|
|
|
| Authored by: IMANAL_TOO on Saturday, September 08 2012 @ 02:40 AM EDT |
"what is it about the Mac that is turning him into a cow?"
I think it has a lot to do with what you wrote:
"I like the mac because of hardware reliability & capability, OS
reliability, program consistency, and yes, everything generally seems to
"just work", and work well."
Here, I particularly dislike the "program consistency" and perhaps
strangely enough, that it "just work[s]".
There is no room for me in that. It is all set for me with no room to wiggle and
break things. That is also why I like Debian Sid and the multitude of ways to
break things, and be able to fix things on my own. I don't have to be reliant on
an overpriced chain of merchandize to get things running again.
Oh, I almost forgot, and quite ironically. Your reference to all those 25 %
scientists with Mac. That reminded me of the years before when I got my PhD.
Yes, I recall that those who used to use Mac were more unidimensional, less
prone to explore alternative solutions. Thats was my impression already then and
has not changed much since. In fact many used them because of two or three
specialized programs then not available for Windows. Much later, when our
neighboring department had bought a new Mac G6, one senior colleague muttered
"Well, there's a new sucker born everyday"; his g-index is over 140.
---
______
IMANAL
.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, September 08 2012 @ 08:22 AM EDT |
I find installing software on linux can be a
pain - I always seem
to run into rpm dependencies, perhaps
because the software I'm trying to
install isn't from major
vendors.
I don't know what Linux
you are using, I have been using
Ubuntu since 2008 and I have no issues with
installs.
Synaptic is excellent and you find Ubuntu packages all over
for just
about anything. If you need to run a windows
program you don't even need a VM
because you can just run it
under Wine or Playonlinux and you can also use the
proprietary crossover software. Ubuntu is extremely
reliable, it never
crashes, and there are very frequent
security updates (3-4 times per
month).
For Apple fanboys the new Unity Gui will even make Ubuntu
look like a
Mac ... for those who need it.
Compared to Windows
machines, I like the mac
because of hardware reliability & capability, OS
reliability, program consistency, and yes, everything
generally seems to "just
work", and work well.
... who do you think you are fooling
with that
kind of statement? This silly claim is typical for Apple
users,
apparently they need to somehow try to justify
paying 3x the normal price for
a likely inferior product to
themselves.
Apple uses the same
components inside, the same ones
that
everybody else is using. How else do
you think you could run
Windows under a VM on an Apple box, if they were not
using
the
exact same parts inside?
Apple had massiv failures of
Graphics-Chips, just like
everybody else did who was building those chips into
their
boxes (like Dell). Apple had to use 3rd party Graphics-Chips
because they
can't develop and manufacture them themselves.
On their newer Models
(2011-2012) Apple are using Intel
integrated Graphics, which is sort of ok, but
of course you
do not get the kind of performance out of them as you would
with
a dedicated graphics processor (discrete), so they are
much much slower
compared to the Windows based high-
performance Gamers-Notebooks. How "capable"
do you think
that is? (for at least double the price by the way)
The
new Macbooks you cannot repair because of the way they
are built, you even have
to send them in just to get the
battery pack changed, how "capable" and user
friendly is
that?
U.S. government has taken Apple off their supplier
list,
because they no longer meet EPA (EPEAT) standards. Real
high-tech
environmental friendly products those Apples eh?
From personal
experience with a Macbook, I can say DVD-Drive
defective and defective power
supply. Disproportionately
high reliability is that?
~SD[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: artp on Saturday, September 08 2012 @ 11:53 AM EDT |
Perhaps what is happening is that on the Mac, you cannot
find any applications that do not install because Apple has
to approve them first.
On Linux, it is very easy to find applications that do not
install. All you have to do is go outside your
distribution's software repository and install something
that wasn't compiled and packaged for your version of your
distribution.
With Debian-based distros, that doesn't happen very often. I
do find that most of the angband variants don't know much
about Linux. unangband was briefly packaged only for Fedora
and Arch using xv compression. Yuck! It now works with Mint.
There are a few others that haven't gotten into the Debian
repositories. It seems that most of these are refugees from
Windows-land, who are still learning the different ways of
UNIX-land.
Some people just want it to work, and want to pay for the
support.
I just want it to work, and also have the option to totally
destroy it during an out-of-brain experience. I can always
put it back together again.
As long as you watch where you get your software, it is hard
to find a package that will not install. I may not have the
hardware to run it, but it will install - thinking of
processor, RAM and graphics requirements there.
---
Userfriendly on WGA server outage:
When you're chained to an oar you don't think you should go down when the galley
sinks ?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
