Re:Why fuss with KDE when can buy an Apple?
on
Preview of KDE 3.5
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
1. Yes, you're locked in. This is both good and bad. It is bad in the sense that the hardware costs more. It is good in two ways however. Firstly, when you sell it three or four years later, you actually get back about half what you paid. Some box I built myself will be worth nothing (as new ones are so cheap). Secondly, everything works. I never have to configure anything when I get a new Mac. I put it on my desk, plug it in, and press the on button.
2. Upgrading will cost you? I can go buy a hard drive, ram, video card, etc, from all sorts of 3rd party vendors. The only thing I can't upgrade is the processor, and that's only on the new G5s. Sucks, yes.
3. A better desktop GUI than OS X? Well I suppose you either love it or you don't, but I personally am confident that it will be the best thing around for awhile. Besides, I can always run KDE or Gnome if I really want to. Plus you can always dual-boot.
4. Xcode is fantastic. There is no reason written in stone that "everything should be separate". If an integrated solution works best, then use that.
5. I've never had a Mac where the "window manager" wouldn't start. There's only one window manager, and hence there is no configuration files to go bonkers or anything to worry about. If it isn't working for you, it isn't working for a lot of other people too.
6. Mhmmm.
I would like to build my own boxes, yes. But as I said, the resale value negates much of the initial expense of buying a mac, and Apple certainly makes good hardware. The Mac is the best solution for what I do (art-related dsp and opengl work), so that's what I use.
How is Ubuntu not easy to install? You pick your country, keyboard settings (American English for most of us), and *gasp* monitor resolution. If you've ever installed Windows 98 from scratch (not sure if XP is better), it isn't pretty either, yet most people seemed to use it just fine.
Apple has been and always will be an "integrated solution provider". The fact that the software can assume certain hardware is a feature, albeit sometimes a more costly one.
I will admit Spotlight's interface is horrible. Terrible, horrible, etc. The find window forgets all my settings, the Spotlight window has virtually no options, the spotlight menu has items that shift around as you try to select them, etc. Pain in the ass.
That said, it IS quite fast! I have never waited more than 2-3 seconds for any search on my 1.25GHz Powerbook.
This bug has been around since NeXTStep. It is due to issue with lookupd, which has lead many engineers to call it lockupd instead. A real pain in the ass, and one that I have no idea why they refuse to fix.
If someone calls something art, you have to consider it art. Period. All this other nonsense debating what is and isn't art is coming from non-artists or hacks trying to put an objective view on everything. If someone says something is art, you have to treat it as such. You may think it is shitty art, and it probably is, but it is still art.
That said, I went to ArtBots last year in Harlem, and it was great. I defy anyone who was actually there to say that there was not a lot of beautiful "art" present.
Trying to merge devices isn't necessarily dumb. My car lets me drive around, but it also has a radio. And a CD player. And an air conditioner. And heated seats. Etc etc. Despite all that, I have no problem using it. Why? The interface (at least in my Saab 9000) is good. One button turns on the air conditioner and restores my last settings. If I put in a CD, the radio automatically stops. If I eject a CD, it goes back to the radio. If I adjust the volume for the radio, it handles the CD too (obviously). Yet, despite the fact that your average car nowadays is just as complex as a new cellphone, it is easy to use. The problem with cellphones is that the interfaces are TERRIBLE. Most mp3 players have shit interfaces too, yet the iPod is a joy to use. If anyone can get this right, it is Apple. No, they're not perfect, and no, they're not gods, but I can't think of any company who knows what they're doing more than Apple in this field.
Freedom is not being able to do whatever you want. I cannot go and kill someone, but I have no doubt that the society in which you are not allowed to murder is the freer society. There is both "freedom to" and "freedom from".
That said, BSD, LGPL, and GPL all have their place. All my work has been BSD so far, but I could see myself using LGPL (or maybe even GPL) in some cases.
Oh I'm sick of hearing this. How many companies sell products that are GPL'd and don't make their money through support or service somehow? I'd suspect none, as you'd be nuts to allow anyone to legally redistribute your software and source code (after modifications no less). There's no reason to buy software from someone when you can legally get it from your friend. Unless you consider getting donations to be making money, you're not going to make money by selling software.
There is always this wiki, which is all about art created through programming (audio, visual, interactive, conceptual, and otherwise). It currently features over 50 artists -- I'm surprised no member of the Slashdot crowd has mentioned it already actually.
Exactly. I'm not blaming KDE here. It is more just the nature of the FOSS world at the moment. Most of the software I personally want to use isn't written with KDE or Gnome in mind. In the Mac, a program that isn't written in Cocoa nowadays is very rare. In the FOSS world, a program written using the KDE libraries are more the exception than the rule.
I've used KDE -- I had to run off a Kubuntu CD for a week after my hard disk died so I could get some work done. I just do not know it well enough to remember how to change that specific option.
And almost does cut it. The differences between Carbon and Cocoa apps are only noticable if you know where to look. By almost I mean 99.9%. A carbon app may not have the prototypical Cocoa about box for example (oh no...), but the about menu is still in the same spot and labeled the same way. Big deal.
KDE is consistant within itself, yes. However, that falls apart as soon as you install any other software. My point is all 3rd party Cocoa apps fit right in. However, install vanilla Firefox in KDE, and forget it.
I think it is not even Commercial versus FOSS. What it really comes down to is Centralized (with a capital C) versus decentralized. The FOSS community is very decentralized, which is both good and bad. It is good in the sense that we have dozens of window managers to pick from. It is bad in the sense that we have to deal with all the issues that arrise from writing software that most work with the lowest common denominator features of those twenty window managers.
OS X is much more than a pretty linux. In your same post you also say that OS X is better at letting people easily install apps than Linux is. Doesn't that right there invalidate your claim?
You're the moron here -- You're denouncing Apple (and insulting me!) because you do not understand why Apple uses HFS+. Hint: It isn't just for legacy reasons. The other reply to your nonsense gives just one of the many reasons.
Most apps that need an installer do use the Apple installer.
You're right about a single command to update everything, although if this fails in Debian, I'm fucked and have to track down the problem.
I find all non-commercial software at macupdate.com. Very nice.
You can unhide usr and all the hidden directories if you want to. For the average user, there is no reason to see them. Ever.
Consistancy in Gnome or KDE is not up to par with OS X. I've used Ubuntu, and it isn't close.
Yes, metal and aqua apps LOOK different, but the behaviour is 100% identical. As for Carbon/Cocoa, they behave almost identically. What's so different?
Bringing up an FTP server in one click is useful for times I need to transfer files to another person over the internet. Why do you think that is a "good idea"?
Adding users is easy in Gnome, yes (I don't use KDE). It still isn't as obvious as it is in OS X though. I could just type in "user" in the search field, and it would highlight the correct thing for me.
I'm hardly "utterly uninformed" about the current state of desktop Linux. I use it every day.
The fact that the package manager *has to* be more advanced than what comes with Windows is the issue. Apt-get is much more advanced than what OS X has by default (although Darwinports and Fink do just as well for those that want them). The thing is though, in OS X, you don't NEED a package manager. Drag and drop to install. Drag to the trash to uninstall. Easy. Synaptic shouldn't even exist in an ideal world (I realize it has to for now). Besides, do you expect my mom to know to go to "Synaptic" when she wants to install a program?
Who the hell modded this up? My mac reason FAT32 just fine. It is the fault of Windows for not bothering to support HFS+.
As for toast, your coworker is a dolt. There is an option right on the screen that says "Burn for Mac", "Burn for PC", or "Burn for Mac and PC". It's very prominently displayed, and in fact, you can't even turn it off.
Slashdot Mirror
1. Yes, you're locked in. This is both good and bad. It is bad in the sense that the hardware costs more. It is good in two ways however. Firstly, when you sell it three or four years later, you actually get back about half what you paid. Some box I built myself will be worth nothing (as new ones are so cheap). Secondly, everything works. I never have to configure anything when I get a new Mac. I put it on my desk, plug it in, and press the on button.
2. Upgrading will cost you? I can go buy a hard drive, ram, video card, etc, from all sorts of 3rd party vendors. The only thing I can't upgrade is the processor, and that's only on the new G5s. Sucks, yes.
3. A better desktop GUI than OS X? Well I suppose you either love it or you don't, but I personally am confident that it will be the best thing around for awhile. Besides, I can always run KDE or Gnome if I really want to. Plus you can always dual-boot.
4. Xcode is fantastic. There is no reason written in stone that "everything should be separate". If an integrated solution works best, then use that.
5. I've never had a Mac where the "window manager" wouldn't start. There's only one window manager, and hence there is no configuration files to go bonkers or anything to worry about. If it isn't working for you, it isn't working for a lot of other people too.
6. Mhmmm.
I would like to build my own boxes, yes. But as I said, the resale value negates much of the initial expense of buying a mac, and Apple certainly makes good hardware. The Mac is the best solution for what I do (art-related dsp and opengl work), so that's what I use.
Please... please spare me...
How is Ubuntu not easy to install? You pick your country, keyboard settings (American English for most of us), and *gasp* monitor resolution. If you've ever installed Windows 98 from scratch (not sure if XP is better), it isn't pretty either, yet most people seemed to use it just fine.
Apart from maybe the home icon (it may just be similar, I can't tell), Exquisite does not have any icons in common with OS X from what I can see.
How could he be smoking crack? It's illegal stupid.
In 2020, Windows 2000 will still perform on 23 year old hardware.
Apple has been and always will be an "integrated solution provider". The fact that the software can assume certain hardware is a feature, albeit sometimes a more costly one.
I will admit Spotlight's interface is horrible. Terrible, horrible, etc. The find window forgets all my settings, the Spotlight window has virtually no options, the spotlight menu has items that shift around as you try to select them, etc. Pain in the ass.
That said, it IS quite fast! I have never waited more than 2-3 seconds for any search on my 1.25GHz Powerbook.
This bug has been around since NeXTStep. It is due to issue with lookupd, which has lead many engineers to call it lockupd instead. A real pain in the ass, and one that I have no idea why they refuse to fix.
Are slashdot mods really that fucking dumb so as to give him an insightful?
If someone calls something art, you have to consider it art. Period. All this other nonsense debating what is and isn't art is coming from non-artists or hacks trying to put an objective view on everything. If someone says something is art, you have to treat it as such. You may think it is shitty art, and it probably is, but it is still art. That said, I went to ArtBots last year in Harlem, and it was great. I defy anyone who was actually there to say that there was not a lot of beautiful "art" present.
I wonder how long it will be until the world begins to wake up and realize...
Trying to merge devices isn't necessarily dumb. My car lets me drive around, but it also has a radio. And a CD player. And an air conditioner. And heated seats. Etc etc. Despite all that, I have no problem using it. Why? The interface (at least in my Saab 9000) is good. One button turns on the air conditioner and restores my last settings. If I put in a CD, the radio automatically stops. If I eject a CD, it goes back to the radio. If I adjust the volume for the radio, it handles the CD too (obviously). Yet, despite the fact that your average car nowadays is just as complex as a new cellphone, it is easy to use. The problem with cellphones is that the interfaces are TERRIBLE. Most mp3 players have shit interfaces too, yet the iPod is a joy to use. If anyone can get this right, it is Apple. No, they're not perfect, and no, they're not gods, but I can't think of any company who knows what they're doing more than Apple in this field.
Freedom is not being able to do whatever you want. I cannot go and kill someone, but I have no doubt that the society in which you are not allowed to murder is the freer society. There is both "freedom to" and "freedom from". That said, BSD, LGPL, and GPL all have their place. All my work has been BSD so far, but I could see myself using LGPL (or maybe even GPL) in some cases.
Oh I'm sick of hearing this. How many companies sell products that are GPL'd and don't make their money through support or service somehow? I'd suspect none, as you'd be nuts to allow anyone to legally redistribute your software and source code (after modifications no less). There's no reason to buy software from someone when you can legally get it from your friend. Unless you consider getting donations to be making money, you're not going to make money by selling software.
There is always this wiki, which is all about art created through programming (audio, visual, interactive, conceptual, and otherwise). It currently features over 50 artists -- I'm surprised no member of the Slashdot crowd has mentioned it already actually.
Exactly. I'm not blaming KDE here. It is more just the nature of the FOSS world at the moment. Most of the software I personally want to use isn't written with KDE or Gnome in mind. In the Mac, a program that isn't written in Cocoa nowadays is very rare. In the FOSS world, a program written using the KDE libraries are more the exception than the rule.
I've used KDE -- I had to run off a Kubuntu CD for a week after my hard disk died so I could get some work done. I just do not know it well enough to remember how to change that specific option. And almost does cut it. The differences between Carbon and Cocoa apps are only noticable if you know where to look. By almost I mean 99.9%. A carbon app may not have the prototypical Cocoa about box for example (oh no...), but the about menu is still in the same spot and labeled the same way. Big deal. KDE is consistant within itself, yes. However, that falls apart as soon as you install any other software. My point is all 3rd party Cocoa apps fit right in. However, install vanilla Firefox in KDE, and forget it.
I think it is not even Commercial versus FOSS. What it really comes down to is Centralized (with a capital C) versus decentralized. The FOSS community is very decentralized, which is both good and bad. It is good in the sense that we have dozens of window managers to pick from. It is bad in the sense that we have to deal with all the issues that arrise from writing software that most work with the lowest common denominator features of those twenty window managers.
OS X is much more than a pretty linux. In your same post you also say that OS X is better at letting people easily install apps than Linux is. Doesn't that right there invalidate your claim?
OS X is UNIX with a pretty GUI and a lot more.
You're the moron here -- You're denouncing Apple (and insulting me!) because you do not understand why Apple uses HFS+. Hint: It isn't just for legacy reasons. The other reply to your nonsense gives just one of the many reasons.
PC Guy: What kind of computer do you use?
... Okay.
...
...
...
Apple Guy: I use a Mac.
PC Guy: You use Mack?
Apple Guy: No, I use *a* Mac.
PC Guy: Oh. I use a Windows.
Apple Guy:
PC Guy: Say, is MACK an acronym?
Apple Guy: No, it isn't. And it is M-A-C.
PC Guy: That's not how you spell MAC.
Apple Guy:
PC Guy: Why is it called MAC?
Apple Guy: It is short for Macintosh.
PC Guy: Like the apple?
Apple Guy: Yes. The company is called Apple.
PC Guy: I thought it was called Macintosh.
Apple Guy: No, that's just the name of their computers. The company is Apple.
PC Guy: So you use Apple?
Apple Guy: No, I use *an* Apple.
PC Guy: But you use *a* Mac?
Apple Guy: Yes.
PC Guy: That's not very consistent.
Apple Guy:
PC Guy: Say, isn't that the computer with the gay rainbow logo?
Apple Guy:
PC Guy: How do you guys expect anyone to take you seriously?
Most apps that need an installer do use the Apple installer. You're right about a single command to update everything, although if this fails in Debian, I'm fucked and have to track down the problem. I find all non-commercial software at macupdate.com. Very nice. You can unhide usr and all the hidden directories if you want to. For the average user, there is no reason to see them. Ever. Consistancy in Gnome or KDE is not up to par with OS X. I've used Ubuntu, and it isn't close. Yes, metal and aqua apps LOOK different, but the behaviour is 100% identical. As for Carbon/Cocoa, they behave almost identically. What's so different? Bringing up an FTP server in one click is useful for times I need to transfer files to another person over the internet. Why do you think that is a "good idea"? Adding users is easy in Gnome, yes (I don't use KDE). It still isn't as obvious as it is in OS X though. I could just type in "user" in the search field, and it would highlight the correct thing for me. I'm hardly "utterly uninformed" about the current state of desktop Linux. I use it every day.
The fact that the package manager *has to* be more advanced than what comes with Windows is the issue. Apt-get is much more advanced than what OS X has by default (although Darwinports and Fink do just as well for those that want them). The thing is though, in OS X, you don't NEED a package manager. Drag and drop to install. Drag to the trash to uninstall. Easy. Synaptic shouldn't even exist in an ideal world (I realize it has to for now). Besides, do you expect my mom to know to go to "Synaptic" when she wants to install a program?
Who the hell modded this up? My mac reason FAT32 just fine. It is the fault of Windows for not bothering to support HFS+. As for toast, your coworker is a dolt. There is an option right on the screen that says "Burn for Mac", "Burn for PC", or "Burn for Mac and PC". It's very prominently displayed, and in fact, you can't even turn it off.