Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: Mac To Linux Return Flow?
jasnw writes "I'm one of apparently many people who moved to OS X from Linux in the early/mid 2000s for their desktop system, keeping Linux boxes around for the heavy lifting and server work. I may also be part of a large segment of that group now considering a return because of all the iOS-ification of OS X, despite the fact that the Linux desktop still falls short in the 'it just works' area. I'm angry enough at Apple, and wary enough of Linux, that I might just go to using Windows 7 for the desktop (not Win8, however). What is the feeling/experience of other 'traitors' who run OS X for the desktop and Linux for everything else?"
This thread will be good. I expect well-reasoned and rational comments from all sides, naturally.
*Munches popcorn and waits*
Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
There is a livecd of each and every desktop available for linux. Try them, choose one, get things done.
Your trollcraft is strong, you named every OS, praising it whilst simultaneously deriding it. I give you 32 troll points for what will likely be highly polarized responses and self-sustaining conjecture and disagreement.
Linux is a great kernel. Linux has never had a good or stable GUI environment. Ever.
OS X and iOS QA has gone to shit. They're toys from China that break a lot now.
Windows 8 is a LSD trip. Windows 7 is the new Windows XP. However the Microsoft people will say Windows "next version" will be super better!!!! (since about Windows 3.11) like a broken record.
What's wrong with paper again?
You already have FreeBSD safe hardware. Linux is great, but FreeBSD would be easier for a Mac user. Personally, I would suggest Debian if you want Linux.
I went linux -> mac in about 2004, and mac -> linux in 2009. Basically got sick of the extra hassle required to get stuff that runs out of the box on linux running on mac. eg a mysql/php/apache stack that actually matched all the linux servers I administered; qgis, grass gis, inkscape, scribus,.. And by 2009 linux-on-the-desktop was a lot more 'just works' than it was in 2004. In short, the extra time I spend getting my mint linux setup working as I want from fresh install to doing work is much shorter than the amount of time spent doing the same on osx. But that's just me - my particular software needs are dictated by the kind of academic work I do, and what you do with your computers may make your experience different.
Now that Windowmaker (http://windowmaker.org) has been picked up again, you might look at that one. That's the one i always ran before switching to OSX.
And i'm pretty sure it's going to be the one i'm running when i move back since i already decided that my next laptop won't be a macbook anymore.
I just cannot figure out what this "question" is all about? You *apparently* *might* be part of a *possibly* large group of OS X people who *might* want to go using Windows?
Well, I just might not feel like answering this. My experience is that this type of questions are apparently suggestive, and only meant to be so.
--------
* Sigh *
You can have my Mac when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers. :-)
I'm not going back. I'm exactly as you describe - my desktop runs OS X and my mobile devices run iOS, but my servers run Debian.
Neither of which is going to change. Specifically, you would have to shoot me before I use Windows as my work environment. I'm happy that I can run a very similar environment on my OS X and Debian machines, which makes development just so much easier. I boot Win7 once a decade or so when I want to play a windows-only game, though mostly I pick games available for OS X (Guild Wars 2, League of Legends, yeah!). Every time I have to use windows for anything other than launching the game I want to play, I cringe. It's just so... words fail me. I don't understand why it's not considered a violation of human rights.
You wanted emotions, there you got em. OS X is the best desktop I know. Debian Linux is the best server operating system I know. Windows is the best reason to shoot someone.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Okay, the Distro's got it horribly wrong with their move the KDE 4. KDE said version 4.0 was only for developers and all the distro's pushed it out anyway.
I started using KDE around 4.7 or 4.8 when Ubuntu pushed out Unity that was utter crap, and the Gnome had gone to their 3.0 crap-fest. I have found KDE 4 awesome.
On lower powered compy's I've install Xubuntu. Way easier to install than Windows XP or 7. Wipe drive, format, and load Xubuntu. Worked without any screwing around with drivers or anything. I was mega impressed.
Disclaimer: This is a very speculative long shot ....
But it used to be that differences between platforms in terms of end user control were a matter of degree. Now with commercial operating systems moving rapidly away from that, with more closed systems, restricted app stores, secure boot, locked devices, disregard for privacy, etc., Linux has a much larger opportunity to distinguish itself on that feature (as well as the security that goes with it).
Don't wait for users to tell you they need it; that will be too late. Though privacy and control aren't so 'cool' now, I find it hard to believe that suddenly human beings will have permanently stopped caring about them. The pendulum could swing back, and if that happens you want Linux firmly associated with end user control and privacy in people's minds.
Plus, Linux could educate them simply by presenting an alternative. Few end users understand the value of end user control and openness.
What you do with the tools is more important that the tools themselves.
You gave us no real idea what you got going on with your computer aside from some comment made about "heavy lifting and server work." If you can use any of the platforms just decide on one. I have a boot camped rMBP that I use and I'm more than happy with it. I'm not exactly sure what the iOSification of OSX is suppose to mean but it sounds like you're making a mountain out of a molehill.
BTW: My personal experience is that people who claim that they need a machine for "heavy lifting" just don't know how to make a reasonable computer do what they need it to do. Unless you're talking storage and if you're really using a full functioning computer for storage then you're just lost right out of the gate.
You're leaving the Mac platform because you don't like the direction that platform seems to be headed, right? That's certainly an okay reason to try your luck elsewhere.
But you've already indicated with your "not Win8" comment that you ALSO don't like where the Windows platform is headed.
Windows 7 may be further from the hated future of the Windows OS than the current Mac OS is from the hated future of the Mac OS, and so Win7 may seem nicer for a while because of that. But in less than a decade Win7 will be orphaned for security updates and you're going to have to jump ship again to an OS you don't hate, and the only OS it looks like you're going to want to consider at that point is Linux.
It's time to dive into Linux and start learning what you like and how to make it work for you. Better now while you've got some lead time than in a few years when it becomes an emergency.
I have used both Linux and Windows pretty extensively for my desktop system, and for servers (not always my choice). I love using Linux servers (specifically CentOS) - they perform well for the tasks I use them for, and they are rock solid.
I miss Linux on my Macbook Air probably about as often as I miss having Windows on my Macbook Air. There are plenty of things I don't like about Apple: expensive hardware often lagging on the performance-features front (e.g. USB3 took a while), their 'our way or get lost' approach, how truly awful Finder is (and it is truly awful), and all of the bollocks about 'It just works' (it mostly works). However, I can use the apps I need on it (e.g. Photoshop: and no, Gimp is not a replacement; MS Office: and no, OpenOffice is not a replacement). The touchpad functionality is brilliant (multi-touch, swiping, etc). Menu bars always at the top of the screen is genius, as it turns out. I don't need to deal with installing GTK+, QT, etc etc - although this is mainly just an artifact of the packaging system.
So in essence, I don't feel like a traitor. I feel like I'm using different OSs for different things based on their match to my needs. Mind you, I revisit Linux fairly regularly to check on how it is going as a desktop OS (and was one of the weird folk who didn't mind Gnome 3), and it is certainly getting better, but I always wind up back on OSX (or Windows, prior to that).
If I stop being able to install apps without the app store, or they all need to be digitally signed and approved by Apple, then you'll see me switching to something else faster than you can blink, but that's a ways off yet.
The "iOSification" of OS X is overblown hyperbole at the moment. Yes, Apple's simplified some of the core apps like iPhoto. Yes, Apple's made the Calendar app fugly. They added the "Launchpad", which you never have to actually see unless you invoke it, and they added the Gatekeeper security feature, which you can switch off with a few clicks of the mouse.
They also recently got rid of the guy who was responsible for some of that stuff, so we may see a roll back on the nasty skeumorphic nonsense.
The core OS, and its UX in general, are still excellent, and every single app distributed outside of the App Store still have as much freedom as they used to.
Does it make you happy you're so strange?
That just is NOT true anymore. Windows 7 has been stable from the word go. Uptime measured in days and weeks for a DESKTOP computer that is only interrupted by important updates and other administrative tasks that require a reboot. Otherwise, it Just Works. This coming from a guy who LOVES Linux- on servers.
Nobodies Prefect
Tidbits for Techs Technology Blog
You're too smart for OS X. You're not geeky enough for Linux. Windows is just right for you. Be smart enough to ignore the lunkheads that can't figure out how to 7ize windows 8. It will make upgrading to Windows 9 that much easier. You can only hope that Microsoft doesn't totally screw up their cloud initiative. They've had plenty of time to learn from others, and they should be ready to roll. Office 365 is actually not as bad as I thought it would be. p.s. keep your old Linux box plugged in just in case. You will need it sooner or later.
You say that like it's a bad thing...
I also don't see the problem. A few changes to the UI and people scream and shout as if the world ends. Grow up, choose the tool you need and get to work.
-- Cheers!
OSX is a prison that keeps getting smaller. Linux on the desktop is wonderful. Stable and easily configurable .
I think it's more like putting the handle back on the spoon.
+1 Disagree
It's worth considering MATE. It's a fork of Gnome2 that intends to develop into what Gnome 3 would have been had they not drunk the cool aid.
@ submittor: if you don't like OSX 10.8 (Mountain Lion), why not just go back to snow leopard? It's stable as a rock. My personal opinion is I like the additional usability in mountain lion, but obv ymmv.
That just is NOT true anymore. Windows 7 has been stable from the word go. Uptime measured in days and weeks for a DESKTOP computer that is only interrupted by important updates and other administrative tasks that require a reboot. Otherwise, it Just Works. This coming from a guy who LOVES Linux- on servers.
That's the first problem with Windows : there is so many things that needs you to reboot it is ridiculous. And the freakin updates that FORCES me to reboot. Only thing you can do is tell it to postpone the reboot for 4 hours. Then 4 hours later that fu***n thing pops-up again requesting you to reboot. And the worst : if you are not in front of you machine when it pops, after about a minute it will decide that it can just reboot. So you come back, your computer is at the login screen and you just have to re-open everything to get back to work. Who the f**k decided this was a good idea ?
Now I don't have that problem anymore. I installed Mint on my work computer and the only time I need to reboot is when I upgrade the kernel. After the upgrade there is a popup that tells me it needs to reboot to fully apply the update. If I click postpone IT WILL NEVER BOTHER ME AGAIN.
Also, I measure uptimes in months, not days and weeks. In fact I have an internet-facing server that is up for more that 5.5 years.
Avoid the MS tax, always buy I.B.M. PC's (I Built-it Myself)
Its funny that Windows 8 is starting to sound like what Linux was a few years ago and Linux is far closer to 'just works' now.
"Windows 8 is great! Now after you install it go to this link, download the app and follow the instructions. That will make your computer usable."
Sound familiar?
Brief background: I've been using Linux since Slackware '96, with kernel version 1.0.0. I prefer using Linux for servers, but often have used Windows in cases where it presents some advantage (like using Active Directory so I can govern Windows desktops, etc)., and most environments I've worked in have become mixed Linux/Windows environments. Still, I am known much moreso for my *nix talents and content to leave Windows to the armies of Windows sysadmins out there.
For a while now at work, I've been using Windows 7. Using KiTTY (or PuTTY) I can generally work well with unix systems, and the Windows system gives me an environment like a normal user, which helps in reproducing issues, etc. The downside is, well, it's still Windows and prone to quirky issues, e.g. problems caused by Windows update, wanting to reboot more often than I'd like..
At home, I use Mac OS X rather than Windows 7. I run a custom-built hackintosh pro system (built late last year, i7-ivy bridge type). Using Mac OS X, I can still interact with systems I need to (using CoRD for Windows Remote Desktop), and it runs all the other programs I need elegantly. It also doesn't need reboots very often and is quite a stable system.
However, I too have been looking for a solution now that Apple is moving in the iOS-y direction for OS X, in terms of a system that lets me keep the awesome BSD power of Mac OS without being confined to Apple's walled garden of App Store restrictions etc.
Linux doesn't work as a Desktop environment for me for a lot of reasons, despite the fact I love Linux. It requires too much overhead to install software (packages, dependencies, etc), often doesn't run software I need (and/or open source equivalents fail to install on my distro, etc etc), and the end-user experience in X windows is generally clunky and not nearly as elegant/streamlined as Mac or Windows. A lot of open source products that do work are second-best to the product you could use on a desktop -- e.g. Microsoft Word on Mac and Windows vs OpenOffice on Linux. It'll work most of the time, but sometimes, it'll be a problem. I'm not a one man team and I work with people using Windows and Mac -- so I have to accomodate. In order to work in Linux, I'd have to have a VM running Windows or Mac -- and that kind of defeats the purpose of Linux.
So, in short, I am searching for an operating system that has the nice interface and POSIX-compliant backend of Mac OS, the openness of Linux, and runs all the software Windows can. Will a solution ever exist? :)
Hold fast to your Apple anger. It is liberating.
I divested myself of Apple shares in early 2012 to finance my daughter's education, and now I'm comfortable wishing ruin upon them without fear.
The choices they make are anti-consumer, anti-competitive and anti-free market. It pleases me that they've lost nearly 1/2 of their value.
As someone who was a great fan of Apple computers going back to before the first Macintosh, I find their current direction extremely disappointing and destructive.
You are welcome on my lawn.
because apple will ultimately rip support for snow leopard away from you, while at the same time breaking your applications. Then insist you should buy a new computer. OS X is like leasing a car vs. owning one. It's not right or wrong for the right people.
It really depends on your usage pattern. Some people find it really annoying, others like it, whilst some are in between. I do find it really annoying on occasion. For example one of the things I like to do is watch a web cast while playing Free Cell. In Windows 7 this was simple enough. In Windows 8, the Free Cell game is a 200 MB download (instead of being built in like in Win 7), and it only plays in Metro - so it takes either the full screen or 80% of the screen if you snap it. Then you can't watch the web cast unless you have two monitors. Honestly whoever thought that it was a good idea to force apps to full screen on large monitors was a moron. Fortunately I do have two monitors so I can make this work. But it is annoying. Most other things are fine - as long as you avoid Metro style apps and make sure to set the system to not use the Metro apps for opening files.
I've had great success with cinnamon on Linux Mint 14, give it a try
Does this belong on Slashdot or on a cooking blog?
No left turn unstoned.
KDE tried to copy Windows as much as they could - when I saw their annoying Windows-esque dialogue when you connect a USB mass storage device I was done with that. Then Gnome chased the "everything is going Web 3.0 and mobile" dream so this leaves me with only sensible window managers like XFCE and LXDE. Any other ones I should try?
I don't really understand this. How does one become so particular about the desktop system?
I personally do prefer KDE. Having said that, you can put me in front of a Gnome, Cinnamon, Windows, OSX, Windowmaker, Enlightenment, Fluxbox, environment and I only need a couple of minutes to find my way around and be comfortable with it. My preference for KDE is marginal. It is not a deal-breaker.
What is it about that USB dialog that prevents you from getting your work done? How is it a show-stopper for you? You described it as annoying, can you elaborate? I really want to understand this because I seem to be the oddball here.
So, let me get this straight : Linux is hard because you need to modify text files to change something, while in Windows there is that super easy click-happy interface anybody can use.
Then, every time I want to do something more advanced, I have to go hack the registry to do it ?
And the first big warning is that if you fuck the registry, your computer may not boot anymore.
Like if you want to disable that CapsLock key, you have to modify some hex value in the registry. On my KDE machine, I just went into the control panel and assigned the CapsLock to another CTRL.
Avoid the MS tax, always buy I.B.M. PC's (I Built-it Myself)
My problem with these "just work" descriptions is that people have very different needs.
I use both Ubuntu and Mac OS regularly. The things that I need to "just work" are a lot of programming tools (gcc, python), databases, and servery stuff like databases, web servers, etc. Getting those to work on Mac OS is unpleasant. MacPorts and Homebrew are both terrible in comparison to the APT world. "apt-get install apache2" is very much "just works" in my book. On the Mac, I'm fine as long as I use Xcode and other Apple-specific tools, but anything else ends up being frustrating.
People complain a lot about desktop choices for Linux, but I never found any of them any worse than Mac, and some are better tailored for certain workstyles than others. All the major ones (GNOME with Shell or Unity, KDE, XFCE) are mature enough now for everyday work, even if they weren't so a few years ago. I really find all of them easier to work with than Mac's desktop. I don't like Mac's bubblegum dock, and I find the Finder to be perhaps the worst file manager ever made.
Another aspect of "just work" is installation. Installing a free OS can be painful on some hardware (and trivial on others). Since you can't (easily) install Mac OS on non-Apple hardware, this problem doesn't exist there, so it indeed "just works" in this respect. If you want a "just works" experience with a free OS, just buy a machine from System 76, a truly wonderful company that has yet to disappoint me. Comes with Ubuntu and everything working, great hardware and great support. And for me, all the things that I want to "just work" indeed do.
I use Windows 7, too, and it's fine, but I really need the Unix stuff to do my work.
Can we retire the "just works" phrase, or at least find better ways to qualify it?
That is a HUGE and ugly truth about Apple. But it is also why they have shied away from the business and government markets -- they don't want to be required to do anythying for anyone. Apple is like "you like what we have and that is all there is." You can't ask Apple for anything -- they have already decided what they will offer and what you need.
The "every-other-Windows-sucks" pattern isn't based on comparing NT kernels. It refers to Microsoft's OS releases for the "home user" space, and Windows NT and Windows 2000 weren't aimed at that market - unlike 95, 98, ME, XP, Vista, Win 7 and now Win 8.
One good reason to purchase a mac with Mountain Lion is to be authorized to develop for iOS, or to do any console logging in Safari post iOS 6. In fact, I have one sitting in the corner of my office for exactly that purpose. It runs a little utility which allows us to upload binaries (developed on a platform of our choosing) to the app store, and runs a console logger for safari. Mountain Lion is the only platform authorized to do those two tasks, and so you are pretty much forced to have it if you want to develop for iOS. That god damn mac is the only piece of technology I have ever used that makes me rage with every part of my being.
Fanboy Status: Apache Flex, C#, Eclipse, KDE, Pirate Party, Ron Paul, Slackware, Windows 7
They also block running the older OS on new system.
Just think if all dells and other windows pc where locked to only windows 8 or newer.
After the story about Miguel de Icaza switching to Mac OS X, it got me thinking about my own history of operating systems. While I had happily used OS X for six and a half years, over that period of time I have drifted back in favor of Linux. This had less to do with new features being offered in Linux as it did with growing tired of foibles in OS X. Here are a list of some of the bigger issues:
- Beach Ball of Death (BBOD): While this didn't occur frequently, when it did it was more frustrating than a Blue Screen of Death (BSOD). At least you knew you were fucked when you saw the BSOD. With the BBOD, sometimes you would recover from it and other times you could wait for up to ten minutes before realizing that you're never coming back. During that period, you are completely unable to access the System menu or start another app to find the proc that is chewing resources so that it can be killed. In 2013, this is completely unacceptable from an OS.
- Mouse Acceleration: There is no way to modify the acceleration curve in OS X, let alone disable acceleration. This is not a problem when you are using a trackpad since the acceleration curve is one of the best out of all OS'es for that, but it is incredibly frustrating when using a mouse. I have gone through many forums and found many other users complaining about this issue, but no one has come up with a decent solution for disabling mouse acceleration. For situations in which I am better off with a mouse, I always hopped over to a non-OS X machine.
- Poor Multi-Monitor Support: Since the menu for each application is in a detached panel that is only displayed on one monitor, this means you will be racking up a lot of mileage on your pointing device to hop between apps on the secondary monitor and their menu on the primary monitor.
- Updating Settings Behind Your Back: For me, this shit started with Microsoft and was one of the big reasons I left their OS. After an update, some of your settings would be changed to whatever they felt you should be using. Apple has since taken up this behavior, doing things like resetting all of your file associations to iTunes after one of their many updates. This didn't happen with my latest update, so maybe they stopped, or at least took a break from this behavior, but it has still left a very bad taste in my mouth.
- Frequent Update Cycles: This would not be too bad of a thing if they didn't regularly remove features they didn't like (but you may have loved) as well as make changes that disrupt your workflow. At this point, I am an old curmudgeon who has everything exactly as he likes it. I don't want to upgrade and run the risk of having the upgrade go south. Such an issue would cause me to have to reinstall all of my apps from scratch and attempt to reconfigure tons of settings to get it to work like it did before the upgrade. And with the update frequent cycles, it won't be long before your current OS version is not supported. Once that happens, Chrome and Firefox support go out the window as well. And don't even get me started on how Apple stops supporting perfectly fine hardware when they come out with new versions of OS X. Apple: you control the hardware in your machines yet you can't be bothered to continue supporting it six years after it is released while Microsoft supported XP on an almost infinite number of hardware configurations for eight years and Linux even longer!
There are many, many more reasons, but these are the biggest gripes. None of them on their own were dealbreakers, but over time they wore on me to the point of driving me back to Linux. While I still use my Mac for some commercial software that isn't available on Linux, it's Linux for everything else.
Its retarded to say Sony took away 'Other OS' when you could have simply not upgraded
No, it is not. The advertised capabilities of the PS3 were "it plays games, and you can also run Linux on it!". Then Sony entered phase 2 of the bait-and-switch and that statement became "it plays games or you can run Linux on it, and once you choose option A you can never again have option B."
Having long been a fan of minimalist window managers like Fluxbox, a friend recently recommended xmonad, which I promptly installed; and since doing so I have been amazed at how much time I can spend not managing windows.
There's apparently also osxmonad for the 'traitors,' but I haven't tried that out yet.
In effect they are. Try running Windows 2000 on modern hardware (and XP isn't far off).
Erm, no they aren't.
Lack of driver support is an issue yes, but they are not actively blocking you from developing your own driver. They wont make it easy for you but they aren't blocking you. Most of my XP/2000 applications have moved into Virtual Machines anyway and 2000 seems to work fine of VMware virtual hardware version 7. I wish the users who still require a Win 2K application worked half as well.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
For what it's worth, I'm running Ubuntu 12.10 with Cinnamon and I swear I have to reboot just as much as I do in Windows. There are prompts for updates almost every other day, and probably a reboot prompt every other week or so. Now, I know in Linux I probably don't *have* to reboot and could just kick services, and it's probably a lot related to the desktop manager and I could just restart that. But at least for me it's far from the panacea of infinite uptime, at least from a desktop user perspective.
This would be fine if it were like buying a car - a 1980 Hooptiemobile drives on the freeway pretty much the same as a 2013 Whatchamotor, and the headlight switch, the horn and the gas pedal don't get moved every time I take it in for six month service.
After 20 years or so it does get a bit harder to find parts, and after 30 or 40 years it's definitely a hobby car. But that's still a lot better than having to go through hoops every two years having to either preserve the desktop UI that you are used to while the infrastructure (KDE, Gnome, etc.) gets completely redesigned according to the latest fad; or spend way too much valuable time trying to maintain a particular system while everything you run on it _has_ to be updated for security or compatibility reasons.
My personal productivity depends a lot on everything working the same. I run dual monitors. I put my mail client on one face of the Desktop Cube. I put other 'housekeeping' (IM, timesheet, Pithos, ...) functions on the same face. I put my editing windows and some web windows for previewing on the next face. If I have multiple projects open I have two more face available for that, or for miscellaneous short things like quick peeks at Slashdot or the news.
Between KDE, Gnome and now Unity (ugh), that requirement for a consistent stable working environment has been broken one too many times. I'm now looking to revert to a simpler window manager that isn't likely to do that any time soon. So far of the ones I've tried, Bodhi (Enlightenment) is the front runner but it's early days yet.
I don't mind the prospect of redoing my UI every five or ten years, but this constant shifting of the sands beneath my feet sucks. It's a fundamental problem of these big all-in-one desktop GUI environments. In short, I want to keep my Desktop Cube, and some other things. It's my metaphor and I like it. I don't want some other idiot's brainstorm of how the metaphor should be. So one way or another, I'm going back to a simple window manager, and I'll run other stuff on top as I see fit. And I can evolve the environment as and when I want. Maybe some bucket seats, a new stereo, exhaust headers, ...
It's easier to be a result of the past, but more fun to be a cause of the future! http://www.spacefinancegroup.com/
If you have to run a really old OS on a new system, you often find that while there's no drivers, the default ones work fine. The "standard VGA" driver works ok for display and so on.
There's also the minor issue of 2000 being unsupported (meaning unpatched) and almost 14 years old.
I don't think companies should have to support everything forever, but MS and PC makers like Dell do a pretty good job with older and newer stuff.
We had to install Windows XP on some newer Lenovo systems, for temporary project. It worked surprisingly well. These were Sandy Bridge Core i5 systems, with Intel graphics, and Realtek NICs. We were able to get graphics, sound, and network all working without a problem. It wasn't as easy as setting up Windows 7, which they were designed for, but it worked. While these are exactly latest hardware, they're not all that old.
Also, as you say, it is quite different between not actively supporting something, and actively stopping it from working. Apple not only has extremely short support cycles, they only support to previous OS versions, and their OS release cycle is pretty quick, but they'll then go and actively stop old OSes from working on new hardware.
Microsoft support its OSes for a minimum of 10 years from release. That's pretty good, and far longer than Apple. PC makers generally doing okay job of supporting older OSes on their PCs at least for a good while.
I have no doubt that windows XP support is going to become fairly hard to come by for new hardware quite soon. This is because it is falling out of support in 2014. However, it's rather hard to hate on a company for "only" supporting something for 13 years.
Actually, the Gnome developers did make the new version incompatible with the old version. That's why there's even a MATE or Cinnamon project to begin with.
Otherwise we could all have just kept using the old binaries.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
The key with Linux is that it is freely redistributable. Instead of having all of those tweaks and fixes spread to the four winds, you can bring them all together and package them up. You can distribute that without fear of being sued or imprisoned.
This has always been the case but is just more obvious with Microsoft's variation on Unity.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
No, you are not the oddball. Most of us are happy and relatively flexible -- and KDE user according to the linux user choice awardss. People who feel compelled to explain how desktop X (KDE SC 4, GNOME 3) destroyed their workflow/unhinged their view of the universe by changing the three crucial pixels on which everything stood are mad.
Also, they try to convince you that their solution (a 1% preference on Linux which is itself a 2% preference in general) is the best thing ever for $BATSHIT_INSANE_REASON.
Now I do think that KDE in its latest iteration is the best desktop there is bar none. And I am irritated a times by the idiosyncrasies of the other desktops (windows, mac, gnome) when I need to use them. But if I had to work for any length of time in any one of them, I'd be OK and quickly pick up the habits. These threads only tell you what the crazies are all about this timeof year.
Have you actually used KDE recently? The reason I ask is because I hadn't. I had it in my mind, like you, that it was basically a windows clone desktop (because that's how it used to be). Recently, Unity on Ubuntu annoyed me enough that I installed Kubuntu. I have to tell you, I was blown away. Modern KDE is nothing like windows. It's stunning, really - quite amazing, and has some great paradigms that I haven't seen in any other OS, like actually making the desktop area useful.
Navigating to apps etc.. is pretty awesome. Every time I boot it up I'm just struck by how beautiful it is, I really don't understand how Apple gets all this "beauty" cred. To me, it looks like a turd compared to KDE. It's in the eye of the beholder, I guess - but if you haven't tried it recently, I highly recommend giving it a shot.
Drinking habits can be dangerous. You can choke on the cloth and the nuns will wonder where their clothes are.
Settings --> Wireless & Networks --> VPN. It's right there on my Galaxy Nexus running vanilla Android.
so this leaves me with only sensible window managers like XFCE and LXDE.
Fluxbox- do-it-yourself!
This's about the only useful post I've seen here in this thread (so far).
That said, it may not be easy. Doin' it yourself (to make it do it the way you want it done) ain't what people want these days. Sad. Fluxbox stays out of your way leaving you to just config apps, but who nowadays wants to diddle with ~/.Xresources and ~/.emacs and ~/.muttrc ...? Oh, and it doesn't include "wizards" that magically config sound or WiFi or USB plugin mountpoints, ... You may need to $google.
Who nowadays even runs Xconsole, or knows the differences between XTerm and urxvt and KTerm and Gnome-Terminal?
Meanwhile, I have three tabs open in urxvt, Xconsole constantly tells me what's happening, Gkrellm tells me thousands of things (including the weather), slrn watches Usenet news, irssi does IRC, mutt watches my IMAP mail (and Gkrellm pings me on newcoming), ... On ALT-F2, I have Firefox, Gimp, Alsa Mixer, LibreOffice, ...
$kidsthesedays.
"Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit
Are you prepared to defend the premise that people are only allowed to be upset by things that are forced upon them? That doesn't seem right to me. Nobody "forces" me to drive my Jeep Liberty but I still fucking hate the god-damned beeping sound it makes all the time. I've never thought "Oh, well you know, I could choose to cartwheel to the store instead of drive, therefore this car, other drivers, traffic, potholes and delays are off limits for annoyance." Nothing else in the world is like that so it seems silly to apply it to computers. Yeah, I could choose to live like the Amish, but I don't think that precludes the legitimacy of negative opinions about aspects of the computer systems I "choose" to use.
What the fuck is it with the Choice Police anyway? What kind of weird ideology is that? Where anything that can be tracked back, no matter how far, to a "choice" suddenly renders the outcome out of bounds for sympathy? It sounds like Republican bullshit to me. "Mmm, you chose to have that second cocktail, therefore you have to carry your rapebaby to term. No complaining! That's what you get for making choices, tsk tsk." Give me a break.
A lot of games required PSN access for online/multiplayer features. Some other ones also required PSN access e.g. PAIN. In effect, I had to choose between running Linux and losing the ability to play games that I'd already bought or "choose" the upgrade and never put Linux on it again.
I'm bitching that they won't let me eat the entire cake that I paid for, especially when the OtherOS feature was a significant factor in my choice to buy Sony. Guess why Sony have forever lost me as a customer?
You're a temporary arrangement of matter sliding towards oblivion in a cold, uncaring universe