Why I switched from OS X to Linux
jeena.net
jeena.net
There's been a tremendous amount of work over the last ten years to make the Linux desktop environment habitable. At first it was usable for very narrow use cases, like living within an Office-compatible application, but over time that space has grown. What was once done out of spite can now be done for the sake of convenience.
Instead of being all negative about Apple not living up to our expectations I think we should appreciate how much Linux has exceeded them.
I thing that this is a misrepresentation of the history of desktop Linux. There was a period at the beginning of the century where Linux was arguably far better positioned to take significant market share. At the time, consumer Windows (98/ME) was dramatically bad. Both in terms of stability and security. OS X just came into existence, but was slow and required expensive hardware.
At the time, Linux was far less fragmented. There were only a few distributions and KDE and GNOME ruled the desktop. There was a very serious push some companies to make Linux easy to install (graphical installers popped up in Red Hat, Corel Linux, Caldera, etc.). You could run Microsoft Office using CrossOver Office with virtually no glitches (I used Office like that for years). Corel released Wordperfect for Linux (which still had significance at the time). Loki was pumping out Linux ports of games like crazy. There was a genuine feeling that Linux was taking off on the desktop and many non-tech family/friends installed Linux.
The problem at the time was that web apps basically didn't exist. So a lot of interested people eventually abandoned the idea to switch to Linux, because they had some win32 application that they needed to run.
In 2017, the Linux distribution landscape is more fragmented than ever and the Linux desktop landscape is more fragmented than ever (heck, even GNOME has three popular forks). Moreover, problems are far harder to debug than they were around 2000, because there are multiple layers of stuff piled on each other (D-Bus, systemd, Debian alternatives, *.d, et al. have blessings and curses).
I think there is some movement from OS X to Linux (though it is hard too tell whether it's not just some vocal minority) for four reasons: 1. people rely less than ever on native applications, so it's much easier to move now; 2. OS X is also Unix, so for OS X users it is quite simple to move OS X to Linux and vice versa; and 3. there are serious worries among OS X users about the future of OS X and Apple's lack of focus; 4. Macs are becoming so expensive that it is hard to justify getting relatively bad specs for 1.5 times the price.
The Linux you remember is very different than what I remember. To say that back then Linux was unusable on the desktop would be an understatement. Yes, you had Red Hat, Mandrake (later Mandriva) and SuSE that were trying hard to provide a usable desktop distribution, but nothing was working well. And people needed Win32 apps because there were no alternatives usable for Linux.
Nowadays Linux usually works well on most hardware you can throw at it, it doesn't choke on the most basic of tasks and while it still has an app problem, sadly, the web is making that less relevant. Nowadays all that average users need is a good web browser, coupled with Linux's security and remote debugging capabilities, it's a very good fit for my father for example.
Speaking of which, I don't have a high regard for companies and products popular among developers and that don't support Linux. I pay a premium for Dropbox because it works on my Linux box, even though my primary workstation is now OS X. And I've been transitioning away from 1Password. Voting with your wallet does work and if a company isn't supporting Linux then it means it doesn't want my money. OS X was in the same situation a while back, for certain use-cases it still is, yet it prevailed because people have stuck with it.
There was a reason why you could buy Linux in bookstores for years. People were actually using it. For instance, SuSE had quite a stronghold in Europe. I was still in high school and I knew quite a lot of people that were using SuSE Linux.
coupled with Linux's security
What security? It's running every application unsandboxed and each X11 application can read all keystrokes, mouse events, make screengrabs, etc. Linux on the desktop is way behind macOS and Windows when it comes to security. It's just not a very interesting target, because of its small marketshare.
One can only hope that distributors will follow the lead of Fedora and move to Wayland soon.
Furthermore StarOffice was the office app available (Abiword and Gnumeric and KOffice were very young and struggled with MS Office files as I recall).
Konqueror as a web browser didn't really take off or mature until KDE 3 as I recall? Firefox/Firebird was very young, there was no Google Chrome. I think I might have been running Netscape on Linux at this time??
Having said all this, I did enjoy using Linux at this period. It was a fresh new operating system to me. I remember wasting hours of my life using it.
All this before .Net, Vala, before Qt was open source. egcs and the gcc fiasco, XFree86 etc. etc.
There's always been some flux to the ease of Linux vs the ease of say..Windows.
There was a time during XP SP1 and SP2 where installing Windows took fucking forever because it had none of the drivers pre-installed, whereas Linux had a grand majority of them bundled.
Windows still had better overall hardware support with peripherals, so there was still the odd thing missing - but if you had a compatible machine, you could do a clean linux install in under an hour and be loaded with apps, codecs, drivers, the works. With XP you would've been left scouring one web page after another for endless download links, often from another computer b/c your NIC driver didn't work out of the box.
I remember reading those same words in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008...
As the article mentions, Thunderbird as an email client is _okay_. Rewind back to the late 90s, and applications like Winamp were pretty amazing, it just needed a better user interface. There are loads of music applications on Linux, but I end up using CLI mplayer and even Foobar2k under Wine, because of some of the other shortcomings.
Even the core of Linux desktop applications like Nautilus feel like they are regressing. When a file manager in my mind should be at the heart of an OS. Mounts and copying should be very intuitive.
Much functionality exists in CLI apps, but is stripped out or lacking in desktop applications. Having something like Rsync in your file manager could be great. And better integration with something like Git. But that's after the core utility of the application is polished to the max.
It's the final 10%, and I appreciate how difficult that is, with moving targets weird Window tool-kits and other abstractions and APIs, but it's that polish that makes it.
Having said that Windows always feels like a fragmented Frankenstein's monster with UI inconsistencies not only across core applications but also with third party ones.
While some of the desktop paradigms have worn well, I don't see much radical experimentation on the desktop, and Linux could provide exactly the platform to try things out.
So I disagree that there has been no progression on the desktop front. The progression has been extraordinary. It's true that in some areas things have stalled a little or even gone backwards as of lately, mostly due to the introduction of Gnome 3 in my opinion, but all in all there's no contest between what we have now and what we had 15 years ago.
In this period, Netscape 4.x still worked pretty well and was available on Linux. Opera was also available for Linux at that time. So, it's definitely not true that the Mozilla Suite (which was indeed horrible) was the only available browser.
You could not play MP3 files out of the box due to patent issues.
I remember mpg123, xmms, etc. being available in many distributions. It was primarily Red Hat who didn't distribute MP3 support out of the box. IIRC free decoders were exempt from the decoder licensing fees.
Most graphic cards only worked in VESA mode, so we had no 3D acceleration of any kind.
Around 2000 there were not that many 3D chipsets. 3DFX was still ruling the world and there was 3D support for Linux per Glide. Many 2D accelerators did have support (e.g. Tseng Labs ET series, Matrox chipsets, ATI chipsets, most S3 chipsets). I had a 3DFX Voodoo 3 and was playing accelerated OpenGL games on Linux. I remember tinkering with NetBSD and having to go back to software rendering, which was frustrating.
But the worst thing was the lack of fonts. Fonts were truly abysmal.
Erm, Microsoft's 'Core fonts for the Web' were distributed since 1996. There has been a Sourceforge project (msttcorefont) distributing the fonts since Microsoft took them offline. Many distributions had an installer or package to get these Microsoft fonts. Then you had all the usual Windows fonts.
I think the articles comments about poor calendar and contact applications really highlight missing functionality. Outlook did well I think because of the calendar integration. Even the most architecturally stunning systems aren't worth much without a great application eco-system. That's no slant on Linux.
I struggled with Flash on Linux for years.
I too am disappointed by the lack of desktop applications. The advent of the microcomputer has meant that we shouldn't need to connect to a server the other side of the world to do tasks - we can do 99% of them locally (unless collaboration is involved).
Whilst I agree that Windows has 20+ years of history to maintain (and it does this very well) and suffers from inconsistencies (particularly apparent in Windows 10 as they push out apps like System Settings which doesn't adhere to UI standards, I can't double-click the icon top-left to close a window like since 1990 because it doesn't exist...), I would prefer Linux did not experiment with desktop paradigms - look at the Unity and GNOME3 weirdness. It seems apparent that the normal "windows and taskbar" system has worked well for decades. You can take a Mac from the early 90s and find your way around it. Experimentation of this paradigm would be for experimentation's sake.
Applications end up doing their own file management for example.
There are alternative innovative ways to access menus and trigger actions. Context tasks etc. But people are stuck in the past it's like they can't imagine anything different.
Linux also has inconsistencies between windowing tool-kits.
Mobile gets a little more attention these days. But that seems to also be stuck in a rut.
I meant experimental forks. Ubuntu foisting unity upon people was pretty damaging. Again if only they'd concentrated on the last 10%. Instead of creating a mess.
With age some tasks have become harder for me. I used to be quite a whizz at dragging and dropping, and fine pointer precision. Now I'm a bit of a fat handed twat, and my eyes aren't that great. I really do need a 10ft display with simple controls.
A lot of this is stuff is usability and ergonomics 101.
But how do you see the push Canonical did with Ubuntu? As I remember, the sentiment was that they were going to make Linux usable and easy for the average user, instead of going after advanced users. And IMHO they really succeeded in doing that, surely you're not saying that was all there before?
A user with absolutely no Linux or terminal experience can use an Ubuntu system for writing letters/emails/browsing and doesn't need to ever touch the terminal (provided all hardware is supported).
I can speak to this. Both my wife and roommate use ubuntu referbished laptops I supplied. Neither knows what a terminal is or how to use it. It just works(tm).
When hardware works out the box, everything is fine and dandy. As soon as it doesn't like with many OSs, it's a time waster, you loose your confidence with the entire project.
I find it ironic that the GNU/Linux is the one that helped make the GNU/Linux desktop less relevant by fostering web apps. Anything that is able to run a recent browser is good enough.
Also the desktop fragmentation and FOSS culture, makes it almost impossible to sell desktop software to GNU/Linux users.
If you look at the engineering workstation segment, there are companies with hundreds or thousands of seats pooling FlexLM licenses of very expensive software, namely for microelectronics design.
Those seats are typically RedHat or CentOS. If you look up revenues for Cadence, Mentor and Synopsys, most of it is EDA software licensing (remainder is mostly IP and training.)
Not prime time news, but not pocket change either.
True, but it also boosts the non-traditional Linux desktop. Something like the Chromebook would be a flop 15 years ago.
The only real problem which you missed is the hardware. Hardware support on Linux wasn't really good these days. I had to buy a new printer and scanner and setting the CRT monitor to work at acceptable framerate took a lot of fiddling with Xorg config.
There was a very brief period, between cca. 2005 and 2011 or so, when the fragmentation was less obvious because there was some degree of integration and cohesion (we had things like QtCurve, for instance). Then everyone started having delusions of grandeur again, in an early-90s-Unix manner, and things have been pretty much degrading ever since.
Today's "Linux desktop ecosystem" (God I hate this particular sequence of words) seems less fragmented largely because application development outside the major desktop environments has been largely abandoned, except for very relevant niches (photo/video editing, web browsers). A development that's largely unsurprising between KDE's architecture astronautics and Gnome's see no feedback, speak no feedback, hear no feedback attitude (that GTK, sadly, adopted for a pretty long time).
The unpleasant consequence is, of course, the "app problem" you speak of. A long time ago, the default KDE installation in Slackware 10 (which shipped with KDE 3.5, I think) shipped with a huge suite of applications, including graphical diff tools, VCS frontends, several multimedia players and so on. Two major rewrites later, they haven't re-accumulated this wealth of applications (and some of the ones that they do ship or advertise today are practically abandoned or remnants from the KDE 3 days). Some of the developments have been outright catastrophic, like KMail, which was turned from a very useful mail client to something that borks in a gazillion unpredictable ways as soon as you try to configure more than one account.
Similar things are happening in Gnome land, where they've chased feature-parity with Gnome 2 for years as they've been scrambling to fix everything that wasn't wrong with it and the horde of bugs that ensued from these fixes. Which, in fact, is why they have three forks in the first place. There was a lot of negativity about the Gnome 1 -> Gnome 2 transition, too, but that never resulted in forking. Nowadays we have people trying to keep a KDE branch that hasn't been developed in almost ten years alive, and actively using it (TDE). That's because, for all its flashiness, Apple and design fetishism, the super-disruptive community of desktop developers has failed to develop anything that's convincingly better than what was available ten years ago. The discussion, for some reason, is centered on whether the UI metaphors are adequate, ignoring users' feedback that focuses on far more obvious things, like "this thing KEEPS FUCKING CRASHING", "I just did apt-get update && apt-get upgrade and now all my applications look weird" and "everything is huge on my screen and this would look great on a tablet but this is not a tablet".
The Linux desktop today is far less fragmented, but that's because a) most of the people who could fragment it by developing fragmenting applications have long given up and use Macs and b) a lot of the traditional functions of a computer's desktop and applications have been eaten up by the web. There's little fragmentation to have when virtually all you use now is a web browser, the terminal and maybe a mail client.
Franly if it were not for the objective-C stuff it would make for a real nice option.
I think Linux will be the better option after: SNAP/Wayland goes mainstream and JACK becomes easier (Low latency Audio on Linux is still a nightmare compared to Windows and OSX).
But there are still a few rough edges. That being said, I use it for everything at home now, except for my Suunto GPS tracker, and Serato.
Perhaps I didn't play sound very often in multiple apps at the same time (who can listen to two sounds at once?)
and then xp came and it was the better in in everything from 98/ME.
But I will say that linux has come miles and miles. My transition from Windows to full time linux by way of Ubuntu was incredibly seamless. The only thing I really miss is Excel.
Sadly Excel for Mac is the main thing keeping me from switching to Linux. OpenOffice/LO are ok for very basic documents but I routinely deal with files that they can't handle.
Google Sheets straight up fails if you try to upload files in that format. No preview available and no option to work around. So I would have to open the file in Excel anyway.
Relatively new versions of LibreOffice are capable of opening simple files, but once you get into features like named ranges LO fails.
So even if the UI is acceptable, failures on data import force me to keep a copy of Excel around. Keep a VM with Excel for Windows around just in case files don't work in Excel for Mac, but I've used it maybe once in the last 6 months.
For example, if you have an index then a tiny kerning shift can bump an item to a new page and screw up your numbering.
It really depends on the types of documents you're dealing with. Some are hell, others are a no-brainer.
You could try office's web app thing if you are mostly a read only excel user.
You could try SoftMaker Office.
Quote: "No other spreadsheet is as compatible with Microsoft Excel as PlanMaker 2016. Both the old .xls files (Microsoft Excel 5.0 and higher) and the modern .xlsx files from Excel 2007 to 2016 are displayed true to the original and saved reliably. This guarantees trouble-free data exchange with Excel users."
Heck, you can even create PDF forms entirely with Free Software, using LibreOffice / OpenOffice.
And don't forget PDF.JS of Firefox, which enables you to view and edit most PDF forms directly in your browser. However, it still has issues with some PDF documents, so I prefer Evince and Okular.
The still-common advice to install Adobe Acrobat Reader is outdated! And it has been outdated for years. In fact, some time ago the FSFE started a (still successful) campaign to convince public entities to no longer tell people to download Acrobat whenever they offer a PDF file. With public entities you can argue that they advertise Adobe without getting paid for that, that they ignore the fact that PDF is an Open Standard, and that they put the plethora of good PDF readers into disadvantage. Instead, most of these public entities now point to a community-driven overview of Free Software PDF readers:
https://pdfreaders.org/pdfreaders.en.html
But as mentioned before: As a Linux you don't need to worry about that, you almost certainly have already installed a good, free PDF viewer in the default installation.
Chromium possibly does it do, have not tested tho.
Although sometimes you can use Chrome (or evince, or okular), occasionally Adobe Reader is the only one that can fill forms properly.
Atril is what Evince used to be before it regressed in usability.
The only hacking I did was to install libdvd-pkg or something like that.
Sure, things are much better, but I think most criticisms of linux not being "out of the box" ready are valid.
I have a hard time seeing how you could possibly be being honest about this.
As I recall, installing libdvdcss, libdvdnav, libdvdread from the official repos solved that problem and allowed me to painlessly watch dvd's through players like VLC and MPlayer.
It's annoying, but better than when DVD support first appeared, and you'd end up compiling something like 5 libraries and a custom version of Xine.
Linux has another learning curve for me than products like Windows server, but i'm slowly getting used to it again.
These days i have very limited money to experiment with computer systems. So i turned an old desktop into an esx. Using linux for my vm's has been very rewarding. There is a ton of resources. Most of the stuff is free. The communities usually love to help you reach your goal.
The main reason people don't switch is just lack of familiarity, driver issues and unsupported software - all driven by network effects.
There's very little about the OS itself which is preventing adoption. It's entirely about the ecosystem.
That pretty much requires a fuck up on the part of Windows or Mac to drive people to use Linux.
I feel like paid $199 just so Microsoft can sell me to advertisers. Bill never would of stood for this shit.
Windows XP, Vista, 8. I mean even if these fuck ups haven't brought Linux market share above rounding error, nothing will.
One thing that could make desktop Linux viable - is throwing transparency, openess, customizability and all similar "good" Linux stuff through the window, having a dictatorship with good UX people and forcing users to one true way.
People do not care that they can tinker with their desktop - I really do not care that I cannot make my macOS or Windows look like screenshots in unixporn subreddit - I just want an experience that's concise, the same for every application, polished, clean, lean, etc etc etc. Windows had this in Windows 7 (10th version with UWP programs for tablets really disturbs the UX), macOS still has this.
Elementary and especially Solus distributions are doing that - "oooh you want X? well screw you buddy, that's poor UX".
Vista was a major screw up. I didn't mind Windows 8 as much. But yeah if those mess ups don't sway people, nothing will.
Personally, I don't care about USB-C replacing USB 3.0, or the introduction of the new Touch Bar. The problem is the pricing (that Touch Bar is costing me $700-800 on top of the equivalent 2013 MacBook Pro model). The removal of the physical escape key and the inexplicable removal of the 3.5 mm jack on iPhones does not help to relieve fears that Apple has completely lost control of basic sense as to what their professional users want and need. The MacBook Pro line has fallen into the same category as the MacBook Air. It's supposed to be a professional machine, but it's now being specced to the lowest common denominator, meant for any average consumer.
For some of us, Linux is not being transitioned to with enthusiasm. We do not consider it a drop-in replacement for OS X, and already pre-emptively regret the inferior keyboard and trackpad we'll get on the OEM PC laptop manufacturers offer. Honestly, what the hell is with PC manufacturers that still include the TrackPoint™ Style Point, Nub, Nipple Mouse, Clit Mouse[1]?!
tldr; Apple is alienating its professional users. Windows is flat out unusable as a Linux-based developer platform for us. Linux is simply the only remaining alternative. Frankly, it's not "good enough" - it's simply the only remaining alternative when you can't reason spending $4,000+ on a laptop you actually do still want to buy.
I'm experiencing substantially more carpal tunnel issues because of the Mac's trackpad-only setup. The trackpoint means I never have to take my hands off the keyboard, which I love. Two months in I'm used to Apple's keyboard, but I don't think it's as good; my error rate is still much better on Thinkpads because the more sculpted keys make it easier for my fingers to know where they are.
And I should say that here I mean the older Thinkpad keyboard, not the newer one that looks much more Apple-ish.
Most people switching, however, are annoyed by the absence of visual polish everywhere (hardware and software) and the lack of robustness compared to Apple laptops, which you can literally walk on or drop in your bag without paying attention to what else is next to it. Except for mil-spec laptops and thick toughbooks, I wouldn't do this with any computer.
Apart from console apps, there is no unified visual language on Linux, and most desktop application developers do not expect to make as much money as with mac or Windows. This often results in apps that just "get the job done", without much extra polish, but sometimes a LOT of extra features, which can actually confuse users. The best advantage of most Linux software is to be open source, which is unfortunately something 99% of people couldn't care less about.
I'm a day to day Linux user, and I couldn't be happier to have switched back from osx (2004-2016), but the switch is clearly not for everyone yet.
I weigh 138kg. Please hand over your apple laptop for a quick test.
Personally, I have no issues with Linux being used almost exclusively as a developer OS (on desktops and laptops). I don't really see Linux moving towards being used by non-technical users any time soon, and I'm perfectly okay with this.
I've been on Ubuntu for nearly a decade, so I barely notice many issues any more, but you're absolutely right. It's a long way away from wonderful.
Obviously, I'm just used to it; I wait 2-3 months before upgrading to the latest releases because having three monitors has _always_ been a headache for me when upgrading any sooner. That's my new normal.
That said, I rarely have any issues that make me lose time. I might have to spend 5 minutes googling around before buying things like web cameras to ensure compatibility, but otherwise, everything tends to be stable. My desktop stays running for months at a time without complaints.
The next step would be to go beyond stable and make the platform a joy to use. I want to be able to plug in some of these fun toys like multi-touch pads and high dpi screens and have them work just as well as they do on other platforms. The journey to that ideal is far longer on Linux. But it remains free, hackable, solid, and powerful. And the more people using the system, the faster progress will come.
I remain hopeful and patient.
There's scope somewhere in there for Canonical to improve Launchpad so the experience of fixing issues is more streamlined.
There aren't enough of them?
Because it's fucking awesome.
Some people like them.
Actually, I was surprised how well the Windows Subsystem for Linux actually works. Yesterday I even compiled some Ubuntu packages (using C++, Qt, Boost, etc.) and submitted them to my PPA on Launchpad. From Windows!
The trackpad situation is a legitimate gripe, but this is hopefully improving with Microsofts Precision Trackpad standard.
The big advantage of stepping outside the Apple garden into the wider world is choice. You have choices like matte screens, 17" screens, up to 64GB RAM, hotswap batteries, upgradable components, ARM chips, Xeon chips etc etc
Even the current Macbook Pros (high spec Airs) have had equivalents available in the PC world for a while, e.g the X1 Carbon, which is being upgraded to KabyLake soon, while Apple have only just released their Skylake machines.
Are there choices? No, I do not see any choice. You see i3, i3-gaps, fluxbox, openbox, xfce, gnome, cinnamon, mate, kde, panteon, budgie, bspwm etc etc and go "whoa, all these choices", meanwhile I couldn't care less even if there three times more clones of a tilling wms, I just want macOS desktop. Choices of stuff that I will never use are useless.
Different people have different preferences - I like the TrackPoint far better than a touchpad, because I can use it without moving my hands from the keyboard.
I'm a huge linux fan and have ubuntu on a desktop and laptop, but if you hate it there's really no reason you have to use it.
If I were starting up a 2D media company I might have some concern moving new hires from probably-familiar Adobe applications to the (excellent) Linux alternatives; but still probably not enough to dissuade me completely. For a new 3D studio the industry is so diverse anyway that it would be worth going with Blender to start with, or Maya if the heart desires it.
For software, I don't think there's a worthwhile platform which you can not develop for from Linux (aside apple nonsense, but even all-apple shops end up using OS X VMs for iOS builds since XCode build is highly stateful(!)).
On that note, I honestly can't think of anything other than Adobe products and Microsoft Office that is preventing a mass migration to Linux (or rather Ubuntu, let's be honest) at this point. It has all other killer apps. Dropbox, Spotify, VSCode, Atom, Steam, Chrome, VLC, etc...
I know that Excel is the only thing keeping my dad on macOS these days. He is definitely not the Apple fanboy he once used to be.
What an amazing day that would be... when, at least Adobe, would release builds for Linux. Does anyone know if there's a serious obstacle for them other than market share?
Also, I think it's pretty unfair to call Inkscape "terrible". It has, by far, the better shape editing tools (especially CSG) between it and Illustrator. As a bonus, Inkscape tends to output SVG files with maybe one or two unwanted transform()s, rather than the six or seven you get with a typical Sketch or Illustrator SVG.
I hope you don't mean Adobe's Photoshop and Illustrator. I tried those a couple of weeks back. Compared to Gimp and Inkscape they are as buggy as hell. Simple .png export with custom dpi often doesn't export to custom dpi. Exported images often aren't pixel-precise if you repeat the export and layer boundaries somehow suffer from float rounding errors if you load/save the file multiple times. I find it amazing how supposedly professional tools can have such major problems. I guess it's just good marketing.
The only thing missing in Gimp is CMYK support and that might be sole reason people are still using Adobe products.
Well I might give it a try, anyway...
I run Arch + i3 as a WM, so a very bare-bone setup, and use just terminals and a browser. No other GUI app. I don't need anything else and I am not a power user, rather a non-tech guy who wants to get stuff done.
About ten years ago, I read all the evilwm source and fixed some quirk in an afternoon. That's usability!
Early last year I switched to OSX. In the past I was heavily into various Linux distros: From Ubuntu, to the more lightweight Xubuntu. Fedora. Elementary. I've played with Gnome and Kde.
It is my opinion that the people who seem ecstatic about their switch to Linux are still in their honeymoon period. I don't feel like any Linux distro out there comes close to the stability and elegance of OSX.
I've had so many issues over the years, it's hard to even list them:
- Ubuntu only used the dedicated gfx card on one of my laptops. Never would it settle into integrated. This caused performance issues, overheating, and I ultimately decided it was impossible to use.
- Gnome had so many display, rendering, and performance issues... I still don't know how people tolerate it. Even software listed in this blog post: KeePassX copy/paste never worked for me. Random software that would just blank out and require a full system restart.
- Crashes... so many... crashes. Especially when using multiple monitors.
- Some distros (Elementary, for example) seem to have quite a few hardware limitations. Half the computers I tried to install these distros on would run into errors, a lot of bios chasing, too much time spent on forums to find help... Most of the times you just give up.
- There just isn't enough software. And Wine isn't exactly the perfect solution. Not ONE single good MySQL gui for Linux (just an example). Think about that - and no, Workbench isn't good! It's extremely intensive on resources and bloated.
I moved into OSX because I was fed up. I wanted to work and be productive and not constantly look after hardware and software. At the end of the day I wanted access to bash, pleasant to look at, with plenty of software options. I didn't want to worry about performance, random crashes, and lack of support for multiple displays. It's costly, but the solution for me was OSX.
Of course, now we can both be upset the course the OSX takes from our adoption of it and observe the removal of features with no recourse. Lesser of two evils I suppose.
- No dedicated graphics card. Intel's work well enough.
- I use Lxde with Xmonad. It's fast.
- No crash since I bough my laptop 8 months ago. No multiple monitors either, though.
- Still need proprietary hardware, so I stick to distros that distribute them. I blame the hardware vendors for their needless secrecy.
- I don't miss anything but the latest Windows games.
Interestingly, that would describe my experience with OSX (or macOS).
At home I use my Lenovo T440s with Linux without any problems or glitches in the past two years. Before I had a Dell Vostro, running Linux without problems for five years.
At work I have to use a MacPro (the winecooler-shaped thing) in a network run by the OSX Server app.
Every other day I have to disconnect the thunderbolt display because it can't be woken up.
Thunderbolt network has an incredible latency when connected to other machines in the same room. Unless you transfer one huge file, 100Mbit ethernet is always faster.
Sometimes you're stuck at the login window because the magic mouse and keyboard refuse to connect (randomly) for half an hour.
The OSX Server App fills the error logs at an incredible speed with only six machines and a couple more users. Network home drives are impossible to get right: NFS breaks ~/Library. AFP has constant "Resource busy" errors. SMB is the only one that works for all users but experiences so many random bugs that are impossible to trace. I can't remember a day where all users were able to login in the morning and no program had crashed overnight with data loss due to an SMB mount suddenly disappearing (work is scientific computing). And this is on a 1Gbit ethernet network, six machines and a server, all in the same room. Incredible!
And has anybody ever tried updating the Server App? Last time it got stuck at upgrading the Wiki (that we have never used) because the postgres upgrade script was botched. That was fun to find and fix.
And then the support. Nobody at the shops can really help you with network/server stuff. And the Apple forum is always like this: You find an old post with a apparently working solution. You try to implement the solution but Apple has removed a button that you're supposed to click.
Or you make a new post, only to be told (from somebody who is not an apple official but apparently has access to a secret forum) that apple knows about the bug since 2011 and is working on it. Just wait for the next update. Sure.
On the other hand, I have never had a Linux question that was not already answered in the Arch Linux forum. Is it really just me? Judging from the posts in the Apple forums, it can't be.
But what do other people do to be productive in an Apple network?
SQLyog Community works wonderfully on Wine. I've been using it through multiple versions for almost 15 years with no problems. In fact I'm going crazy looking for a Posgres client that works as well and doesn't cost a fortune (meanwhile I'm working with a mix of pgAdmin and InteliJ's database plugin)
I started using Linux (Ubuntu) last year. I was trying to get into open source software and I had a choice between a Macbook or a Dell laptop with Ubuntu on it.
I was aware that Linux had a reputation of being difficult to use but I was planning on doing some learning anyway, so why not give it a try? Of course, another factor was that I've never really cared for Macs much. I never understood the appeal of Mac design and I always felt like Mac products, and particularly one button mice, violate "form follows function." (note: I'm not design-minded).
Anyway, I was really surprised that Ubuntu desktop (unity) was basically the same thing as Windows, except the sidebar was on the left. That and I could use the software manager (and later, apt-get) to install common programs instead of googling "skype installer," which is what I would have done on windows.
Later, I learned to appreciate how easy it is to edit config files in Linux. Plain text files vs. regedit? Yeah, I'll take the English please.
Of course, discovery is an issue with this method, and that just came with a few weeks of using it.
"Many long time users" will also agree that Unity is just fine as far as UX goes.
Source: I'm a happy Unity user.
As years passed, both Mac OS and Windows have been gradually losing their appeal, getting more and more bloated, resource-hungry, sometimes plain crazy. Finally, they deteriorated to the point of a marginal usefulness to me. Linux, on the other hand, has been improving at an astounding pace. Today, it is friendly. It is snappy. And it does not spy on you. There are many variants to choose from. You can get it up and running in no time. It is there to suit your computing needs.
Today, there is nothing better.
Everything Macbooks (and the OS) provide is replaceable with good alternatives on a Linux environment and I personally had the satisfaction to do so. But still, there existed no notebook with the same keyboard feeling, trackpad (touchpad, whatever), weight and durability as a Macbook. What do I miss here?
Edit: Grammar fix. :)
Right now I think that Mac trackpad has three issues:
* it is freaking cold in the morning (metal case)
* you don't see the buttons (I still don't know if mac 1 one or 2 or 3 buttons :)
* click sound, when you have a child sleeping you don't want to have it so loud or at all (it should make same sound as pushing a keyboard button).
The advantages are:
* 3 finger, 4 finger gestures for desktop switching, window management etc. * You don't really need buttons. 1 finger tap/click is the left click, 2 finger tap/click is the right click. There are tools (i.e MagicPrefs) to make 3 finger tap/click the middle click. If you prefer clicks over taps, the sound can annoy you, that is a catch for sure. * Natural scroll is almost always pixel perfect instead of line snapping.
The best feature is that the click force needed can be configured, and there is a 'silent mode' that removes almost all the click noise.
Rebooting my Macbook into Windows makes the touchpad dumb.
Do you know if this is available on any particular distros out of the box?
On windows is another story, everything feels janky when using trackpad gestures.
I would never go back to Windows or even OSX.
I love Gnome's workspace switcher. OSX's workspace switcher felt tedious and slow by comparison.
With Ubuntu/Gnome, I just Ctrl+Alt+arrow-key to move between workspaces and it's so smooth/quick. It's great for writing/debugging code; I have one workspace with the app/site I'm building, one with my source code and one with the terminal for launching/killing processes. Sometimes I use the fourth workspace to do CPU profiling when doing performance testing.
It's nice that there are just four workspaces - One in each corner, then I can switch to any one of them with a single hotkey without even having to think - I can instantly bring up the one I want in a fraction of a second. It really adds up.
Windows was terrible. I had to move the mouse and click several times every time I wanted to test a change I made to the code. I can't believe I was doing that just a few years ago.
My Windows usage is restricted to gaming and music production. Sadly, getting low latency audio on Linux requires lots of fiddling, and even if I do get it running, I'm still going to miss the tons of windows-only audio plugins.
Step 1. Enable workspaces in Settings->Appearance->Behavior->Enable workspaces You can see the four workspaces on the Launcher, near the Trash icon.
Step 2. Add shortcuts to switch to these workspaces in Settings->Keyboard->Shortcuts->Navigation
You set a shortcut for "Switch to workspace 1" (up to 4). Ideally, you would set these to "Alt+1", "Alt+2", etc so that a single shortcut takes you as once to a specific workspace.
Ctrl-left/Ctrl-right switches workspaces for me. Four-finger swipe does the same.
what am I doing wrong?
But there hit a point when learning the shiny just felt like a chore, and I started gravitating back to tried and true software like emacs. And Linux stopped requiring much futzing to work pretty well. And the need to exchange Word docs evaporated due to Google Docs, LibreOffice, and life circumstances. And somewhere I decided that workstations are a luxury.
And then MacOS started crapping up the UI with stuff I never asked for. It became more of a hassle to strip the Mac than to build up a more comfortable free \*nix environment.
I'm unlikely to go back. I'll always be glad for the decade+ Apple gave me. But I'm even more thankful for the luxury of not needing them.
But as I've said repeatedly in the past, the thing that still drives me completely insane are the keyboard shortcuts, their general inconsistency across DE, apps, etc., the layering interaction of how they're intercepted by different parts of the system (so even when I can manually change them to be consistent, I still can't guarantee they'll be interpreted correctly), and their use of the Control key as the primary modifier in both GUI and Terminal applications.
Linux mostly copied Windows in this regard, and it's just as painful as Windows (and then some) for that reason. I would gladly pay $1,000 for a KDE Neon or Fedora Gnome distro that went through the trouble of thoroughly implementing and maintaining a version with fully Mac-like keyboard shortcuts and keyboard shortcut customization facilities.
I'd pay that per user for my team too. We'd make the money back quickly on savings in hardware purchases.
Being able to bind almost everything (including running custom scripts) to a keyboard shortcut, having tons of desktop options you can force by matching window or app properties, using special attributes or regexps, all of that screams "don't use default and customize me" to me, which is where KDE really shines, IMO.
From your response to the sibling comment, it sounds like you're looking for a way to swap the Super and Control keys? There are actually settings for that in both Gnome and KDE/Plasma. In Gnome, you can go into one of the sections of Gnome Tweak Tool (I think it's called "Typing") and in one of the lists of options, there's a checkbox for something like "Swap left Win and left Control". In MADE/Plasma, it's in main settings app somewhere there's an identical list of checkbox options (I think it's in the "Keyboard" section, but I might be wrong, as I haven't used Plasma in a while; if you're having trouble finding it though, I can go back and find the exact location tomorrow and let you know)
What that doesn't do is decouple terminal shortcuts from GUI shortcuts. It just puts the Control key under my thumb.
I'll take a look. Maybe I can have some luck either rebuilding everything in a fork of the KDE Neon repos with that enabled or getting the maintainers to enable it.
edit: and LibreOffice would drive me nuts since it won't just import an exported config from a Mac that has Mac keybindings, and the export format is binary, so hard to export on Linux bulk-modify and re-import, so I'd still have to painstakingly go through its clunky interface to change everything to make sense. But still... that'd all be a huge improvement over the current state of affairs.
The whole thing uses basically GNOME standard keyboard shortcuts, and two extremely common ones, Cmd-S and Cmd-W, which are normally used universally for "Save" and "Close" respectively are actually for doing things with the window and workspace manager in elementaryOS.
For the most part the shortcuts seem to be inherited from GNOME/Gtk.
There are Linux users that love to hate something, but we those at a distance.
Used ubuntu + Unity, then switched to i3 on Ubuntu. After lots of tweaking, I found out how to get nice font rendering on i3 (default rendering is not so good when you're used to osx).
Then I went on the hunt for replacement apps for my office work : email + calendar + contacts; oh my, spent hours trying Thunderbird, Evolution, Geary (and it's new fork also), also Gnome Calendar, Thunderbird lightning and California for calendar.
In the end, I settled on Thunderbird + Gnome cal, but it felt like a compromise rather than a happy choice.
After some weeks of working with that setup, not finding emails when needed, forgetting about calendar appointments because of sync issues, I just gave up and when back to The Path Of Least Resistance for me : macos.
Also, there is no good email client for Linux. Thunderbird is a huge waste of time and other programs are even worse.
So, yeah, switching from OSX to Linux now isn't so bad. Isn't 2017 the year of "Linux On The Desktop", or was that 2016, or 2015, or 14...
It works great. Running Arch linux btw.
Also, you might want to look into a used Macbook Pro. As you have seen, they can last for awhile and parts (like batteries) are usually easy to source even years after they've been discontinued. FYI, they stopped using the PowerBook naming in 2006.
It's the multi-workspace support, that completely decouples workspaces from screens. (So you can swap them around arbitrarily.)
I realised I liked consistency of keyboard shortcuts and replaced my work MBP15 with a X1 carbo nand realised how crazy heavy the MBP is.
Still miss Lightroom and Preview on Mac OS.
Recently I decided to get my teen brother, who's going into CS soon, a Linux laptop for development and a Raspberry Pi for a project we're doing together (a "magic mirror").
Instantly found desktop Linux to still be a giant pain in the ass. Ubuntu on the Pi defaulted wifi to only manual addressing, not DHCP. On top of that, set to IPv6 only as well. After digging through SO and other forums for a while we finally figured it out.
I've never had a desktop Linux experience work "out of the box". It still takes a power user to make it even half-way tolerable, and as a power user, I found it intolerable. I could see how overwhelming it was just writ plain on his face. Then realized I was making the same expressions.
Apple is definitely irritating me lately with their hardware decisions, but at the end of the day OSX is just better with desktop tasks. Hell, I'd choose Windows desktop experience over Linux, even with MS's privacy issues with Win10. Because I don't want to spend 3 hours figuring out how to turn on wifi.
Completely the opposite for me. Ubuntu installs on almost anything I've tried (laptops, netbooks, desktops with production dates ranging from 2006 to present day). Install and setup for use usually take less than an hour. For a couple of years now I haven't encountered a single issue (like networking or graphics not working).
Not to say your experience isn't accurate, just wanted to add how impressed I've been with Linux and particularly Ubuntu for the past few years.
Conversely, installing windows (8) on modern, fresh from the factory, HP laptops has been an experience I will never voluntarily repeat.
Additionally, if you're installing on a raspberry pi you're fundamentally at a power user level - my non-techie friends and family are nowhere near that level. If you actually install it on a desktop it's a breeze, I think your frustration stems from engaging in an activity that's fairly challenging no matter what you do. There are plenty of alternatives for your pi, but neither OS X nor Windows are among them.
I'd be more interested to hear how the linux laptop went. Did that come preinstalled? Did your brother like it?
The laptop for him seems to be going okay as a development machine. He's definitely not using it as a daily desktop. And editor and console open is mostly what he's using it for.
It wasn't pre-installed, it was a laptop donated from my work without a hard drive. I gave it to him with a new in box HD and a bootable USB stick for his birthday in November and told him to roll with it. Eventually I had to step in and help because the install just wasn't working, we switched to a DVD install disc instead. The USB just wouldn't work.
I did the same for my daughter for Christmas, except with me doing the installation. This was going to be a desktop experience for her to use for homework and the like. Google Docs, watching YouTube videos, etc.
Sound card issues. Browsing issues. Bluetooth headphone issues. Blue or black screens with no response. Eventually I just bought her a Windows laptop and she's been productive ever since. I'm sure given time I could have corrected every issue by delving through documentation and forums, and in fact she was willing to over look all the issues and power through. But at end of the day I wanted to give her something that worked.
I love Linux for servers. But Linux for desktops still seems like a tinkerer's passion to make it work. In my own experiences it seems not that more advanced than it was a decade ago. I'm glad it works for some though.
No, I get it, I mixed together my frustrations with the Pi with my frustrations with the laptop installs. At the end of the day though the combined experiences recently made me go "this is still a pain in the butt".
I keep saying that I have, and its way better now. But, I'm slowly realizing that I haven't done a bare metal install in probably 6 years. I suspect that a lot of people are in the same boat.
As [astrodust] points out, there's been great strides in making the Linux ecosystem "habitable." With more people thinking about putting in the effort to switch, I think it would be useful if we focused on the positive aspects of a free operating system and not just that you can run them on systems without a touchbar. The article mentions configurability and being able to run it on anything. I'd add zero cost and privacy. If you value those things then switching could still be worth it in the end even with other pain points.
Main reason why I didn't use it, I don't want to be tied only to Mac platform. From this perspective, it was a good hunch. I have android phone, omni focus is not available, others are.
Is it not known that this behavior can be disabled back to the old way with a single line command? You simply run this from Terminal:
defaults write NSGlobalDomain NSDocumentSaveNewDocumentsToCloud -bool false
In addition, often you can play Win games using Wine, while on a Mac [EDIT: the following is true only if the game needs Vulkan or OpenGL > 4.1] the only way would be using bootcamp (which means you have to reboot every time you want to play).
Disclaimer: I haven't used Mac OS in recent times so I may be unaware of other solutions.
Sales of my game on Steam seem to confirm that. It sold 8x more copies on Linux than on Mac.
After that pretty much a desktop PC with different Linux distributions, have since standardized on Xubuntu. Got a MBP for my current job. Not exactly loving it but it's ok. Next laptop will very likely not be an Apple laptop. Maybe I'll just stop the little iOS stuff I'm doing completely (as it's my experience that it's fairly horrible on non-Apple products). I'll gladly take recommendations (I was thinking about maybe buying a Mac Mini the next time I get some iOS request) but that's pretty much the only reason why I'd buy Apple hardware now.
PS: I work at Nylas. :)
I definitely recommend against Nylas, unless you want to pay a subscription fee.
I, and many others, had a very sour experience [0] that wasn't helped by poor communication [1].
tl;dr - a free product suddenly turned into a paid product that was (mis-)sold as an upgrade.
[0] - https://github.com/nylas/N1/issues/2617#issuecomment-2331371...
[1] - https://github.com/nylas/N1/issues/2617#issuecomment-2331802...
We also didn't want to add an advertising system or sell user data or anything scammy like that to pay the bills, so we decided to simply charge users for the version which uses our hosted backend. We had to implement this pretty quickly, and I wrote about the transition here: https://nylas.com/blog/nylas-pro
Our team at the time was almost entirely engineers (including myself) and we definitely could have done a better job with the messaging.
But on another note... stay tuned! We're working on some updates that should make it more affordable for folks who just want the basic mail experience and don't need any of the pro features like open/link tracking, mail merge, Salesforce integration, etc.
> ElectronJS
A tad mutually exclusive.
I did try N1 ~6 months ago and performance was as bad as expected in an Electron app, though admittedly it may have improved since then.
We also have an infrastructure API product that powers many apps: https://nylas.com/cloud
Konsole has been my daily terminal emulator since the move from GNOME {2,3} (since the removal of fallback mode which subsequently disabled compiz fusion, also breaking a lot of my long term formed habits) to KDE 4.10 (now latest plasma 5). Cannot complain.
However, there is a new GPU accelerated terminal emulator emerging - alacritty which claims to be the fastest in the business. Looks promising (I've tried it) -> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13338592
Its only because a lot of general use case computing is becoming browser specific and Linux desktops have made massive strides in usability that the general use case even becomes a possibility but the push factor still remains.
Poeple who are not computer centric will use what comes to them and nearly impossible to imagine a scenario where they reach to install another OS. Even developers are often not systems folks, they know how to get their programming environment going and little beyond that.
The kind of knowledge you need to really manage an OS from installing, hardware, networking, storage is specialized and unless is designed in by hardware and software vendors with support and training be it Linux, Windows or OSX becomes an uphill battle. Possible but time consuming. This knowledge is held by people who are paid to know it or are in technology software industry and unlikely to interest people who just want to use stuff and not gain an indepth knowledge of it.
But now I'm my late 30's, I work as a Linux Admin/DevOps/automation engineer for a living and I have more money than I have time. So time has become very important to me. Even in 2016, running Linux in a desktop is a time sink, since researching hardware and troubleshooting X, etc. other issues, selecting which variant of some basic killer app with strange names to use, all that other stuff I ENJOYED doing I now don't enjoy, because I have hobbies.
HOWEVER, I would be willing to forgo all of that, and suffer the miserable time sink of running Linux on a desktop again for one thing: Adobe support. Lightroom and sometimes Photoshop are 'killer apps' for me for photography as a hobby, and no, I'm not moving to Gimp or something else that's open source. Again, my wallet has more power than my free time is vast.
I had a Mac Pro tower years ago, the big heavy one, before the newer revisions turned it into a tiny garbage-can-shaped appliance that you can't upgrade (soldered graphics, clever). Then I've Macbook Airs, and once that new Pro came out, needless to say I had to pick other alternatives.
At the end of the day I chose a Microsoft Surface Book, because a) Microsoft is now the underdog (and this is coming from an open source, Linux guy by trade) b) the hardware is sexy, with a screen that comes off a real base with a discrete GPU and decent keyboard, turning itself into a tablet c) It runs Lightroom and Photoshop! And the pen is a nice touch.
So that's my story. I'd have a story more closely aligned to moving to Linux if I weren't hobbled by Adobe dependence. But I do say, I don't regret the (very expensive, but time-saving) Surface Book.
Linux is great. I have been coding/learning/programming for almost 3 years and there is a lot of knowledge neccessary to be productive-- in any environment. There have been a large amount of these "os x alternative posts"; and I agree with them.
Apple is alienating people like me-- not just the archetypal guru ninjas who contribute to the kernal or live in vim. I just bought a used 2011 15" macbook pro. The 2012 mbp are really the last year that could be hardware updated. I have a flashdrive with bootable yosemite and a carbon copy of one of my hard drives that run Yosemite. This is because if you upgrade you can't revert to previous gens. Sometimes even when testing a beta.
I am ALL for progression, it would be AWESOME if people updated their browsers and the web could push forward-- but os x has gotten worse. El capitan & sierra are pretty bad imo and many others.
Also, the hardware is leaving a lot to be desired. Also, linux is rising, shit even Microsoft is making software for linux. Apple is barely competing in the "pro" space.
I am sure people will still decelop plenty of hq apps for iphone and macos but with Linux, Android and Microsoft making such obvious pains to win devs, this could be a mistake.
I am running 2 OS back on a 5 year old hardware and the experience is only alightly worse than when I had a 2015 maxed MBP. Also web platforms are allowing tons of greatvsoftware to be env agnostic.
I am semi sick of these posts, but there is a reason they keep topping HN. A few years ago I remeber PG even calling Apple out. He said something like, he had just unconsciously subscribed to Apples next computer, but it wasnt obvious he would anymore. They weren't keeping up.
OS X was-- and still is, pretty great. Cook is likely making the right business decision in the hub progression:
laptop is hub > cloud is hub > phone is hub
But a little more effort to ship better software and reasonable hardware would go so far. No ports, non-upgradeable, limited memory and SSD storage for fing 1600.
I can punt on a decision for 1-2 more years with current configuration but without marked improvement and inprovement v alternatives i will leave amd so will many other like me-- avg & beginner developers, designers and media(photo/video/music) pros.
Bummed.
There of course are far more apps available in apt/yum, but the quality of them typically doesn't compare at all to what you get on OSX. What's a super simple app in nix nearly always tends to have a far higher quality OSX version that has a nice menu bar with actions available, status changes, integrations with other apps, etc.
A lot of simple third party apps that I use daily, like popclip which saves me a ton of clicks when copy/pasting, 1passwords browser extensions (you can run it in Wine but the extensions can't connect to the app), bartender, fantastical, some pomodoro app I always forget to use tend to not have nix versions or alternatives that are anywhere near the same quality and once you've gotten accustomed to using these your workflow when dumped into a raw nix desktop just plummets.
Not to mention when any new hip thing is released on github I can almost guarantee that there's going to be an OSX release readily available.
It's a chicken egg situation which sucks. There's less users so there's less incentive to port the apps.. and there we stand.
1. dtrace (I don't see systemtap improving that, and there's the unhealthy NIH syndrom)
2. wifi reconnnection time (10x slower)
3. power (always behind, always have to patch or recompile kernels or kernel modules. this actually broke my last linux laptop)
OS X is getting worse and worse, almost to the state of systemd. But do I want to switch over to systemd? No, hell no.
Seriously though, it was only until last year that I decided I want to only use Ubuntu (specifically) because I did not want to switch between keybindings between my work Mac and my home PC. My work MacBook is actually much more capable than my home PC, with the retina screen/better processor/etc. However, it now sits collecting dust, only opened to watch movies and will be used as such if and when my employment terminates. I regret asking for a MacBook, thinking I was going to be doing more work within OS X.
However, my mind changed when the little things about OS X started to get to me. I work on two screens mostly (unless it is just my laptop at home.) All windows are usually full-screened. They usually consist of Emacs, Chrome and a terminal, with some side applications like Skype. I don't use any special Unity features, like the Dock, etc. and only use the graphical file browser occasionally. In this setup, OS X seemed to conflict with my desires towards this use-case. I was also getting scared that Apple's use-cases would override mine in the future, conflicting with my rather simple and stable usage requirements. Ubuntu, through the years, has been incredibly stable for me; I rarely have issues with it. When there are issues, they are usually just dumb ones. However, it was 16.04 that solidified the case for me, because it turned out to be more solid than previous versions.
A long time ago, the cracks were starting to show when I threw up my arms over OS X over compiling ruby gems. At the time, I had to always fight with it to compile ruby gems. In Ubuntu, things just worked.
My wife still wants to use OS X/macOS, running a 2010 macbook pro (that is in an advanced state of decay :)) but that's her. I wish I can just by a cheap+powerful PC laptop and stick ubuntu on it, but that's not going to happen.
To sum, to me this is about taste and tolerance. I am glad people are interested in using GNU/Linux-based distributions more. With the audience growing, I am glad to see that this can lead to more investments in the desktop Linux space.
- i3 is great, better than tiling WMs for OS X, including amethyst.
- I didn't notice lack of Microsoft Office - Import to google docs and LibreOffice have been more than sufficient.
- Gimp and inkspace are the biggest difference. Photoshop and Illustrator are much better. On the other hand, I disliked spammy "Adobe creative cloud" on Mac.
- Installing many dev tools is easier. brew was much worse than pacman/yaourt in Arch Linux.
- For many tools mentioned in article (mail, music, calendar) web interface have been better for me, even on Mac
- If you want to use nice new things happening in 2016, like train deep learning models or play VR you need a PC.
- everything sucks at some point - it has never been easier to test before making a decision - it is possible not to switch but to adapt and use different devices and systems - "switching' is not an life commitment; if it sucks for you, switch back; it is not an insult to the system you chose - when encountering issues, spend some time contributing to reports or wiki. Not a user but archlinux wiki is great.
Switching back and forth assumes investment of time and effort, which are tradable things. We trade our time and effort for money, we are willing to pay money for things that saves us time and effort. It's kind of a big deal for some of us.
What is it with MacOS and this workflow? It's annoying enough to make me want to buy Office just so I can open an app and fiddle before I decide if and where I want to save things. Why does everything have to be in a concrete location in the filesystem before I can do anything in the office apps? I do think they fixed this for textedit though so that's nice, that'd have been annoying.
What I feel unreplaceable, (I don't mind free or paid)
- Sequel Pro (Windows may have HeidiSQL)
- Source Tree (Windows one exist but not Linux.)
- Better Touch Tools
- Forklift / Transmit (That does dual pane file browser / sftp remote browser)
- QR clipboard (To pass URL to phone)
- Xcode
Web browser, email and Jetbrains stuff are available all over, so those are fine though.
It's sad and ironic that I can't recommend a good git gui client to a friend who uses Linux daily.
That one's going to be a hard nut to crack...
> Forklift / Transmit (That does dual pane file browser / sftp remote browser)
MC anyone? /semi-s
It has a bad reputation because, back in the day, it was buggy and bloated. But I haven't hit a single bug over these years, and while it eats a significant amount of memory, it's on par with other options (and these days everyone has plenty of RAM).
I'd love to see more people giving it a second chance.
I see a lot of "leaving apple" articles and comments lately. From what I gather, this is because their latest macbook is disappointing. But from what I remember, the initial reason for switching to apple was because of the incredible UX of macOSX.
Did I miss something and there also are software problems in apple world?
The fact that Apple machines built in the last ~4 years do not allow to upgrade RAM, for example, is a problem to me. I own a MacMini, the last version that allowed upgrading RAM, and I just went from 4GB to 16GB, and the difference in performance is significant. Next, I will replace the hard disk with an SSD. Both are impossible on more recent Macs.
Also, it appears many people feel the quality of OS X (pardon me: macOS)) is not what it used to be; Apple, I heard, is also rather slow to deliver patches for security issues other bugs.
The feeling I get, while not following Apple-related news that closely, is that they focus most of their resources on the iPhone/iOS, and OS X and Mac hardware is not really that much of a priority any more.
The UX of macOS is very nice in some points, but personally, I find it about as nice as Gnome2/Mate - some things I like better on macOS, some things I like better on Mate. And of course, this is highly subjective, and may be largely due to force of habit. (In all fairness, Gnome2/Mate seems to have taken a lot of, uh, inspiration from OS X, but still.)
Now that you mention it, I think I've heard something in the stance of "they focus on mobile and leave desktop behind" before.
Thanks for feedback!
listening to music = cmus
cutting pictures = darktable can stay
text editor = emacs or vim
audio processing = idk about this one
writing iso = nope dd is perfect
irc = erc or weechat
email = mutt or gmail website
calendar = org agenda mode (emacs)
address book = org mode table
terminal = urxvt or st
rss = idk i don't read rss
tweeting = don't
passwords = paper
don't have your don't read articles to you, either.
bonus:
browser: vimb or chromium i guess
terminal: alacritty (fewer kinks every day)
clock: xclock
Text Editor - Sublime (nothing comes close, sorry)
Illustrator - Krita
Terminal - Alacritty
Passwords - LastPass
Browser - Firefox
All of these are available for Mac and Linux. A good and simple image editor for Windows is paint.net
Consider using Lightning, it's a plugin for Thunderbird and it's really excellent.
For the rest of the world... sadly, just look at it.
But once you need something advanced, you can install Ubuntu as dual-boot and you will be at home.
Then XP came out, it was better, but still much of the same, I wanted Linux. Went back to Red Hat. Then Ubuntu came out a few years later, stuck with that, but overall Linux didn't progress much.
In 2007 I switched to Mac and stayed with the platform until summer 2015, when I sold my Macbook Pro and switched to a Lenovo Thinkpad running Win10.
Windows 10 is solid, stable and fast, but it just isn't - and will never be - a developer's OS (unless you're a .NET dev). This past summer I built a rig and was running Win10 for a while but couldn't stand it. I installed Linux Mint with Cinnamon. But Cinnamon crashed every time I logged in, no idea why, even on fresh builds (as I kept a separate /home partition).
So a week ago I ventured into the mysterious world of Hackintosh, and I am kicking myself for not doing this sooner. It's the best of both worlds, assuming you don't mind maintaining the system before/after updates to keep it running. I don't have a WiFi card/adapter nor a bluetooth one, so I obviously don't have all the functionality the platform offers but I don't care, it's plenty good enough otherwise. I even have iMessage working with no issues at all.
OS X is the only platform for me, plain and simple.
I know it's in beta and I know many changes are coming, but I needed to start working on a real side project and needed a reliable and dependable dev environment. maybe one day we can replace CMD with bash entirely, that would be nice.
But I also need to target and test Ionic apps on iOS, so I need OS X in some capacity. I've used Phonegap Build but it's a hassle and not free, I'm just more comfy in OS X