4 ms·

Woah, woah, my comment never said that people who prefer macOS to Linux/*BSD are inferior hackers. I think I was clear that I was differentiating between the so

Woah, woah, my comment never said that people who prefer macOS to Linux/*BSD are inferior hackers. I think I was clear that I was differentiating between the software that I run and the software that a creative professional is required to run. That is, I have a choice where to run my dev stacks, while a graphic designer is probably a captive Adobe CS user. And yes, that's exactly what I meant by "qualitative experience." I was actively calling out that the opinion voiced in my comment was, like, my opinion man. People are entitled to their preferences, and you clearly have yours neither is "silly" but we can still politely disagree.

21 10y ago
It's funny that you say that an Adobe CS user is "captive", but you don't consider yourself "captive" to the superior Linux hacker tools. Ie: why is the creative user captive, but you are free. If you wanted to move to macOS/Windows you couldn't, because you wouldn't bear their inferiority when it comes to hacker things, so aren't you also captive?
- peatmoss 10y ago
  Easy, because I could and occasionally do run my tools on Windows and macOS. And from some of the responses here, it's clear that some people do prefer that. But, if I wanted to buy the latest Adobe Creative Suite and run it in Linux, I have no real recourse. So I guess in that sense, my statement could be made more precisely as: Obligate users of such commercial software suites as Adobe Creative Suite are captive users of either Windows or macOS.
  - 21 10y ago
    Said obligate users _could_ migrate to Gimp or Audacity. But they don't, for the same reason you stay on Linux. The fact that you can run bash on Windows is not such a huge difference if for other reasons you don't. They don't want an inferior experience, even if they could tolerate it if strictly necessary.
    - peatmoss 10y ago
      > Said obligate users _could_ migrate to Gimp or Audacity. Perhaps—and I've certainly met professionals that claim to use those tools. However, I've met others who claim (rightly or wrongly) that Gimp and Audacity are not perfect substitutes for other commercial packages.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]

21 10y ago

It's funny that you say that an Adobe CS user is "captive", but you don't consider yourself "captive" to the superior Linux hacker tools. Ie: why is the creative user captive, but you are free. If you wanted to move to macOS/Windows you couldn't, because you wouldn't bear their inferiority when it comes to hacker things, so aren't you also captive?

peatmoss 10y ago
Easy, because I could and occasionally do run my tools on Windows and macOS. And from some of the responses here, it's clear that some people do prefer that. But, if I wanted to buy the latest Adobe Creative Suite and run it in Linux, I have no real recourse. So I guess in that sense, my statement could be made more precisely as: Obligate users of such commercial software suites as Adobe Creative Suite are captive users of either Windows or macOS.
- 21 10y ago
  Said obligate users _could_ migrate to Gimp or Audacity. But they don't, for the same reason you stay on Linux. The fact that you can run bash on Windows is not such a huge difference if for other reasons you don't. They don't want an inferior experience, even if they could tolerate it if strictly necessary.
  - peatmoss 10y ago
    > Said obligate users _could_ migrate to Gimp or Audacity. Perhaps—and I've certainly met professionals that claim to use those tools. However, I've met others who claim (rightly or wrongly) that Gimp and Audacity are not perfect substitutes for other commercial packages.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]