401–410 of 617 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are many games that run well in Linux, including a large portion of the Steam library! If you meant a specific game to run, well then you need to weight your pros and cons and stop whining when you make your decision. Alternatively, dual boot.
Alternatively, grow up and stop playing games.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, that ought to be a great sales line. I'd be wary about how the real world actually deals with that, but there is no lack of large companies jumping on short term costs cuts without looking at the risks.
From the point of view of upper management in a large enterprise, paying a third party with whom they have an SLA and someone to sue for infrastructure which may go down vs. paying their own staff to build and maintain the infrastructure that may go down often either isn't a difference in risk or, actually, the former seems to be better-managed risk. It's the same reason they often prefer to buy support contracts eve…
Really? People incentivised into looking for your best interests vs. a managed organization incentivised into dissolving your contract and gaining on average. I can't imagine anything that could create more different risks.
What people seem to do all the time is looking at an SLA and believing the real world must behave the way things are on paper; because there's a signature there. People do this even after being recently burned by the same partner. Some people have the same trust for in house staff, but the usual on high management is to have the exact opposite bias.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There's already a lot of low hanging fruit they could clean up with an update, but haven't. In all honesty that's been my impression of Windows since its inception. The only time I can recall ever feeling like Windows was deserved market leader was with Windows 2000: Linux wasn't mature on the desktop, OS X wasn't yet released or literally only just released and OS 9 was god awful (worse than the Win 95 in my opini…
Am I remembering the timing wrong? XP came after 2000 and before Vista, right?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Xbox and PlayStation. The "problem" is that you want to game on your PC, not that there isn't another viable option.
Can you point me to the console version of Dota 2?
But yeah, the overall point still stands. If you have a particular game that you don't feel like you can substitute and it's not available on a platform that you'd like to switch to, you're probably not switching to that platform.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
that's... not what most users want. even as a dev myself, I understand most people want just freedom and no hassle, OS to be there in the background, not creating narrow allowed alley for its own users. will keep my Win7 for as long as hardware and software keeps running. don-t expect much more from OS honestly
> that's... not what most users want. even as a dev myself, I understand most people want just freedom and no hassle, OS to be there in the background, not creating narrow allowed alley for its own users. Android and iOS have demonstrably shown that most users don't value freedom as long as the OS works for their needs. Most users are security nightmares as IT Admins and relatives supporting family members can attest…
The first is designed to be casual and apps grew out of a situation where there previously was nothing, while desktop OS's have had decades of external software being installed regularly. Introducing something new, especially when opening up so much potential, is far easier than trying to change existing habits of both consumers and vendors on an existing landscape.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That hardware report is surprising to me in many ways. * In 2018, the most popular resolution for users of Firefox is still 1366x768. And only 1920x1080 is making any headway against the dominance of 1366x768. As much as I am surrounded by the culture of multiple 4K+ displays, apparently this is not at all commonplace. 4K doesn't even get listed, presumably lumped into the "Other" category. * In 2018, the most popula…
>disappointingly small 8GB. In my world, I consider 16GB a bare minimum My main computer has 8GB RAM. I don't know why I would need more than that. Right now I have firefox with 15 tabs, qt creator and 3 terminals open and I'm only using 2.5 GB of RAM. Unless I suddenly wanted to get into heavy video editing I don't think I'll feel the need to upgrade soon.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> macOS isn't business-level stable amazing how many people here are missing the point. this is not about Windows vs MacOS. Client OS has become a commodity with prices approaching 0 (MacOS no longer charges for upgrades, neither does iOS or Android) and users care less about how they get to Facebook. Think about server/mobile space. if MS tried to hang on to their dominance simply via desktop lock-in (because it wor…
Established businesses aren't going to put their data in someone else's datacenter. Small to medium businesses perhaps, but all it takes is one downturn that tightens the purse strings, or one critical event that reveals their absolute dependence on a third party. SAAS solutions are fair weather, and while we've had a lot of good weather I don't expect them to be used for critical business functions in the long term.
When it comes to "someone else's datacenter", I think you'd be surprised at just how few companies even own a datacenter, let alone their own racks. Even the major clouds lease their own space from actual datacenter builders and operators.
This seems like a ridiculous strategy. Who would abandon an ecosystem that they own over 80% of? If they're spending too much money on it, stop adding features and harden what they already have. It's increasingly clear that macOS isn't business-level stable, and Linux isn't polished... No one has an Android device on their desk at work. Maybe if they stopped trying to take over the world they would realize that they…
Sticking with something just because it's a large majority is a great way to fail when that something fades into the background.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 4K doesn't even get listed, presumably lumped into the "Other" category. Could the chart be reporting CSS pixels rather than hardware pixels? Macs are only 7% of total Firefox users but the majority of Mac hardware has a "Retina" display with a higher resolution than these. BTW, 2560x1440 is listed with about ~1% but it's not visible because the line and text is black on a black background.
I've been using 2560x1080 for almost a year now and will never go back. 21:9 is the way to go.
EDIT: https://www.asus.com/us/ROG-Republic-Of-Gamers/ROG-SWIFT-PG3... 100Hz is awesome, even for just browsing the web.