On Jan 30, 2009, at 4:50 PM, solarwind wrote: > On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Nate Duehr wrote: >> I found for most times since all I needed was a shell and a browser, >> ratpoison worked well. Look it up. No mouse. Keyboard shortcuts >> to pop >> windows, move them around (panels) etc. I was using Mutt back >> then for >> e-mail, though... all text. >> >> I got over it, and bought a Mac. :-) >> >> Nate > > Lol, I know what ratpoison is - I used it on a 386 embedded PC with > only a keyboard port. > > And the Mac - I am disappointed in you. Why? I'm not a developer and don't contribute to Linux desktops, and it's free so when they finally get something worth using, I can easily switch back. I used to be a Linux zealot. Then I realized that the quality software on Linux is server software. Linux as a desktop is "okay" but really not better than commercial options. On the Mac, I can build or download virtually every application ported from Linux (almost everything), and I have a commercially supported desktop with real support from major closed source software manufacturers too. So I get the best of both worlds. Then add on virtualization and I can have Windows too, if I must. I rarely boot the Windows VM. Technically I could put a Linux VM on it too, but why? Prior to faster machines and virtualization I kept one of "each" OS online at home, doing something... now after 10 years of running a Linux server for mail/webserver and other things, I "outsourced" it all to fastmail.fm, shut the silly blog down, and got on with life... So... I made the most open option -- the Mac will do it all. As far as cost, I paid $130 to outfit five machines ("family pack") with Leopard. I know people that spend more than that on frivolous stuff. I only have four Macs and one won't do Leopard, so it was $43 a machine. Whoop dee doo. Linux makes a nice platform for commercial software like Apache (GPL'ed or not, the main team is PAID to write Apache) and MySQL (another commercially funded project), and I see very little quality out of the completely freely written stuff. OpenOffice (another project with commercial monetary support) struggles to be a copy of MS Office, which I already have -- and iLife, iWork are good too. All the commercial closed options are higher quality, when you compare them feature for feature. With all the Macs around, iTunes works fine for me and my one old "regular" iPod, and my iPhone acting as one. I want to use my computers, not compile other people's code and screw around with them, prior to them being useful. I used to do Linux From Scratch, Gentoo from source, all of it... I learned a lot, but nothing's really changed since then... compiling a kernel is still compiling a kernel, etc... once you've done it a few times, you don't need to do it anymore, unless you're developing a kernel driver or something. I'm certainly not. I contend, and will continue to... that users don't need a Linux desktop at all. They get Windows at a discount similar to the price I paid for OSX Leopard, and the same thing happens on Mac hardware. I do get a kick out of how it drives Linux nuts that "free" hasn't taken over the world yet. There *is* a reason... and it's not just familiarity... many Linux desktops have adequately mimic'ed the Windows/Mac interfaces that users aren't completely confused by them... it's that Linux offers them nothing compelling other than to copycat the commercial stuff. Sorry list... others have seen my opinions on this, but I just figured I'd reiterate them for solarwind. He can be a Linux zealout if he likes, I don't mind -- developers like Linux. The distros almost all cater to developers, and not as much to end-users. The old funny video "Switch to Linux" making fun of the Apple "Switch" marketing campaign is always a light way to look at it all... but true! http://www.ubergeek.tv/article.php?pid=54 Nate -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist