homebrew frequently requires you to manually perform steps or edit files. While it might not be directly homebrews fault, that 100% disqualifies it for the label "It's actually better".
Yaggo 11y ago
There are many developers who value high several OS X features, such as well-implemented HiDPI mode with custom resolutions, super-easy backup solution, solid energy saving & suspend & resume functionalities (no conflicts with crappy 3D drivers), etc, etc. Those features wouldn't mean much without the possibility to easily¹ run FOSS on unix-like system. ¹) The differences between various package management systems are not significant in this context.
tlarkworthy 11y ago
eh? I have a both and I far prefer developing on the MBP just because the computer is so great and I can use it anywhere hassle free. My ubuntu machine is hard to tab around the windows and generally has a bad UI and the fonts are terrible. I actually had an ubuntu machine before I ever used a mac computer, so if anything I should be bias towards the more familiar linux setup. The MBP totally blew me away. Linux package managers may be superior, but I don't actually spend most of my development time installing system packages thankfully. npm, maven, pip are identical experiences on both.
superuser2 11y ago
As a developer I work with text all day, a task made thoroughly more pleasant with good font rendering and proper HiDPI support, neither of which are available on Linux. I'll take my 13 inches of Retina display over a pair of 27-inch externals any day. SSH and rsync for remote editing work just fine from an rMBP.
- salmon30salmon 11y ago
  I feel the same way. Every few months I will have a moment where I think, "I really shouldn't be using this small screen 14 hours a day, lets hook up my 22 inch monitor" and I use it for all of 8 minutes before I switch back. The text rendering is absolutely beautiful.
- mbrock 11y ago
  It's possible to use HiDPI on Linux, but I guess it depends on what software you use. I've used it for almost a year. I set my DPI in X and GTK. I believe GNOME understands DPI, but I just use ratpoison so I don't know. After turning off hunting, fonts look very nice. Don't bother trying to connect an external monitor with a different DPI though, hehe. I've heard that problem is unsolvable with the X11 paradigm but will be fixed in Wayland (whatever that is).
  - askafriend 11y ago
    I want you to re-read the first paragraph you wrote. That's exactly why I don't use Linux. I don't mean this to be a condescending comment, but really, the contents of your entire first paragraph are just things that I don't want to deal with. It's all just bullshit, and I don't have time to deal with bullshit like that. I really just don't want to even think about stuff like that. Not even a tiny bit, not even for a second.
    - slgeorge 11y ago
      > It's all just bullshit, and I don't have time to deal with bullshit like that It's bullshit to you, but it doesn't make Linux bullshit - others prioritise different aspects. You care about HiDPI - perhaps you are a designer, so it's important. But, you're not everyone. For example, I have no need for HiDPI and I personally have much more focus on the power and control Linux gives me. I wouldn't want HiDPI if I had to give up a proper Window Manager. Your choice is fair enough, but it's no more than a personal preference.
manyxcxi 11y ago
BULLSHIT I live in the command line and use a modern toolchain. Package management has no bearing on my development. mvn, npm, composer, gem, and pip all work just fine. Home brew gets you the OS packages and I've yet to run into an even remotely popular package not in a Homebrew repo somewhere. On top of all that- with Vagrant and (or even just) Virtualbox you have whatever flavor of Linux you want running on your desktop. I have found OSX to be the best combination of just works enough OS with all the command line power I need. I can't effing stand Windows anymore and all the Linux desktop distros, though may have some appealing niche characteristics over OS X, there are way more rough edges. I could see one day leaving OS X for a Linux distro, but it won't be any time soon.
- sirkneeland 11y ago
  I've been on HN for years now and I've never seen someone write "BULLSHIT" in all caps here. Can we not do that?
  - manyxcxi 11y ago
    That's fair enough. I can see how the response starts significantly more aggressive than I meant it to be as a quick response.
  - masteryupa_ 11y ago
    Trash talking laptops and OS choices seem to be a pressure point for HN users, considering how civilised discussion is normally.
  - sosuke 11y ago
    Hmm, I guess the tone of the actual content wasn't abusive or inflammatory so I didn't think about it. OS flame wars are still burning.
- barrkel 11y ago
  We've just given up on OS X for developers at my workplace. There are just too many little incompatibilities. Especially around clang replacing gcc messing with our C++ code, but also different revisions of various gems - especially browser testing - that cause hiccups. And then there's setting up all the ancillary services like databases etc. - not just once, but repeatedly, and reconfiguration when the arrangement changes. We can reuse many of our actual deployment Puppet scripts for setting up developer Linux machines; not so much for Mac. Various utility scripts need to be written more defensively to run correctly in OS X with its ancient shell and BSD tools. Overall it's just not worth the hassle, particularly when you need to ramp up new developer machines in minimal time.
pjmlp 11y ago
Which developers? Not everyone is writing POSIX only code.
- jfb 11y ago
  Of course, Darwin is a perfectly cromulent POSIX system.
  - pjmlp 11y ago
    My point being that human beings writing native desktop and mobile applications, device drivers, games, vertical integrations, plugins for commercial software are developers as well. UNIX having a cli doesn't do anything to help us.

Symbiote 11y ago

Is it really only one day a year for you? I was given the latest MBP for my new job, which was the first time I'd used a Mac. The external keyboard uses a non standard USB port. That's broken. It's not easy to maximise a window fully. Apparently I'm not supposed to do this, but I don't like being told how I'm supposed to use a computer. Focus follows mouse can't be done. There are very few ways the window manager can be customised. Homebrew lacks many packages. Coming from Debian / Ubuntu, the package repository was always the first place to look when I needed some software. The window manager plus homebrew pushed me to using Kubuntu after a month. It doesn't yet support using a high dpi display at the same time as a normal, external display, but that's all.

jordanthoms 11y ago
Mostly true, but you may want to look into Divvy (which makes it very easy to maximize and manage windows) and TotalSpaces2. I'd rather deal with these issues and run a ubuntu VM for some things than deal with the cornucopia of crap that is the PC laptop market but hopefully some day that will change.
- threatofrain 11y ago
  It is so strange to me that OS X has not adopted some kind of Divvy-like solution. Manipulating windows on OS X is a frustration to me.
- Symbiote 11y ago
  Fixes like this remind me of installing TweakUI on Windows 98, or dodgy bits of freeware to have multiple desktops on Windows etc. Installing Kubuntu fixed all of the issues at once, and should I decide to fix the issues it introduced at least I'm improving open source software.
  - jordanthoms 11y ago
    Oh absolutely, but there is only one laptop that can run Linux with proper hardware support, 10+ hr battery life, high-quality screen, good build quality: the Chromebook Pixel, and that is limited to 64gb storage and a 12" screen. There's such an extreme lack of decent laptops around that working around the limitations of OSX seems to be the only option for now. Maybe the next version of the Pixel will be more suitable as a general purpose development machine or someone else will make a decent linux laptop (if Google can do it, why can't Dell?)

merb 11y ago

Actually I thought that, however in my company we bought 2 MacBook Pro's (Late 2013), we used two different distributors. Actually one (mine) works totally fine, except that the AC Power Adapter is totally shitty (damnit Apple MagSafe cable sucks). However his laptop had some really aweful bugs even that we are running the complete same version of Apple Mac OS X we even installed the image from my computer. At the last month his OS X gave up totally (currently he used Bootcamp so not a big deal), but at the moment he can't even boot os x

jhildings 11y ago

A pity that the WM totally sucks and does not even support themes or configurable behaviour