8 ms·

I really don't get why someone would want to change platform while doing his damnest to keep things exactly as before. Instead of, I don't know... embracing the

by bostand 10y ago

I really don't get why someone would want to change platform while doing his damnest to keep things exactly as before. Instead of, I don't know... embracing the changes? Maybe try something new?? I mean switching to Linux but using a homebrew port instead of the native package manager? Really?

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
a3n 10y ago
The intent was access to better hardware. He believes Apple is falling behind.
- johnpowell 10y ago
  Or getting some hits on their site.
wezm 10y ago
I tried Linuxbrew but didn't stick with it for exactly the reason you point out: > However it turns out Linuxbrew manages it’s own version of all the packages it tracks (makes sense I guess). This end up duplicating many of the packages available or already installed by the system package manager. This works on macOS since there is no system package repository but did not sit well with me on a Linux system.
- bostand 10y ago
  Fair enough. But I am still wondering why linuxbrew exists to begin with. I mean, I understand the point of having snap or flatpack in addition to native distro packages, but linuxbrew?
  - tormeh 10y ago
    Sounds like with Linuxbrew you get actually updated packages, which non-rolling release distros lack.
    - DominoTree 10y ago
      Bingo. The benefit here is that you can get your choice of rolling-release packages on any distribution you want without mucking up the base system.
    - bostand 10y ago
      Not entirely, you can always use PPAs and alike. There are also these universal package formats that some directly from the developers.
  - santaclaus 10y ago
    Do flatpack and snap require root? A cursory glance over their examples all have users sudoing to get things installed.
    - bostand 10y ago
      There is at least one (can't remember which) that allows users to install packages locally.
    - thinkmassive 10y ago
      Flatpak can install system-wide by root, or by any user to their home directory.
  - srssays 10y ago
    Unless you are using Arch, the packages in the system package manager are often several months old. This is somewhat of a regression to anyone used to homebrew where packages are updated promptly. The Linux 'solution' to this problem is to compile from sources. linuxbrew is a way of automating that, if you will.
nextos 10y ago
You can't beat MacOS at it's own game. As a developer, switching to Linux can give you a very nice custom enviroment with CLI applications like mutt or zathura and a DE like xmonad or i3. But you can't have a GUI as polished as MacOS, although things are getting closer. One of the big innovations of Linux was package management. So using homebrew is indeed a bit absurd. Actually, I would argue next-generation package managers like nix or guix are extremely interesting and have tons of advantages. Maximizing benefits of a MacOS to Linux switch maybe makes it advisable to use one of those.
- lisper 10y ago
  > You can't beat MacOS at it's own game. Why not? > you can't have a GUI as polished as MacOS Why not? All it would take would be for a company to publish a Linux UI library and a standards doc, and to curate an app store. I don't see any reason that a Linux machine could not be made to look and feel like a Mac. There's no magic in OS X, just a lot of hard work. I'm not saying this would be easy, only that I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be possible. And given how badly Apple is dropping the ball, I also don't see any reason why it couldn't be lucrative. When Google started, everyone thought that the search market was mature and that Yahoo and Microsoft would lead the computer industry forever. I don't see any reason Apple could not be unseated just as they were.
  - smallnamespace 10y ago
    I think the barrier here is going to be driver support in Linux. You lose 90% of the value of having UX that 'just works' if the driver support is buggy or isn't there. Developing and testing drivers is expensive. Apple solves this problem by designing and selling the hardware as well, and controlling the whole stack. They then charge extra margins for the privilege of using a Mac. MS solves this problem by shoving the driver work onto each hardware vendor. So while you can make and publish a very polished Linux distro / library, what's the business plan for getting paid for it, when the UX only gets you a fraction of the way towards having a seamless 'out of the box' experience for users?
    - 10y ago
mmanfrin 10y ago
If I were to switch, it would be because I am disappointed in the company that manages my current platform (Apple) not because I dislike the platform experience. The point of a switch for me would be to keep my workflow but extract the element I dont like (Apple); to that end I would switch platforms and then try to keep everything else as it was before. I really don't get why that seem's so off.
- bostand 10y ago
  But then you will completely miss all the advantages of the new platform has while getting mad at everything that doesnt work exactly as in osx. You will be running back to osx in no time after a horrifying Linux experience. So take my advice: save yourself the headache and stay with Apple.
  - coldtea 10y ago
    >But then you will completely miss all the advantages of the new platform has while getting mad at everything that doesnt work exactly as in osx. The parent's goal is not to embrace change, is to get back to having the same things they liked and worked for them on the new platform. If they could be satisfied with any random thing, they would have just as well stayed and followed the old platforms new direction.
    - wtetzner 10y ago
      > The parent's goal is not to embrace change, is to get back to having the same things they liked and worked for them on the new platform. I think that's understood. It's just that trying to make Linux behave like OS X might end up being more painful than just embracing change. That doesn't mean they shouldn't try, I guess, but it's something to keep in mind.
- AsyncAwait 10y ago
  What seems off is that you'll not be taking advantage of the platform's capabilities and thus handicap your experience, which seems like a large cost to pay for a tiny amount of adjustment cost. Using Homebrew on Linux seems really off.
Bluestrike2 10y ago
Most of the more recent Apple criticism seems to be focused on hardware limitations. People tend to like the OS X GUI and experience for the most part. They just don’t like the Apple hardware you’re limited to now that Macs seem to be less and less of a priority for minor updates. The Mac Pro is literally over years old. The Mac Mini is over two. And the iMac is over a year old as well, besides the limitations of the form factor: it’s a limited machine, and I don’t want to use two monitors after falling in love with a 34” curved ultrawide display. Personally, I came to the same conclusion recently. But I went the Hackintosh route instead of switching to a Linux/dual-booted Windows machine. The latest rMBP’s disappointing hardware and battery life, not to mention the cost premium, made the decision fairly easy for me. That, and I wanted to go back to using a separate desktop and laptop after repeatedly hitting performance bottlenecks with Adobe Lightroom on my previous rMBP. My photography pretty much nixed a Linux option unless I wanted to dual-boot into Windows more often than I’d prefer. There are alternatives like Darktable, but even though Lightroom is a resource pig that needs a diet and a lot of optimization work still, it’s my preferred catalog software that I’m most comfortable in. And when you’re trying to sort through 3-5k+ photos shot over a very busy weekend, comfort is the deciding factor. As a developer, I have no problem with the popular Linux distros. I’ve worked with Linux servers for years, and I love the approach to package management package management. I’m perfectly comfortable with CLI apps. But when I’m not doing dev work, I don’t want to be saddled by the need to constantly boot into Windows for other tasks. The Hackintosh route gave me the best of both worlds. Better hardware that I can upgrade on my own terms, my preferred GUI environment, and no need to dual-boot unless I want to game. I had a bit of extra work to deal with in the beginning to get everything working properly (with my Skylake build, proper audio support and the wireless networking card in particular), but it didn’t take much of an effort thanks to a very robust community ([tonymacx86.com]). The only other issue is checking on discussions for new software updates to make sure there aren’t any problems before I go and install them. But that’s not too big a deal, all things considered. Tl;dr - I guess my point is that we all have our preferred environments and will go to a hell of a lot of trouble to maintain them. Or, if that’s not an option, then to at least get things close to them. Even when that can mean more trouble later on. Using a homebrew port strikes me as a less-than-advantageous approach, but I can imagine why the original author did so.
- 10y ago
coldtea 10y ago
>I really don't get why someone would want to change platform while doing his damnest to keep things exactly as before. Instead of, I don't know... embracing the changes? Maybe try something new?? Isn't it OBVIOUS? Because they very much like their existing platform and how it works, but just dislike some things enough (e.g. the hardware options offered lately) that they want to move away.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

by bostand 10y ago

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

a3n 10y ago

The intent was access to better hardware. He believes Apple is falling behind.

johnpowell 10y ago
Or getting some hits on their site.

wezm 10y ago

I tried Linuxbrew but didn't stick with it for exactly the reason you point out: > However it turns out Linuxbrew manages it’s own version of all the packages it tracks (makes sense I guess). This end up duplicating many of the packages available or already installed by the system package manager. This works on macOS since there is no system package repository but did not sit well with me on a Linux system.

bostand 10y ago
Fair enough. But I am still wondering why linuxbrew exists to begin with. I mean, I understand the point of having snap or flatpack in addition to native distro packages, but linuxbrew?
- tormeh 10y ago
  Sounds like with Linuxbrew you get actually updated packages, which non-rolling release distros lack.
  - DominoTree 10y ago
    Bingo. The benefit here is that you can get your choice of rolling-release packages on any distribution you want without mucking up the base system.
  - bostand 10y ago
    Not entirely, you can always use PPAs and alike. There are also these universal package formats that some directly from the developers.
- santaclaus 10y ago
  Do flatpack and snap require root? A cursory glance over their examples all have users sudoing to get things installed.
  - bostand 10y ago
    There is at least one (can't remember which) that allows users to install packages locally.
  - thinkmassive 10y ago
    Flatpak can install system-wide by root, or by any user to their home directory.
- srssays 10y ago
  Unless you are using Arch, the packages in the system package manager are often several months old. This is somewhat of a regression to anyone used to homebrew where packages are updated promptly. The Linux 'solution' to this problem is to compile from sources. linuxbrew is a way of automating that, if you will.

nextos 10y ago

You can't beat MacOS at it's own game. As a developer, switching to Linux can give you a very nice custom enviroment with CLI applications like mutt or zathura and a DE like xmonad or i3. But you can't have a GUI as polished as MacOS, although things are getting closer. One of the big innovations of Linux was package management. So using homebrew is indeed a bit absurd. Actually, I would argue next-generation package managers like nix or guix are extremely interesting and have tons of advantages. Maximizing benefits of a MacOS to Linux switch maybe makes it advisable to use one of those.

lisper 10y ago
> You can't beat MacOS at it's own game. Why not? > you can't have a GUI as polished as MacOS Why not? All it would take would be for a company to publish a Linux UI library and a standards doc, and to curate an app store. I don't see any reason that a Linux machine could not be made to look and feel like a Mac. There's no magic in OS X, just a lot of hard work. I'm not saying this would be easy, only that I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be possible. And given how badly Apple is dropping the ball, I also don't see any reason why it couldn't be lucrative. When Google started, everyone thought that the search market was mature and that Yahoo and Microsoft would lead the computer industry forever. I don't see any reason Apple could not be unseated just as they were.
- smallnamespace 10y ago
  I think the barrier here is going to be driver support in Linux. You lose 90% of the value of having UX that 'just works' if the driver support is buggy or isn't there. Developing and testing drivers is expensive. Apple solves this problem by designing and selling the hardware as well, and controlling the whole stack. They then charge extra margins for the privilege of using a Mac. MS solves this problem by shoving the driver work onto each hardware vendor. So while you can make and publish a very polished Linux distro / library, what's the business plan for getting paid for it, when the UX only gets you a fraction of the way towards having a seamless 'out of the box' experience for users?
  - 10y ago

mmanfrin 10y ago

If I were to switch, it would be because I am disappointed in the company that manages my current platform (Apple) not because I dislike the platform experience. The point of a switch for me would be to keep my workflow but extract the element I dont like (Apple); to that end I would switch platforms and then try to keep everything else as it was before. I really don't get why that seem's so off.

bostand 10y ago
But then you will completely miss all the advantages of the new platform has while getting mad at everything that doesnt work exactly as in osx. You will be running back to osx in no time after a horrifying Linux experience. So take my advice: save yourself the headache and stay with Apple.
- coldtea 10y ago
  >But then you will completely miss all the advantages of the new platform has while getting mad at everything that doesnt work exactly as in osx. The parent's goal is not to embrace change, is to get back to having the same things they liked and worked for them on the new platform. If they could be satisfied with any random thing, they would have just as well stayed and followed the old platforms new direction.
  - wtetzner 10y ago
    > The parent's goal is not to embrace change, is to get back to having the same things they liked and worked for them on the new platform. I think that's understood. It's just that trying to make Linux behave like OS X might end up being more painful than just embracing change. That doesn't mean they shouldn't try, I guess, but it's something to keep in mind.
AsyncAwait 10y ago
What seems off is that you'll not be taking advantage of the platform's capabilities and thus handicap your experience, which seems like a large cost to pay for a tiny amount of adjustment cost. Using Homebrew on Linux seems really off.

Bluestrike2 10y ago

Most of the more recent Apple criticism seems to be focused on hardware limitations. People tend to like the OS X GUI and experience for the most part. They just don’t like the Apple hardware you’re limited to now that Macs seem to be less and less of a priority for minor updates. The Mac Pro is literally over years old. The Mac Mini is over two. And the iMac is over a year old as well, besides the limitations of the form factor: it’s a limited machine, and I don’t want to use two monitors after falling in love with a 34” curved ultrawide display. Personally, I came to the same conclusion recently. But I went the Hackintosh route instead of switching to a Linux/dual-booted Windows machine. The latest rMBP’s disappointing hardware and battery life, not to mention the cost premium, made the decision fairly easy for me. That, and I wanted to go back to using a separate desktop and laptop after repeatedly hitting performance bottlenecks with Adobe Lightroom on my previous rMBP. My photography pretty much nixed a Linux option unless I wanted to dual-boot into Windows more often than I’d prefer. There are alternatives like Darktable, but even though Lightroom is a resource pig that needs a diet and a lot of optimization work still, it’s my preferred catalog software that I’m most comfortable in. And when you’re trying to sort through 3-5k+ photos shot over a very busy weekend, comfort is the deciding factor. As a developer, I have no problem with the popular Linux distros. I’ve worked with Linux servers for years, and I love the approach to package management package management. I’m perfectly comfortable with CLI apps. But when I’m not doing dev work, I don’t want to be saddled by the need to constantly boot into Windows for other tasks. The Hackintosh route gave me the best of both worlds. Better hardware that I can upgrade on my own terms, my preferred GUI environment, and no need to dual-boot unless I want to game. I had a bit of extra work to deal with in the beginning to get everything working properly (with my Skylake build, proper audio support and the wireless networking card in particular), but it didn’t take much of an effort thanks to a very robust community ([tonymacx86.com]). The only other issue is checking on discussions for new software updates to make sure there aren’t any problems before I go and install them. But that’s not too big a deal, all things considered. Tl;dr - I guess my point is that we all have our preferred environments and will go to a hell of a lot of trouble to maintain them. Or, if that’s not an option, then to at least get things close to them. Even when that can mean more trouble later on. Using a homebrew port strikes me as a less-than-advantageous approach, but I can imagine why the original author did so.

10y ago

coldtea 10y ago

>I really don't get why someone would want to change platform while doing his damnest to keep things exactly as before. Instead of, I don't know... embracing the changes? Maybe try something new?? Isn't it OBVIOUS? Because they very much like their existing platform and how it works, but just dislike some things enough (e.g. the hardware options offered lately) that they want to move away.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]