> More importantly, as a developer, I'm still deploying everything to Linux on Intel, so I value the ability to virtualize Linux without emulation.
Then why not just develop on Linux?
Then why not just develop on Linux?
I wasn't the one that downvoted you but to give a typical reason why some programmers don't run Linux on the laptop/desktop even though they deploy to Linux: they need to run critical software that only runs on Windows or macOS. (My previous comments with examples of this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20312066, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20312336)
I also write software for Linux but it's backend processing utilities deployed to Linux servers and not client GUI software with GTK/Qt meant for Ubuntu desktops. In that situation, it's more reliable and less hassle for me to run macOS or Windows as the 1st-class desktop and then run Linux & gcc in a vm .... rather than the reverse of running Ubuntu desktop and trying to run Windows in Wine/vm and then finding out something is incompatible.
The reality is that if you're going to be interfacing with non-technical people (managers, customers, exec level), they all expect a certain amount of polish that comes from presentations. I'm willing to dunk on MBA types that drop buzzwords all day, but sometime you need to be flexible with regard for what tools you use for your job.
The heart of it is that PowerPoint is a product, not a standard.
Because we can't assume everyone is a Microsoft house, we have to support presentations produced in open standard formats and proprietary ones alike. This is why we invest so heavily into our AV and conference spaces - we don't want to make fools of ourselves and our guests by neglecting simple and costless accommodations.
You can easily create crappy presentations in PowerPoint
You were quite unreasonable in my opinion, and failed to communicate why they would need to use PPT
I’m saying this as a person with PowerPoint as the second most important tool at my workplace, after Excel
>poor formatting...many conflicts/broken formatting
Yes you can create crappy presentations in Powerpoint but when you open those crappy presentations they still look exactly how they did when it was created. That's not always the case with LibreOffice when one of their files is opened in Microsoft Office.
When I was in university I had instructors who demanded documents be created in MS Office (which I did not own) and I did those assignments in the library where MS Office is installed on every machine.
Basic documents work just fine between LibreOffice and MS Office but the more advanced you get the worse the compatibility is. In your view, how much responsibility does the author have for broken formatting versus the reader? Basically, if I (as a student) submit a document with broken formatting, how do you as an instructor make the determination that it's because of a software error instead of a lazy student? And after you make that determination, how much time do you as an instructor put into fixing the student's broken formatting versus rejecting the document and moving on?
This is a big shift from just a few years ago where significantly fewer students had the hard drive space, internet, and know-how to download and manage multiple licensed versions or bitnesses of MS Office products. Since professors might require older versions of software that are incompatible with other courses at the school (or simply not be aware of the newer version available to them), there's not much students can do except hope the professor will listen to reason or not grade too harshly on something they might be getting entirely wrong.
Poor professoring (or TAing) is a good way to get a chair or dean involved, so it's rare to have things escalate too far, but it's still a big source of stress for students who might hold certain parts of the system in higher esteem than they rightfully deserve.
I’m very much a person who values technology that “just works”. While my latest Ubuntu installation admittedly wasn’t quite as smooth as running macOS on Apple hardware, the gap has narrowed considerably. Especially for anyone who already possesses a fair amount of Linux experience from working with servers for work, and who sticks with known-compatible hardware, running a Linux desktop can be a delight.
UI jank is also reduced but not eliminated. Even Pop!/DE Ubuntu have a fair number of rough edges - not so much that you're constantly tearing your hair out, but there's definite room for improvement. Personally, I live with it because I also think Windows and OSX have regressed in usability and stability, but I'd be a liar if I didn't mention all the time spent yelling at things like DPI scaling w/ hardware dock-attached monitors.
e: also, expect to do some manual power tuning if you want anything close to battery life parity.
I find the overall UX quite good (Microsoft RD + Microsoft VS Code) and the fact that I do not have relevant data on the Macs allows me to hop from office to home, and second homes without having to carry a laptop.
Native docker would be a strong draw, but the thing that has stopped me so far is that I have refined workflows and a handful of killer apps (eg. OmniFocus) that I don't want to retool.