I'm not annoyed at all. As I said, I've just been there, done that (in a paying job for 10 years) and don't want the hassle at home. My free time is limited, and spending it on operating system stuff is time I'll never get back. Running Linux I gain very little over what I can do with OS X, but lose a lot in terms of quality applications, system wide automation, etc.
Sure Linux has plenty of software, but most of it is half-finished garbage. Yes there are gems like Firefox, KDE and the networking stack. But there's an awful lot of stuff that wouldn't even pass as beta in the real world if you were trying to sell it.
"But it's free" you say? Well I don't care. I want to pay money to make my life easier.
If it works for you, great. Linux does break from time to time too - I was around for the libc5 -> glibc clusterfuck, and I've dealt with kernel upgrades doing retarded shit like changing device probe order so that eth0 because eth1 and vice versa.
Your day job is "Linux" proves my point. What tasks do you get done with it? Network monitoring/configuration/diagnostics? Video editing? Remote desktop support? Office stuff?
Unless you're paid as a coder, "Linux" isn't (or shouldn't) be a job. The fact that you're explaining your job as as "Linux" when asked what tasks you perform simply supports the case that just running, maintaining and dealing with the breakage is a full time job in itself. Sure, any muppet can run apt-get. It breaks. And don't tell me it doesn't, because I've been using Debian since Bo.
So, again - what tasks are you using the platform for?
You're running the wrong binaries. Run OS X apps - and they just work with a minimum of fucking about. If you're going to bitch about running GNU software on OS X being a pain in the ass, you may as well compare to running Windows apps on Linux.
Ok so where are the fully working, polished alternatives on Linux or FreeBSD to: Automator, Applescript (i.e. pervasive desktop application supported scripting), Ableton Live, iMovie, Photoshop, etc?
There are plenty of apps available on OS X that either don't exist AT ALL and have no alternative or have some shitty half-assed alternative in the free software world.
Seriously. What is your actual workload? Because I'm willing to bet that whatever it is you're doing on Linux could be done just as easily on OS X without fucking about maintaining the operating system.
I feel confident in making that call because I've been there myself. OS X can do pretty much anything Linux can do - can virtualize Linux if required anyway, and has a shitload more quality apps for desktop type stuff, video, audio, etc. than Linux does, to boot.
This. So much this. Mirrors my experience pretty much as well. I started out on slackware back in 1995 and moved to the mac because I can afford the money but don't want to spend the TIME fucking around just to make shit work.
This. Pick the correct tool for the job. Linux makes a shitty desktop operating system. OS X makes a shitty server and gaming platform. I too run a mixed environment at home including a ZFS NAS, Windows and PS3 for gaming and OS X for pretty much everything else.
Lol. In Linux or free unix desktop land you're a slave to software dependencies and chasing down half-assed solutions to common desktop application type tasks. On my mac, I spend a total of about 1 hour per 18 months on operating system upgrades. I've been there, done that, and will GLADLY pay the software licensing cost to get what I want done with a minimum of fucking about.
I made the same decision, for pretty much the same reasons (plus pretty hardware) in 2007. It's nice being able to just do what I want to do, rather than faffing about fixing things or chasing dependencies to get something halfway there.
That must be why Linux is leading the charge in terms of having a dell defined, hardware abstracted, properly layered rendering pipeline rather than the X11 clusterfuck. Oh wait...
Except the proper integrated solution (in this case, a rendering pipeline that doesn't suck hardcore) has already been done by others multiple decades ago. E.g., NextStep. OS X, hell, even the Windows DirectX stack, like it or not, is far superior to the clusterfuck that is X11.
And the problem here lies in the fact that the source could be compromised. Hence, code signing - the software can be uploaded to the net, after being signed by the private key which is kept off-line. Trusting the server sending you stuff these days is no real security at all.
Also - watch out, it may also re-enable the Java plugin in your browser if you had previously turned it off, on at least one box I've updated on (previous update).
Even worse - a recent Java update decided to upgrade me from Java 6 to Java 7 (I know this is the case, because I don't install Java 7 myself). It left Java 1.6u38 installed, and no update to Java 6. I have applications that do not run on Java 7. So i'll be running Java 6. Which is still insecure on my machine.
.... and Base is pretty damn broken anyhow. I tested it a couple of months back - create new database. create a single table with 2 fields, a primary key and a name. It crashed when I tried to save the table design. Doesn't exactly inspire confidence as far as holding my data goes, which is somewhat crucial for a DATABASE.
And if you subnet it into appropriately sized subnets, guess what happens to the number of available IPs? Hint: You don't get anywhere near the 16 million odd IPs in that allocation for actual use. Hence bitching that "i'll bet that they don't have 16 million hosts!" leads me to believe you're an idiot.
True, but i really think the mini is at the "light enough" point for a tablet. If they COULD make it lighter, i'd rather they spend the weight to give it more battery, better screen, better processor, etc. The iPad 4 is just unwieldy by comparison. Yes, firstworldproblem, etc; but if you're an iPad X owner, seriously try spending some time with a mini. I was a skeptic and totally see the point.
Slashdot Mirror
Good for you if your application requirements can be met by free software, great. Mine can't.
I'm not annoyed at all. As I said, I've just been there, done that (in a paying job for 10 years) and don't want the hassle at home. My free time is limited, and spending it on operating system stuff is time I'll never get back. Running Linux I gain very little over what I can do with OS X, but lose a lot in terms of quality applications, system wide automation, etc.
Sure Linux has plenty of software, but most of it is half-finished garbage. Yes there are gems like Firefox, KDE and the networking stack. But there's an awful lot of stuff that wouldn't even pass as beta in the real world if you were trying to sell it.
"But it's free" you say? Well I don't care. I want to pay money to make my life easier.
If it works for you, great. Linux does break from time to time too - I was around for the libc5 -> glibc clusterfuck, and I've dealt with kernel upgrades doing retarded shit like changing device probe order so that eth0 because eth1 and vice versa.
Your day job is "Linux" proves my point. What tasks do you get done with it? Network monitoring/configuration/diagnostics? Video editing? Remote desktop support? Office stuff?
Unless you're paid as a coder, "Linux" isn't (or shouldn't) be a job. The fact that you're explaining your job as as "Linux" when asked what tasks you perform simply supports the case that just running, maintaining and dealing with the breakage is a full time job in itself. Sure, any muppet can run apt-get. It breaks. And don't tell me it doesn't, because I've been using Debian since Bo.
So, again - what tasks are you using the platform for?
You're running the wrong binaries. Run OS X apps - and they just work with a minimum of fucking about. If you're going to bitch about running GNU software on OS X being a pain in the ass, you may as well compare to running Windows apps on Linux.
Ok so where are the fully working, polished alternatives on Linux or FreeBSD to: Automator, Applescript (i.e. pervasive desktop application supported scripting), Ableton Live, iMovie, Photoshop, etc?
There are plenty of apps available on OS X that either don't exist AT ALL and have no alternative or have some shitty half-assed alternative in the free software world.
Q: what do you actually "get done" with Linux?
Seriously. What is your actual workload? Because I'm willing to bet that whatever it is you're doing on Linux could be done just as easily on OS X without fucking about maintaining the operating system.
I feel confident in making that call because I've been there myself. OS X can do pretty much anything Linux can do - can virtualize Linux if required anyway, and has a shitload more quality apps for desktop type stuff, video, audio, etc. than Linux does, to boot.
You buy some more with the income you earned not wasting your time fucking around fixing it. "Smart guy".
Android has about as much in common with desktop Linux as Windows 7 does with VMS.
This. So much this. Mirrors my experience pretty much as well. I started out on slackware back in 1995 and moved to the mac because I can afford the money but don't want to spend the TIME fucking around just to make shit work.
This. Pick the correct tool for the job. Linux makes a shitty desktop operating system. OS X makes a shitty server and gaming platform. I too run a mixed environment at home including a ZFS NAS, Windows and PS3 for gaming and OS X for pretty much everything else.
Lol. In Linux or free unix desktop land you're a slave to software dependencies and chasing down half-assed solutions to common desktop application type tasks. On my mac, I spend a total of about 1 hour per 18 months on operating system upgrades. I've been there, done that, and will GLADLY pay the software licensing cost to get what I want done with a minimum of fucking about.
I made the same decision, for pretty much the same reasons (plus pretty hardware) in 2007. It's nice being able to just do what I want to do, rather than faffing about fixing things or chasing dependencies to get something halfway there.
Plus LTS and all the versions in between the last LTS and current.
That must be why Linux is leading the charge in terms of having a dell defined, hardware abstracted, properly layered rendering pipeline rather than the X11 clusterfuck. Oh wait...
Except the proper integrated solution (in this case, a rendering pipeline that doesn't suck hardcore) has already been done by others multiple decades ago. E.g., NextStep. OS X, hell, even the Windows DirectX stack, like it or not, is far superior to the clusterfuck that is X11.
And the problem here lies in the fact that the source could be compromised. Hence, code signing - the software can be uploaded to the net, after being signed by the private key which is kept off-line. Trusting the server sending you stuff these days is no real security at all.
Confirmed on a second machine.
Also - watch out, it may also re-enable the Java plugin in your browser if you had previously turned it off, on at least one box I've updated on (previous update).
Even worse - a recent Java update decided to upgrade me from Java 6 to Java 7 (I know this is the case, because I don't install Java 7 myself). It left Java 1.6u38 installed, and no update to Java 6. I have applications that do not run on Java 7. So i'll be running Java 6. Which is still insecure on my machine.
This was on a 15 minute old install of debian stable, by the way. Not some bleeding edge or ricer-cflags distribution.
.... and Base is pretty damn broken anyhow. I tested it a couple of months back - create new database. create a single table with 2 fields, a primary key and a name. It crashed when I tried to save the table design. Doesn't exactly inspire confidence as far as holding my data goes, which is somewhat crucial for a DATABASE.
And if you subnet it into appropriately sized subnets, guess what happens to the number of available IPs? Hint: You don't get anywhere near the 16 million odd IPs in that allocation for actual use. Hence bitching that "i'll bet that they don't have 16 million hosts!" leads me to believe you're an idiot.
This is an exceedingly small percentage of development.
True, but i really think the mini is at the "light enough" point for a tablet. If they COULD make it lighter, i'd rather they spend the weight to give it more battery, better screen, better processor, etc. The iPad 4 is just unwieldy by comparison. Yes, firstworldproblem, etc; but if you're an iPad X owner, seriously try spending some time with a mini. I was a skeptic and totally see the point.