5 ms·

I had two of them running side-by-side for several months now: I've been struggling to make a decision between MBP+OSX vs Thinkpad+Ubuntu and ended up with both

by tx 19y ago

I had two of them running side-by-side for several months now: I've been struggling to make a decision between MBP+OSX vs Thinkpad+Ubuntu and ended up with both. Over time I find myself glued to Linux more and more: the software I like tends to be native on Linux and somewhat foreign on OS X, and yes - I know about Macports and I don't like it: too limited and too awkward compared to apt. All in all, OS X just isn't particularly hacker friendly: it always took me longer to do something on a Mac, the recent case was Python/Pylons stack with some libs: I was done under a minute on Ubuntu while Mac took some googling and IRC'ing to accomplish the same task. Moreover, I keep hitting OSX limitations on less exotic stuff all the time: the terminal is retarded by default, Finder doesn't really do FTP properly (in 2008! WTF??), windows are resizable only by bottom-right corner, font rendering is worse than Ubuntu is capable of, Mac "spaces" are dumbed down version of Gnome workspaces - the list goes on and on. The only area where OSX destroys competition is their window management: I find myself Alt-tabbing a lot less on the Mac. Also OSX is too commercialized: people are selling freaking screensavers for god's sake... So I am on Ubuntu most of the time now, the only thing that I am envious of is nearly instant ruspend/resume on my macbook and, as mentioned above, Macs window management. But hardware plays an important role too. MBP+OSX wins head down against an average disposable Dell/HP/Whatever, even Ubuntu powers can't help that junk, so Thinkpads rule.

sunkencity 19y ago
Totally agree but: >But hardware plays an important role too. MBP+OSX wins head >Down against an average disposable Dell/HP/Whatever, even >Ubuntu powers can't help that junk, so Thinkpads rule. Running linux on a mac is fantastic, the hardware is well supported, only caveat is the one-button touchpad. And it totally pisses of Apple Freaks!
- boredguy8 19y ago
  If only that were as true today as it was 5 years ago. But I bought 5 Mac Pros and had 4 HDs fail. Our HP 6910 laptops work great.
- ken 19y ago
  So does Linux not support the scrolling trackpad?
  - orib 19y ago
    It does, but middle or right clicking is rather awkward (2/3 finger taps, awkward key combinations)
    - ken 19y ago
      Strange; I find it easier. To right-click, I just put down my right finger, the one I use for right-clicking with a mouse, and which is otherwise unused. With separate physical buttons, I have to move my thumb to an uncomfortable angle.
white 19y ago
Well, I have a Unix experience with more then 10 years and I can tell you that OS X (Darwin) is not less functional or harder to use then any other Unix system. I bet you haven't tried SunOS...
- pistoriusp 19y ago
  Agreed. I had been running FreeBSD exclusively for well over 5 years before I switched to OS X. I can't say that I miss FreeBSD much. Still love it though, always will!
  - white 19y ago
    That's what confuses me a lot. What is the reason to get Mac with Darwin and purchase a secondary laptop with any type of Linux on it? Come on, you are shredding your money away. ;) But this is a pretty common behavior and frequently asked question over here. Is it a try to look more "geeky"? A lot of people motivate that Linux has got an apt and this makes it a hacker friendly platform. I've started using FreeBSD from 2-RELEASE (sorry, don't remember the numbers). The ports sucked there so much, that you can't even imagine now. But it still was a great platform to develop and to use. The Darwin' port system is a very nice tool. They're really similar to BSD ports and they are powerful enough. You just never learned how to use it. Do you still miss apt? Get Fink (http://www.finkproject.org http://www.finkproject.org). What can be easier? People, don't get me wrong, I'm not about a holy war. But I'm really confused why guys over here want to have two laptops running Unix at the same time. ;)
    - apu 19y ago
      It's not to look more 'geeky.' The difference between apt on ubuntu and fink on mac is not in their interface -- it's the number of packages that are available. I find that just about every package I need is available in ubuntu's repositories, whereas only the very major packages are available on Mac. As mentioned in the original comment by tx, the process of installing a set of libraries/programs on Mac often involves a lot of googling and getting other help, whereas just about everything I've tried on Ubuntu "just works." This is true even for programs that are not in either repository; compiling by hand also usually "just works" on Ubuntu, and I've never had it be that easy on Mac (some weird compile or link error always comes up, which then requires extensive google-fu to fix). Another problem I find is that there seems to be a 'Mac' way of doing things which is different from both linux and unix/bsd methods (e.g. binaries often go into /Library/Framework/... instead of the usual /usr/bin or /usr/local/bin, etc.) which causes problems when interfacing with other *nix tools. Finally, an unrelated thing (but one that affects me a lot) is the complete lack of the /proc filesystem. I think BSD/Unix doesn't have this either, so perhaps with your background you won't miss this in any case -- but I grew up on Linux and find /proc to be invaluable. It allows for easy programmatic access to processes using only file I/O, as well as allowing for awesome helper programs like htop.
sayhello 19y ago
>> the terminal is retarded by default, Finder doesn't really do FTP properly (in 2008! WTF??) What's wrong with Terminal.app? I find only 2 complaints for the Leopard version: the inability to change ANSI colors and in second, no support for 256-color rendering. As for ftp, have you tried 'ftp' from the commandline? if you want a GUI, give cyberduck or transmit a try. >> But hardware plays an important role too. MBP+OSX wins head down against an average disposable Dell/HP/Whatever, even Ubuntu powers can't help that junk, so Thinkpads rule. Macbooks are manufactured by Asus and Foxconn, or at least the components. Granted though, they may require more quality components than Dell/HP/etc such as higher quality PCB, capacitors etc...
admp 19y ago
Regarding FTP I would say: FTP? WTF? It's 2008, isn't it?
- rms 19y ago
  What do you use? Linux supports SSH in the command line/gui also...

by tx 19y ago

sunkencity 19y ago

Totally agree but: >But hardware plays an important role too. MBP+OSX wins head >Down against an average disposable Dell/HP/Whatever, even >Ubuntu powers can't help that junk, so Thinkpads rule. Running linux on a mac is fantastic, the hardware is well supported, only caveat is the one-button touchpad. And it totally pisses of Apple Freaks!

boredguy8 19y ago
If only that were as true today as it was 5 years ago. But I bought 5 Mac Pros and had 4 HDs fail. Our HP 6910 laptops work great.
ken 19y ago
So does Linux not support the scrolling trackpad?
- orib 19y ago
  It does, but middle or right clicking is rather awkward (2/3 finger taps, awkward key combinations)
  - ken 19y ago
    Strange; I find it easier. To right-click, I just put down my right finger, the one I use for right-clicking with a mouse, and which is otherwise unused. With separate physical buttons, I have to move my thumb to an uncomfortable angle.

white 19y ago

Well, I have a Unix experience with more then 10 years and I can tell you that OS X (Darwin) is not less functional or harder to use then any other Unix system. I bet you haven't tried SunOS...

pistoriusp 19y ago
Agreed. I had been running FreeBSD exclusively for well over 5 years before I switched to OS X. I can't say that I miss FreeBSD much. Still love it though, always will!
- white 19y ago
  That's what confuses me a lot. What is the reason to get Mac with Darwin and purchase a secondary laptop with any type of Linux on it? Come on, you are shredding your money away. ;) But this is a pretty common behavior and frequently asked question over here. Is it a try to look more "geeky"? A lot of people motivate that Linux has got an apt and this makes it a hacker friendly platform. I've started using FreeBSD from 2-RELEASE (sorry, don't remember the numbers). The ports sucked there so much, that you can't even imagine now. But it still was a great platform to develop and to use. The Darwin' port system is a very nice tool. They're really similar to BSD ports and they are powerful enough. You just never learned how to use it. Do you still miss apt? Get Fink (http://www.finkproject.org http://www.finkproject.org). What can be easier? People, don't get me wrong, I'm not about a holy war. But I'm really confused why guys over here want to have two laptops running Unix at the same time. ;)
  - apu 19y ago
    It's not to look more 'geeky.' The difference between apt on ubuntu and fink on mac is not in their interface -- it's the number of packages that are available. I find that just about every package I need is available in ubuntu's repositories, whereas only the very major packages are available on Mac. As mentioned in the original comment by tx, the process of installing a set of libraries/programs on Mac often involves a lot of googling and getting other help, whereas just about everything I've tried on Ubuntu "just works." This is true even for programs that are not in either repository; compiling by hand also usually "just works" on Ubuntu, and I've never had it be that easy on Mac (some weird compile or link error always comes up, which then requires extensive google-fu to fix). Another problem I find is that there seems to be a 'Mac' way of doing things which is different from both linux and unix/bsd methods (e.g. binaries often go into /Library/Framework/... instead of the usual /usr/bin or /usr/local/bin, etc.) which causes problems when interfacing with other *nix tools. Finally, an unrelated thing (but one that affects me a lot) is the complete lack of the /proc filesystem. I think BSD/Unix doesn't have this either, so perhaps with your background you won't miss this in any case -- but I grew up on Linux and find /proc to be invaluable. It allows for easy programmatic access to processes using only file I/O, as well as allowing for awesome helper programs like htop.

sayhello 19y ago

>> the terminal is retarded by default, Finder doesn't really do FTP properly (in 2008! WTF??) What's wrong with Terminal.app? I find only 2 complaints for the Leopard version: the inability to change ANSI colors and in second, no support for 256-color rendering. As for ftp, have you tried 'ftp' from the commandline? if you want a GUI, give cyberduck or transmit a try. >> But hardware plays an important role too. MBP+OSX wins head down against an average disposable Dell/HP/Whatever, even Ubuntu powers can't help that junk, so Thinkpads rule. Macbooks are manufactured by Asus and Foxconn, or at least the components. Granted though, they may require more quality components than Dell/HP/etc such as higher quality PCB, capacitors etc...

admp 19y ago

Regarding FTP I would say: FTP? WTF? It's 2008, isn't it?

rms 19y ago
What do you use? Linux supports SSH in the command line/gui also...