"You don’t need to be a climate scientist to understand this stuff. Or even a scientist. But it has long suited the alarmist camp to pretend otherwise because it would like us all to believe that “climate change” is a mystery which only the elect can understand. That is, they wish to confer on climate scientists the status priests used to have before the invention of the printing press and the translation of the Bible into the vernacular"
"The thing is that thing that I mentioned at the beginning: the guys providing the science for the alarmist agenda are often really quite low-grade."
"The computer models on which anthropogenic global warming theory are based are inadequate to the task because they fail to take into account all the real-world data. And it’s not me saying this stuff: this is a viewpoint coming directly from the alarmist camp."
"But basically, they haven’t a ****ing clue. They can’t do logic; they can’t read or understand the most rudimentary argument; they refuse to accept the truth of their own findings. They’re a bunch of second-raters who yet have the gall to invite us to believe that on their say-so should depend the future of climate science, global environmental policy and, by extension, the world’s economy."
How about you take your own advice instead of getting your panties in a bunch over other people's posts?
You really do have to wonder why some people are so precious about free speech. He could have chosen to ignore the threads he disliked, or he could have chosen to contribute something valid and useful. But no, he went straight for the dummy spit:-)
After about 12 months an LTS release really starts to feel dated and you find yourself wishing you'd had newer packages from the various testing/unstable branches, which come with their own host of problems. It's a constantly moving feast of nightmares. Apple has solved that problem for me.
Using various hardware over the years I would, from the time to time, experience complete X lock-ups. That was another reason I ditched Linux for a Mac. I've had no hardware/software issues at all in the past 3+ years. With PC hardware you never quite knew what was at fault.
You'll be glad you did if you do get a Mac. Machines will last you 5 years and the OS is so stable. In fact, I started with a Mac Mini for 1 year then upgraded to a Macbook Pro, and used Time Machine to transfer everything from one to the other. There is absolutely no way I would trust such a thing on Windows but with Mac, I'm still using my profile copied from that Mac Mini and I've had no problems whatsoever.
Mac is an excellent Unix with a desktop that's done right.
Why should I bother conducting "research" into which window manager might give me a reasonable approximation of a sane and stable UI like I have on my Mac? I've done plenty of research in my many years of using Linux, and the end result was that Linux on the desktop was a fool's errand. Unless Apple decides to follow the Ubuntu/Unity or Microsoft/Metro examples, there's no point looking around for an alternative when I have no need and there is certainly no signs that there is something better out there I'm missing out on.
My brief look-see at FreeBSD would have to have been at least 5 years ago. But why bother checking it out again? Mac is already BSD underneath. I've got a rock solid unix with a damned good UI on top of it. I also once used Linux Mint and yet now you are having to leave it for something else. This is the story of many Linux users: having to chop and change all the time. I decided to get off that merry-go-round.
I may have noticed the iCloud default once but when you save it elsewhere most applications (that I've seen, anyway) remember your last-used location. So it's not a major issue.
Nope. That's a statement of fact. It was my brother's wife who bought a Mac a year or so before my brother. We both liked to tease her about it but she shot back with the fact that she'd never rebooted (a slight exaggeration) and had dozens of browser tabs open. The writing was on the wall when my brother (an overclocking nerd clearly not sympathetic to locked-down hardware and OSes) finally switched, and with Linux going down the toilet, Mac was the only logical choice for me.
I'm using Yosemite and I've not once been pressured into setting up a Facebook account by Apple. I don't have one, and don't care for it. I'm still not sure what you mean by 'mobilization' of OS X.
Using a fork of something simply to keep what I was used to was the beginning of a slippery slope in my book. I didn't want to start using someone's fork that could wither and fall into obscurity thereby kicking off yet another round of DE evaluations until I found one that suited. I no longer have this conundrum because I have OS X. Its DE "just is" and "just works" and it's no longer a concern.
It's a bit like Maslow's hierarchy of needs: with Linux I felt I never quite got to Self Actualisation, I was always stuck down at the Safety level fiddling around with config files and packages. With OS X I don't have to worry about any of the lower level stuff, I'm doing what *I* want to do, not what the OS forces me to do.
I did try FreeBSD - once - but only as a curiosity. There was no way it was going to be viable as a desktop OS, for me at least. As far as distros I still respect it would have to be Debian, but even the stable branch was too out of date, and there was no way I was going to run unstable. I want my OS to behave, I don't want to be its slave. That's one thing I like about OS X, I hardly ever notice the OS.
No, I did not RTFA. The slashdot summary was quite sufficient to indicate that it would be a yawn-fest, but your contribution has confirmed it. I remember using KDE 3 when I thought GNOME was a toy but then KDE 4 came out and when it was shown to be a disaster, I eventually settled on GNOME and realised that simplicity is good. I actually should thank Ubuntu and GNOME for preparing me for Mac OS X, I suppose. The "no features for you" nature of Nautilus helped me cope with the Finder, and various other efforts to strip out features in Ubuntu made me appreciate the no-nonsense interface of OS X. So it's not all bad:-) There is a happy ending!
I had been hopping around distros for several years before I settled on Ubuntu 10.04 for a while. I just grew dissatisfied with the endless and unnecessary changes that required me to read HOWTOs to install this or that to get back what I had lost. My brother and his wife had also switched to Mac around a year or two before and I saw how simple life could be. Once you go Mac you never go back (and I used to laugh at Mac fanboys; but now I'm one of them). There really is no better coupling between software and hardware than a Mac.
you would have noticed that you can run one of a few hundred different window managers on Linux
That is SO funny. I don't even know where to begin. I'm just so over "oooh, look at this new window manager and how it does this obscure thing in this slightly different way to that other evil one". There's more to life than fiddling with window managers (and I used to configure them heavily!). I'm so glad that OS X has cured me of my WM-tweaking addiction.
I suppose I'm not exactly thrilled about iOS features coming to Mac but Apple hasn't been as forceful at upsetting desktop systems.
Exactly. I haven't noticed ANY features from iOS suddenly ruining my day on OS X (Yosemite) so that's got to be a sign that Apple, indeed, has NOT upset the desktop like Microsoft did with the dreaded Windows 8.
Ubuntu's 'macification' of their UI was so half-baked that it was a massive retrograde step. Forcing apps to render their menus at the top of the screen is only one aspect. The whole Linux ecosystem is NOT designed around this fundamental concept from OS X, and it was never going to work well - it certainly didn't before I gave up. I have no idea if it has improved since then, but now that I'm a happy Mac user - "fanboy" if you will (boo, hiss!!) - there's absolutely no reason to go back. All my dev stuff works on OS X and I have a fully functional unix underneath (if I care to go near it).
I actually see the lack of significant changes as a *good* thing, and hope it continues.
Amen! The constant chopping and changing (often for no apparent reason) on Ubuntu drove me nuts. The same with Windows, which I have to use at work (thank goodness for Classic Shell). Whilst I'm no particular fan of the Dock on OS X one good thing about it is that it hasn't significantly changed in 15+ years. Windows has done more damage with throwing out the Start Menu than Apple ever has by having a crappy dock instead of a decent task bar.
OS X doesn't suffer from the 'mobilization' of the desktop. I use OS X on a daily basis and not one thing that's going on in iOS-land has adversely (or even noticeably!) affected my existence. Perhaps you could elaborate on what you mean?
Why should I have to fight with package dependencies and fiddling with config files every time some clique of nerds decides one DE is better than another? It soon became tiresome. Now that I've been on OS X for 3+ years I've never looked back. Its DE doesn't throw the baby out with the bath water every 12 to 18 months.
Yawn. Not *another* desktop environment. I gave up on Linux when Ubuntu ruined everything with their Unity rubbish. Never been happier than I am now with a Mac. Linux still good for servers, but for desktops? It never has been suitable, and never will be.
The only warming that has occurred since 1998 has been due to scientists committing fraud by adjusting the historical temperature record to suit their failed prophesies. Here's one of the more irreverent write-ups on the whole thing (if you dare to read it, that is; I know alarmists dislike reading heretical material):
I agree. I was once a member of the Linux crowd who thought Bill Gates was the Borg leader trying to enslave us all, but these days his head is screwed on reasonably well (apart from his belief in the non-problem of climate change -i.e., no warming in 18 years and 6 months should tell you that *something* smells fishy about the theory). I use c#.NET and SQL Server at work on Windows and recently Azure, and it's nice. Just because IE has sucked for a long time that doesn't mean the man is evil. At least he doesn't buy into the nonsense that we'll all be saved if only the countryside was covered in wind farms and everyone had solar panels on their roofs. If climate change is really a thing, then he (and the likes of Bjorn Lomborg) are right: it's going to take investment in technology research to solve the problem, not government subsidised green window dressing.
Slashdot Mirror
The following from James Delingpole yesterday says it far better than I ever could: http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...
Some choice quotes:
"You don’t need to be a climate scientist to understand this stuff. Or even a scientist. But it has long suited the alarmist camp to pretend otherwise because it would like us all to believe that “climate change” is a mystery which only the elect can understand. That is, they wish to confer on climate scientists the status priests used to have before the invention of the printing press and the translation of the Bible into the vernacular"
"The thing is that thing that I mentioned at the beginning: the guys providing the science for the alarmist agenda are often really quite low-grade."
"The computer models on which anthropogenic global warming theory are based are inadequate to the task because they fail to take into account all the real-world data. And it’s not me saying this stuff: this is a viewpoint coming directly from the alarmist camp."
"But basically, they haven’t a ****ing clue. They can’t do logic; they can’t read or understand the most rudimentary argument; they refuse to accept the truth of their own findings. They’re a bunch of second-raters who yet have the gall to invite us to believe that on their say-so should depend the future of climate science, global environmental policy and, by extension, the world’s economy."
Q.E.D.
How about we talk about TDE?
How about you take your own advice instead of getting your panties in a bunch over other people's posts?
You really do have to wonder why some people are so precious about free speech. He could have chosen to ignore the threads he disliked, or he could have chosen to contribute something valid and useful. But no, he went straight for the dummy spit :-)
After about 12 months an LTS release really starts to feel dated and you find yourself wishing you'd had newer packages from the various testing/unstable branches, which come with their own host of problems. It's a constantly moving feast of nightmares. Apple has solved that problem for me.
Using various hardware over the years I would, from the time to time, experience complete X lock-ups. That was another reason I ditched Linux for a Mac. I've had no hardware/software issues at all in the past 3+ years. With PC hardware you never quite knew what was at fault.
You'll be glad you did if you do get a Mac. Machines will last you 5 years and the OS is so stable. In fact, I started with a Mac Mini for 1 year then upgraded to a Macbook Pro, and used Time Machine to transfer everything from one to the other. There is absolutely no way I would trust such a thing on Windows but with Mac, I'm still using my profile copied from that Mac Mini and I've had no problems whatsoever.
Mac is an excellent Unix with a desktop that's done right.
Why should I bother conducting "research" into which window manager might give me a reasonable approximation of a sane and stable UI like I have on my Mac? I've done plenty of research in my many years of using Linux, and the end result was that Linux on the desktop was a fool's errand. Unless Apple decides to follow the Ubuntu/Unity or Microsoft/Metro examples, there's no point looking around for an alternative when I have no need and there is certainly no signs that there is something better out there I'm missing out on.
My brief look-see at FreeBSD would have to have been at least 5 years ago. But why bother checking it out again? Mac is already BSD underneath. I've got a rock solid unix with a damned good UI on top of it. I also once used Linux Mint and yet now you are having to leave it for something else. This is the story of many Linux users: having to chop and change all the time. I decided to get off that merry-go-round.
I may have noticed the iCloud default once but when you save it elsewhere most applications (that I've seen, anyway) remember your last-used location. So it's not a major issue.
Gee, the old Power PC to Intel chestnut, eh? Time has shown that Apple made the right decision on that one.
Nope. That's a statement of fact. It was my brother's wife who bought a Mac a year or so before my brother. We both liked to tease her about it but she shot back with the fact that she'd never rebooted (a slight exaggeration) and had dozens of browser tabs open. The writing was on the wall when my brother (an overclocking nerd clearly not sympathetic to locked-down hardware and OSes) finally switched, and with Linux going down the toilet, Mac was the only logical choice for me.
I'm using Yosemite and I've not once been pressured into setting up a Facebook account by Apple. I don't have one, and don't care for it. I'm still not sure what you mean by 'mobilization' of OS X.
Using a fork of something simply to keep what I was used to was the beginning of a slippery slope in my book. I didn't want to start using someone's fork that could wither and fall into obscurity thereby kicking off yet another round of DE evaluations until I found one that suited. I no longer have this conundrum because I have OS X. Its DE "just is" and "just works" and it's no longer a concern.
It's a bit like Maslow's hierarchy of needs: with Linux I felt I never quite got to Self Actualisation, I was always stuck down at the Safety level fiddling around with config files and packages. With OS X I don't have to worry about any of the lower level stuff, I'm doing what *I* want to do, not what the OS forces me to do.
I did try FreeBSD - once - but only as a curiosity. There was no way it was going to be viable as a desktop OS, for me at least. As far as distros I still respect it would have to be Debian, but even the stable branch was too out of date, and there was no way I was going to run unstable. I want my OS to behave, I don't want to be its slave. That's one thing I like about OS X, I hardly ever notice the OS.
No, I did not RTFA. The slashdot summary was quite sufficient to indicate that it would be a yawn-fest, but your contribution has confirmed it. I remember using KDE 3 when I thought GNOME was a toy but then KDE 4 came out and when it was shown to be a disaster, I eventually settled on GNOME and realised that simplicity is good. I actually should thank Ubuntu and GNOME for preparing me for Mac OS X, I suppose. The "no features for you" nature of Nautilus helped me cope with the Finder, and various other efforts to strip out features in Ubuntu made me appreciate the no-nonsense interface of OS X. So it's not all bad :-) There is a happy ending!
I had been hopping around distros for several years before I settled on Ubuntu 10.04 for a while. I just grew dissatisfied with the endless and unnecessary changes that required me to read HOWTOs to install this or that to get back what I had lost. My brother and his wife had also switched to Mac around a year or two before and I saw how simple life could be. Once you go Mac you never go back (and I used to laugh at Mac fanboys; but now I'm one of them). There really is no better coupling between software and hardware than a Mac.
you would have noticed that you can run one of a few hundred different window managers on Linux
That is SO funny. I don't even know where to begin. I'm just so over "oooh, look at this new window manager and how it does this obscure thing in this slightly different way to that other evil one". There's more to life than fiddling with window managers (and I used to configure them heavily!). I'm so glad that OS X has cured me of my WM-tweaking addiction.
I suppose I'm not exactly thrilled about iOS features coming to Mac but Apple hasn't been as forceful at upsetting desktop systems.
Exactly. I haven't noticed ANY features from iOS suddenly ruining my day on OS X (Yosemite) so that's got to be a sign that Apple, indeed, has NOT upset the desktop like Microsoft did with the dreaded Windows 8.
Ubuntu's 'macification' of their UI was so half-baked that it was a massive retrograde step. Forcing apps to render their menus at the top of the screen is only one aspect. The whole Linux ecosystem is NOT designed around this fundamental concept from OS X, and it was never going to work well - it certainly didn't before I gave up. I have no idea if it has improved since then, but now that I'm a happy Mac user - "fanboy" if you will (boo, hiss!!) - there's absolutely no reason to go back. All my dev stuff works on OS X and I have a fully functional unix underneath (if I care to go near it).
I actually see the lack of significant changes as a *good* thing, and hope it continues.
Amen! The constant chopping and changing (often for no apparent reason) on Ubuntu drove me nuts. The same with Windows, which I have to use at work (thank goodness for Classic Shell). Whilst I'm no particular fan of the Dock on OS X one good thing about it is that it hasn't significantly changed in 15+ years. Windows has done more damage with throwing out the Start Menu than Apple ever has by having a crappy dock instead of a decent task bar.
OS X doesn't suffer from the 'mobilization' of the desktop. I use OS X on a daily basis and not one thing that's going on in iOS-land has adversely (or even noticeably!) affected my existence. Perhaps you could elaborate on what you mean?
Why should I have to fight with package dependencies and fiddling with config files every time some clique of nerds decides one DE is better than another? It soon became tiresome. Now that I've been on OS X for 3+ years I've never looked back. Its DE doesn't throw the baby out with the bath water every 12 to 18 months.
Yawn. Not *another* desktop environment. I gave up on Linux when Ubuntu ruined everything with their Unity rubbish. Never been happier than I am now with a Mac. Linux still good for servers, but for desktops? It never has been suitable, and never will be.
The only warming that has occurred since 1998 has been due to scientists committing fraud by adjusting the historical temperature record to suit their failed prophesies. Here's one of the more irreverent write-ups on the whole thing (if you dare to read it, that is; I know alarmists dislike reading heretical material):
http://jamesdelingpole.com/201...
I agree. I was once a member of the Linux crowd who thought Bill Gates was the Borg leader trying to enslave us all, but these days his head is screwed on reasonably well (apart from his belief in the non-problem of climate change -i.e., no warming in 18 years and 6 months should tell you that *something* smells fishy about the theory). I use c# .NET and SQL Server at work on Windows and recently Azure, and it's nice. Just because IE has sucked for a long time that doesn't mean the man is evil. At least he doesn't buy into the nonsense that we'll all be saved if only the countryside was covered in wind farms and everyone had solar panels on their roofs. If climate change is really a thing, then he (and the likes of Bjorn Lomborg) are right: it's going to take investment in technology research to solve the problem, not government subsidised green window dressing.
As far as I'm aware I'm getting the electronic guide from the digital transmission. If it stops working then I guess I'll be going back to Myth TV.