On 2026-05-23 10:14 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-05-22, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-21 4:53 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-05-21, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-21 12:30 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-05-20, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-20 5:30 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-05-19, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-18 2:42 p.m., RonB wrote:
< snipped for brevity >
I find that there is enough customization in MacOS. After all, I can
change the icons and the sounds, and that is already more than Windows.
It's not as much as any Linux desktop environment though. Plus, I can
move the dock to where it should logically be, on the left side of the
screen, which is something Windows is only planning to have five years
after Windows 11's initial release.
When I used the Mac a little that's where I moved the "dock." (Everybody has
a different name for these.) Still other stuff I can't stand, like the
Uni-Menu (or whatever they call it) where can open a small terminal window,
but have to move your mouse up the top, left corner for everything —
provided you have focus on the right application. I don't if Mac OS supports
workspaces or not, but I know it doesn't do it by default (unless that's
changed in recent versions. A lot of stuff I just don't like about Macs.
Just yesterday I wanted to share my laptop screen with the AppleTV in >>>>>>>>> our bedroom because the USB thumb drive I plugged into it didn't >>>>>>>>> recognize that it had been loaded with content (good job, Android). I >>>>>>>>> kept searching how to do it knowing that it was likely stupidly easy...
it was. A lot of MacOS stuff requires you to rethink things because >>>>>>>>> things are more or less where they should be and not in random places >>>>>>>>> that you simply get used to. Microsoft has conditioned me to find >>>>>>>>> comfort in counterintuitive behaviour.
I don't think I would go with "where they should be." Maybe just where Apple
"thinks they should be." But I agree Microsoft Windows is a pain to use — at
least for someone who's used Linux for almost 20 years.
I don't find Windows as painful as the rest, just less
counter-intuitive. Once you know where something is, you notice that >>>>>>> it's generally accessible fairly easily or that there is a good keyboard
combination to get to it. MacOS has decent keyboard combinations too, >>>>>>> but I find them to be less useful than those in Windows. Of course, I'm >>>>>>> not an expert on MacOS yet.
Compared to Linux I find the Windows file system convoluted. I don't know
enough about the Mac file system to get into much detail but, for me, it was
harder to find applications than in Linux. And I consider its file manager
to be a convoluted mess. Admittedly it's not what I grew up with.
My biggest issues with Windows's filesystem is the fact that it is
outdated and tends to corrupt itself. It does the job, but poorly. As >>>>> for the file manager, I have no complaints. It does the job, better than >>>>> MacOS at the very least.
It would probably be nice if one of these Linux hardware outfits could
figure out a way to use ARM CPUs, similar to Macs, for some new machines.
I've been messing with Raspberry Pis, so I know Linux could run on ARM CPUs.
But I guess that would take a lot of work.
I doubt it. I think that the market has made its decision and that they
prefer raw power in the form of x86-64 CPUs rather than the objectively
better ARM CPUs that provide a better balance of power and efficiency.
Add the fact that most of the world's most demanded software is already
available for the x86-64 platform with no compromise in performance, and
the sale of a platform on which the speed is already a little worse (in
multi-core settings, at least) and which would necessitate further speed
compromises through emulation becomes more difficult.
You're probably right on this. I don't see much about the ARM Windows
machines these days. (This is the second time Microsoft has tried to go to
ARM CPUs.)
I think that the reality is that while battery life is a fantastic thing
to have, those who really need it are the ones who are unable to find >>>>>>>>> outlets wherever they land. For me, that's university students who go >>>>>>>>> from class to class. For them, the Mac should be an automatic purchase.
However, even for a teacher like me, I have not only my own desk but my
own room, and there is an outlet at my disposal at all times. The >>>>>>>>> benefit of the MacBook is therefore minimal. Even when battery life is
important, I notice that people can handle having no more than six or >>>>>>>>> seven hours.
My little Dell Latitude 3180 supposedly gets about 14 hours on a charge. I
don't know how realistic that number is, but that's what it shows when fully
charged and turned on. I do know it lasts about six hours when streaming.
For me low specs mean a longer battery life.
Does your Mac have a way to use multiple desktops?
As far as I know it does, but I never use that feature anyway. I imagine
that if I needed application to constantly have their windows opened and
easily accessible at all times, I'd make use of it. Nevertheless, I like
to minimize and maximize windows as needed.
When I want to post an image (for example) I like to keep the Browser window
open in one workspace, and edit the image in another work space. To me it
feels something like two workbenches in a shop where I can do something >>>>>> completely different on each one. I use the secondary workspace a lot. >>>>>>
It looks like Apple calls it "Mission Control." It appears to work something
like it does in Gnome (which I think is convoluted). I prefer just clicking
the second workspace on my panel in Cinnamon, Xfce or Mate. It's quicker and
more intuitive.
Today's Gnome is the result of developers taking the wave of tablets too >>>>> seriously and thinking that they needed to cater to that audience more >>>>> than the desktop one. Windows 8 did the same thing and alienated
countless people from ever using the operating system again. I can't >>>>> help but notice that the most successful desktop products today are the >>>>> ones which didn't play too much with the clever interface Microsoft came >>>>> up with in 1995.
I agree. Seems like a lot of the changes (or "new ideas") in OSes has been >>>> the result of "we want to do something different." Change for change sake. >>>> The "one interface" for computers, tablets and phones was always a stupid >>>> idea. You don't use these devices the same way.
I remember when Microsoft released its first Surface tablets (when they were
still mostly ARM based). In the tablet ads they would show how to connect a
keyboard, and in the ads for Windows 8 desktop computers, they would show >>>> the users reaching over their keyboards and mice and touching the screen. >>>> Like that made any sense.
I actually thought that Microsoft might go in the right direction when
they released the Surface Book after the initial Surface. Some of us
want the kind of portability that the Surface offers, but can't imagine
using any machine without a physical keyboard. That it never managed to
become what the MacBook Air now is is more than a little disappointing.
Of course, I stopped being surprised that Microsoft could come up with
an excellent idea but never execute it properly.
If I remember correctly, Balmer was still in charge at the time. That guy
was like a bull in a china shop.
To me, it just doesn't matter who is in charge anymore. I've lost faith
in Microsoft to the point that I am actively trying to figure out
whether I will replace my main machine with a Mac or a Linux one. If the latter, I won't be dumb about it: I'll buy a machine that was made specifically to work with Linux. I'm thinking something by System76, but
we will see. As much as I love the Mac, I'm not a fan of the idea that I will never be able to upgrade anything I purchased, if only to extend
its life by a year or two.
You're much more restless about this than I am. I guess (for what I do)
Linux Mint just works, so I just stick with it. It also might have
something to do with our age difference. I test other Linuxes (and the
Mac OS) out of curiosity but I never have any intention of moving away
from Linux Mint. Which is where I will stay (unless something changes drastically with LM).
On 2026-05-23, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-23 10:14 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-05-22, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-21 4:53 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-05-21, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-21 12:30 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-05-20, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:My biggest issues with Windows's filesystem is the fact that it is >>>>>> outdated and tends to corrupt itself. It does the job, but poorly. As >>>>>> for the file manager, I have no complaints. It does the job, better than >>>>>> MacOS at the very least.
On 2026-05-20 5:30 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-05-19, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-18 2:42 p.m., RonB wrote:
< snipped for brevity >
I find that there is enough customization in MacOS. After all, I can
change the icons and the sounds, and that is already more than Windows.
It's not as much as any Linux desktop environment though. Plus, I can
move the dock to where it should logically be, on the left side of the
screen, which is something Windows is only planning to have five years
after Windows 11's initial release.
When I used the Mac a little that's where I moved the "dock." (Everybody has
a different name for these.) Still other stuff I can't stand, like the
Uni-Menu (or whatever they call it) where can open a small terminal window,
but have to move your mouse up the top, left corner for everything —
provided you have focus on the right application. I don't if Mac OS supports
workspaces or not, but I know it doesn't do it by default (unless that's
changed in recent versions. A lot of stuff I just don't like about Macs.
Just yesterday I wanted to share my laptop screen with the AppleTV in
our bedroom because the USB thumb drive I plugged into it didn't >>>>>>>>>> recognize that it had been loaded with content (good job, Android). I
kept searching how to do it knowing that it was likely stupidly easy...
it was. A lot of MacOS stuff requires you to rethink things because >>>>>>>>>> things are more or less where they should be and not in random places
that you simply get used to. Microsoft has conditioned me to find >>>>>>>>>> comfort in counterintuitive behaviour.
I don't think I would go with "where they should be." Maybe just where Apple
"thinks they should be." But I agree Microsoft Windows is a pain to use — at
least for someone who's used Linux for almost 20 years.
I don't find Windows as painful as the rest, just less
counter-intuitive. Once you know where something is, you notice that >>>>>>>> it's generally accessible fairly easily or that there is a good keyboard
combination to get to it. MacOS has decent keyboard combinations too, >>>>>>>> but I find them to be less useful than those in Windows. Of course, I'm
not an expert on MacOS yet.
Compared to Linux I find the Windows file system convoluted. I don't know
enough about the Mac file system to get into much detail but, for me, it was
harder to find applications than in Linux. And I consider its file manager
to be a convoluted mess. Admittedly it's not what I grew up with. >>>>>>
It would probably be nice if one of these Linux hardware outfits could
figure out a way to use ARM CPUs, similar to Macs, for some new machines.
I've been messing with Raspberry Pis, so I know Linux could run on ARM CPUs.
But I guess that would take a lot of work.
I doubt it. I think that the market has made its decision and that they
prefer raw power in the form of x86-64 CPUs rather than the objectively
better ARM CPUs that provide a better balance of power and efficiency.
Add the fact that most of the world's most demanded software is already
available for the x86-64 platform with no compromise in performance, and
the sale of a platform on which the speed is already a little worse (in
multi-core settings, at least) and which would necessitate further speed
compromises through emulation becomes more difficult.
You're probably right on this. I don't see much about the ARM Windows
machines these days. (This is the second time Microsoft has tried to go to
ARM CPUs.)
I think that the reality is that while battery life is a fantastic thing
to have, those who really need it are the ones who are unable to find
outlets wherever they land. For me, that's university students who go
from class to class. For them, the Mac should be an automatic purchase.
However, even for a teacher like me, I have not only my own desk but my
own room, and there is an outlet at my disposal at all times. The >>>>>>>>>> benefit of the MacBook is therefore minimal. Even when battery life is
important, I notice that people can handle having no more than six or
seven hours.
My little Dell Latitude 3180 supposedly gets about 14 hours on a charge. I
don't know how realistic that number is, but that's what it shows when fully
charged and turned on. I do know it lasts about six hours when streaming.
For me low specs mean a longer battery life.
Does your Mac have a way to use multiple desktops?
As far as I know it does, but I never use that feature anyway. I imagine
that if I needed application to constantly have their windows opened and
easily accessible at all times, I'd make use of it. Nevertheless, I like
to minimize and maximize windows as needed.
When I want to post an image (for example) I like to keep the Browser window
open in one workspace, and edit the image in another work space. To me it
feels something like two workbenches in a shop where I can do something >>>>>>> completely different on each one. I use the secondary workspace a lot. >>>>>>>
It looks like Apple calls it "Mission Control." It appears to work something
like it does in Gnome (which I think is convoluted). I prefer just clicking
the second workspace on my panel in Cinnamon, Xfce or Mate. It's quicker and
more intuitive.
Today's Gnome is the result of developers taking the wave of tablets too >>>>>> seriously and thinking that they needed to cater to that audience more >>>>>> than the desktop one. Windows 8 did the same thing and alienated
countless people from ever using the operating system again. I can't >>>>>> help but notice that the most successful desktop products today are the >>>>>> ones which didn't play too much with the clever interface Microsoft came >>>>>> up with in 1995.
I agree. Seems like a lot of the changes (or "new ideas") in OSes has been
the result of "we want to do something different." Change for change sake.
The "one interface" for computers, tablets and phones was always a stupid >>>>> idea. You don't use these devices the same way.
I remember when Microsoft released its first Surface tablets (when they were
still mostly ARM based). In the tablet ads they would show how to connect a
keyboard, and in the ads for Windows 8 desktop computers, they would show >>>>> the users reaching over their keyboards and mice and touching the screen. >>>>> Like that made any sense.
I actually thought that Microsoft might go in the right direction when >>>> they released the Surface Book after the initial Surface. Some of us
want the kind of portability that the Surface offers, but can't imagine >>>> using any machine without a physical keyboard. That it never managed to >>>> become what the MacBook Air now is is more than a little disappointing. >>>> Of course, I stopped being surprised that Microsoft could come up with >>>> an excellent idea but never execute it properly.
If I remember correctly, Balmer was still in charge at the time. That guy >>> was like a bull in a china shop.
To me, it just doesn't matter who is in charge anymore. I've lost faith
in Microsoft to the point that I am actively trying to figure out
whether I will replace my main machine with a Mac or a Linux one. If the
latter, I won't be dumb about it: I'll buy a machine that was made
specifically to work with Linux. I'm thinking something by System76, but
we will see. As much as I love the Mac, I'm not a fan of the idea that I
will never be able to upgrade anything I purchased, if only to extend
its life by a year or two.
You're much more restless about this than I am. I guess (for what I do)
Linux Mint just works, so I just stick with it.
It also might have something
to do with our age difference. I test other Linuxes (and the Mac OS) out of curiosity but I never have any intention of moving away from Linux Mint. Which is where I will stay (unless something changes drastically with LM).
On 2026-05-20, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-20 5:30 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-05-19, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-18 2:42 p.m., RonB wrote:
< snipped for brevity >
Just yesterday I wanted to share my laptop screen with the AppleTV inI find that there is enough customization in MacOS. After all, I can >>>>>> change the icons and the sounds, and that is already more than Windows. >>>>>> It's not as much as any Linux desktop environment though. Plus, I can >>>>>> move the dock to where it should logically be, on the left side of the >>>>>> screen, which is something Windows is only planning to have five years >>>>>> after Windows 11's initial release.
When I used the Mac a little that's where I moved the "dock." (Everybody has
a different name for these.) Still other stuff I can't stand, like the >>>>> Uni-Menu (or whatever they call it) where can open a small terminal window,
but have to move your mouse up the top, left corner for everything — >>>>> provided you have focus on the right application. I don't if Mac OS supports
workspaces or not, but I know it doesn't do it by default (unless that's >>>>> changed in recent versions. A lot of stuff I just don't like about Macs. >>>>
our bedroom because the USB thumb drive I plugged into it didn't
recognize that it had been loaded with content (good job, Android). I
kept searching how to do it knowing that it was likely stupidly easy... >>>> it was. A lot of MacOS stuff requires you to rethink things because
things are more or less where they should be and not in random places
that you simply get used to. Microsoft has conditioned me to find
comfort in counterintuitive behaviour.
I don't think I would go with "where they should be." Maybe just where Apple
"thinks they should be." But I agree Microsoft Windows is a pain to use — at
least for someone who's used Linux for almost 20 years.
I don't find Windows as painful as the rest, just less
counter-intuitive. Once you know where something is, you notice that
it's generally accessible fairly easily or that there is a good keyboard
combination to get to it. MacOS has decent keyboard combinations too,
but I find them to be less useful than those in Windows. Of course, I'm
not an expert on MacOS yet.
Compared to Linux I find the Windows file system convoluted. I don't know enough about the Mac file system to get into much detail but, for me, it was harder to find applications than in Linux. And I consider its file manager
to be a convoluted mess. Admittedly it's not what I grew up with.
It would probably be nice if one of these Linux hardware outfits could >>>>>>> figure out a way to use ARM CPUs, similar to Macs, for some new machines.
I've been messing with Raspberry Pis, so I know Linux could run on ARM CPUs.
But I guess that would take a lot of work.
I doubt it. I think that the market has made its decision and that they >>>>>> prefer raw power in the form of x86-64 CPUs rather than the objectively >>>>>> better ARM CPUs that provide a better balance of power and efficiency. >>>>>> Add the fact that most of the world's most demanded software is already >>>>>> available for the x86-64 platform with no compromise in performance, and >>>>>> the sale of a platform on which the speed is already a little worse (in >>>>>> multi-core settings, at least) and which would necessitate further speed >>>>>> compromises through emulation becomes more difficult.
You're probably right on this. I don't see much about the ARM Windows >>>>> machines these days. (This is the second time Microsoft has tried to go to
ARM CPUs.)
I think that the reality is that while battery life is a fantastic thing >>>> to have, those who really need it are the ones who are unable to find
outlets wherever they land. For me, that's university students who go
from class to class. For them, the Mac should be an automatic purchase. >>>> However, even for a teacher like me, I have not only my own desk but my >>>> own room, and there is an outlet at my disposal at all times. The
benefit of the MacBook is therefore minimal. Even when battery life is >>>> important, I notice that people can handle having no more than six or
seven hours.
My little Dell Latitude 3180 supposedly gets about 14 hours on a charge. I >>> don't know how realistic that number is, but that's what it shows when fully
charged and turned on. I do know it lasts about six hours when streaming. >>> For me low specs mean a longer battery life.
Does your Mac have a way to use multiple desktops?
As far as I know it does, but I never use that feature anyway. I imagine
that if I needed application to constantly have their windows opened and
easily accessible at all times, I'd make use of it. Nevertheless, I like
to minimize and maximize windows as needed.
When I want to post an image (for example) I like to keep the Browser window open in one workspace, and edit the image in another work space. To me it feels something like two workbenches in a shop where I can do something completely different on each one. I use the secondary workspace a lot.
It looks like Apple calls it "Mission Control." It appears to work something like it does in Gnome (which I think is convoluted). I prefer just clicking the second workspace on my panel in Cinnamon, Xfce or Mate. It's quicker and more intuitive.
On 2026-05-21 12:30 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-05-20, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-20 5:30 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-05-19, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-18 2:42 p.m., RonB wrote:
< snipped for brevity >
I find that there is enough customization in MacOS. After all, I can >>>>>>> change the icons and the sounds, and that is already more than
Windows.
It's not as much as any Linux desktop environment though. Plus, I >>>>>>> can
move the dock to where it should logically be, on the left side >>>>>>> of the
screen, which is something Windows is only planning to have five >>>>>>> years
after Windows 11's initial release.
When I used the Mac a little that's where I moved the
"dock." (Everybody has
a different name for these.) Still other stuff I can't stand, like >>>>>> the
Uni-Menu (or whatever they call it) where can open a small
terminal window,
but have to move your mouse up the top, left corner for everything — >>>>>> provided you have focus on the right application. I don't if Mac
OS supports
workspaces or not, but I know it doesn't do it by default (unless >>>>>> that's
changed in recent versions. A lot of stuff I just don't like about >>>>>> Macs.
Just yesterday I wanted to share my laptop screen with the AppleTV in >>>>> our bedroom because the USB thumb drive I plugged into it didn't
recognize that it had been loaded with content (good job, Android). I >>>>> kept searching how to do it knowing that it was likely stupidly
easy...
it was. A lot of MacOS stuff requires you to rethink things because
things are more or less where they should be and not in random places >>>>> that you simply get used to. Microsoft has conditioned me to find
comfort in counterintuitive behaviour.
I don't think I would go with "where they should be." Maybe just
where Apple
"thinks they should be." But I agree Microsoft Windows is a pain to
use — at
least for someone who's used Linux for almost 20 years.
I don't find Windows as painful as the rest, just less
counter-intuitive. Once you know where something is, you notice that
it's generally accessible fairly easily or that there is a good keyboard >>> combination to get to it. MacOS has decent keyboard combinations too,
but I find them to be less useful than those in Windows. Of course, I'm
not an expert on MacOS yet.
Compared to Linux I find the Windows file system convoluted. I don't know
enough about the Mac file system to get into much detail but, for me,
it was
harder to find applications than in Linux. And I consider its file
manager
to be a convoluted mess. Admittedly it's not what I grew up with.
My biggest issues with Windows's filesystem is the fact that it is
outdated and tends to corrupt itself. It does the job, but poorly. As
for the file manager, I have no complaints. It does the job, better than MacOS at the very least.
Alan wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
On 2026-05-18 11:42, RonB wrote:
<snip>
When I used the Mac a little that's where I moved the "dock." (Everybody has
a different name for these.) Still other stuff I can't stand, like the
Uni-Menu (or whatever they call it) where can open a small terminal window, >>> but have to move your mouse up the top, left corner for everything —
provided you have focus on the right application. I don't if Mac OS supports
workspaces or not, but I know it doesn't do it by default (unless that's >>> changed in recent versions. A lot of stuff I just don't like about Macs.
1. It's called the Dock. Everyone calls it that except Windows switchers
who haven't learned yet.
2. If by the "Uni-Menu", you mean the fact that the menu BAR is at the
top of the display, it's been shown that--with the fact that the
mouse/trackpad has non-linear tracking with respect to the speed with
which you move it--having the menu bar at the top makes it faster to use... >>
...because a quick flick of the mouse (or trackpad) up and to the left
will always result in your pointer ending up ON the menu bar. No need to
start tracking the movement of the mouse from the first moment you
decide to use a menu command.
I like the way Fluxbox does it. Right-click on the desktop to
bring up the system menu. Or (my setup) use Win-M to pop it up.
Also, Fluxbox's keystroke navigation of menus/nested menu is nice.
No need to define accelerator keys. Example (my personal setup):
Win-M s enter m enter l enter
Navigates to Style Collections / My Styles / LintherBrushed
If you want instead a style called "Life", do lif enter instead.
Anyway, not trying win a dick-size contest, just casting my vote
for Fluxbox.
On 2026-05-20 21:30, RonB wrote:
<snip>
It looks like Apple calls it "Mission Control." It appears to work something >> like it does in Gnome (which I think is convoluted). I prefer just clicking >> the second workspace on my panel in Cinnamon, Xfce or Mate. It's quicker and >> more intuitive.
Everyone seems to mistake "more familiar and comfortable to me" with
"more intuitive".
Alan wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
On 2026-05-20 21:30, RonB wrote:
<snip>
It looks like Apple calls it "Mission Control." It appears to work something
like it does in Gnome (which I think is convoluted). I prefer just clicking >>> the second workspace on my panel in Cinnamon, Xfce or Mate. It's quicker and
more intuitive.
Everyone seems to mistake "more familiar and comfortable to me" with
"more intuitive".
Including you.
On Mon, 25 May 2026 23:47:21 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
You're much more restless about this than I am. I guess (for what I do)
Linux Mint just works, so I just stick with it. It also might have
something to do with our age difference. I test other Linuxes (and the
Mac OS) out of curiosity but I never have any intention of moving away
from Linux Mint. Which is where I will stay (unless something changes
drastically with LM).
I'm a polygamist. The active boxes are Ubuntu, Fedora, Mint, Leap 16, and the Pi's take on Debian Trixie. Endeavour was interesting but the semi- rolling Fedora is bad enough although, knock on wood, an update has never killed it. It might be a passing phase but the Mint laptop has been a busy little bee too.
The antiX on the eeePC was an experiment but the device is currently
powered down.
End of the day, they're all the same but I use the different boxes for different projects so I might as well have different distros. It's easy to confuse the Fedora tower and the Lenovo laptop since both ate KDE.
On 2026-05-25 7:47 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-05-23, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-23 10:14 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-05-22, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-21 4:53 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-05-21, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-21 12:30 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-05-20, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:My biggest issues with Windows's filesystem is the fact that it is >>>>>>> outdated and tends to corrupt itself. It does the job, but poorly. As >>>>>>> for the file manager, I have no complaints. It does the job, better than
On 2026-05-20 5:30 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-05-19, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-18 2:42 p.m., RonB wrote:
< snipped for brevity >
I find that there is enough customization in MacOS. After all, I can
change the icons and the sounds, and that is already more than Windows.
It's not as much as any Linux desktop environment though. Plus, I can
move the dock to where it should logically be, on the left side of the
screen, which is something Windows is only planning to have five years
after Windows 11's initial release.
When I used the Mac a little that's where I moved the "dock." (Everybody has
a different name for these.) Still other stuff I can't stand, like the
Uni-Menu (or whatever they call it) where can open a small terminal window,
but have to move your mouse up the top, left corner for everything —
provided you have focus on the right application. I don't if Mac OS supports
workspaces or not, but I know it doesn't do it by default (unless that's
changed in recent versions. A lot of stuff I just don't like about Macs.
Just yesterday I wanted to share my laptop screen with the AppleTV in
our bedroom because the USB thumb drive I plugged into it didn't >>>>>>>>>>> recognize that it had been loaded with content (good job, Android). I
kept searching how to do it knowing that it was likely stupidly easy...
it was. A lot of MacOS stuff requires you to rethink things because >>>>>>>>>>> things are more or less where they should be and not in random places
that you simply get used to. Microsoft has conditioned me to find >>>>>>>>>>> comfort in counterintuitive behaviour.
I don't think I would go with "where they should be." Maybe just where Apple
"thinks they should be." But I agree Microsoft Windows is a pain to use — at
least for someone who's used Linux for almost 20 years.
I don't find Windows as painful as the rest, just less
counter-intuitive. Once you know where something is, you notice that >>>>>>>>> it's generally accessible fairly easily or that there is a good keyboard
combination to get to it. MacOS has decent keyboard combinations too, >>>>>>>>> but I find them to be less useful than those in Windows. Of course, I'm
not an expert on MacOS yet.
Compared to Linux I find the Windows file system convoluted. I don't know
enough about the Mac file system to get into much detail but, for me, it was
harder to find applications than in Linux. And I consider its file manager
to be a convoluted mess. Admittedly it's not what I grew up with. >>>>>>>
MacOS at the very least.
You're probably right on this. I don't see much about the ARM WindowsIt would probably be nice if one of these Linux hardware outfits could
figure out a way to use ARM CPUs, similar to Macs, for some new machines.
I've been messing with Raspberry Pis, so I know Linux could run on ARM CPUs.
But I guess that would take a lot of work.
I doubt it. I think that the market has made its decision and that they
prefer raw power in the form of x86-64 CPUs rather than the objectively
better ARM CPUs that provide a better balance of power and efficiency.
Add the fact that most of the world's most demanded software is already
available for the x86-64 platform with no compromise in performance, and
the sale of a platform on which the speed is already a little worse (in
multi-core settings, at least) and which would necessitate further speed
compromises through emulation becomes more difficult. >>>>>>>>>>>>
machines these days. (This is the second time Microsoft has tried to go to
ARM CPUs.)
I think that the reality is that while battery life is a fantastic thing
to have, those who really need it are the ones who are unable to find
outlets wherever they land. For me, that's university students who go
from class to class. For them, the Mac should be an automatic purchase.
However, even for a teacher like me, I have not only my own desk but my
own room, and there is an outlet at my disposal at all times. The >>>>>>>>>>> benefit of the MacBook is therefore minimal. Even when battery life is
important, I notice that people can handle having no more than six or
seven hours.
My little Dell Latitude 3180 supposedly gets about 14 hours on a charge. I
don't know how realistic that number is, but that's what it shows when fully
charged and turned on. I do know it lasts about six hours when streaming.
For me low specs mean a longer battery life.
Does your Mac have a way to use multiple desktops?
As far as I know it does, but I never use that feature anyway. I imagine
that if I needed application to constantly have their windows opened and
easily accessible at all times, I'd make use of it. Nevertheless, I like
to minimize and maximize windows as needed.
When I want to post an image (for example) I like to keep the Browser window
open in one workspace, and edit the image in another work space. To me it
feels something like two workbenches in a shop where I can do something
completely different on each one. I use the secondary workspace a lot. >>>>>>>>
It looks like Apple calls it "Mission Control." It appears to work something
like it does in Gnome (which I think is convoluted). I prefer just clicking
the second workspace on my panel in Cinnamon, Xfce or Mate. It's quicker and
more intuitive.
Today's Gnome is the result of developers taking the wave of tablets too
seriously and thinking that they needed to cater to that audience more >>>>>>> than the desktop one. Windows 8 did the same thing and alienated >>>>>>> countless people from ever using the operating system again. I can't >>>>>>> help but notice that the most successful desktop products today are the >>>>>>> ones which didn't play too much with the clever interface Microsoft came
up with in 1995.
I agree. Seems like a lot of the changes (or "new ideas") in OSes has been
the result of "we want to do something different." Change for change sake.
The "one interface" for computers, tablets and phones was always a stupid
idea. You don't use these devices the same way.
I remember when Microsoft released its first Surface tablets (when they were
still mostly ARM based). In the tablet ads they would show how to connect a
keyboard, and in the ads for Windows 8 desktop computers, they would show
the users reaching over their keyboards and mice and touching the screen.
Like that made any sense.
I actually thought that Microsoft might go in the right direction when >>>>> they released the Surface Book after the initial Surface. Some of us >>>>> want the kind of portability that the Surface offers, but can't imagine >>>>> using any machine without a physical keyboard. That it never managed to >>>>> become what the MacBook Air now is is more than a little disappointing. >>>>> Of course, I stopped being surprised that Microsoft could come up with >>>>> an excellent idea but never execute it properly.
If I remember correctly, Balmer was still in charge at the time. That guy >>>> was like a bull in a china shop.
To me, it just doesn't matter who is in charge anymore. I've lost faith
in Microsoft to the point that I am actively trying to figure out
whether I will replace my main machine with a Mac or a Linux one. If the >>> latter, I won't be dumb about it: I'll buy a machine that was made
specifically to work with Linux. I'm thinking something by System76, but >>> we will see. As much as I love the Mac, I'm not a fan of the idea that I >>> will never be able to upgrade anything I purchased, if only to extend
its life by a year or two.
You're much more restless about this than I am. I guess (for what I do)
Linux Mint just works, so I just stick with it.
And it is indeed pretty good. The one issue I could find with it was
that while I could use my laptop's function to easily switch from mirror display, extend, external only or built-in only, I didn't have a display overhead to let me know which option I had selected. It wasn't that huge
of an issue, but I would prefer to be able to know which option it was
going to change to next, especially in class where it is important that
I look like I am in total control.
It also might have something
to do with our age difference. I test other Linuxes (and the Mac OS) out of >> curiosity but I never have any intention of moving away from Linux Mint.
Which is where I will stay (unless something changes drastically with LM).
I don't see much difference between an Ubuntu machine and a MacOS one,
at this point. The Mac hardware is definitely better since it allows for greater portability and noise-free operation, but an Ubuntu machine will allow you to play games, and it will run on any hardware you wish to use
it on. The advantage is therefore that you can upgrade or swap
components on your Ubuntu machine unlike a machine running MacOS. Security-wise, both are more or less the same too. I would give MacOS an edge because of the very strict signing it forces onto the user. The
result of it is that attempting to install any software Apple isn't explicitly aware of will cause you a lot of headaches. There are ways
around it, but it is definitely a good security measure despite being annoying.
On 2026-05-26, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-25 7:47 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-05-23, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-23 10:14 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-05-22, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-21 4:53 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-05-21, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-21 12:30 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-05-20, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:My biggest issues with Windows's filesystem is the fact that it is >>>>>>>> outdated and tends to corrupt itself. It does the job, but poorly. As >>>>>>>> for the file manager, I have no complaints. It does the job, better than
On 2026-05-20 5:30 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-05-19, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-18 2:42 p.m., RonB wrote:
< snipped for brevity >
I find that there is enough customization in MacOS. After all, I can
change the icons and the sounds, and that is already more than Windows.
It's not as much as any Linux desktop environment though. Plus, I can
move the dock to where it should logically be, on the left side of the
screen, which is something Windows is only planning to have five years
after Windows 11's initial release.
When I used the Mac a little that's where I moved the "dock." (Everybody has
a different name for these.) Still other stuff I can't stand, like the
Uni-Menu (or whatever they call it) where can open a small terminal window,
but have to move your mouse up the top, left corner for everything —
provided you have focus on the right application. I don't if Mac OS supports
workspaces or not, but I know it doesn't do it by default (unless that's
changed in recent versions. A lot of stuff I just don't like about Macs.
Just yesterday I wanted to share my laptop screen with the AppleTV in
our bedroom because the USB thumb drive I plugged into it didn't >>>>>>>>>>>> recognize that it had been loaded with content (good job, Android). I
kept searching how to do it knowing that it was likely stupidly easy...
it was. A lot of MacOS stuff requires you to rethink things because
things are more or less where they should be and not in random places
that you simply get used to. Microsoft has conditioned me to find >>>>>>>>>>>> comfort in counterintuitive behaviour.
I don't think I would go with "where they should be." Maybe just where Apple
"thinks they should be." But I agree Microsoft Windows is a pain to use — at
least for someone who's used Linux for almost 20 years.
I don't find Windows as painful as the rest, just less
counter-intuitive. Once you know where something is, you notice that >>>>>>>>>> it's generally accessible fairly easily or that there is a good keyboard
combination to get to it. MacOS has decent keyboard combinations too,
but I find them to be less useful than those in Windows. Of course, I'm
not an expert on MacOS yet.
Compared to Linux I find the Windows file system convoluted. I don't know
enough about the Mac file system to get into much detail but, for me, it was
harder to find applications than in Linux. And I consider its file manager
to be a convoluted mess. Admittedly it's not what I grew up with. >>>>>>>>
MacOS at the very least.
You're probably right on this. I don't see much about the ARM WindowsIt would probably be nice if one of these Linux hardware outfits could
figure out a way to use ARM CPUs, similar to Macs, for some new machines.
I've been messing with Raspberry Pis, so I know Linux could run on ARM CPUs.
But I guess that would take a lot of work.
I doubt it. I think that the market has made its decision and that they
prefer raw power in the form of x86-64 CPUs rather than the objectively
better ARM CPUs that provide a better balance of power and efficiency.
Add the fact that most of the world's most demanded software is already
available for the x86-64 platform with no compromise in performance, and
the sale of a platform on which the speed is already a little worse (in
multi-core settings, at least) and which would necessitate further speed
compromises through emulation becomes more difficult. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
machines these days. (This is the second time Microsoft has tried to go to
ARM CPUs.)
I think that the reality is that while battery life is a fantastic thing
to have, those who really need it are the ones who are unable to find
outlets wherever they land. For me, that's university students who go
from class to class. For them, the Mac should be an automatic purchase.
However, even for a teacher like me, I have not only my own desk but my
own room, and there is an outlet at my disposal at all times. The >>>>>>>>>>>> benefit of the MacBook is therefore minimal. Even when battery life is
important, I notice that people can handle having no more than six or
seven hours.
My little Dell Latitude 3180 supposedly gets about 14 hours on a charge. I
don't know how realistic that number is, but that's what it shows when fully
charged and turned on. I do know it lasts about six hours when streaming.
For me low specs mean a longer battery life.
Does your Mac have a way to use multiple desktops?
As far as I know it does, but I never use that feature anyway. I imagine
that if I needed application to constantly have their windows opened and
easily accessible at all times, I'd make use of it. Nevertheless, I like
to minimize and maximize windows as needed.
When I want to post an image (for example) I like to keep the Browser window
open in one workspace, and edit the image in another work space. To me it
feels something like two workbenches in a shop where I can do something
completely different on each one. I use the secondary workspace a lot.
It looks like Apple calls it "Mission Control." It appears to work something
like it does in Gnome (which I think is convoluted). I prefer just clicking
the second workspace on my panel in Cinnamon, Xfce or Mate. It's quicker and
more intuitive.
Today's Gnome is the result of developers taking the wave of tablets too
seriously and thinking that they needed to cater to that audience more >>>>>>>> than the desktop one. Windows 8 did the same thing and alienated >>>>>>>> countless people from ever using the operating system again. I can't >>>>>>>> help but notice that the most successful desktop products today are the
ones which didn't play too much with the clever interface Microsoft came
up with in 1995.
I agree. Seems like a lot of the changes (or "new ideas") in OSes has been
the result of "we want to do something different." Change for change sake.
The "one interface" for computers, tablets and phones was always a stupid
idea. You don't use these devices the same way.
I remember when Microsoft released its first Surface tablets (when they were
still mostly ARM based). In the tablet ads they would show how to connect a
keyboard, and in the ads for Windows 8 desktop computers, they would show
the users reaching over their keyboards and mice and touching the screen.
Like that made any sense.
I actually thought that Microsoft might go in the right direction when >>>>>> they released the Surface Book after the initial Surface. Some of us >>>>>> want the kind of portability that the Surface offers, but can't imagine >>>>>> using any machine without a physical keyboard. That it never managed to >>>>>> become what the MacBook Air now is is more than a little disappointing. >>>>>> Of course, I stopped being surprised that Microsoft could come up with >>>>>> an excellent idea but never execute it properly.
If I remember correctly, Balmer was still in charge at the time. That guy >>>>> was like a bull in a china shop.
To me, it just doesn't matter who is in charge anymore. I've lost faith >>>> in Microsoft to the point that I am actively trying to figure out
whether I will replace my main machine with a Mac or a Linux one. If the >>>> latter, I won't be dumb about it: I'll buy a machine that was made
specifically to work with Linux. I'm thinking something by System76, but >>>> we will see. As much as I love the Mac, I'm not a fan of the idea that I >>>> will never be able to upgrade anything I purchased, if only to extend
its life by a year or two.
You're much more restless about this than I am. I guess (for what I do)
Linux Mint just works, so I just stick with it.
And it is indeed pretty good. The one issue I could find with it was
that while I could use my laptop's function to easily switch from mirror
display, extend, external only or built-in only, I didn't have a display
overhead to let me know which option I had selected. It wasn't that huge
of an issue, but I would prefer to be able to know which option it was
going to change to next, especially in class where it is important that
I look like I am in total control.
It also might have somethingI don't see much difference between an Ubuntu machine and a MacOS one,
to do with our age difference. I test other Linuxes (and the Mac OS) out of >>> curiosity but I never have any intention of moving away from Linux Mint. >>> Which is where I will stay (unless something changes drastically with LM). >>
at this point. The Mac hardware is definitely better since it allows for
greater portability and noise-free operation, but an Ubuntu machine will
allow you to play games, and it will run on any hardware you wish to use
it on. The advantage is therefore that you can upgrade or swap
components on your Ubuntu machine unlike a machine running MacOS.
Security-wise, both are more or less the same too. I would give MacOS an
edge because of the very strict signing it forces onto the user. The
result of it is that attempting to install any software Apple isn't
explicitly aware of will cause you a lot of headaches. There are ways
around it, but it is definitely a good security measure despite being
annoying.
I don't like the Mac OS GUI or the Ubuntu GUI (or Snaps). But I can see
where Ubuntu could be compared to Mac OS.
I have Debian installed on secondary partition and the Raspberry Pi
flavor on some Raspberry Pis. I gave away the laptop that had KDE Neon.
I pretty much like to stick Debian based distributions.
I don't like the Mac OS GUI or the Ubuntu GUI (or Snaps). But I can see
where Ubuntu could be compared to Mac OS.
| Sysop: | DaiTengu |
|---|---|
| Location: | Appleton, WI |
| Users: | 1,118 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 40:11:39 |
| Calls: | 14,341 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 186,357 |
| D/L today: |
24,628 files (7,970M bytes) |
| Messages: | 2,533,023 |