231–240 of 248 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What updates were those? I'm still using a 2013 MBP too and no plans to upgrade. Given that 10.14 is still compatible with 2010 MBPs I think I have more than a few years left with it.
Not to belittle OP's experience, but I've been running High Sierra on a 2010 MBP since it came out with no issues, so YMMV.
I can tell you from experience that building a Hackintosh is a terrible idea for almost all people. I have no moral objection to it and I totally understand the motivation. Apple is completely failing to provide hardware that runs at a fraction of the performance you'd get from building a commodity $2500 AMD/Nvidia desktop even if you give Apple $7000 for a Pro model. Apple's platform especially sucks if you do anyth…
The only reasonable thing to do was to dedicate the machine to gaming on Windows and buy a Mac. Not trying this again anytime soon.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My main (additional) consideration: to develop for any Apple platform its required to use MacOS. There is no alternative way for developing and publishing in Apple App Stores.
Only for iOS, tvOS and watchOS, because ironically, you don't really need a Mac to develop for macOS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I ran Linux on the last two MBPs that I used (from my work, can't afford one myself). Best Linux laptops I've used. And physically solid, I like the hardware quality. Only struggle was the HiDPI stuff which takes a bit of setup (some environment variables to set, basically) but once it works, it works. I wouldn't say that MBP is "unsupported hardware" for Ubuntu. I rebooted to OS X only rarely, for testing Mac progra…
My 2013 retina mbpro couldn't run Linux successfully including Ubuntu. It's somewhat supported. Except for the trackpad (which you can sort of get working, just not well), dual graphics switching (and therefore decent battery life), crap external monitor support, and the random crashes. After this last one, I just gave up and I realized I was blaming Linux when in reality it was my fault for using unsupported hardwar…
In that sense every computer is "unsupported hardware" for Linux, so I dunno. (Except maybe some rare purpose-made machines that tend to be expensive anyways..)
I really don't get it. The biggest appeal of Apple is their wonderful hardware. I dislike MacOS and it has been worse over the last years. It seems to me that a Hackintosh is the worst of both worlds. If you spend that much time hacking around the hardware anyways, why not use Linux ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For the HN crowd, the Linux Subsystem for Windows is kind of a big deal - many traditional Windows annoyances are ameliorated when you've got a Bash shell. Pen input is a) available and b) very good. The split control panel is a bit gross, but it's also a reasonable compromise - novice users get a greatly simplified interface for basic settings, while experienced users keep a familiar interface for more complex confi…
The Windows bash shell would be a lot better if you could interact with files on your normal Windows filesystem, like Desktop and Dropbox, and vice versa with opening files you made in Bash in Atom outside.
With WSL, I've been able to run Linux-based dev and build tools and Windows IDEs at the same time on source stored in the Windows world with no issues.
On the other hand, it's true that you can't / shouldn't modify files on the Linux file system (i.e. Files outside of /mnt/...) in Windows itself since the Linux-specific concepts would get mangled. With the mounts though, there shouldn't be any need to do this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> - macOS gets more iOS-ified with each release and some people don’t like that How does running the same software on a different machine do anything to address this?
It means you don't give Apple money.
Well, sure, but where's the victory in using something you don't like (the situation that peatmoss (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17709084) describes) for free? Sure, it's better than using something you don't like and paying for it, but (1) you're still investing time and effort, if not money, and (2) it seems better still just not to use the thing you don't like.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What wonderful hardware? Ah, you must be thinking of the laptops. If you need desktop power, anything Apple sells right now is out. iMac Pro included, because of lack of storage (for my particular needs at least).
I'd think, that of all the components in a not-user-upgradable stationary desktop computer, storage is the one that's easily solved through external devices. I obviously don't know your particularly needs, and gather there's something I'm missing here — are there e.g. throughput issues with external SSDs? — so I'm curious to learn why my assumption is wrong!
For my particulars, I need about a gazillion VMs on local storage. They're not accessed often enough to pay thousands for enough SSD, and the iMac(Pro) only has space for one anyway (4 Tb won't cut it). So I need at least one spinny disk in addition to the system SSD. I am not willing to put said disks on thunderbolt, usb 3.14159 or whatever, I want them inside the case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It means you don't give Apple money.
> It means you don't give Apple money. Well, sure, but where's the victory in using something you don't like (the situation that peatmoss ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17709084 ) describes) for free? Sure, it's better than using something you don't like and paying for it, but (1) you're still investing time and effort, if not money, and (2) it seems better still just not to use the thing you don't like.
- You like Mac OS after modifying it to counter its Iosification but don't want to support a company that makes you jump to those hoops, or
- You actually like Mac OS but oppose Apple's tendency to restrict their user's freedom on principle.
Using a hackintosh just because you don't like Apple would be pointless, of course.
I really don't get it. The biggest appeal of Apple is their wonderful hardware. I dislike MacOS and it has been worse over the last years. It seems to me that a Hackintosh is the worst of both worlds. If you spend that much time hacking around the hardware anyways, why not use Linux ?