4 ms·

I suspect you're right, but I've come to understand that the OS itself is a small part of the equation. While you could find just about any software equivalents

by mcav 17y ago

I suspect you're right, but I've come to understand that the OS itself is a small part of the equation. While you could find just about any software equivalents on Linux <=> Mac, some non-free software is markedly better than any free version. The hardware really is good; and when it isn't, AppleCare has saved me much frustration. If Mac didn't exist, I'd be on Linux for sure; but the entire ecosystem around Mac software has lent itself to some really quality work. Often that saves time and energy. Aesthetics are part of it, but there are indeed other factors entering into my equation more than just raw hardware+software cost.

abalashov 17y ago
Certainly, I have no trouble believing that - especially with commercial software in the domain that has traditionally been Mac's strength, such as video and graphics stuff. What I am really curious about are the motivations for using Macs by highly technical developers who are not otherwise into that kind of stuff. This means people whose use of a machine consists, at least 90% of the time, of basic things like a web browser, command-line terminal and/or SSH, an IM client, an MP3 player, maybe an IDE, and so on. It seems to me that if they wanted pretty aesthetics they could do a contemporary Linux desktop environment and reap the benefits, but they insist that their productivity is greatly enhanced by Mac's basic UI features and the sort of environmental/ecosystem integration to which you allude. I personally cannot see how, although I'm a huge fan of the magnetic power clip as much as the next guy -- power sockets that go bad due to the cable being jerked around at weird angles are my #1 problem with laptops, period.
- f00 17y ago
  I can answer your question quite simply, and it's not about aesthetics or the magsafe power connector. The aesthetics are just icing on the cake. Very, very beautiful icing, but icing nonetheless. I have better things to do with my life than dick around with xorg.conf for one more minute. I don't care whether the open source 'nv' or the closed source 'nvidia' module works better for my particular video setup, or what other voodoo incantations I need to do to get dual-monitor support working with or without compositing. When I disconnect my laptop from my external display, I want to know that my window manager isn't going to strand my windows off on an unaccessible part of the desktop. I want to know that when I put my laptop to sleep, that I'll be able to wake it up again. Quickly. Reliably. I don't need to think about ACPI or CPU power states, or why the kernel module for my wireless card won't work after waking up. Linux works great for all my servers. I'm very happy with it, and I don't mind doing all the configuration work, because it makes a great platform for that purpose. On the desktop, Linux is a non-starter. To quote Pulp Fiction -- "It ain't the same fuckin' ballpark, it ain't the same league, it ain't even the same fuckin' sport."
  - abalashov 17y ago
    Yeah, I understand that. But I don't have any of the problems you're describing above, with my Debian + GNOME setup. I know others aren't so fortunate, though, so it depends on what hardware you're running it on. And to be fair, the system definitely did take a little more low-level initial configuration, like compiling the binary nVidia drivers manually.

by mcav 17y ago

abalashov 17y ago

Certainly, I have no trouble believing that - especially with commercial software in the domain that has traditionally been Mac's strength, such as video and graphics stuff. What I am really curious about are the motivations for using Macs by highly technical developers who are not otherwise into that kind of stuff. This means people whose use of a machine consists, at least 90% of the time, of basic things like a web browser, command-line terminal and/or SSH, an IM client, an MP3 player, maybe an IDE, and so on. It seems to me that if they wanted pretty aesthetics they could do a contemporary Linux desktop environment and reap the benefits, but they insist that their productivity is greatly enhanced by Mac's basic UI features and the sort of environmental/ecosystem integration to which you allude. I personally cannot see how, although I'm a huge fan of the magnetic power clip as much as the next guy -- power sockets that go bad due to the cable being jerked around at weird angles are my #1 problem with laptops, period.

f00 17y ago
I can answer your question quite simply, and it's not about aesthetics or the magsafe power connector. The aesthetics are just icing on the cake. Very, very beautiful icing, but icing nonetheless. I have better things to do with my life than dick around with xorg.conf for one more minute. I don't care whether the open source 'nv' or the closed source 'nvidia' module works better for my particular video setup, or what other voodoo incantations I need to do to get dual-monitor support working with or without compositing. When I disconnect my laptop from my external display, I want to know that my window manager isn't going to strand my windows off on an unaccessible part of the desktop. I want to know that when I put my laptop to sleep, that I'll be able to wake it up again. Quickly. Reliably. I don't need to think about ACPI or CPU power states, or why the kernel module for my wireless card won't work after waking up. Linux works great for all my servers. I'm very happy with it, and I don't mind doing all the configuration work, because it makes a great platform for that purpose. On the desktop, Linux is a non-starter. To quote Pulp Fiction -- "It ain't the same fuckin' ballpark, it ain't the same league, it ain't even the same fuckin' sport."
- abalashov 17y ago
  Yeah, I understand that. But I don't have any of the problems you're describing above, with my Debian + GNOME setup. I know others aren't so fortunate, though, so it depends on what hardware you're running it on. And to be fair, the system definitely did take a little more low-level initial configuration, like compiling the binary nVidia drivers manually.