The Mac Pro Lives • Hacker News Board

Re: The Mac Pro Lives

#741

Post by thomastjeffery » Wed, Apr 05, 2017, 2:41 AM UTC

spectistcles wrote: post #601

csomar wrote: post #178

Am I the only one that sees OS X as the biggest reason to switch to Mac? I mean Windows is good, but nowhere good as OS X. And please, don't tell me Ubuntu or other linux flavors. They look good (and are good if you are programming on them) but the UX is still lacking a lot. (Never mind the confusion of the different flavors, packaging systems, and configurations). Also god forbid you have a problem (especially a har…

I'm with you on this. The bloatware in modern operating systems, even once you take away the PC-vendor garbage, is appalling. I feel like they could keep things the way they are, and offer an AOSP-like vanilla version for people who generally know what they're doing (Google does a pretty good job with limiting it). I'd pay hundreds of dollars more for this software option (have previously considered hiring someone to…

What you want is Linux.

OS X is a bloated version of BSD. Why run that when you can use Linux for free? Install the software you use and nothing else. Your package manager will keep all of your software up to date for you. You won't be running an absurd antivirus program an the time...

Re: The Mac Pro Lives

#742

Post by joemi » Wed, Apr 05, 2017, 2:41 AM UTC

_acme wrote: post #714

joemi wrote: post #667

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> IMO Ubuntu is now superior to OSX in almost every way. Out of genuine curiosity, what are the ways it's not superior?

Out of genuine curiosity, what are the ways it is superior?

Either you're trying to start an argument that I want no part of, or you're asking the wrong person. I don't have much experience with any linux desktops (I've just done server stuff mostly), so I have no idea. Hence why I'm asking.

Re: The Mac Pro Lives

#743

Post by vinceguidry » Wed, Apr 05, 2017, 3:23 AM UTC

thomastjeffery wrote: post #725

vinceguidry wrote: post #669

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I primarily buy Apple for the hardware, secondarily for OSX. I used Windows for years and years, there's nothing about it I can't get used to. If MacBooks weren't so great, I'd be using ThinkBooks, they're not terrible. But MacBooks are so much better that it isn't even a close consideration. That might be the lock-in talking, Apple would have to screw the MacBook line over as badly as they did the Mac Pro line to ge…

> That might be the lock-in talking It is. Apple hardware is ok, except for the fact that it is insanely overpriced.

The price differential doesn't really concern me. I've tried using different laptops, I always come back to Apple. I wouldn't call it insanely overpriced, it's just higher priced than everything else if you just went by specs. Being that the quality is superior, I do not begrudge them their profits. It would be a sad day if Apple ever stopped making hardware.

Re: The Mac Pro Lives

#744

Post by Whitestrake » Wed, Apr 05, 2017, 3:48 AM UTC

coldtea wrote: post #498

specialp wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fullscreen mode loses focus constantly with 2 monitors, SMB shares are very slow especially with large amounts of files to be listed. Finder crashes a lot dealing with network filesystems. The search on Finder is extremely bad and doesn't hold a candle to Windows 10 search. I am typing this on a Macbook Pro so I am not some Windows fan. OS X has fallen way behind in its desktop incarnation. The only reason I use OS X…

> Fullscreen mode loses focus constantly with 2 monitors I've never lost focus with fullscreen/2 monitors. So?

"I haven't experienced the problem you're talking about, so it must not exist."

Re: The Mac Pro Lives

#745

Post by thomastjeffery » Wed, Apr 05, 2017, 4:05 AM UTC

vinceguidry wrote: post #743

thomastjeffery wrote: post #725

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That might be the lock-in talking It is. Apple hardware is ok, except for the fact that it is insanely overpriced.

The price differential doesn't really concern me. I've tried using different laptops, I always come back to Apple. I wouldn't call it insanely overpriced, it's just higher priced than everything else if you just went by specs. Being that the quality is superior, I do not begrudge them their profits. It would be a sad day if Apple ever stopped making hardware.

> I wouldn't call it insanely overpriced Are you kidding? I would. I did. Just now.

> Being that the quality is superior

Exactly how? Honest question.

Re: The Mac Pro Lives

#746

Post by jolux » Wed, Apr 05, 2017, 4:40 AM UTC

scholia wrote: post #659

jolux wrote: post #647

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is idiocy. Solitaire and Freecell are originally not video games, and nobody is making money off selling them. Candy Crush Saga, on the other hand...well, I don't think I need to explain to you who benefits from having it preinstalled on Windows.

This is idiocy. Freecell was originally sold as part of a games pack for Windows, and Candy Crush Saga is a highly-rated game that's otherwise available from the Windows Store. Thousands of people have downloaded it. The Good Times video in Windows 95 also sold Edie a lot of CDs, but it would be equally stupid to criticize that. In both cases, Microsoft is providing something entertaining that demonstrates some benef…

I don't give a shit if it's highly rated. The Chainsmokers are also highly rated and completely critically empty as well, just like Candy Crush. To compare the two is lunacy, it's the difference between Windows Media Player coming with Bach sample music versus Nickelback. Thousands of people downloading something is no excuse for advertising it and forcing it down the throats of probably millions more paying customers. It sets a bad precedent for Microsoft either way because they're supposed to be the company that supports Freedom Zero where Apple doesn't, and yet increasingly your use of their software is contingent on accepting ugly and invasive advertising. This is also why "you can turn it off" is a non-criticism. "You can turn it off" is an acceptable response to Siri being included with macOS, I shouldn't even have to deal with advertisements in the first place.

If you don't see this as part of a bigger trend I don't think I can help you do so.

Re: The Mac Pro Lives

#747

Post by Qcombinator » Wed, Apr 05, 2017, 5:05 AM UTC

guelo wrote: post #509

Aaargh20318 wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Window management in OSX is horrible. What is so horrible about it ? I have the exact same reaction every time I have to use Microsoft Windows. Window management is one of the strongpoints of MacOS. > A network drive hangs? Good luck with Finder..., the whole system halts. I've never encountered this problem on both AFP and SMB shares.

command-tabbing between apps instead of windows is just wrong imo. You constantly have to keep in mind if the window you're switching to is part of the same app or a different app.

The way command-tabbing brings all an application's windows forward always bugged me too. Fortunately, there is LiteSwitch (http://sysbeep.com) that lets you switch to the frontmost window only.

While I'm at it, I'll also plug https://manytricks.com/witch which I find invaluable for switching between windows and just got an update.

Re: The Mac Pro Lives

#748

Post by Whitestrake » Wed, Apr 05, 2017, 5:07 AM UTC

m_mueller wrote: post #723

_acme wrote: post #717

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is it that sucks about Terminal.app that iTerm2 fixes?

I'd be interested in that too. I've never wanted anything more than what Terminal.app offers, but maybe I just don't know what I'm missing.

The iTerm2 features page[1] has a pretty good run-down of all the extra stuff it can do. Personally, I'm a big fan of the split panes, and I use iTerm2 full screen with two panes.

That said, almost identical behaviour can be had in fullscreen with two Terminal windows sharing a full screen desktop space.

I also enjoy having my terminal be a slightly-transparent black rectangular slate, with no title bars, corner curving, etc., but that's purely preference and has no impact on functionality.

[1] https://www.iterm2.com/features.html

Re: The Mac Pro Lives

#749

Post by flukus » Wed, Apr 05, 2017, 5:26 AM UTC

SippinLean wrote: post #277

jrimbault wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why is it that the PowerShell terminal emulator is (graphically) even worse than a tty ? I've worked on ttys more agreeable on the eyes than Windows terminal emulators. Windows is supposed to have better font support than Linux. Also, if someone here has an answer: Why in the design of Windows aren't programs installed or symlinked in the PATH by default? I guess that was a design choice somewhere along the histo…

Fair criticism, but PowerShell is just under the hood, most devs on Windows use cmder or similar.

I stick with cygwin and tmux. I still find it easier to write scripts in bash than powershell.

Re: The Mac Pro Lives

#750

Post by flukus » Wed, Apr 05, 2017, 5:28 AM UTC

jrimbault wrote: post #269

yokohummer7 wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On the other hand, if Windows had a proper shell and cli tools, like cygwin with zsh, but native and not Ubuntu layer inside - that would be tremendous. It is PowerShell, and it really is. Until recently I thought Windows had poor CLI support, and I discovered PowerShell and now I favor it even more than bash. Am I crazy? Possibly, but PowerShell is truly a piece of gem in the CLI history. It is a thoughtfully craf…

But why is it that the PowerShell terminal emulator is (graphically) even worse than a tty ? I've worked on ttys more agreeable on the eyes than Windows terminal emulators. Windows is supposed to have better font support than Linux. Also, if someone here has an answer: Why in the design of Windows aren't programs installed or symlinked in the PATH by default? I guess that was a design choice somewhere along the histo…

> Also, if someone here has an answer: Why in the design of Windows aren't programs installed or symlinked in the PATH by default? I guess that was a design choice somewhere along the history of Windows/DOS. Is there a reason?

This get's to the real issue of what makes powershell so horrible. It's not that anyone loves bash scripts, it's that there are a tonne of great utilities that bash script tie together. Windows doesn't have this.