3 ms·
> "Poweruser"? No, I feel the more accurate term would be power-consumer. Possibly. I guess there are many different kinds of powerusers. The interpretation I
by tomp 8y ago
> "Poweruser"? No, I feel the more accurate term would be power-consumer.
Possibly. I guess there are many different kinds of powerusers. The interpretation I had in mind is that I use the computer (1) a lot, (2) not just for internet/media consumption, and (3) I use it to program so I want/need easy accessibility to many software packages (which is a problem on Windows, IME).
Just because I can solve all of the problems/configuration and use all the low-level backup/networking tools, it doesn't mean that I want to (it's just not worth my time).
- paavoova 8y agoIf you use computers "a lot", the percentage of time required to learning a select few Linux userspace administrative tools, as well as the time dedicated to configuration and maintenance, is less than nothing compared to time spent on general everyday usage. The common perception that Linux is a timesink is false (not to mention most things are very much plug-and-play nowadays, e.g. networking via DHCP). And the benefits in doing so are huge, in that you now control your needs using a variety of independent tools, as opposed to the far more locked-in, proprietary solutions that Apple offers. I simply disagree with your claim that Macbooks are the best option for so-called power-users when on multiple aspects from hardware to software they're not. Macbooks/The Apple ecosystem is A choice, not THE choice.
- posting2fast 8y ago> Possibly. I guess there are many different kinds of powerusers. It's simply that "programmer who doesn't like to configure things in detail until everything they use fits them like a glove and doesn't know much about hardware" and "power user" are different and orthogonal things.