> and it never stops running for some arcane reason after a pkg update.
Based on how I've grown accustomed to running Unix (and even Windows for that matter), MacOS constantly "stops running".
I always found that file sharing was far too unreliable and impossible to debug for it to be considered a proper Unix.
On Windows I have Cygwin. On Linux I have Virtualbox. If you really want to pay money for closed proprietary software, there's really no better OS than Windows.
If I really cared about MSOffice, I wouldn't trust the MacOS version.
How much of this self-selection is dependent on browsing habits? Are you ever going to get approached to take this survey if you browse the web in paranoid mode? Is this selection methodology going to bias against the paranoid? How would that kind of bias alter the results?
It would expect it to favor MacOS and disfavor both Windows and Linux.
Some people are helpless regardless of what OS they're using. They require constant care and feeding even if they are using an Apple tablet. Even Apple products won't "save" those kinds of people. They are entirely hopeless.
...decent GPU, better CPU, more storage, civilized set of ports.
Apple products only cater to a very small set of use cases whereas PCs accommodate any of those plus plenty of other options. Current Apple products aren't at all interesting beyond the novelty form factors. So the idea that you can't get a similarly equipped PC is "cute".
The single biggest problem with using a Mac is the (limited) hardware.
It's really a shame that using MacOS in a VM isn't simpler.
Wasn't MacOS supposed to have been "the desktop Unix" 10 or 15 years ago. Wasn't this supposed to have happened already rather than it just happening now?
"feminists" love to tell other women what to do with their bodies just as much as born again church ladies. They don't respect anyone elses freedom. They despise other people's choices and think that gives them the right to meddle.
I tried to turn my mother-in-law onto Cagney & Lacey. She would have none of it because the girls were ugly. This is despite the fact that she herself is an engineering professional with 30 years of industry experience. She didn't care for Gloria Steinem's favorite cop show because it did not appeal to her "inner girl".
There's the fascist side and the communist side. So there is also a Lenin to consider and we have one of those this election cycle.
It makes perfect sense actually. We had a recession that probably qualifies as a full blown depression in 19th century terms. The end result of that is pretty obvious once you think it through. You end up with the same kinds of wingnuts suddenly gaining traction.
The wingnut who should not be named was considered a kook until the economy seriously tanked.
THIS is why the 1% should pay more attention and be somewhat less greedy. They should stop trying to undermine the measures that were put in place the last time things got ugly. Of course human nature prevents that.
You're an idiot. You're probably some suburbanite born with a silver spoon in his mouth just spouting liberal propaganda from NPR and other highly liberal sources.
I have actually "been there" and "done that".
Now I have an approach similar to the OP. I have tried to take advantage of what opportunities good timing has exposed me to. I have avoided the folly of buying into American consumerism too much.
People do have real choices and they do have self-determination despite what communist wannabes might want to tell you.
It's easier to tell yourself you aren't in control of your own destiny. It conveniently avoids facing up to your own failure and laziness.
When you try to implement communism, all you end up with is a different set of middle men. You trade one kind of Czar for another. People all over tend to devalue specialized skills. This includes the ability to manage and run things. If you kill the managing class, you don't get rid off the problem. You just cripple your society or a new management class arises.
The problem with Communism is that proles for the most part just aren't up to running anything. Otherwise they would already. They don't have what it takes to be equal participants in the end state Communist Utopia.
People that come up with these ideas (and support them) tend to be sheltered nitwits that know nothing about the proles and would probably active avoid being around them.
Of course as a bunch of geeks we do the same thing in terms of devaluing other skill sets (including management).
Your entire rant is irrelevant because you fail to address the point. The OP stated that the residents of Detroit already receive a European style "basic income". You did nothing to refute that.
The wannabe socialists forget that we already do actually have welfare programs in this country.
Oddly enough, they are the ones least likely to have ever had any actual experience with this sort of thing.
It doesn't have to be children. It can be ANY thing that is not work. Want to get out and actually DO something? Want to be something more than a slave to your boss?
You will need a corporate culture that acknowledges that employees do something besides work for the corporation.
Even game programmers like to get out of the office some time.
Well, Obamacare was all about making sure everyone has health insurance. Obama even wiped his butt with the Constitution in the process. So if ANY one has a sob story now, it's all on Obama.
He's the white knight that was supposed to have solved this problem with a purely partisan effort.
Of course any Democrats will try to shout you down if you have one bad thing to say about the ACA or what's happened with insurance afterwards. They don't want to hear about any unintended consequences or gaps in Obama's solution.
They also should be scared witless of Bernie. They have screwed over the working class enough and caused enough chaos that people are starting to listen to commies and not run away screaming into the night. This is a not unexpected result of a financial meltdown of epic proportions.
The 1% have primed the situation for their own downfall due to their greed and lack of foresight.
All of this low profile stuff is relatively obscure to the point where Linux users make up a very significant chunk of the user community.
As far as the Mac Mini nonsense goes... low profile PCs predate the Mini. I had one myself. In fact, I advocated that Apple pursue this path rather than their stupid lampshade concept. I did so in this very forum.
Beyond the really compact stuff like Book PCs, the major PC vendors all had low profile desktops that were heavily used in business.
There are slightly larger Steam boxes that come with the ability to upgrade the GPU and come shipped with them. They're not really tiny but they aren't really huge either. They're old style desktop cases that are about as large as an S1 Tivo. They're standard machines but they will fit in an AV cabinet if there isn't a back wall.
Shoebox and cube systems are also a possibility as well as ITX systems.
I even have a standard mini tower that's not too huge. it's not much bigger than a subwoofer.
My main system is a monster but it's also got room for 15 3.5 inch hot swap drive bays. More a "server" than a "desktop".
Although unless you are living in an IKEA showroom, the space of a "conventional PC" should not really be a problem anyways.
For anything BUT gaming in the living room, this machine is expensive and inflexible. It simply does not represent a good set of engineering tradeoffs in a cutthroat PC market where alternatives are legion. There are alternatives in all shapes and sizes including laptops of various sizes multiple desktop form factors.
This includes slightly larger and dramatically cheaper Steam machines that can be put to any use you like.
It's not like Apple products where you're pretty much a captive audience.
If you aren't interested in sharing then you can't really call it science. Eventually, every esoteric experiment should be repeatable by every Tom, Dick, and Harry. It might take 200 years, or 1000, but eventually all of the most important breakthroughs should eventually trickle down to the High School Science fair.
You can't alter any field unless you allow ideas to propagate.
Sure you can. The "seal of approval" has been diluted. It's like diluting any trademark. Once that trust has been betrayed, then it is rightfully difficult to regain it. It doesn't matter if it's journalism or "science".
The time for separate gatekeepers is at an end. Each contributing entity can publish and vet their own work. We don't have the overhead of dead tree publishing anymore and should jettison the other vestiges of such dinosaurs.
Science is ultimately about reproducible results. Results are definitive regardless of what some self-appointed talking head wants you to think.
"I am alive and well and here to tell you you're full of shit" THAT is a result. '-pppp
So... we're going to actively avoid using that material as fuel because someone on the other side of the planet might decide to make bombs out of their wasted fuel?
They're fit enough for the purpose. As always, it's the end user's requirements that ultimately matter. What some random snob has to say on the matter is entirely irrelevant.
Those of us that want better have plenty of good alternatives.
Slashdot Mirror
> and it never stops running for some arcane reason after a pkg update.
Based on how I've grown accustomed to running Unix (and even Windows for that matter), MacOS constantly "stops running".
I always found that file sharing was far too unreliable and impossible to debug for it to be considered a proper Unix.
On Windows I have Cygwin. On Linux I have Virtualbox. If you really want to pay money for closed proprietary software, there's really no better OS than Windows.
If I really cared about MSOffice, I wouldn't trust the MacOS version.
How much of this self-selection is dependent on browsing habits? Are you ever going to get approached to take this survey if you browse the web in paranoid mode? Is this selection methodology going to bias against the paranoid? How would that kind of bias alter the results?
It would expect it to favor MacOS and disfavor both Windows and Linux.
Some people are helpless regardless of what OS they're using. They require constant care and feeding even if they are using an Apple tablet. Even Apple products won't "save" those kinds of people. They are entirely hopeless.
...decent GPU, better CPU, more storage, civilized set of ports.
Apple products only cater to a very small set of use cases whereas PCs accommodate any of those plus plenty of other options. Current Apple products aren't at all interesting beyond the novelty form factors. So the idea that you can't get a similarly equipped PC is "cute".
The single biggest problem with using a Mac is the (limited) hardware.
It's really a shame that using MacOS in a VM isn't simpler.
Wasn't MacOS supposed to have been "the desktop Unix" 10 or 15 years ago. Wasn't this supposed to have happened already rather than it just happening now?
"feminists" love to tell other women what to do with their bodies just as much as born again church ladies. They don't respect anyone elses freedom. They despise other people's choices and think that gives them the right to meddle.
I tried to turn my mother-in-law onto Cagney & Lacey. She would have none of it because the girls were ugly. This is despite the fact that she herself is an engineering professional with 30 years of industry experience. She didn't care for Gloria Steinem's favorite cop show because it did not appeal to her "inner girl".
If less people bought into this Democrat cult of victimhood, then the whole gerrymandering thing would be a total non-problem.
...as is true with nearly any "democracy".
Don't get confused by abuse of terms in the vernacular.
No it isn't really.
At that point, corporations are only being forced to hand over what they already should have had to hand over to the US Library of Congress.
You're confusing the idea of "Open Source" and freeware.
Well, there are two sides to this.
There's the fascist side and the communist side. So there is also a Lenin to consider and we have one of those this election cycle.
It makes perfect sense actually. We had a recession that probably qualifies as a full blown depression in 19th century terms. The end result of that is pretty obvious once you think it through. You end up with the same kinds of wingnuts suddenly gaining traction.
The wingnut who should not be named was considered a kook until the economy seriously tanked.
THIS is why the 1% should pay more attention and be somewhat less greedy. They should stop trying to undermine the measures that were put in place the last time things got ugly. Of course human nature prevents that.
People are both arrogant and greedy.
So the cycle of history repeats...
You're an idiot. You're probably some suburbanite born with a silver spoon in his mouth just spouting liberal propaganda from NPR and other highly liberal sources.
I have actually "been there" and "done that".
Now I have an approach similar to the OP. I have tried to take advantage of what opportunities good timing has exposed me to. I have avoided the folly of buying into American consumerism too much.
People do have real choices and they do have self-determination despite what communist wannabes might want to tell you.
It's easier to tell yourself you aren't in control of your own destiny. It conveniently avoids facing up to your own failure and laziness.
When you try to implement communism, all you end up with is a different set of middle men. You trade one kind of Czar for another. People all over tend to devalue specialized skills. This includes the ability to manage and run things. If you kill the managing class, you don't get rid off the problem. You just cripple your society or a new management class arises.
The problem with Communism is that proles for the most part just aren't up to running anything. Otherwise they would already. They don't have what it takes to be equal participants in the end state Communist Utopia.
People that come up with these ideas (and support them) tend to be sheltered nitwits that know nothing about the proles and would probably active avoid being around them.
Of course as a bunch of geeks we do the same thing in terms of devaluing other skill sets (including management).
Your entire rant is irrelevant because you fail to address the point. The OP stated that the residents of Detroit already receive a European style "basic income". You did nothing to refute that.
The wannabe socialists forget that we already do actually have welfare programs in this country.
Oddly enough, they are the ones least likely to have ever had any actual experience with this sort of thing.
It doesn't have to be children. It can be ANY thing that is not work. Want to get out and actually DO something? Want to be something more than a slave to your boss?
You will need a corporate culture that acknowledges that employees do something besides work for the corporation.
Even game programmers like to get out of the office some time.
Well, Obamacare was all about making sure everyone has health insurance. Obama even wiped his butt with the Constitution in the process. So if ANY one has a sob story now, it's all on Obama.
He's the white knight that was supposed to have solved this problem with a purely partisan effort.
Of course any Democrats will try to shout you down if you have one bad thing to say about the ACA or what's happened with insurance afterwards. They don't want to hear about any unintended consequences or gaps in Obama's solution.
They also should be scared witless of Bernie. They have screwed over the working class enough and caused enough chaos that people are starting to listen to commies and not run away screaming into the night. This is a not unexpected result of a financial meltdown of epic proportions.
The 1% have primed the situation for their own downfall due to their greed and lack of foresight.
All of this low profile stuff is relatively obscure to the point where Linux users make up a very significant chunk of the user community.
As far as the Mac Mini nonsense goes... low profile PCs predate the Mini. I had one myself. In fact, I advocated that Apple pursue this path rather than their stupid lampshade concept. I did so in this very forum.
Beyond the really compact stuff like Book PCs, the major PC vendors all had low profile desktops that were heavily used in business.
There are slightly larger Steam boxes that come with the ability to upgrade the GPU and come shipped with them. They're not really tiny but they aren't really huge either. They're old style desktop cases that are about as large as an S1 Tivo. They're standard machines but they will fit in an AV cabinet if there isn't a back wall.
Shoebox and cube systems are also a possibility as well as ITX systems.
I even have a standard mini tower that's not too huge. it's not much bigger than a subwoofer.
My main system is a monster but it's also got room for 15 3.5 inch hot swap drive bays. More a "server" than a "desktop".
Although unless you are living in an IKEA showroom, the space of a "conventional PC" should not really be a problem anyways.
For anything BUT gaming in the living room, this machine is expensive and inflexible. It simply does not represent a good set of engineering tradeoffs in a cutthroat PC market where alternatives are legion. There are alternatives in all shapes and sizes including laptops of various sizes multiple desktop form factors.
This includes slightly larger and dramatically cheaper Steam machines that can be put to any use you like.
It's not like Apple products where you're pretty much a captive audience.
If you aren't interested in sharing then you can't really call it science. Eventually, every esoteric experiment should be repeatable by every Tom, Dick, and Harry. It might take 200 years, or 1000, but eventually all of the most important breakthroughs should eventually trickle down to the High School Science fair.
You can't alter any field unless you allow ideas to propagate.
Sure you can. The "seal of approval" has been diluted. It's like diluting any trademark. Once that trust has been betrayed, then it is rightfully difficult to regain it. It doesn't matter if it's journalism or "science".
The time for separate gatekeepers is at an end. Each contributing entity can publish and vet their own work. We don't have the overhead of dead tree publishing anymore and should jettison the other vestiges of such dinosaurs.
Science is ultimately about reproducible results. Results are definitive regardless of what some self-appointed talking head wants you to think.
"I am alive and well and here to tell you you're full of shit" THAT is a result. '-pppp
So... we're going to actively avoid using that material as fuel because someone on the other side of the planet might decide to make bombs out of their wasted fuel?
I never understood that logic.
They're fit enough for the purpose. As always, it's the end user's requirements that ultimately matter. What some random snob has to say on the matter is entirely irrelevant.
Those of us that want better have plenty of good alternatives.
> > Spoken like a true American. Moar is always better value, even if you donÃ(TM)t need all of it, right? Would you like your Pi[drive] supersized?
What can I say? I have the extra space AND the extra disposable income... '-p