But guess what? My parents and my grandma and my little sister don't want to write their own operating system or applications. They want to use them. And since linux is still lacking, they're willing to pay for others to deliver (more or less) what they want.
Telling your customer "if you don't like it, do it yourself!" is a really bad way to handle business and a terrible way to build a user-base. This is precisely what linux's problem is. It's a bunch of primadonna developers developing things the way developers want to. And developers tend to throw every reason at you for why you don't want what you're positive you want (of course, that's usually just bullshit; they just dont' want to put in the extra effort to do what people really want and would rather talk you into wanting what they want you to want).
The solution isn't telling end-users to become developers. The solution is tellign developers to start developing for the average end-user that they claim to so desperately want to reach.
It's been a fun ride, but I've spent enough time on treating my computer as a hobby. OS X has pretty much taken over for all my actual computer use outside of work.
EXACTLY.
I finally decided that I was tired of wasting my life away going through ridiculous hoops and justifying it because it was "fun" and a "hobby" and decided that I wanted to spend that time actually doing things that I built or bought my computer for in the first place. And that's why I made the switch to OSX. And I actually use it at work, too. Sure, for some things I have to VNC to a Solaris box running CDE, but that's fine.
I still enjoy wasting my time dealing with computers. But now I get to waste it doing things I enjoy. Instead of spending a week configuring some videocard or soundcard or USB device, I spend it debugging some code, downloading porn or pissing people off on Slashdot.
I'll always be rooting for linux. But I have noticed a heavy trend in the last couple years where long-time linux freaks (like myself) have become so frustrated and exhausted with tolerating linux deficiencies and waiting for that fabled time when "things will be as they should be" that we've just switched to the next best thing. I hate sounding like an Apple nut, but I really just dig having the flexibility of installing an application by dragging one simple file into the/Applications folder -- or compiling and running everything through the console.
Yeah, there are still a lot of problems, but they're tolerable. Fink kind of sucks. Darwin ports kind of suck. A lot of perl modules kind of suck. dealing with connect.c and ssh to tunnel through a really restrictive firewall/socks server just so you can access your email or sftp your box at home kind of sucks... But man... I haven't enjoyed using computers this much since I used to make fun of Windows 3.0 users for using a "silly GUI insted of DOS" or Mac users for . . . well, the myriad things you could always laugh at them for before OSX.
love it how people blame linux for manufactures xnot suporting their hardware on it then say it is linuxs fault for not having someone that could properly reverse engineer the hardware to their liking.
The monitor and videocard were both selectable options from the Graphical installer. The good that did was fuck-all, because it simply didn't work. The manufacturer (nvidia) provided a tested linux driver.
Also it is fun to watch people complain about How they cuoldn't get a monitor to display in 1920x1600 while i type this on my monitor displaying in 1920x1600 funny what a google search and not being an idiot will do for you
I guess you're relatively new to linux. If you've used it for any reasonable length of time, you know exactly how finicky it can be. You know how you can have the exact environment replicated on two seperate machines and the same linux distro will work flawlessly on one and refuse to work on the other (say, the infamous gripe with many videocards).
Funny what being an ignorant trolling slashdot dick will do for you.
My big breaking point with desktop linux was when I tried to plug a $3,000 monitor into it.
On OSX and Windows, I plugged it into the computer. It worked instantly. With linux, I spent a week and a half researching on the internet and tweaking config files and recompiling drivers when the official drivers wouldn't work and speaking with other gurus and reading support sites. Even with very precise "it worked for my exact same monitor on this exact same setup with this configuration" instructions, it didn't behave properly for me. No real reason why. It simply just didn't work. Even though my videocard was supported and the manufacturer provided their own linux driver for the card and the monitor was supported by the distro (it was even a selectable monitor/videocard combination in the Display section of the graphical installer)... it just would not work.
So let's see: Time involved on OSX/Windows - one second to plug the DVI cable from the monitor into the videocard. On Linux: 10 long days without any success.
Gee, whyever hasn't linux taken off on everybody's desktop?
"Quicken isn't working, Grandma? Okay, here's the tech support phone number at Intuit".......
"What's that grandma? KLedger isn't working? Okay, fire up your favorite usenet reader and subscribe to the comp.sci.software.linux.kledger.support group and post your problem in there. With any luck, they should have you sorted out in a few days."
But then you're just ripping off the competing desktops out there. Worse than that, you're essentially just emulating them and running their apps (more or less). So what is the point of not using them in the first place? Other than "no viruses (yet)" and "it's free-(ish)", there's nothing.
And both of those are easily answered in favor of Windows right now:
Computers come with anti-virus suites and Windows. And as far as the user is concerned, it was "free" with the hardware. And as far as the OEM is concerned, they passed the cost on to the customer - so they couldn't care less.
There's just no reason to bother. Windows is "good enough" for everyone involved. Linux is not about a "great desktop experience". Linux is all about tolerating a (currently) inferior experience in support of ideaologies. Those who continue to use it in the face of so many problems and frustrations do so out of stubborn rebelion. Nothing wrong with that, but face it - when you are running Linux on your desktop, it's more of a statement than an experience.
Look at VoIP. It's taking off like mad. I know clueless AOL people who have signed up for and use Vonage (or similar services). Why? Because they want a good cost/performance benefit. Their phone bills drop from $200/mo to $20/mo and their services and benefits expand (they can now call anywhere in America/Canada without additional costs and outside of the country cheaply). They see the benefit immediately and VoIP, at this point, pretty much "just works". You plug the adapter in. You plug the phone in. You're done.
If Linux was truly a better experience, people would flock to it. All the moreso since it's free. The idea that people won't try linux because "if it's free, it has to suck" is laughable. When was the last time you knew someone who hated a bargain?
The average user would do just as well with Linux pre-loaded as they do with Windows pre-loaded.
Until they had to install an application, wanted to play their favorite videogame or upgrade their hardware.
"Hi grandma. You did what? You bought Quicken at OfficeMax today? Um... You do realize that doesn't work on linux don't you? No, I'm sorry grandma, that only works on a PC or a Macintosh. No, you totally wasted your money. But it's okay, you can totally get the same kind of program for free on linux! You just have to download it and install it. Well, your bank probably won't support it and it probably won't even connect to your bank and you'll have to do everything manually, but... it's free! . . . . Okay, grandma. You have to su to root and then apt-get update; apt-get upgrade. But first, make sure to edit your apt.sources file to point to the security branch so you'll recieve all of those updates. Okay, done? Good. Alright, now you wanted to get an account ledger application to track your banking, right? Okay, apt-get install aptitude and then run aptitude from the command line. After it loads up, start scrolling through the list of applications until you find something that sounds like it will do what you want. Oh - found one? Awesome, grandma! Now you need to press + and then g and g again . . . . . . . Huh? Wait, what'd it say? . . . . Oh, crap. No, apparently one of the dependancies didn't update properly. Okay, we need to remove and purge it and start all over again. Do you know how to use dpkg grandma?"
At first, I really admired your lofty goals and pure-hearted ambitions. You spoke of freedom. You spoke of choice. You spoke of a world without limits.
But over the years, you have stagnated. Sure, you make a robust server and I'll always have a place in my heart (and my production racks) for you. But you have failed to thrive on my desktop.
Why, just last year, I tried to get you to work with my 23" Apple Cinedisplay. I was ready to return to you full-time after a long desktop-linux hiatus, if only you could have displayed properly on that Cinedisplay without screwing up the resolution. I didn't want to run you in 1024x768 on a 1920x1600 screen. Nor did I want to run 1920x1600 worth of desktop in a 1024x768 resolution where I'd have to roll the mouse all over the place to screen-off to the rest of the desktop.
And should I even mention the fiascos with various sound cards that you just didn't want to play nicely with? Or of the hardware that you were supposed to be "known-good" on that you chose not to work with at the most inopportune moments?
After seven years of courting, you still didn't achieve desktop prominence in my life. In fact, the only switch you encouraged me to make was away from you and toward a platform that "just works".
See, I've recently decided to shove you off the desk and turn you into a fileserver for my massive collection of porn, MP3s and ripped movies. Apple has found a way to give me a beautiful, slick, useful, enjoyable interface that makes everything you offer look like a rejected Fisher-Price prototype. And it slaps this onto a powerful BSD core. It's the best of both worlds. More, when I plug something into it - be it an iPod, 23" or 30" cinedisplay or anything else, it just works. I don't have to spend five days playing with LineModes in x86free.conf or massaging device drivers. I don't have to spend more time configuring and installing things than I do using them anymore.
As I said, you'll always have a place in my production racks. There, we'll always be friends. But when it comes to my desk... I think we should really stop seeing each other. In fact, I already have. I've moved on. And my new desktop is more than you could ever hope to be. Maybe someday you'll grow up and realize that "free as in freedom" and "screw the corporates" rhetoric, nice as it is, doesn't justify sub-par computing.
Maybe we can try again some day. For now, I need my space.
Hey, if you are into people who look like they've been broiled, that's your business. When I see some chick whose main goal in life is to roast, the only impression it leaves on me is that of a pathetic, self-concious, insecure superficial prat. Then, to top it off, they're almost always the same chicks who then feel they have to bleach their hair some sort of platinum color so they look completely cheesecaked and washed-out (think the worst Christina Aguilar photo you've probably come across).
Sure, if you're one of these idiots who falls asleep on a beach towel to get a tan (which, honestly, I've always found kind of disgusting looking), you should probably use sunscreen.
But you certainly don't need sunscreen to cope with the 30 minutes you spend each day walking from your car to the office and back to the car again, and to and from lunch down the street and taking the garbage out when you get home at the end of the day.
And yeah, I'll repeat that - tans are gross. Darker skin is attractive if it's natural. More pale tones are attractive, if they're natural. But some white chick trying to tan herself into J-Lo is just gross and looks... uncomfortable.
Are you one of those guys who goes around justifying the verbal abuse of your wife and ridiculing her for being ten pounds overweight by saying you're doing it "because I care about her" and because you want to "motivate her"?
Seriously, that kind of thinking is incredibly 1950s.
I'm not necessarily complaining about anything involved in indy games. It's just that I'm so used to playing the "norm" that anything else feels... secondary. Perhaps a way to explain it is - if you have a decent computer and a fast connection, you're going to play Counterstrike and WarCraft - but if all you have is a half-assed laptop with no net connection and you're stuck in the waiting room at a doctor's office for two hours, maybe you'll pop out the single player side-scroller or something.
I think a lot of us have just become so used to multi-player, online, FPS/RTS/SIMULATION everything that' switching out of that is like watching an old silent black and white movie with the little breakaway "reader-board" dialogue every few seconds. It's still a movie. It's still entertainment. And perhaps it's even good entertainment. But it still doesn't feel like the color movie with audio and a film score and dialogue that you're familiar with.
I don't play a lot of games anymore, but there's some neat stuff out in the smaller scene now that (even though it feels weird to someone like myself who has been involved in multiplayer/online everything for so long) are enjoyable. Especially in the office when you're stuck with a lot of down time. Things like GooBall, Maelstrom... OH! BZFLAG! I forgot about BZFLAG. There you go - Multiplayer. Online. Networked. Simple graphics. BIG player base. Insanely fun. Free.
Of course, that's unique. I can't think of another game in the same boat.
I really am hoping that as more people switch to Apple, the indie scene will blow up even more. Mac users are hungry for good games and smaller developers don't have to compete against as many big players. If you have a good $30 little game for the Mac with some serious quality and gameplay, you will reach people. But a lot of developers just don't see a reason to port (or develop from the beginning) for 5% of the market. Especially when that 5% of the market probably just uses consoles if they even play games at all.
Am I the only one who finds independant games often difficult to get "comfortable" with? I mean, I've been so warped by non-stop playing of games like Quake and Counterstrike or Civilization and Baldur's Gate that anything that doesn't involve running around in a multi-player environment blowing people up, running missions in an MMORPG with other players, building terran forces to avoid another player's zerg attack or building up my party in a single player RPG feels... akward.
And don't get me wrong - there are some wonderful independant games out there. As a recent convert to Mac, I'm almost forced to hunt such games down, because there either aren't a lot of choices of modern games (say, Rome Total War) for the Mac, they won't run well on the Mac or I simply dont' want to buy them all over again just to play them on my mac instead of the PC. Fortunately, lots of neat little independant games are made for (or ported to) the Mac.
It's just that having spent so much time in the last decade on the games I mentioned in the first paragraph, playing anything else feels a lot like playing Mine-Sweeper. Or more - it feels like going without an internet connection for a long time. Disconnected. Seperated. A backup alternative for when you can't play the other games.
Maybe this sounds insane and nobody knows what I'm talking about. It's just been so long since I've played at an arcade and I dont' play console games, so my main experience has been very much as described previously.
I think it also speaks to the lack of unique popular and mainstream publisher games out there, that some of us have become so molded to a single type of gameplay.
Can we please have a "women gamers" section so that those of us who simply don't care can filter them out in our preferences? I don't need three stories about how neglected female gamers are or female IT workers or female students or female college students or fema
If women want to work with computers, they'll pursue a computer field. If they want to play videogames, they'll play videogames. The games they pick will be whatever interests them. I just don't give a fuck.
Please, please, PLEASE -- you're ramming this shit down our throats daily like Jon Katz on a "GEEKS ARE BEING PERSECUTED!" hellmouth frenzy where everything is a catastrophe, a conspiracy and a shame.
At the price the next generation of consoles are being rumored to sell at (as much as $400!), I think I'll stick with my one spare gaming PC. I was going to jump into the console market finally, but I'll wait a year or two until the prices drop at least 50%. If they think I'm going to spend $400 for a box and a single controller and $70+ per game on top of that, they're out of their freaking vending-machine-panty-sniffing minds.
That's $12 for a single plugin. Add all the costs of all the little bits and pieces over time and see how much you've wasted on things that, everywhere else, are completely free. Christ, I'm surprised Apple included a "Shutdown" option in the menu, rather than leaving it out so that some developer could sell you one for $40.
I can't believe some of the silly crap that I've actually seen people charging for on this platform. Are they nuts?!
Firefox extensions are free (I've never found one you had to pay for). To install them, you click on an XPI link and then click the "install" confirmation. Then you restart the browser.
That's preferable to having to pay for, download, extract, install plugin, restart browser on the other Apple browsers...
Really, as a new Mac user, I have to say that the concept of paying for a browser extension is about the hardest thing I've had to try and deal with. Sure, I understand someone works hard to make them, but someone works hard to make them for Firefox, too. I can't say I'm thrilled that it seems like 99% of Mac developers our just out to make a buck, rather than just make a neat little useful utility to share with the world.
And of course, more power to them if they can find enough suckers to pay... But there's also something to be said for the guy who just does it to do it and let's everyone else benefit, too.
The thing is, I don't think Windows is the right choice for big business... except for the proprietary file formats.
What can you do easier on Windows that you can't on any other major OS - especially now that OpenOffice has evolved into something even a dedicated MSOffice user can very quickly figure out and it handles most (if not all) of the file formats? And most business applications that exist for Windows exist for the other systems, too (well, Mac at least).
I mean, other than get and spread viruses and trojans easier and quicker and give the IT department lots of patching grief?
The only thing Windows has "up" on Apple is variety. You often have to really do your research and a lot of hunting to find a good OSX application that you could find (and for free too) on Windows with a quick Google search. Otherwise, they're essentially identical (speaking only of the general interface and end-user experience that is -- meaning that the average person probably doesn't use the DOS emulation command prompt any more than they do a shell on OSX).
And they both have usability "up" on Linux and Unix, obviously.
Don't get me wrong here, either. I am a huge linux nut. I'm just a jaded and cynical one that has decided not to fool myself into believing that "linux is ready for the desktop!" anymore... until it really is. And Windows is fine, but I'm tired of fixing all the crap that goes wrong with them. I'm tired of spending every visit to the family fixing their stupid Windows boxes instead of visiting with them. I'm tired of having to lock my windows boxes up tighter than a virgin daughter on prom night. In general, I'm just tired of the computer using me after two decades and I'm relieved to have any computer - whatever company or system it may be - that let's me use it for a change.
Commence bitching about paying for software...now.
I will.
+Camino doesn't do it. +Safari does it, with Saft... which is $12. +Opera does it... for $39 (or free, if you want a banner full of Google ads). +Firefox does it... with the click of a mouse and a restart... for free.
What is this obsession that Apple users have with paying for trivial things? My god, I swear Apple users would even pay $50 for a freaking FTP program.
Yeah, but what are you going to run on those IBMs and HPs? Windows? A reduced version of linux (unless maybe you get a decent Thinkpad that happens to have really great linux support/compatibility)?
The only reason I run around with a PowerBook is that it lets me do what I need to do when I need to do it without a lot of bullshit. It has one of the most solid keyboards I've ever seen on a laptop (and certainly the most responsive) and the best screen I've found on any laptop (no more shiny glossy plastic reflective eye-killing displays). And everything just works. I'm not stuck screwing around with windows and I'm not spending two fruitless weeks trying to figure out how to get my laptop's power management to work with my linux install.
Corporate politics has nothing to do with my choice of laptop. I bought my PowerBook because I was tired of the frustrating life I've had with various laptops and was tired of having to make windows live nicely on the many different networks I have to deal with. And I wanted to be able to have a local shell rather than sshing out of my laptop to a box somewhere to do simple things.
I don't see how you even have a choice if you want a non-windows world for your laptop. Now, the day someone puts out a Debian laptop that is a great piece of hardware with full and robust linux operation that just works, I'll be all over it. I'm done playing the linux hardware/driver/support musical chair game. I have too much to do with my time to waste large amounts of it here and there trying to get something to work that should be ridiculously simple.
I wish it weren't that way, but it is. So until thinks improve, I'm sticking with my PowerBook. And Debian will continue to get my love on my production server.
By the way - did you ever stop to think that maybe the reason those guys are using HP and IBM laptops is that they get great discounts on laptops that already are fairly cheap (probably looking at $2,000 versus the $3,000+ for a powerbook).
In short, I don't think you're making a fair comparison... unless the engineers you're talking about are linux/unix engineers. People are probably going to gravitate toward the platform that is most similar to what they use all the time. As a linux/unix guy, a powerbook is closer to my world than a windows box. If you write your software in Visual C++ and develop applications for Windows Server or windows desktops or work in marketing or payroll - you probably are more comfortable with a Windows laptop.
Nobody has invented a new kind of toilet paper, either. It's all pretty much the same and has been for a long time. Why? Because it WORKS. Innovation for innovation's sake is pointless and wasteful. Not everythign "new" is good. Progress is important and new ideas may lead to other new ideas which may lead to eventually brilliant replacements - but for very long periods of time, what has always been will still always be (for the considerable future, at least)... because it just works.
Yeah, there are little tweaks here and there. And there will always be minor improvements. But the general idea remains a good one. Just like cars, toilet paper, toilets, microwaves, toasters and pans and dishes and silverware have remained more or less the same for so long.
The presentation is largely fine (though still largely clunky in many linux derivatives, unfortunately). It's what's underneath that is improving and will continue to do so (such as Spotlight, better file systems, etc). You can only do so much with a two-dimensial interface (monitor) and a keyboard and mouse and the general idea of the "windowing system" is probably as efficient as it can get. Maybe you can develop a windowing/menuing system that uses less clicks and mouse travel, but that's about it. Everything else will just remain eye-candy.
If we ever get perfect speech recognition, that might be a bit different. Then I won't have to mouse around through a file system. I could just say "give me April's expense report" or "show me all email from Julie recieved in the last two weeks and sort it by date, higlighting any references to space and read them to me".
Reliable adblocking is far more involved than simply checking against domains or IP addresses. Maybe I want to visit a site, but they serve seriously annoying advertising content (or any annoying content for that matter) directly from their own server? I want to access the wanted content without being subjected to the unwanted. The only way to do this is to block based on context using either GreaseMonkey or Adblocker (for example).
Not to mention, IP addresses and domains change, but http://*/ads/* and http://*adclick.cgi* are always the same. Oh - and they will filter against every domain I visit instead of requiring 50,000 seperate entries.
Slashdot Mirror
But guess what? My parents and my grandma and my little sister don't want to write their own operating system or applications. They want to use them. And since linux is still lacking, they're willing to pay for others to deliver (more or less) what they want.
Telling your customer "if you don't like it, do it yourself!" is a really bad way to handle business and a terrible way to build a user-base. This is precisely what linux's problem is. It's a bunch of primadonna developers developing things the way developers want to. And developers tend to throw every reason at you for why you don't want what you're positive you want (of course, that's usually just bullshit; they just dont' want to put in the extra effort to do what people really want and would rather talk you into wanting what they want you to want).
The solution isn't telling end-users to become developers. The solution is tellign developers to start developing for the average end-user that they claim to so desperately want to reach.
It's been a fun ride, but I've spent enough time on treating my computer as a hobby. OS X has pretty much taken over for all my actual computer use outside of work.
/Applications folder -- or compiling and running everything through the console.
EXACTLY.
I finally decided that I was tired of wasting my life away going through ridiculous hoops and justifying it because it was "fun" and a "hobby" and decided that I wanted to spend that time actually doing things that I built or bought my computer for in the first place. And that's why I made the switch to OSX. And I actually use it at work, too. Sure, for some things I have to VNC to a Solaris box running CDE, but that's fine.
I still enjoy wasting my time dealing with computers. But now I get to waste it doing things I enjoy. Instead of spending a week configuring some videocard or soundcard or USB device, I spend it debugging some code, downloading porn or pissing people off on Slashdot.
I'll always be rooting for linux. But I have noticed a heavy trend in the last couple years where long-time linux freaks (like myself) have become so frustrated and exhausted with tolerating linux deficiencies and waiting for that fabled time when "things will be as they should be" that we've just switched to the next best thing. I hate sounding like an Apple nut, but I really just dig having the flexibility of installing an application by dragging one simple file into the
Yeah, there are still a lot of problems, but they're tolerable. Fink kind of sucks. Darwin ports kind of suck. A lot of perl modules kind of suck. dealing with connect.c and ssh to tunnel through a really restrictive firewall/socks server just so you can access your email or sftp your box at home kind of sucks... But man... I haven't enjoyed using computers this much since I used to make fun of Windows 3.0 users for using a "silly GUI insted of DOS" or Mac users for . . . well, the myriad things you could always laugh at them for before OSX.
love it how people blame linux for manufactures xnot suporting their hardware on it then say it is linuxs fault for not having someone that could properly reverse engineer the hardware to their liking.
The monitor and videocard were both selectable options from the Graphical installer. The good that did was fuck-all, because it simply didn't work. The manufacturer (nvidia) provided a tested linux driver.
Also it is fun to watch people complain about How they cuoldn't get a monitor to display in 1920x1600 while i type this on my monitor displaying in 1920x1600 funny what a google search and not being an idiot will do for you
I guess you're relatively new to linux. If you've used it for any reasonable length of time, you know exactly how finicky it can be. You know how you can have the exact environment replicated on two seperate machines and the same linux distro will work flawlessly on one and refuse to work on the other (say, the infamous gripe with many videocards).
Funny what being an ignorant trolling slashdot dick will do for you.
My big breaking point with desktop linux was when I tried to plug a $3,000 monitor into it.
On OSX and Windows, I plugged it into the computer. It worked instantly. With linux, I spent a week and a half researching on the internet and tweaking config files and recompiling drivers when the official drivers wouldn't work and speaking with other gurus and reading support sites. Even with very precise "it worked for my exact same monitor on this exact same setup with this configuration" instructions, it didn't behave properly for me. No real reason why. It simply just didn't work. Even though my videocard was supported and the manufacturer provided their own linux driver for the card and the monitor was supported by the distro (it was even a selectable monitor/videocard combination in the Display section of the graphical installer)... it just would not work.
So let's see: Time involved on OSX/Windows - one second to plug the DVI cable from the monitor into the videocard. On Linux: 10 long days without any success.
Gee, whyever hasn't linux taken off on everybody's desktop?
"Quicken isn't working, Grandma? Okay, here's the tech support phone number at Intuit" .......
"What's that grandma? KLedger isn't working? Okay, fire up your favorite usenet reader and subscribe to the comp.sci.software.linux.kledger.support group and post your problem in there. With any luck, they should have you sorted out in a few days."
But then you're just ripping off the competing desktops out there. Worse than that, you're essentially just emulating them and running their apps (more or less). So what is the point of not using them in the first place? Other than "no viruses (yet)" and "it's free-(ish)", there's nothing.
And both of those are easily answered in favor of Windows right now:
Computers come with anti-virus suites and Windows. And as far as the user is concerned, it was "free" with the hardware. And as far as the OEM is concerned, they passed the cost on to the customer - so they couldn't care less.
There's just no reason to bother. Windows is "good enough" for everyone involved. Linux is not about a "great desktop experience". Linux is all about tolerating a (currently) inferior experience in support of ideaologies. Those who continue to use it in the face of so many problems and frustrations do so out of stubborn rebelion. Nothing wrong with that, but face it - when you are running Linux on your desktop, it's more of a statement than an experience.
Look at VoIP. It's taking off like mad. I know clueless AOL people who have signed up for and use Vonage (or similar services). Why? Because they want a good cost/performance benefit. Their phone bills drop from $200/mo to $20/mo and their services and benefits expand (they can now call anywhere in America/Canada without additional costs and outside of the country cheaply). They see the benefit immediately and VoIP, at this point, pretty much "just works". You plug the adapter in. You plug the phone in. You're done.
If Linux was truly a better experience, people would flock to it. All the moreso since it's free. The idea that people won't try linux because "if it's free, it has to suck" is laughable. When was the last time you knew someone who hated a bargain?
The average user would do just as well with Linux pre-loaded as they do with Windows pre-loaded.
Until they had to install an application, wanted to play their favorite videogame or upgrade their hardware.
"Hi grandma. You did what? You bought Quicken at OfficeMax today? Um... You do realize that doesn't work on linux don't you? No, I'm sorry grandma, that only works on a PC or a Macintosh. No, you totally wasted your money. But it's okay, you can totally get the same kind of program for free on linux! You just have to download it and install it. Well, your bank probably won't support it and it probably won't even connect to your bank and you'll have to do everything manually, but... it's free! . . . . Okay, grandma. You have to su to root and then apt-get update; apt-get upgrade. But first, make sure to edit your apt.sources file to point to the security branch so you'll recieve all of those updates. Okay, done? Good. Alright, now you wanted to get an account ledger application to track your banking, right? Okay, apt-get install aptitude and then run aptitude from the command line. After it loads up, start scrolling through the list of applications until you find something that sounds like it will do what you want. Oh - found one? Awesome, grandma! Now you need to press + and then g and g again . . . . . . . Huh? Wait, what'd it say? . . . . Oh, crap. No, apparently one of the dependancies didn't update properly. Okay, we need to remove and purge it and start all over again. Do you know how to use dpkg grandma?"
Dear Linux,
At first, I really admired your lofty goals and pure-hearted ambitions. You spoke of freedom. You spoke of choice. You spoke of a world without limits.
But over the years, you have stagnated. Sure, you make a robust server and I'll always have a place in my heart (and my production racks) for you. But you have failed to thrive on my desktop.
Why, just last year, I tried to get you to work with my 23" Apple Cinedisplay. I was ready to return to you full-time after a long desktop-linux hiatus, if only you could have displayed properly on that Cinedisplay without screwing up the resolution. I didn't want to run you in 1024x768 on a 1920x1600 screen. Nor did I want to run 1920x1600 worth of desktop in a 1024x768 resolution where I'd have to roll the mouse all over the place to screen-off to the rest of the desktop.
And should I even mention the fiascos with various sound cards that you just didn't want to play nicely with? Or of the hardware that you were supposed to be "known-good" on that you chose not to work with at the most inopportune moments?
After seven years of courting, you still didn't achieve desktop prominence in my life. In fact, the only switch you encouraged me to make was away from you and toward a platform that "just works".
See, I've recently decided to shove you off the desk and turn you into a fileserver for my massive collection of porn, MP3s and ripped movies. Apple has found a way to give me a beautiful, slick, useful, enjoyable interface that makes everything you offer look like a rejected Fisher-Price prototype. And it slaps this onto a powerful BSD core. It's the best of both worlds. More, when I plug something into it - be it an iPod, 23" or 30" cinedisplay or anything else, it just works. I don't have to spend five days playing with LineModes in x86free.conf or massaging device drivers. I don't have to spend more time configuring and installing things than I do using them anymore.
As I said, you'll always have a place in my production racks. There, we'll always be friends. But when it comes to my desk... I think we should really stop seeing each other. In fact, I already have. I've moved on. And my new desktop is more than you could ever hope to be. Maybe someday you'll grow up and realize that "free as in freedom" and "screw the corporates" rhetoric, nice as it is, doesn't justify sub-par computing.
Maybe we can try again some day. For now, I need my space.
Hey, if you are into people who look like they've been broiled, that's your business. When I see some chick whose main goal in life is to roast, the only impression it leaves on me is that of a pathetic, self-concious, insecure superficial prat. Then, to top it off, they're almost always the same chicks who then feel they have to bleach their hair some sort of platinum color so they look completely cheesecaked and washed-out (think the worst Christina Aguilar photo you've probably come across).
Ick ick ick.
Sure, if you're one of these idiots who falls asleep on a beach towel to get a tan (which, honestly, I've always found kind of disgusting looking), you should probably use sunscreen.
But you certainly don't need sunscreen to cope with the 30 minutes you spend each day walking from your car to the office and back to the car again, and to and from lunch down the street and taking the garbage out when you get home at the end of the day.
And yeah, I'll repeat that - tans are gross. Darker skin is attractive if it's natural. More pale tones are attractive, if they're natural. But some white chick trying to tan herself into J-Lo is just gross and looks... uncomfortable.
I'm going to start sending a daily suggestion to Rob Malda, suggesting that he jump off a tall bridge. I'll update you in twelve weeks.
Are you one of those guys who goes around justifying the verbal abuse of your wife and ridiculing her for being ten pounds overweight by saying you're doing it "because I care about her" and because you want to "motivate her"?
Seriously, that kind of thinking is incredibly 1950s.
Shit. Stupid anonymously button :(
I'm not necessarily complaining about anything involved in indy games. It's just that I'm so used to playing the "norm" that anything else feels... secondary. Perhaps a way to explain it is - if you have a decent computer and a fast connection, you're going to play Counterstrike and WarCraft - but if all you have is a half-assed laptop with no net connection and you're stuck in the waiting room at a doctor's office for two hours, maybe you'll pop out the single player side-scroller or something.
I think a lot of us have just become so used to multi-player, online, FPS/RTS/SIMULATION everything that' switching out of that is like watching an old silent black and white movie with the little breakaway "reader-board" dialogue every few seconds. It's still a movie. It's still entertainment. And perhaps it's even good entertainment. But it still doesn't feel like the color movie with audio and a film score and dialogue that you're familiar with.
I don't play a lot of games anymore, but there's some neat stuff out in the smaller scene now that (even though it feels weird to someone like myself who has been involved in multiplayer/online everything for so long) are enjoyable. Especially in the office when you're stuck with a lot of down time. Things like GooBall, Maelstrom... OH! BZFLAG! I forgot about BZFLAG. There you go - Multiplayer. Online. Networked. Simple graphics. BIG player base. Insanely fun. Free.
Of course, that's unique. I can't think of another game in the same boat.
I really am hoping that as more people switch to Apple, the indie scene will blow up even more. Mac users are hungry for good games and smaller developers don't have to compete against as many big players. If you have a good $30 little game for the Mac with some serious quality and gameplay, you will reach people. But a lot of developers just don't see a reason to port (or develop from the beginning) for 5% of the market. Especially when that 5% of the market probably just uses consoles if they even play games at all.
Am I the only one who finds independant games often difficult to get "comfortable" with? I mean, I've been so warped by non-stop playing of games like Quake and Counterstrike or Civilization and Baldur's Gate that anything that doesn't involve running around in a multi-player environment blowing people up, running missions in an MMORPG with other players, building terran forces to avoid another player's zerg attack or building up my party in a single player RPG feels... akward.
And don't get me wrong - there are some wonderful independant games out there. As a recent convert to Mac, I'm almost forced to hunt such games down, because there either aren't a lot of choices of modern games (say, Rome Total War) for the Mac, they won't run well on the Mac or I simply dont' want to buy them all over again just to play them on my mac instead of the PC. Fortunately, lots of neat little independant games are made for (or ported to) the Mac.
It's just that having spent so much time in the last decade on the games I mentioned in the first paragraph, playing anything else feels a lot like playing Mine-Sweeper. Or more - it feels like going without an internet connection for a long time. Disconnected. Seperated. A backup alternative for when you can't play the other games.
Maybe this sounds insane and nobody knows what I'm talking about. It's just been so long since I've played at an arcade and I dont' play console games, so my main experience has been very much as described previously.
I think it also speaks to the lack of unique popular and mainstream publisher games out there, that some of us have become so molded to a single type of gameplay.
Can we please have a "women gamers" section so that those of us who simply don't care can filter them out in our preferences? I don't need three stories about how neglected female gamers are or female IT workers or female students or female college students or fema
If women want to work with computers, they'll pursue a computer field. If they want to play videogames, they'll play videogames. The games they pick will be whatever interests them. I just don't give a fuck.
Please, please, PLEASE -- you're ramming this shit down our throats daily like Jon Katz on a "GEEKS ARE BEING PERSECUTED!" hellmouth frenzy where everything is a catastrophe, a conspiracy and a shame.
At the price the next generation of consoles are being rumored to sell at (as much as $400!), I think I'll stick with my one spare gaming PC. I was going to jump into the console market finally, but I'll wait a year or two until the prices drop at least 50%. If they think I'm going to spend $400 for a box and a single controller and $70+ per game on top of that, they're out of their freaking vending-machine-panty-sniffing minds.
You missed the "b" in Whambulance.
That's $12 for a single plugin. Add all the costs of all the little bits and pieces over time and see how much you've wasted on things that, everywhere else, are completely free. Christ, I'm surprised Apple included a "Shutdown" option in the menu, rather than leaving it out so that some developer could sell you one for $40.
I can't believe some of the silly crap that I've actually seen people charging for on this platform. Are they nuts?!
Firefox extensions are free (I've never found one you had to pay for). To install them, you click on an XPI link and then click the "install" confirmation. Then you restart the browser.
That's preferable to having to pay for, download, extract, install plugin, restart browser on the other Apple browsers...
Really, as a new Mac user, I have to say that the concept of paying for a browser extension is about the hardest thing I've had to try and deal with. Sure, I understand someone works hard to make them, but someone works hard to make them for Firefox, too. I can't say I'm thrilled that it seems like 99% of Mac developers our just out to make a buck, rather than just make a neat little useful utility to share with the world.
And of course, more power to them if they can find enough suckers to pay... But there's also something to be said for the guy who just does it to do it and let's everyone else benefit, too.
The thing is, I don't think Windows is the right choice for big business... except for the proprietary file formats.
What can you do easier on Windows that you can't on any other major OS - especially now that OpenOffice has evolved into something even a dedicated MSOffice user can very quickly figure out and it handles most (if not all) of the file formats? And most business applications that exist for Windows exist for the other systems, too (well, Mac at least).
I mean, other than get and spread viruses and trojans easier and quicker and give the IT department lots of patching grief?
The only thing Windows has "up" on Apple is variety. You often have to really do your research and a lot of hunting to find a good OSX application that you could find (and for free too) on Windows with a quick Google search. Otherwise, they're essentially identical (speaking only of the general interface and end-user experience that is -- meaning that the average person probably doesn't use the DOS emulation command prompt any more than they do a shell on OSX).
And they both have usability "up" on Linux and Unix, obviously.
Don't get me wrong here, either. I am a huge linux nut. I'm just a jaded and cynical one that has decided not to fool myself into believing that "linux is ready for the desktop!" anymore... until it really is. And Windows is fine, but I'm tired of fixing all the crap that goes wrong with them. I'm tired of spending every visit to the family fixing their stupid Windows boxes instead of visiting with them. I'm tired of having to lock my windows boxes up tighter than a virgin daughter on prom night. In general, I'm just tired of the computer using me after two decades and I'm relieved to have any computer - whatever company or system it may be - that let's me use it for a change.
Commence bitching about paying for software...now.
I will.
+Camino doesn't do it.
+Safari does it, with Saft... which is $12.
+Opera does it... for $39 (or free, if you want a banner full of Google ads).
+Firefox does it... with the click of a mouse and a restart... for free.
What is this obsession that Apple users have with paying for trivial things? My god, I swear Apple users would even pay $50 for a freaking FTP program.
The idea of paying for a browser extension just makes me feel like pithing my money away.
Yeah, but what are you going to run on those IBMs and HPs? Windows? A reduced version of linux (unless maybe you get a decent Thinkpad that happens to have really great linux support/compatibility)?
The only reason I run around with a PowerBook is that it lets me do what I need to do when I need to do it without a lot of bullshit. It has one of the most solid keyboards I've ever seen on a laptop (and certainly the most responsive) and the best screen I've found on any laptop (no more shiny glossy plastic reflective eye-killing displays). And everything just works. I'm not stuck screwing around with windows and I'm not spending two fruitless weeks trying to figure out how to get my laptop's power management to work with my linux install.
Corporate politics has nothing to do with my choice of laptop. I bought my PowerBook because I was tired of the frustrating life I've had with various laptops and was tired of having to make windows live nicely on the many different networks I have to deal with. And I wanted to be able to have a local shell rather than sshing out of my laptop to a box somewhere to do simple things.
I don't see how you even have a choice if you want a non-windows world for your laptop. Now, the day someone puts out a Debian laptop that is a great piece of hardware with full and robust linux operation that just works, I'll be all over it. I'm done playing the linux hardware/driver/support musical chair game. I have too much to do with my time to waste large amounts of it here and there trying to get something to work that should be ridiculously simple.
I wish it weren't that way, but it is. So until thinks improve, I'm sticking with my PowerBook. And Debian will continue to get my love on my production server.
By the way - did you ever stop to think that maybe the reason those guys are using HP and IBM laptops is that they get great discounts on laptops that already are fairly cheap (probably looking at $2,000 versus the $3,000+ for a powerbook).
In short, I don't think you're making a fair comparison... unless the engineers you're talking about are linux/unix engineers. People are probably going to gravitate toward the platform that is most similar to what they use all the time. As a linux/unix guy, a powerbook is closer to my world than a windows box. If you write your software in Visual C++ and develop applications for Windows Server or windows desktops or work in marketing or payroll - you probably are more comfortable with a Windows laptop.
Nobody has invented a new kind of toilet paper, either. It's all pretty much the same and has been for a long time. Why? Because it WORKS. Innovation for innovation's sake is pointless and wasteful. Not everythign "new" is good. Progress is important and new ideas may lead to other new ideas which may lead to eventually brilliant replacements - but for very long periods of time, what has always been will still always be (for the considerable future, at least)... because it just works.
Yeah, there are little tweaks here and there. And there will always be minor improvements. But the general idea remains a good one. Just like cars, toilet paper, toilets, microwaves, toasters and pans and dishes and silverware have remained more or less the same for so long.
The presentation is largely fine (though still largely clunky in many linux derivatives, unfortunately). It's what's underneath that is improving and will continue to do so (such as Spotlight, better file systems, etc). You can only do so much with a two-dimensial interface (monitor) and a keyboard and mouse and the general idea of the "windowing system" is probably as efficient as it can get. Maybe you can develop a windowing/menuing system that uses less clicks and mouse travel, but that's about it. Everything else will just remain eye-candy.
If we ever get perfect speech recognition, that might be a bit different. Then I won't have to mouse around through a file system. I could just say "give me April's expense report" or "show me all email from Julie recieved in the last two weeks and sort it by date, higlighting any references to space and read them to me".
Reliable adblocking is far more involved than simply checking against domains or IP addresses. Maybe I want to visit a site, but they serve seriously annoying advertising content (or any annoying content for that matter) directly from their own server? I want to access the wanted content without being subjected to the unwanted. The only way to do this is to block based on context using either GreaseMonkey or Adblocker (for example).
Not to mention, IP addresses and domains change, but http://*/ads/* and http://*adclick.cgi* are always the same. Oh - and they will filter against every domain I visit instead of requiring 50,000 seperate entries.