Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Switching from macOS: The Basics

blog.elementary.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 610 posts

Re: Switching from macOS: The Basics

#391

Post by rprospero »

adultSwim wrote: post #345
vladimir-y wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not Manjaro? Does Apricity ship Arch packages passed through the its own repositories doing some testing and making sure core components are not broken and work well one with each other in the Apricity terms and in general? Manjaro does that, there is a kind of release cycle, every 1 or 2 week updates come, ie updates come not directly from the Arch repos (except AUR stuff obviously).

(sincerely) Why Manjaro and not just straight Arch?

I love Arch and I've installed it on plenty of machines, but I've already grasped what little pedagogical value the install procedure contained and now mostly want to have the computer automate that process while I work on other things. Hence I installed Manjaro on my wife's laptop last night.

Re: Switching from macOS: The Basics

#392

Post by wyager »

epmaybe wrote: post #223
fnl wrote: post #211

I try Ubuntu about once a year, in the hopes of getting rid of OSX. But each time, the reason for going back to Apple ID is interoperability : Try dragging stuff (images, fotos, links, files, formatted text ...) from one program to another, including the "dreaded" Finder; Works nearly always in OSX. While Ubuntu has come a long way with these things, I think it's still an even longer way away from what OSX can do. So…

My biggest gripe with OS X right now is that Safari doesn't play nice with some website when it comes to dragging pictures and pasting them in from the clipboard.

Part of this is sites like Facebook intentionally subverting proper click and drag behavior with photos, links, etc. It's incredibly annoying, and we should be shaming sites that do it.

Re: Switching from macOS: The Basics

#393

Post by [deleted] »

pjmlp wrote: post #288
marrs wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GTK+ supports both of those languages. Also, macOS's "tooling" is XCode, so Linux's tooling is superior by default.

If you think that, then you don't have any idea of what a fully working desktop stack for GUI developers looks like. GTK+ is no competition for these APIs: https://developer.apple.com/reference/

[deleted]

Re: Switching from macOS: The Basics

#394

Post by pjmlp »

module0000 wrote: post #377
pjmlp wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. GNU/Linux doesn't have desktop stack capable of matching Objective-C, Swift frameworks both in feature set and related GUI tooling.

> GNU/Linux doesn't have desktop stack capable of matching Objective-C, Swift frameworks both in feature set and related GUI tooling. Qt alone exceeds the feature set, has more GUI tooling, and is multi-platform. That's just Qt, and the same could be said for GTK. I'm not slinging mud at Obj-c and the frameworks Apple maintains, but they are not unique snowflakes without equal.

Sorry but no,

https://developer.apple.com/reference/

I can find tons of entries without parity in Qt.

And their current trend to invent a different flavor of JavaScript every few releases, no thanks.

Re: Switching from macOS: The Basics

#397

Post by marrs »

pjmlp wrote: post #288
marrs wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GTK+ supports both of those languages. Also, macOS's "tooling" is XCode, so Linux's tooling is superior by default.

If you think that, then you don't have any idea of what a fully working desktop stack for GUI developers looks like. GTK+ is no competition for these APIs: https://developer.apple.com/reference/

well the not-fully-working desktop stack for Linux devs seems to work just fine for them. I've certainly never had a problem with it. I've never had a problem with the Apple kit either but it's nothing to write home about. The only thing I've seen Apple do that I did think was really cool is the package signing.

Re: Switching from macOS: The Basics

#398

Post by ciokan »

reitanqild wrote: post #272
chrishacken wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm right there with you. The only thing that keeps me on a Mac is the combination of Unix + Half decent UX. If someone built a paid Unix/Linux distro that could run Mac Apps, I'd give away my extra kidney for it. Windows almost has me sold with their new Ubuntu subsystem.

> Windows almost has me sold with their new Ubuntu subsystem. Anything in particular you are missing?

I gave that up in 10 minutes. I really tried spinning up a basic docker project (docker compose) without luck. Sure, having a bash is a step forward and I see it getting better but it's no way near to a developer's basic needs.

Re: Switching from macOS: The Basics

#399

Post by yoz-y »

r3bl wrote: post #141
yoz-y wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is progressively becoming quite more than a simple skin. They do have their own window manager and a quite comprehensive set of applications with simplified interfaces and consistent UI. To me it seems like a worthy goal, however it seems to create a separation between the typical Linux user/developer and their potential targeted users.

Not really. I developed on elementary quite a lot. I find its ease of getting around quite easy. Your text editor / IDE is at the front and everything else is completely tucked away + you can control basic things about your OS like music / notifications etc. without having to focus on some other app to make a change. And it's pretty lightweight. Comparing that to GNOME, where everything is so damn big that it wastes…

That is quite neat. Sometimes I have been adding `&& terminal-notifier -message "done"` to my scripts in macOS terminal/iterm.

Re: Switching from macOS: The Basics

#400

Post by matzipan »

throwsincenotpc wrote: post #366
matzipan wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I'm talking about gdb support, for example. I'm talking for a testing framework (right now you have to write your own build process capable of bundling the unit tests with your source).

They still had 10 years to do that. complaining about the lack of tooling they didn't develop is idiotic, they are in charge of the language themselves.

Well, not all people have the expertise or willingness (in case of volunteers) to work on this. Switching to Rust would allow them to leverage somebody else's work.

Also, GObject itself made a lot of sense in an era when C was dominant. Maybe now, not so much.

Post reply on HN