3 ms·

I use Linux at home right now (Ubuntu 8.10) for a mythtv system. I used Ubuntu 7.4 (and others previous) for a couple of years for my desktop environment. I've

by TJensen 17y ago

I use Linux at home right now (Ubuntu 8.10) for a mythtv system. I used Ubuntu 7.4 (and others previous) for a couple of years for my desktop environment. I've run Linux since 1993 and administered it since 1994 (trip down memory lane: did a google search and found an e-mail from 1994 about a problem I was having with ftpd :). The reason why I changed was because I got sick of the nagging 1%. It didn't seem to matter where, there was always some 1% that wasn't polished. It was either that multiple monitors didn't work quite right (especially when plugging in my laptop) or that my wi-fi wouldn't come back to life after hibernating. There is always some little thing like that, and it interrupts what I really want to be doing (developing, not troubleshooting). On top of that, I don't just use emacs. I use things like photoshop, scratch (always fun to code with my kid), garage band, keynote and pages. Yes, I can get the same functionality on Linux (usually), but now we are at a 90% experience (at best). There is truth (for me, at least) that well designed OS X software just gets out of the way. Yes, I do deal with "multiple user land", though I've honestly never thought of it that way. My shells (including emacs) are set up to use ports, the rest of the system uses Apple's defaults. I've never run into a problem there, but, objectively, it is a little more pain than I would have on Linux. If I were strictly using emacs and bash in a desktop environment, Linux would be better than my MacBook, but I don't. I think it is disingenuous to imply that developers don't do anything but that. In addition to being a developer, I'm a regular computer user, too. With OS X, I get what I feel is a good development environment along with a great computing environment. With Linux, I got a great development environment with an OK computing environment. That was fine when I enjoyed spending my time troubleshooting the environment, but I'm not interested in that now.

etherael 17y ago
I follow you, but what I was talking about with regards to unconscious competence is exactly what makes that "nagging 1%" totally irrelevant, case in point, upgraded an 8.10 system to 9.04 today, didn't boot, remembered something about grub switching to a different format for it's root line, edited the boot line in the grub interface, sure enough it was UUID based, switched it to hd0,2 based, worked instantly, time elapsed < 20 seconds. This is globally applicable to any problem I run into now, because I have those unconscious competences built up from dealing with thousands upon thousands of tiny issues like this in the past, I no longer even consciously see them unless I look hard for them. Thus, taking care of those problems for me is not something I find very valuable. In the same way, I've trained myself to stick to hardware I know doesn't suck for Linux, avoid ATI like the plague, make sure that all the devices I'm going to be using work before I fork over cash for them, etc. So right there there's a bunch of issues I don't even come across like your multi monitor issue because I have taken measures to offset them appropriately. As in the original argument, you could indeed argue that such things are a waste of time and it's a lot easier to just pay some other company a premium to handle it all for you, and thus it makes sense for platforms like OS X to exist and thrive, but it still doesn't negate my original point, you've just evolved away from being in the same group of users as I am into another one altogether. And that is of course totally fine, but just serves to reinforce the original point even more. Thanks for the reference about scratch, that looks kind of interesting, if I ever find myself having to teach I can definitely see a use case for something like that.
- TJensen 17y ago
  Like I said: Ride what you like; like what you ride. I can definitely see why some people would like Linux better as a development environment. I can see why some people would like OS X better. Believe it or not, I can even see why some people would like Windows better (but I have to stretch really hard :). However, your central argument seemed to be "if you've used Linux since 1994, you would never find OS X better than Linux." I wanted to provide a counter-point that, in fact, it was possible to use Linux since before 1994 and still prefer OS X. I'm still hoping for the day that I can have the same experience on Linux that I get on OS X. One interesting observation is that I seemed to be able to handle it better when the experience was 75% than when it is 90%. Perhaps it is like human robots: the closer they get to being human, the creepier they get. :) Perhaps the closer Linux gets (without being there), the more I notice what's not right about it. For anybody who isn't sure whether to go OS X or Linux, I'd certainly try Linux first.
  - etherael 17y ago
    I need to be less wordy. My central argument was supposed to be that when you've spent the time to develop the skills necessary to use Linux as a platform to the point where the advantages of the OS X platform are invisible and the deficiencies are glaringly apparent, you're not going to prefer OS X, despite the fact that it's still perfectly fine for a whole ton of people.
    - rbanffy 17y ago
      You summed it up pretty well, but I would put it slightly differently: there is a point where the characteristics of OSX are no longer an advantage, but a hindrance, the same way as the characteristics of a more traditional Unix (or Linux) are a problem for those who are more used to OSX or Windows. There is a time you have to get rid of the training wheels.

by TJensen 17y ago

etherael 17y ago

I follow you, but what I was talking about with regards to unconscious competence is exactly what makes that "nagging 1%" totally irrelevant, case in point, upgraded an 8.10 system to 9.04 today, didn't boot, remembered something about grub switching to a different format for it's root line, edited the boot line in the grub interface, sure enough it was UUID based, switched it to hd0,2 based, worked instantly, time elapsed < 20 seconds. This is globally applicable to any problem I run into now, because I have those unconscious competences built up from dealing with thousands upon thousands of tiny issues like this in the past, I no longer even consciously see them unless I look hard for them. Thus, taking care of those problems for me is not something I find very valuable. In the same way, I've trained myself to stick to hardware I know doesn't suck for Linux, avoid ATI like the plague, make sure that all the devices I'm going to be using work before I fork over cash for them, etc. So right there there's a bunch of issues I don't even come across like your multi monitor issue because I have taken measures to offset them appropriately. As in the original argument, you could indeed argue that such things are a waste of time and it's a lot easier to just pay some other company a premium to handle it all for you, and thus it makes sense for platforms like OS X to exist and thrive, but it still doesn't negate my original point, you've just evolved away from being in the same group of users as I am into another one altogether. And that is of course totally fine, but just serves to reinforce the original point even more. Thanks for the reference about scratch, that looks kind of interesting, if I ever find myself having to teach I can definitely see a use case for something like that.

TJensen 17y ago
Like I said: Ride what you like; like what you ride. I can definitely see why some people would like Linux better as a development environment. I can see why some people would like OS X better. Believe it or not, I can even see why some people would like Windows better (but I have to stretch really hard :). However, your central argument seemed to be "if you've used Linux since 1994, you would never find OS X better than Linux." I wanted to provide a counter-point that, in fact, it was possible to use Linux since before 1994 and still prefer OS X. I'm still hoping for the day that I can have the same experience on Linux that I get on OS X. One interesting observation is that I seemed to be able to handle it better when the experience was 75% than when it is 90%. Perhaps it is like human robots: the closer they get to being human, the creepier they get. :) Perhaps the closer Linux gets (without being there), the more I notice what's not right about it. For anybody who isn't sure whether to go OS X or Linux, I'd certainly try Linux first.
- etherael 17y ago
  I need to be less wordy. My central argument was supposed to be that when you've spent the time to develop the skills necessary to use Linux as a platform to the point where the advantages of the OS X platform are invisible and the deficiencies are glaringly apparent, you're not going to prefer OS X, despite the fact that it's still perfectly fine for a whole ton of people.
  - rbanffy 17y ago
    You summed it up pretty well, but I would put it slightly differently: there is a point where the characteristics of OSX are no longer an advantage, but a hindrance, the same way as the characteristics of a more traditional Unix (or Linux) are a problem for those who are more used to OSX or Windows. There is a time you have to get rid of the training wheels.