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

macOS Tahoe

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

881–890 of 1001 posts

Re: macOS Tahoe

#881

Post by The_President »

zenmac wrote: post #876
The_President wrote: post #872

Meanwhile in iOSland I am hesitant to update an iPhone SE 2nd gen from 16 to 18 due to the apparant lack of option to customize the charging limit. To anyone with an engineer mind, this seems like a non-implementation that would have an excuse behind it if it were ever exposed. I also wonder if the Personal Hotspot wifi bug ever will get fixed for old hardware, or will the speculation remain of another service changi…

And also AD-Hoc wifi which was quietly taken away. Many many developer rely on it. Yes there are some apps that the added latency via wifi hub vs ad-hoc wifi makes the difference!!!!

I imagine there will be a day soon when disabling wifi and bluetooth will no longer be behind five button presses, rather just always on.

Re: macOS Tahoe

#882

Post by hulitu »

massysett wrote: post #807
eloisius wrote: post #771

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used Mac for 10 years and started feeling the same irritation around 2017. In 2020 I finally bit the bullet and switched to Linux. The initial investment into getting a usable Arch desktop was horrible. It took several days just to get to the point of something that I could boot into and be productive. It takes me a long time to get things working the way I want, but I kind of enjoy that aspect of total customizati…

> The best part is, though, nothing ever changes. Wasn’t true when they switched to systemd, or when KDE 4 came out, or when the new Gnome came out, or when the kernel renamed Ethernet interfaces to enps-whatever.

Some of us use Slackware, with fvwm.

Re: macOS Tahoe

#883

Post by hulitu »

jakogut wrote: post #837
massysett wrote: post #807

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The best part is, though, nothing ever changes. Wasn’t true when they switched to systemd, or when KDE 4 came out, or when the new Gnome came out, or when the kernel renamed Ethernet interfaces to enps-whatever.

Or when they switched from applications requesting exclusive access to ALSA audio devices to using sound servers for mixing, or when Xorg autoconfiguration was introduced (obviating manual Xorg.conf creation), or when the modesetting DDX replaced vendor specific DDX packages, or when Wayland was introduced with full backward compatibility with Xorg via XWayland. I suppose that last one is more of a lack of change.

> when Wayland was introduced with full backward compatibility with Xorg

you shouldn't believe everything you read on the internet.

Re: macOS Tahoe

#884

Post by mikae1 »

konart wrote: post #864
mikae1 wrote: post #859

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The initial investment into getting a usable Arch desktop was horrible. It is my conviction that very few should go down the Arch route. If you want to sysadmin Linux or learn how to do so, fine. But if you want to do something else with your computer I'd strongly recommend looking into one of the https://universal-blue.org images (I use https://getaurora.dev btw). These are based on atomic Fedora and my experience…

>These are based on atomic Fedora and my experience is that they offer extreme stability These were my hopes. Up until a new update introduced something that broke my nvidia drivers "integration". After a few days I decided to try to update the system once more (which killed the oldest snapshot) and I was left with the system that can only be run in 1024 mode. I've tried every suggestion from the web to no avail.

It's been working well with my NVIDIA equipped laptop and desktop machine with a Radeon GPU. I would never buy NVIDIA for Linux use again though. GPU support needs to be in the kernel, So Arc or Radeon it is.

Re: macOS Tahoe

#885

Post by sys_64738 »

al_borland wrote: post #686
sys_64738 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's truly hideous to look at. I really can't believe they went for these massively rounded corners. They're too stubborn to allow you to select an option for right angled corners again. They just tinker as there's no other real UI enhancements.

Whenever I see people try to make their Linux environment look modern and fancy, they generally include extremely rounded corners.

"modern and fancy" isn't how I'd describe these bizarre rounded corners in Tahoe. They remind me more of a Buck Rogers TV episode from the 1970s or Speak & Spell from the 1980s. They are ghastly to look at.

Re: macOS Tahoe

#886

Post by sys_64738 »

_2d30 wrote: post #210
sys_64738 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's truly hideous to look at. I really can't believe they went for these massively rounded corners. They're too stubborn to allow you to select an option for right angled corners again. They just tinker as there's no other real UI enhancements.

> They're too stubborn to allow you to select an option for right angled corners again. "right angled corners again" I have a feeling you aren't and haven't been a Mac user for a long time. When was the last time Macs had right angled corners!? 30+ years ago?

I've used Macs since 1988.

Re: macOS Tahoe

#887

Post by OJFord »

mikae1 wrote: post #859
eloisius wrote: post #771

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used Mac for 10 years and started feeling the same irritation around 2017. In 2020 I finally bit the bullet and switched to Linux. The initial investment into getting a usable Arch desktop was horrible. It took several days just to get to the point of something that I could boot into and be productive. It takes me a long time to get things working the way I want, but I kind of enjoy that aspect of total customizati…

> The initial investment into getting a usable Arch desktop was horrible. It is my conviction that very few should go down the Arch route. If you want to sysadmin Linux or learn how to do so, fine. But if you want to do something else with your computer I'd strongly recommend looking into one of the https://universal-blue.org images (I use https://getaurora.dev btw). These are based on atomic Fedora and my experience…

> It is my conviction that very few should go down the Arch route. If you want to sysadmin Linux or learn how to do so, fine.

I don't think sysadmin is fair, but certainly it's true that a lot of 'how do I do the equivalent of Windows/macOS built-in foobar' questions will have the answer 'well this is a non-exhaustive list of possible things you could install to do that'.

Which is to say that first time around it's almost inevitably going to be a lot of setup. But then it won't change, or when it does it will just be whichever puzzle piece changed - not 'Arch reimagined everything with Liquid Glass'.

Re: macOS Tahoe

#888

Post by OJFord »

eloisius wrote: post #857
tjpnz wrote: post #825

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The best part is, though, nothing ever changes. I get things working the way I want, and it just stays that way year after year. No UI language updates, no replacing my default shell, nothing. It just keeps working the way I like. While Arch might make you safer by virtue of choice, some of the more "beginner friendly" distros aren't immune to changing things seemingly overnight. Ubuntu for instance dropped GNOME fo…

Yeah, I didn't mean to write a "Linux is better" polemic, just that building my own Linux desktop works better for me. I also haven't used Gnome since ~2009 except briefly to discover that Gnome 3 was trash. Unity was a travesty and I also hated it when Ubuntu force fed me that. You're right. Locking yourself into a distro, especially the more user-friendly ones, can get you into just as much of a dictatorship as mac…

I'd switch if I were you - well, I did, after holding out for what I thought was a long time. A lot of minor nuisances I hadn't gotten around to investigating with X just disappeared, I think you'd find that by comparison you were/are actually nearer 'not working' than you realise, my sway experience has been much smoother.

Re: macOS Tahoe

#890

Post by CharlesW »

AlexandrB wrote: post #820
CharlesW wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been using it for ~6 weeks, and I'm also a bit confused by the hate since it's barely changed. I'm a fan of the improved UX harmonization across form factors. My intuition is that the minor and gradual "Duploization" of macOS in Sequoia and now Tahoe foreshadows touchscreen MacBooks.

> I'm a fan of the improved UX harmonization across form factors. Don't understand why. A ~6" phone screen and a 3x1440p setup have little in common regarding what "effective" UX looks like. Unifying them for the sake of consistency risks making both worse.

Absolutely, scalable UX is a hard problem, and it's taken Apple nearly two decades to get to this point. But to be able to learn a "Control Center pattern" (for example) and apply that across desktop, tablet, phone, HMDs and TV UXs has real benefits for ordinary users.
Post reply on HN