[News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X - Linux

This is a discussion on [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X - Linux ; -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Switch to Ubuntu Linux not Apple Mac OS ,----[ Quote ] | So why are people not going over to Ubuntu? Beats me. If you are looking for | commercial technical support, Ubuntu does ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 83

Thread: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

  1. [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    Switch to Ubuntu Linux not Apple Mac OS

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | So why are people not going over to Ubuntu? Beats me. If you are looking for
    | commercial technical support, Ubuntu does offer that. If you are looking at
    | extreme personalization options Ubuntu offers that, probably even more than
    | the Mac OS. If you are looking for easy upgrades to future versions, Ubuntu
    | offers that. If you are looking for ease of use, Ubuntu offers that. If you
    | are looking for robustness and security, Ubuntu is the best. Ubuntu can be
    | installed on all types of hardware and even on older hardware. Mac OS does
    | not offer this flexibility.
    |
    | The more I use Ubuntu, the more I fail to understand the lure of the Mac OS.
    | Is it the snob value or stupidity that make people consider a Mac over
    | Windows and not Ubuntu?
    `----

    http://prosenjit23.wordpress.com/200...-apple-mac-os/


    Recent:

    Dell Mini Inspiron 9

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | I’m living the dream, I tell you! I’ve swapped my MacBook for a Dell Mini and
    | so far the experience has been pretty positive.
    `----

    http://jonrob.wordpress.com/2008/09/...ni-inspiron-9/


    Moving from Mac to Ubuntu: Why I’m switching

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Why I’m leaving Mac
    |
    | * *1. Crap file management.The Finder doesn’t work for me. No location bar
    | * *and no tree strucure side panel makes it difficult to navigate folders and
    | * *move files around the way I want to.
    | * *2. Insufficient panels & customization. In Ubuntu I can have as many
    | * *panels I want, can put all kinds of stuff on them, and can arrange them
    | * *however I want. In OSX You just have the dock, and you can really only put
    | * *applications or files on them, and you can’t even put in a separator to
    | * *keep them organized.
    | * *3. Various other annoyances. Such as:
    | * * * * * * program menus are glued to the top of the screen on one monitor
    | * * * * * only, which detaches them from the window. This is especailly
    | * * * * * annoying when the program you’re using is on the second monitor.
    | * * * * * * the date/time doesn’t open to a navigable calendar. I often use
    | * * * * * this to check dates in the past or future.
    | * * * * * * you can’t see hidden files unless you run a command from the
    | * * * * * terminal to turn them on. Thus, hidden files are either always on
    | * * * * * or always off.
    `----

    http://meganmcdermott.com/2008/08/29...ntu-switching/
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

    iEYEARECAAYFAkj552YACgkQU4xAY3RXLo70/gCfbUG1Mz8MnjiSIbqPnxfm5ySR
    iR8An0wlZljKoZTbfQJzn/e4YEbzcwSK
    =nWOG
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  2. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X


    "Roy Schestowitz" wrote in message
    news:1651924.rMZ0WqjcMP@schestowitz.com...
    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > Switch to Ubuntu Linux not Apple Mac OS
    >
    > ,----[ Quote ]
    > | So why are people not going over to Ubuntu? Beats me. If you are looking
    > for
    > | commercial technical support, Ubuntu does offer that. If you are looking
    > at
    > | extreme personalization options Ubuntu offers that, probably even more
    > than
    > | the Mac OS. If you are looking for easy upgrades to future versions,
    > Ubuntu
    > | offers that. If you are looking for ease of use, Ubuntu offers that. If
    > you
    > | are looking for robustness and security, Ubuntu is the best. Ubuntu can
    > be
    > | installed on all types of hardware and even on older hardware. Mac OS
    > does
    > | not offer this flexibility.
    > |
    > | The more I use Ubuntu, the more I fail to understand the lure of the Mac
    > OS.
    > | Is it the snob value or stupidity that make people consider a Mac over
    > | Windows and not Ubuntu?
    > `----
    >
    > http://prosenjit23.wordpress.com/200...-apple-mac-os/
    >


    From the comments:


    Hugh Says:
    October 18, 2008 at 5:02 am

    Nice way to end an article. Imply anyone who doesn't agree with you is
    either a "snob" or "an idiot".

    I am neither. I use Windows, Mac, OpenBSD, Linux and at work many customized
    Linux and non Linux OSes that run on appliances. Like Juniper SA.

    As others have said, a ready to go experience and marketing are some
    barriers.

    The other thing is, even as an IT professional, sometimes RPMs don't work,
    and sometimes people offering software want you to compile source and you
    don't have all the pre-reqs or dependencies. Sometimes I can get to that
    work, sometimes not. How on earth are non IT literate users supposed to make
    software work.

    Or how about fiddling with XFree86.conf or Xorg to wrestle a graphics card
    to work. Boring.

    OSX also looks way snazzier than Ubuntu. Even Mark Shuttleworth realises
    this.





  3. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    this bit o' wisdom:

    >
    > OSX also looks way snazzier than Ubuntu. Even Mark Shuttleworth realises
    > this.
    >


    Beauty is just a theme engine away. Relatively few Windows users have
    ever gone on the trek needed to obtain what GNU/Linux distros have
    readily on tap.

    I remember DFS jeering at the theming in Linux, not realizing that all
    he needed to do was install some theme engines.

    --
    QOTD:
    "If he learns from his mistakes, pretty soon he'll know everything."

  4. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 10:08:46 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:

    > "Roy Schestowitz" wrote in message
    > news:1651924.rMZ0WqjcMP@schestowitz.com...
    >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >> Hash: SHA1
    >>
    >> Switch to Ubuntu Linux not Apple Mac OS
    >>
    >> ,----[ Quote ]
    >>| So why are people not going over to Ubuntu? Beats me. If you are looking
    >> for
    >>| commercial technical support, Ubuntu does offer that. If you are looking
    >> at
    >>| extreme personalization options Ubuntu offers that, probably even more
    >> than
    >>| the Mac OS. If you are looking for easy upgrades to future versions,
    >> Ubuntu
    >>| offers that. If you are looking for ease of use, Ubuntu offers that. If
    >> you
    >>| are looking for robustness and security, Ubuntu is the best. Ubuntu can
    >> be
    >>| installed on all types of hardware and even on older hardware. Mac OS
    >> does
    >>| not offer this flexibility.
    >>|
    >>| The more I use Ubuntu, the more I fail to understand the lure of the Mac
    >> OS.
    >>| Is it the snob value or stupidity that make people consider a Mac over
    >>| Windows and not Ubuntu?
    >> `----
    >>
    >> http://prosenjit23.wordpress.com/200...-apple-mac-os/
    >>

    >
    > From the comments:
    >
    >
    > Hugh Says:
    > October 18, 2008 at 5:02 am
    >
    > Nice way to end an article. Imply anyone who doesn't agree with you is
    > either a "snob" or "an idiot".
    >
    > I am neither. I use Windows, Mac, OpenBSD, Linux and at work many customized
    > Linux and non Linux OSes that run on appliances. Like Juniper SA.
    >
    > As others have said, a ready to go experience and marketing are some
    > barriers.
    >
    > The other thing is, even as an IT professional, sometimes RPMs don't work,
    > and sometimes people offering software want you to compile source and you
    > don't have all the pre-reqs or dependencies. Sometimes I can get to that
    > work, sometimes not. How on earth are non IT literate users supposed to make
    > software work.
    >
    > Or how about fiddling with XFree86.conf or Xorg to wrestle a graphics card
    > to work. Boring.
    >
    > OSX also looks way snazzier than Ubuntu. Even Mark Shuttleworth realises
    > this.
    >
    >


    Schestowitz seems to miss the high points of the articles every time.

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

  5. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X


    "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    newssnKk.53868$De7.43985@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    > this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >>
    >> OSX also looks way snazzier than Ubuntu. Even Mark Shuttleworth realises
    >> this.
    >>

    >
    > Beauty is just a theme engine away. Relatively few Windows users have
    > ever gone on the trek needed to obtain what GNU/Linux distros have
    > readily on tap.


    True. But I think that Bob's comment (item #3) on the same page sums it up
    rather well.


    Bob Says:
    October 18, 2008 at 6:13 am

    "The more I use Ubuntu, the more I fail to understand the lure of the Mac
    OS. Is it the snob value or stupidity that make people consider a Mac over
    Windows and not Ubuntu?"

    1) Firstly with a mac everything just works. No trying to find half dodgy
    drivers for your wifi card or graphics. I know you can have a scenario where
    everything works as is often the case with my hardware.

    2) Fonts. I have been using Linux best part of a decade now, the fonts have
    always looked rubbish and still do. Become more standardised but still
    rubbish in comparison to a mac or even Windows.

    3) OSX Leopard GUI is just SOOOOOO much more nicer and productive to work
    in. Yes you will tell me how you can change anything you like in Gnome and
    (OSX copy cat) KDE4. If I go to a restaurant I expect the food to be ready
    on a plate, cooked to perfection and provide that gastronomical experience.
    I don't want to be redoing the seasoning to solve chefs inabilities or cook
    a meal myself.

    4) Everything flows. Apple HCI guidelines really work., Everything is so
    well integrated. Linux is massively off here.

    5) Applications. Mac has some great cant live without applications. Mac
    developers unlike Linux/Win seem to understand what makes a good interface.
    Applications like Coda, Transmit, Toast, iWork and the Omni group are just
    so good. Linux cant compete. Again you can accomplish the task but not as
    productively, or well presented on Linux.

    I still use Linux but not for my desktop. Right now it belongs in a server
    or for some specialised tasks. As a platform for development Linux is great.
    But I wont be switching over to Linux/Ubuntu any time soon. It fails for
    what I want in my desk machine, yet I am well versed with how it works. It's
    not because I am a snob or stupid. But because Linux needs a massive
    overhaul for the consumer market, and Mark Shuttleworth (I think) gets it.
    See his comments on being more Apple like.



    > I remember DFS jeering at the theming in Linux, not realizing that all
    > he needed to do was install some theme engines.


    Themes can be installed. I think the point is that OSX comes with a damn
    good theme "out of the box" which is a plus for the many people who don't
    want to tweak and configure their desktop. My Ubuntu desktop with Compiz is
    rather nice and it wasn't all that difficult to configure.

    The larger point is #4 and to a lesser degree #5. I don't use a Mac but
    several people around me at work do. The consistency and integration between
    all applications and the OSX is first rate. I find that with Linux it isn't
    as consistent. Example - I typically use emacs for editing source code,
    scripts, etc. Use the clipboard on Emacs and I can copy text into it and
    paste it into other Emacs buffers. But often I can't paste the text into
    other Linux apps.


    > --
    > QOTD:
    > "If he learns from his mistakes, pretty soon he'll know everything."




  6. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    ____/ Chris Ahlstrom on Saturday 18 October 2008 15:47 : \____

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    > this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >>
    >> OSX also looks way snazzier than Ubuntu. Even Mark Shuttleworth realises
    >> this.
    >>

    >
    > Beauty is just a theme engine away. Relatively few Windows users have
    > ever gone on the trek needed to obtain what GNU/Linux distros have
    > readily on tap.
    >
    > I remember DFS jeering at the theming in Linux, not realizing that all
    > he needed to do was install some theme engines.


    X+Composite enable 'Linux' to look and behave like anything you want it to,
    including OS X.

    - --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | Useless fact: Florida is bigger than England
    http://Schestowitz.com | Free as in Free Beer | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    Load average (/proc/loadavg): 0.86 0.91 0.95 5/242 6634
    http://iuron.com - semantic search engine project initiative
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

    iEYEARECAAYFAkj6Da8ACgkQU4xAY3RXLo5cdQCdFcoO6bDDXz mP6ffB7RTX3yP/
    ckQAn33Mb63YnlXILq9HKbWMPm6j3V/D
    =uTUT
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  7. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 12:22:21 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:

    > "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    > newssnKk.53868$De7.43985@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
    >> After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    >> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> OSX also looks way snazzier than Ubuntu. Even Mark Shuttleworth realises
    >>> this.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Beauty is just a theme engine away. Relatively few Windows users have
    >> ever gone on the trek needed to obtain what GNU/Linux distros have
    >> readily on tap.

    >
    > True. But I think that Bob's comment (item #3) on the same page sums it up
    > rather well.
    >
    >
    > Bob Says:
    > October 18, 2008 at 6:13 am
    >
    > "The more I use Ubuntu, the more I fail to understand the lure of the Mac
    > OS. Is it the snob value or stupidity that make people consider a Mac over
    > Windows and not Ubuntu?"
    >
    > 1) Firstly with a mac everything just works. No trying to find half dodgy
    > drivers for your wifi card or graphics. I know you can have a scenario where
    > everything works as is often the case with my hardware.


    Plug it in and turn it on.
    It just works.
    Ubuntu does not, although it's getting better.

    > 2) Fonts. I have been using Linux best part of a decade now, the fonts have
    > always looked rubbish and still do. Become more standardised but still
    > rubbish in comparison to a mac or even Windows.


    But........the loons in COLA claim that this was fixed circa 1997 or so.
    They've been denying that fonts are a problem for Linux
    for years in fact.

    > 3) OSX Leopard GUI is just SOOOOOO much more nicer and productive to work
    > in. Yes you will tell me how you can change anything you like in Gnome and
    > (OSX copy cat) KDE4. If I go to a restaurant I expect the food to be ready
    > on a plate, cooked to perfection and provide that gastronomical experience.
    > I don't want to be redoing the seasoning to solve chefs inabilities or cook
    > a meal myself.


    Good description.

    > 4) Everything flows. Apple HCI guidelines really work., Everything is so
    > well integrated. Linux is massively off here.


    Linux is a fragmented mess.
    The applications look different, act different etc.
    A total clusterfsck.

    > 5) Applications. Mac has some great cant live without applications. Mac
    > developers unlike Linux/Win seem to understand what makes a good interface.
    > Applications like Coda, Transmit, Toast, iWork and the Omni group are just
    > so good. Linux cant compete. Again you can accomplish the task but not as
    > productively, or well presented on Linux.


    With digital audio, the Apple versions of software like Nuendo, Protools
    and so forth tend to run smoother and have a better more consistan UI.
    They also tend to look a little nicer.

    Compared to the Windows versions of course.

    Linux need not apply here because it has nothing comparable.


    > I still use Linux but not for my desktop. Right now it belongs in a server
    > or for some specialised tasks. As a platform for development Linux is great.
    > But I wont be switching over to Linux/Ubuntu any time soon. It fails for
    > what I want in my desk machine, yet I am well versed with how it works. It's
    > not because I am a snob or stupid. But because Linux needs a massive
    > overhaul for the consumer market, and Mark Shuttleworth (I think) gets it.
    > See his comments on being more Apple like.
    >


    Can't speak for servers, but Apple desktop is THE system to beat, overall.

    Linux is a joke compared to Apple and OSX.

    >
    >> I remember DFS jeering at the theming in Linux, not realizing that all
    >> he needed to do was install some theme engines.

    >
    > Themes can be installed. I think the point is that OSX comes with a damn
    > good theme "out of the box" which is a plus for the many people who don't
    > want to tweak and configure their desktop. My Ubuntu desktop with Compiz is
    > rather nice and it wasn't all that difficult to configure.


    I found eye candy in Ubuntu to be a mess to configure.
    Some people use envy some people use some other manager and then there is
    all the outdated information (beryl for example) that just confuses things
    even more.

    A mess IMHO.



    > The larger point is #4 and to a lesser degree #5. I don't use a Mac but
    > several people around me at work do. The consistency and integration between
    > all applications and the OSX is first rate. I find that with Linux it isn't
    > as consistent. Example - I typically use emacs for editing source code,
    > scripts, etc. Use the clipboard on Emacs and I can copy text into it and
    > paste it into other Emacs buffers. But often I can't paste the text into
    > other Linux apps.


    Yet another borked feature of Linux that the COLA loons deny exists.
    Sometimes you can use the middle button, and key combinations or menus and
    sometimes you can't.


    Linux has a long, long way to go before it reaches Apple in terms of
    quality, ease of use, appeal and applications.

    It's not even close.

    But Linux is free and Apple is expensive.



    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

  8. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 16:24:15 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > ____/ Chris Ahlstrom on Saturday 18 October 2008 15:47 : \____
    >
    >> After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    >> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> OSX also looks way snazzier than Ubuntu. Even Mark Shuttleworth realises
    >>> this.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Beauty is just a theme engine away. Relatively few Windows users have
    >> ever gone on the trek needed to obtain what GNU/Linux distros have
    >> readily on tap.
    >>
    >> I remember DFS jeering at the theming in Linux, not realizing that all
    >> he needed to do was install some theme engines.

    >
    > X+Composite enable 'Linux' to look and behave like anything you want it to,
    > including OS X.


    It's like putting a bridal dress on a pig.
    No matter how you look at it, the pig is still a pig.


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

  9. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    "Moshe Goldfarb." writes:

    > On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 12:22:21 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
    >
    >> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >> newssnKk.53868$De7.43985@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
    >>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    >>> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>> OSX also looks way snazzier than Ubuntu. Even Mark Shuttleworth realises
    >>>> this.
    >>>>

    >>>
    >>> Beauty is just a theme engine away. Relatively few Windows users have
    >>> ever gone on the trek needed to obtain what GNU/Linux distros have
    >>> readily on tap.

    >>
    >> True. But I think that Bob's comment (item #3) on the same page sums it up
    >> rather well.
    >>
    >>
    >> Bob Says:
    >> October 18, 2008 at 6:13 am
    >>
    >> "The more I use Ubuntu, the more I fail to understand the lure of the Mac
    >> OS. Is it the snob value or stupidity that make people consider a Mac over
    >> Windows and not Ubuntu?"
    >>
    >> 1) Firstly with a mac everything just works. No trying to find half dodgy
    >> drivers for your wifi card or graphics. I know you can have a scenario where
    >> everything works as is often the case with my hardware.

    >
    > Plug it in and turn it on.
    > It just works.
    > Ubuntu does not, although it's getting better.


    The problem with the COLA loonies is that they don't understand how
    important this is. A good example was when I was contracting at
    CERN. One of the *very* smart particle physicists there had some
    problems with his PC. Network I think. Anyway down comes some ****y
    technician and started to talk down to him and "explain" how he could
    have done this and that and blah blah blah. The physicist burst into
    tears and smacked his table repeatedly !!!! He wasn't interested in how
    to install some half arsed driver etc etc - he just wanted access to his
    data and simulation SW. "Just works" is important for many. They don't
    care how or why. The PC is a tool not a job for them.

  10. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X


    "Roy Schestowitz" wrote in message
    news:5853553.PRIMlCD6on@schestowitz.com...
    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > ____/ Chris Ahlstrom on Saturday 18 October 2008 15:47 : \____
    >
    >> After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    >> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> OSX also looks way snazzier than Ubuntu. Even Mark Shuttleworth realises
    >>> this.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Beauty is just a theme engine away. Relatively few Windows users have
    >> ever gone on the trek needed to obtain what GNU/Linux distros have
    >> readily on tap.
    >>
    >> I remember DFS jeering at the theming in Linux, not realizing that all
    >> he needed to do was install some theme engines.

    >
    > X+Composite enable 'Linux' to look and behave like anything you want it
    > to,
    > including OS X.


    Just because someone adds a bunch of icons, fonts and colors that "look"
    like OSX will not magically convert Linux into OSX. The main difference is
    that in OSX all of the applications and the OS fit and work together
    seemlessly. No matter what icons and window-borders you put on Linux... this
    isn't going to happen.







  11. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    "Moshe Goldfarb." writes:

    > On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 16:24:15 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >> Hash: SHA1
    >>
    >> ____/ Chris Ahlstrom on Saturday 18 October 2008 15:47 : \____
    >>
    >>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    >>> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>> OSX also looks way snazzier than Ubuntu. Even Mark Shuttleworth realises
    >>>> this.
    >>>>

    >>>
    >>> Beauty is just a theme engine away. Relatively few Windows users have
    >>> ever gone on the trek needed to obtain what GNU/Linux distros have
    >>> readily on tap.
    >>>
    >>> I remember DFS jeering at the theming in Linux, not realizing that all
    >>> he needed to do was install some theme engines.

    >>
    >> X+Composite enable 'Linux' to look and behave like anything you want it to,
    >> including OS X.



    Most people would go "Eh?" at this point.

    >
    > It's like putting a bridal dress on a pig.
    > No matter how you look at it, the pig is still a pig.


    I disagree. I like Gnome. It does its job. KDE is a mess for fan boyz
    who have nothing better to do than tinker.

    --
    "His asshole is so reamed out he has room for an oxygen
    tank, too."
    -- Tattoo Vampire loooking for new accomodation in comp.os.linux.advocacy

  12. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 19:22:06 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    > "Moshe Goldfarb." writes:
    >
    >> On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 16:24:15 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>
    >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >>> Hash: SHA1
    >>>
    >>> ____/ Chris Ahlstrom on Saturday 18 October 2008 15:47 : \____
    >>>
    >>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    >>>> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> OSX also looks way snazzier than Ubuntu. Even Mark Shuttleworth realises
    >>>>> this.
    >>>>>

    >>>>
    >>>> Beauty is just a theme engine away. Relatively few Windows users have
    >>>> ever gone on the trek needed to obtain what GNU/Linux distros have
    >>>> readily on tap.
    >>>>
    >>>> I remember DFS jeering at the theming in Linux, not realizing that all
    >>>> he needed to do was install some theme engines.
    >>>
    >>> X+Composite enable 'Linux' to look and behave like anything you want it to,
    >>> including OS X.

    >
    >
    > Most people would go "Eh?" at this point.


    Exactly.

    >>
    >> It's like putting a bridal dress on a pig.
    >> No matter how you look at it, the pig is still a pig.

    >
    > I disagree. I like Gnome. It does its job. KDE is a mess for fan boyz
    > who have nothing better to do than tinker.


    I was referring to the various schemes that make Linux look like OSX etc.
    No matter what the look, the applications are still the same as is the
    system admin etc.

    IOW OSX/Apple is a cohesive, all works together computing experience and
    Linux is a hodge podge of grafted on stuff.

    I used to be a kde fan but I have moved to gnome.
    I like eye candy, but only in terms of colors, fonts and layout.
    I'm not big on rotating cubes etc.


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

  13. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 19:19:30 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    > "Moshe Goldfarb." writes:
    >
    >> On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 12:22:21 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
    >>
    >>> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >>> newssnKk.53868$De7.43985@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
    >>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    >>>> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> OSX also looks way snazzier than Ubuntu. Even Mark Shuttleworth realises
    >>>>> this.
    >>>>>

    >>>>
    >>>> Beauty is just a theme engine away. Relatively few Windows users have
    >>>> ever gone on the trek needed to obtain what GNU/Linux distros have
    >>>> readily on tap.
    >>>
    >>> True. But I think that Bob's comment (item #3) on the same page sums it up
    >>> rather well.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Bob Says:
    >>> October 18, 2008 at 6:13 am
    >>>
    >>> "The more I use Ubuntu, the more I fail to understand the lure of the Mac
    >>> OS. Is it the snob value or stupidity that make people consider a Mac over
    >>> Windows and not Ubuntu?"
    >>>
    >>> 1) Firstly with a mac everything just works. No trying to find half dodgy
    >>> drivers for your wifi card or graphics. I know you can have a scenario where
    >>> everything works as is often the case with my hardware.

    >>
    >> Plug it in and turn it on.
    >> It just works.
    >> Ubuntu does not, although it's getting better.

    >
    > The problem with the COLA loonies is that they don't understand how
    > important this is. A good example was when I was contracting at
    > CERN. One of the *very* smart particle physicists there had some
    > problems with his PC. Network I think. Anyway down comes some ****y
    > technician and started to talk down to him and "explain" how he could
    > have done this and that and blah blah blah. The physicist burst into
    > tears and smacked his table repeatedly !!!! He wasn't interested in how
    > to install some half arsed driver etc etc - he just wanted access to his
    > data and simulation SW. "Just works" is important for many. They don't
    > care how or why. The PC is a tool not a job for them.


    My first expeience with a Mac, perosnally at home, was one of the original
    iMacs that I purchased.
    The instructions were literally 4 steps.
    Unpack it.
    Plug in the keyboard
    Plug in the power cord and turn it on.

    Done deal...

    At that time I was on dialup but did have a home network.
    When I got broadband the Apple discovered it and said something like "You
    appear to have a high speed connection. Would you like to use it?"

    Yea, that sounds like a good idea.
    Bingo it worked.

    Windows at the time?
    It was a nightmare.
    Don't even ask about Linux (SuSE I believe) at that time.
    Another nightmare.

    The COLA nuts love to make fun of MacHeads but the joke is really on the
    Linux advocates because the idea for most people is to USE the applications
    and not tinker with the OS.

    Mac wrote the book and is they standard for that.
    Linux is at the bottom of the pile.

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

  14. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 13:21:11 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:

    > "Roy Schestowitz" wrote in message
    > news:5853553.PRIMlCD6on@schestowitz.com...
    >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >> Hash: SHA1
    >>
    >> ____/ Chris Ahlstrom on Saturday 18 October 2008 15:47 : \____
    >>
    >>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    >>> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>> OSX also looks way snazzier than Ubuntu. Even Mark Shuttleworth realises
    >>>> this.
    >>>>

    >>>
    >>> Beauty is just a theme engine away. Relatively few Windows users have
    >>> ever gone on the trek needed to obtain what GNU/Linux distros have
    >>> readily on tap.
    >>>
    >>> I remember DFS jeering at the theming in Linux, not realizing that all
    >>> he needed to do was install some theme engines.

    >>
    >> X+Composite enable 'Linux' to look and behave like anything you want it
    >> to,
    >> including OS X.

    >
    > Just because someone adds a bunch of icons, fonts and colors that "look"
    > like OSX will not magically convert Linux into OSX. The main difference is
    > that in OSX all of the applications and the OS fit and work together
    > seemlessly. No matter what icons and window-borders you put on Linux... this
    > isn't going to happen.


    Linux users seem to miss this point all the time.
    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

  15. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    "Moshe Goldfarb." writes:

    > On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 19:19:30 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> "Moshe Goldfarb." writes:
    >>
    >>> On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 12:22:21 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >>>> newssnKk.53868$De7.43985@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
    >>>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    >>>>> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> OSX also looks way snazzier than Ubuntu. Even Mark Shuttleworth realises
    >>>>>> this.
    >>>>>>

    >>>>>
    >>>>> Beauty is just a theme engine away. Relatively few Windows users have
    >>>>> ever gone on the trek needed to obtain what GNU/Linux distros have
    >>>>> readily on tap.
    >>>>
    >>>> True. But I think that Bob's comment (item #3) on the same page sums it up
    >>>> rather well.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Bob Says:
    >>>> October 18, 2008 at 6:13 am
    >>>>
    >>>> "The more I use Ubuntu, the more I fail to understand the lure of the Mac
    >>>> OS. Is it the snob value or stupidity that make people consider a Mac over
    >>>> Windows and not Ubuntu?"
    >>>>
    >>>> 1) Firstly with a mac everything just works. No trying to find half dodgy
    >>>> drivers for your wifi card or graphics. I know you can have a scenario where
    >>>> everything works as is often the case with my hardware.
    >>>
    >>> Plug it in and turn it on.
    >>> It just works.
    >>> Ubuntu does not, although it's getting better.

    >>
    >> The problem with the COLA loonies is that they don't understand how
    >> important this is. A good example was when I was contracting at
    >> CERN. One of the *very* smart particle physicists there had some
    >> problems with his PC. Network I think. Anyway down comes some ****y
    >> technician and started to talk down to him and "explain" how he could
    >> have done this and that and blah blah blah. The physicist burst into
    >> tears and smacked his table repeatedly !!!! He wasn't interested in how
    >> to install some half arsed driver etc etc - he just wanted access to his
    >> data and simulation SW. "Just works" is important for many. They don't
    >> care how or why. The PC is a tool not a job for them.

    >
    > My first expeience with a Mac, perosnally at home, was one of the original
    > iMacs that I purchased.
    > The instructions were literally 4 steps.
    > Unpack it.
    > Plug in the keyboard
    > Plug in the power cord and turn it on.
    >
    > Done deal...
    >
    > At that time I was on dialup but did have a home network.
    > When I got broadband the Apple discovered it and said something like "You
    > appear to have a high speed connection. Would you like to use it?"
    >
    > Yea, that sounds like a good idea.
    > Bingo it worked.
    >
    > Windows at the time?
    > It was a nightmare.
    > Don't even ask about Linux (SuSE I believe) at that time.
    > Another nightmare.
    >
    > The COLA nuts love to make fun of MacHeads but the joke is really on the
    > Linux advocates because the idea for most people is to USE the applications
    > and not tinker with the OS.
    >
    > Mac wrote the book and is they standard for that.
    > Linux is at the bottom of the pile.


    As far as networking goes, Debian now has WICD. Excellent. But in
    typical half arsed fashion no one tested the network upgrade and lots of
    wireless users ended up net less. it#s situations like that that make me
    realise how few people actually use Debian/Ubuntu on wireless
    laptops. Had there been more there would have been a far louder out cry
    and someone would have fixed the package by now.

    --
    "Too bad they can't run your stupid ass out of here, flatfarb."
    -- Tattoo Vampire in comp.os.linux.advocacy

  16. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 19:55:13 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    > "Moshe Goldfarb." writes:
    >
    >> On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 19:19:30 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> "Moshe Goldfarb." writes:
    >>>
    >>>> On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 12:22:21 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >>>>> newssnKk.53868$De7.43985@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
    >>>>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    >>>>>> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> OSX also looks way snazzier than Ubuntu. Even Mark Shuttleworth realises
    >>>>>>> this.
    >>>>>>>

    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Beauty is just a theme engine away. Relatively few Windows users have
    >>>>>> ever gone on the trek needed to obtain what GNU/Linux distros have
    >>>>>> readily on tap.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> True. But I think that Bob's comment (item #3) on the same page sums it up
    >>>>> rather well.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Bob Says:
    >>>>> October 18, 2008 at 6:13 am
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "The more I use Ubuntu, the more I fail to understand the lure of the Mac
    >>>>> OS. Is it the snob value or stupidity that make people consider a Mac over
    >>>>> Windows and not Ubuntu?"
    >>>>>
    >>>>> 1) Firstly with a mac everything just works. No trying to find half dodgy
    >>>>> drivers for your wifi card or graphics. I know you can have a scenario where
    >>>>> everything works as is often the case with my hardware.
    >>>>
    >>>> Plug it in and turn it on.
    >>>> It just works.
    >>>> Ubuntu does not, although it's getting better.
    >>>
    >>> The problem with the COLA loonies is that they don't understand how
    >>> important this is. A good example was when I was contracting at
    >>> CERN. One of the *very* smart particle physicists there had some
    >>> problems with his PC. Network I think. Anyway down comes some ****y
    >>> technician and started to talk down to him and "explain" how he could
    >>> have done this and that and blah blah blah. The physicist burst into
    >>> tears and smacked his table repeatedly !!!! He wasn't interested in how
    >>> to install some half arsed driver etc etc - he just wanted access to his
    >>> data and simulation SW. "Just works" is important for many. They don't
    >>> care how or why. The PC is a tool not a job for them.

    >>
    >> My first expeience with a Mac, perosnally at home, was one of the original
    >> iMacs that I purchased.
    >> The instructions were literally 4 steps.
    >> Unpack it.
    >> Plug in the keyboard
    >> Plug in the power cord and turn it on.
    >>
    >> Done deal...
    >>
    >> At that time I was on dialup but did have a home network.
    >> When I got broadband the Apple discovered it and said something like "You
    >> appear to have a high speed connection. Would you like to use it?"
    >>
    >> Yea, that sounds like a good idea.
    >> Bingo it worked.
    >>
    >> Windows at the time?
    >> It was a nightmare.
    >> Don't even ask about Linux (SuSE I believe) at that time.
    >> Another nightmare.
    >>
    >> The COLA nuts love to make fun of MacHeads but the joke is really on the
    >> Linux advocates because the idea for most people is to USE the applications
    >> and not tinker with the OS.
    >>
    >> Mac wrote the book and is they standard for that.
    >> Linux is at the bottom of the pile.

    >
    > As far as networking goes, Debian now has WICD. Excellent. But in
    > typical half arsed fashion no one tested the network upgrade and lots of
    > wireless users ended up net less. it#s situations like that that make me
    > realise how few people actually use Debian/Ubuntu on wireless
    > laptops. Had there been more there would have been a far louder out cry
    > and someone would have fixed the package by now.


    I sent a note to one of the Ubuntu developers asking why the
    nvidia-settings program isn't automatically installed when the nvidia
    driver is selected and installed.
    Like Windows does.
    Additionally, I asked why the program is allowed to be run as user when
    root permission is required to actually save the settings to the xorg.conf.

    The response I got back was "I don't understand what you are asking for
    please explain further".

    I'm debating if I am even going to reply because obviously this person is
    so far out of touch with reality he can't see the forest for the trees.

    I dunno, it seems rather simple to me.




    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

  17. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    "Moshe Goldfarb." writes:

    > On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 19:55:13 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> "Moshe Goldfarb." writes:
    >>
    >>> On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 19:19:30 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> "Moshe Goldfarb." writes:
    >>>>
    >>>>> On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 12:22:21 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >>>>>> newssnKk.53868$De7.43985@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
    >>>>>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    >>>>>>> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> OSX also looks way snazzier than Ubuntu. Even Mark Shuttleworth realises
    >>>>>>>> this.
    >>>>>>>>

    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Beauty is just a theme engine away. Relatively few Windows users have
    >>>>>>> ever gone on the trek needed to obtain what GNU/Linux distros have
    >>>>>>> readily on tap.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> True. But I think that Bob's comment (item #3) on the same page sums it up
    >>>>>> rather well.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Bob Says:
    >>>>>> October 18, 2008 at 6:13 am
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> "The more I use Ubuntu, the more I fail to understand the lure of the Mac
    >>>>>> OS. Is it the snob value or stupidity that make people consider a Mac over
    >>>>>> Windows and not Ubuntu?"
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> 1) Firstly with a mac everything just works. No trying to find half dodgy
    >>>>>> drivers for your wifi card or graphics. I know you can have a scenario where
    >>>>>> everything works as is often the case with my hardware.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Plug it in and turn it on.
    >>>>> It just works.
    >>>>> Ubuntu does not, although it's getting better.
    >>>>
    >>>> The problem with the COLA loonies is that they don't understand how
    >>>> important this is. A good example was when I was contracting at
    >>>> CERN. One of the *very* smart particle physicists there had some
    >>>> problems with his PC. Network I think. Anyway down comes some ****y
    >>>> technician and started to talk down to him and "explain" how he could
    >>>> have done this and that and blah blah blah. The physicist burst into
    >>>> tears and smacked his table repeatedly !!!! He wasn't interested in how
    >>>> to install some half arsed driver etc etc - he just wanted access to his
    >>>> data and simulation SW. "Just works" is important for many. They don't
    >>>> care how or why. The PC is a tool not a job for them.
    >>>
    >>> My first expeience with a Mac, perosnally at home, was one of the original
    >>> iMacs that I purchased.
    >>> The instructions were literally 4 steps.
    >>> Unpack it.
    >>> Plug in the keyboard
    >>> Plug in the power cord and turn it on.
    >>>
    >>> Done deal...
    >>>
    >>> At that time I was on dialup but did have a home network.
    >>> When I got broadband the Apple discovered it and said something like "You
    >>> appear to have a high speed connection. Would you like to use it?"
    >>>
    >>> Yea, that sounds like a good idea.
    >>> Bingo it worked.
    >>>
    >>> Windows at the time?
    >>> It was a nightmare.
    >>> Don't even ask about Linux (SuSE I believe) at that time.
    >>> Another nightmare.
    >>>
    >>> The COLA nuts love to make fun of MacHeads but the joke is really on the
    >>> Linux advocates because the idea for most people is to USE the applications
    >>> and not tinker with the OS.
    >>>
    >>> Mac wrote the book and is they standard for that.
    >>> Linux is at the bottom of the pile.

    >>
    >> As far as networking goes, Debian now has WICD. Excellent. But in
    >> typical half arsed fashion no one tested the network upgrade and lots of
    >> wireless users ended up net less. it#s situations like that that make me
    >> realise how few people actually use Debian/Ubuntu on wireless
    >> laptops. Had there been more there would have been a far louder out cry
    >> and someone would have fixed the package by now.

    >
    > I sent a note to one of the Ubuntu developers asking why the
    > nvidia-settings program isn't automatically installed when the nvidia
    > driver is selected and installed.
    > Like Windows does.
    > Additionally, I asked why the program is allowed to be run as user when
    > root permission is required to actually save the settings to the xorg.conf.
    >
    > The response I got back was "I don't understand what you are asking for
    > please explain further".
    >
    > I'm debating if I am even going to reply because obviously this person is
    > so far out of touch with reality he can't see the forest for the trees.
    >
    > I dunno, it seems rather simple to me.


    I had similar with default options for another package. It was as if the
    guy had never used it. I got the "because I do this for free and that's
    the way it is" response so common from little big men given some
    authority.

    And here's another thing - why don't individual users have different
    xorg.conf files?

    --
    "Every piece of evidence I've heard from developers inside Microsoft
    supports my theory that the company has become completely tangled up in..."
    -- William Poaster boring people again in comp.os.linux.advocacy

  18. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    Hadron wrote:

    > "Moshe Goldfarb." writes:
    >
    >> On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 19:55:13 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> "Moshe Goldfarb." writes:
    >>>
    >>>> On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 19:19:30 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> "Moshe Goldfarb." writes:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 12:22:21 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >>>>>>> newssnKk.53868$De7.43985@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
    >>>>>>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    >>>>>>>> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> OSX also looks way snazzier than Ubuntu. Even Mark Shuttleworth
    >>>>>>>>> realises this.
    >>>>>>>>>

    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Beauty is just a theme engine away. Relatively few Windows users
    >>>>>>>> have ever gone on the trek needed to obtain what GNU/Linux distros
    >>>>>>>> have readily on tap.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> True. But I think that Bob's comment (item #3) on the same page sums
    >>>>>>> it up rather well.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Bob Says:
    >>>>>>> October 18, 2008 at 6:13 am
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> "The more I use Ubuntu, the more I fail to understand the lure of
    >>>>>>> the Mac OS. Is it the snob value or stupidity that make people
    >>>>>>> consider a Mac over Windows and not Ubuntu?"
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> 1) Firstly with a mac everything just works. No trying to find half
    >>>>>>> dodgy drivers for your wifi card or graphics. I know you can have a
    >>>>>>> scenario where everything works as is often the case with my
    >>>>>>> hardware.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Plug it in and turn it on.
    >>>>>> It just works.
    >>>>>> Ubuntu does not, although it's getting better.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> The problem with the COLA loonies is that they don't understand how
    >>>>> important this is. A good example was when I was contracting at
    >>>>> CERN. One of the *very* smart particle physicists there had some
    >>>>> problems with his PC. Network I think. Anyway down comes some ****y
    >>>>> technician and started to talk down to him and "explain" how he could
    >>>>> have done this and that and blah blah blah. The physicist burst into
    >>>>> tears and smacked his table repeatedly !!!! He wasn't interested in
    >>>>> how to install some half arsed driver etc etc - he just wanted access
    >>>>> to his data and simulation SW. "Just works" is important for many.
    >>>>> They don't care how or why. The PC is a tool not a job for them.
    >>>>
    >>>> My first expeience with a Mac, perosnally at home, was one of the
    >>>> original iMacs that I purchased.
    >>>> The instructions were literally 4 steps.
    >>>> Unpack it.
    >>>> Plug in the keyboard
    >>>> Plug in the power cord and turn it on.
    >>>>
    >>>> Done deal...
    >>>>
    >>>> At that time I was on dialup but did have a home network.
    >>>> When I got broadband the Apple discovered it and said something like
    >>>> "You appear to have a high speed connection. Would you like to use it?"
    >>>>
    >>>> Yea, that sounds like a good idea.
    >>>> Bingo it worked.
    >>>>
    >>>> Windows at the time?
    >>>> It was a nightmare.
    >>>> Don't even ask about Linux (SuSE I believe) at that time.
    >>>> Another nightmare.
    >>>>
    >>>> The COLA nuts love to make fun of MacHeads but the joke is really on
    >>>> the Linux advocates because the idea for most people is to USE the
    >>>> applications and not tinker with the OS.
    >>>>
    >>>> Mac wrote the book and is they standard for that.
    >>>> Linux is at the bottom of the pile.
    >>>
    >>> As far as networking goes, Debian now has WICD. Excellent. But in
    >>> typical half arsed fashion no one tested the network upgrade and lots of
    >>> wireless users ended up net less. it#s situations like that that make me
    >>> realise how few people actually use Debian/Ubuntu on wireless
    >>> laptops. Had there been more there would have been a far louder out cry
    >>> and someone would have fixed the package by now.

    >>
    >> I sent a note to one of the Ubuntu developers asking why the
    >> nvidia-settings program isn't automatically installed when the nvidia
    >> driver is selected and installed.
    >> Like Windows does.
    >> Additionally, I asked why the program is allowed to be run as user when
    >> root permission is required to actually save the settings to the
    >> xorg.conf.
    >>
    >> The response I got back was "I don't understand what you are asking for
    >> please explain further".
    >>
    >> I'm debating if I am even going to reply because obviously this person is
    >> so far out of touch with reality he can't see the forest for the trees.
    >>
    >> I dunno, it seems rather simple to me.

    >
    > I had similar with default options for another package. It was as if the
    > guy had never used it. I got the "because I do this for free and that's
    > the way it is" response so common from little big men given some
    > authority.


    He *has* authority. He has written that package. Nobody is pointing a gun to
    your head to use it.

    > And here's another thing - why don't individual users have different
    > xorg.conf files?
    >


    Are you *really* asking such a question, "kernel hacker" Hadron Quark?

    xorg.conf describes the *hardware* of input devices and the display devices.
    Those actually stay the same, regardless who uses them.

    If you want to change resolution for the display (pointless if you have LCD)
    you can do that, and each user can take his preferred one.

    The keyboard and mouse settings *are* configurable per user outside of
    xorg.conf, so what are you blubbering about, "true linux advocate", "kernel
    hacker", "emacs user", "swapfile expert", "X specialist", "CUPS
    guru", "USB-disk server admin", "defragger professional", "newsreader
    magician", "hardware maven", "time coordinator", "email sage" and "OSS
    culling committee chairman" Hadron Quark, aka Hans Schneider, aka Richard,
    aka Damian O'Leary?

    Why do you have to prove over and over again that you really don't have a
    clue about linux?
    --
    Only two things are infinite,
    the Universe and Stupidity.
    And I'm not quite sure about the former.
    - Albert Einstein


  19. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    this bit o' wisdom:

    > "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    > newssnKk.53868$De7.43985@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
    >> After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    >> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> OSX also looks way snazzier than Ubuntu. Even Mark Shuttleworth realises
    >>> this.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Beauty is just a theme engine away. Relatively few Windows users have
    >> ever gone on the trek needed to obtain what GNU/Linux distros have
    >> readily on tap.

    >
    > True. But I think that Bob's comment (item #3) on the same page sums it up
    > rather well.
    >
    >
    > Bob Says:
    > October 18, 2008 at 6:13 am
    >
    > "The more I use Ubuntu, the more I fail to understand the lure of the Mac
    > OS. Is it the snob value or stupidity that make people consider a Mac over
    > Windows and not Ubuntu?"
    >
    > 1) Firstly with a mac everything just works. No trying to find half dodgy
    > drivers for your wifi card or graphics. I know you can have a scenario where
    > everything works as is often the case with my hardware.


    Yeah, that would be nice, if you are content to stick with Apple
    hardware and only Apple hardware.

    > 2) Fonts. I have been using Linux best part of a decade now, the fonts have
    > always looked rubbish and still do. Become more standardised but still
    > rubbish in comparison to a mac or even Windows.


    Patent nonsense.

    > 3) OSX Leopard GUI is just SOOOOOO much more nicer and productive to work
    > in. Yes you will tell me how you can change anything you like in Gnome and
    > (OSX copy cat) KDE4. If I go to a restaurant I expect the food to be ready
    > on a plate, cooked to perfection and provide that gastronomical experience.
    > I don't want to be redoing the seasoning to solve chefs inabilities or cook
    > a meal myself.


    Good for him.

    > 4) Everything flows. Apple HCI guidelines really work., Everything is so
    > well integrated. Linux is massively off here.


    Again, if you like the package, go for it. I'd be more interested in
    how much you /can/ tailor OSX, myself.

    I didn't like being locked into one company's idea of a user interface
    with Microsoft, and there's a good change I wouldn't like it with Apple,
    either.

    But I've had this argument with Snit, so no need to rehash. Simply put,
    I like the way I do things just fine.

    > 5) Applications. Mac has some great cant live without applications. Mac
    > developers unlike Linux/Win seem to understand what makes a good interface.
    > Applications like Coda, Transmit, Toast, iWork and the Omni group are just
    > so good. Linux cant compete. Again you can accomplish the task but not as
    > productively, or well presented on Linux.


    All in all, the guy's a fan of Macs. Cool.

    I don't care. As I've noted before, the thing that will most push Linux
    right now is advertising. Not chasing someone else's idea of a desktop
    look-and-feel.

    >> I remember DFS jeering at the theming in Linux, not realizing that all
    >> he needed to do was install some theme engines.

    >
    > Themes can be installed. I think the point is that OSX comes with a damn
    > good theme "out of the box" which is a plus for the many people who don't
    > want to tweak and configure their desktop.


    How difficult is it? Select the Themes menu and pick one.

    Who's going to pick a Mac solely because it has a nice default theme?

    > My Ubuntu desktop with Compiz is
    > rather nice and it wasn't all that difficult to configure.
    >
    > The larger point is #4 and to a lesser degree #5. I don't use a Mac but
    > several people around me at work do. The consistency and integration between
    > all applications and the OSX is first rate. I find that with Linux it isn't
    > as consistent. Example - I typically use emacs for editing source code,
    > scripts, etc. Use the clipboard on Emacs and I can copy text into it and
    > paste it into other Emacs buffers. But often I can't paste the text into
    > other Linux apps.


    Such as?

    I'm having a hard time believing that one. One can even cut-n-paste
    between a Windows VM and Linux vi session. X is what handles it.

    --
    Kaufman's Law:
    A policy is a restrictive document to prevent a recurrence
    of a single incident, in which that incident is never mentioned.

  20. Re: [News] Desktop GNU/Linux a Better Mac Than Mac OS X

    After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    this bit o' wisdom:

    >> X+Composite enable 'Linux' to look and behave like anything you want it
    >> to, including OS X.

    >
    > Just because someone adds a bunch of icons, fonts and colors that "look"
    > like OSX will not magically convert Linux into OSX. The main difference is
    > that in OSX all of the applications and the OS fit and work together
    > seemlessly. No matter what icons and window-borders you put on Linux... this
    > isn't going to happen.


    This is indeed true, and it is probably an issue for some people.

    However, I have a very mixed desktop, running gnome, kde, fox-toolkit,
    wxwidgets, console, and other kinds of apps on a fluxbox desktop with
    help from KDE, Gnome, and XFce theming items.

    Does it look as slick as a Mac, or even Win 2000/XP classic? Not
    really. Does it do what I want? And how!

    --
    I got the bill for my surgery. Now I know what those doctors were
    wearing masks for.
    -- James Boren

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 ... LastLast