Rich <[email protected]d> wrote or quoted:
:The /typical/ Mac user [1] who is the person Apple targets in their :marketing is someone who views "a computer" as simply a tool to
:accomplish some other task(s), in the same way that most automobile owners :view their car as a "means for personal transportation from point A to :point B".
A scientist who uses Linux to study frequencies of words or
diseases is someone who wants to use his computer as a tool
to accomplish some other task, too.
So, I appreciate your attempt to clarify what is special about
Mac users, but I'm not sure whether your current wording is
already the most accurate wording possible. Maybe someone can
improve it.
[email protected] (Stefan Ram) writes:
Rich <[email protected]d> wrote or quoted:
:The /typical/ Mac user [1] who is the person Apple targets in their
:marketing is someone who views "a computer" as simply a tool to
:accomplish some other task(s), in the same way that most automobile owners >> :view their car as a "means for personal transportation from point A to
:point B".
A scientist who uses Linux to study frequencies of words or
diseases is someone who wants to use his computer as a tool
to accomplish some other task, too.
So, I appreciate your attempt to clarify what is special about
Mac users, but I'm not sure whether your current wording is
already the most accurate wording possible. Maybe someone can
improve it.
Mac users are the vegans of the computing world.
For years I was rather neutral about Apple but grew to hate it more than
I do Microsoft.
[email protected] (Stefan Ram) writes:
Rich <[email protected]d> wrote or quoted:
:The /typical/ Mac user [1] who is the person Apple targets in their
:marketing is someone who views "a computer" as simply a tool to
:accomplish some other task(s), in the same way that most automobile owners >> :view their car as a "means for personal transportation from point A to
:point B".
A scientist who uses Linux to study frequencies of words or
diseases is someone who wants to use his computer as a tool
to accomplish some other task, too.
So, I appreciate your attempt to clarify what is special about
Mac users, but I'm not sure whether your current wording is
already the most accurate wording possible. Maybe someone can
improve it.
Mac users are the vegans of the computing world.
For years I was rather neutral about Apple but grew to hate it more than
I do Microsoft.
Well, they are definitely more environmentally friendly. After all,
Apple offers to recycle your old machine and even gives you a rebate if
you do so.
On 22/04/2026 00:05, Daniel wrote:
[email protected] (Stefan Ram) writes:People who buy Macs consider themselves to be intelligent, but who are
Rich <[email protected]d> wrote or quoted:
:The /typical/ Mac user [1] who is the person Apple targets in their
:marketing is someone who views "a computer" as simply a tool to
:accomplish some other task(s), in the same way that most automobile
owners
:view their car as a "means for personal transportation from point A to
:point B".
A scientist who uses Linux to study frequencies of words or
diseases is someone who wants to use his computer as a tool
to accomplish some other task, too.
So, I appreciate your attempt to clarify what is special about
Mac users, but I'm not sure whether your current wording is
already the most accurate wording possible. Maybe someone can
improve it.
Mac users are the vegans of the computing world.
For years I was rather neutral about Apple but grew to hate it more than
I do Microsoft.
too stupid to learn how to drive a computer.
Macs give them the illusion of intelligence.
Dunning Kruger in a shiny case.
http://vps.templar.co.uk/Cartoons%20and%20Politics/original.jpg
On 22/04/2026 00:10, CrudeSausage wrote:
Well, they are definitely more environmentally friendly. After all,
Apple offers to recycle your old machine and even gives you a rebate
if you do so.
LOL. I bet they simply send it to some Chinese scrapyard.
I'd love to see other manufacturers do that.And where you'll be arrested for having the wrong opinion, but the
Will in reality, that's what happens to any dead PC hardware.
I live in Britain, because the air is free...
:-)
<snip>
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their computer. They
don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and compliment the thing in
the hope that it won't off itself like Linux and Windows computers do.
A good chunk of Mac users used to be Windows and Linux users.--
CrudeSausage wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
<snip>
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their computer. They
don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and compliment the thing in
the hope that it won't off itself like Linux and Windows computers do.
I think most people who buy computers buy them to perform tasks,
even if, for some, that task is "just" gaming.
I certainly do a lot of tasks in Linux.
On 2026-04-22 1:49 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
CrudeSausage wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
<snip>
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their computer. They
don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and compliment the thing in
the hope that it won't off itself like Linux and Windows computers do.
I think most people who buy computers buy them to perform tasks,
even if, for some, that task is "just" gaming.
I certainly do a lot of tasks in Linux.
All of those tasks are repairing the operating system to keep it working.
On 2026-04-22 20:24, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 1:49 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
CrudeSausage wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
<snip>
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their computer. They
don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and compliment the thing in >>>> the hope that it won't off itself like Linux and Windows computers do.
I think most people who buy computers buy them to perform tasks,
even if, for some, that task is "just" gaming.
I certainly do a lot of tasks in Linux.
All of those tasks are repairing the operating system to keep it working.
Nope. It just works and works, every day.
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their computer. They
don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and compliment the thing in
the hope that it won't off itself like Linux and Windows computers do.
A good chunk of Mac users used to be Windows and Linux users.
On 2026-04-22 5:04 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/04/2026 00:10, CrudeSausage wrote:
Well, they are definitely more environmentally friendly. After all,
Apple offers to recycle your old machine and even gives you a rebate
if you do so.
LOL. I bet they simply send it to some Chinese scrapyard.
And they paid you for the honour of doing so. Remember that.
I'd love to see other manufacturers do that.And where you'll be arrested for having the wrong opinion, but the
Will in reality, that's what happens to any dead PC hardware.
I live in Britain, because the air is free...
:-)
Muslim raping your ass won't be reprimanded in any way.
On 2026-04-22 1:49 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
CrudeSausage wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
<snip>
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their computer. They
don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and compliment the thing in
the hope that it won't off itself like Linux and Windows computers do.
I think most people who buy computers buy them to perform tasks,
even if, for some, that task is "just" gaming.
I certainly do a lot of tasks in Linux.
All of those tasks are repairing the operating system to keep it working.
On 2026-04-22 3:16 p.m., Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-04-22 20:24, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 1:49 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
CrudeSausage wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
<snip>I think most people who buy computers buy them to perform tasks,
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their computer. They >>>>> don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and compliment the thing in >>>>> the hope that it won't off itself like Linux and Windows computers do. >>>>
even if, for some, that task is "just" gaming.
I certainly do a lot of tasks in Linux.
All of those tasks are repairing the operating system to keep it
working.
Nope. It just works and works, every day.
Gee, I wonder if a guy who lives in far-left Spain and takes pride in
being a part of the far-left European Union would lie to me.
A good chunk of Mac users used to be Windows and Linux users.
CrudeSausage wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
<snip>
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their computer. They
don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and compliment the thing in
the hope that it won't off itself like Linux and Windows computers do.
I think most people who buy computers buy them to perform tasks,
even if, for some, that task is "just" gaming.
I certainly do a lot of tasks in Linux.
A good chunk of Mac users used to be Windows and Linux users.
On 4/14/26 07:04, Tom Elam wrote:
On 4/9/26 1:37 PM, -hh wrote:
Decades too late, as more & more new models today don't even
provision a spare tire. Even so, tire technology has become
profoundly better over the past fifty years, such that flats have
become quite rare. Locally, probably ~80% of the flats I've gotten
have come fairly shortly after we've had a major weather event, which
is where nails/ screws/debris get washed into the roadway to become a
tire puncture.
You must be kidding. I have replaced way too many tires from sidewall
breaks after hitting a pothole.
In our household, we've had zero such failures.
So that appears to be on you.
-hh
[email protected] (Stefan Ram) writes:
Rich <[email protected]d> wrote or quoted:
:The /typical/ Mac user [1] who is the person Apple targets in their
:marketing is someone who views "a computer" as simply a tool to
:accomplish some other task(s), in the same way that most automobile owners >> :view their car as a "means for personal transportation from point A to
:point B".
A scientist who uses Linux to study frequencies of words or
diseases is someone who wants to use his computer as a tool
to accomplish some other task, too.
So, I appreciate your attempt to clarify what is special about
Mac users, but I'm not sure whether your current wording is
already the most accurate wording possible. Maybe someone can
improve it.
Mac users are the vegans of the computing world.
For years I was rather neutral about Apple but grew to hate it more than
I do Microsoft.
On 22/04/2026 17:45, CrudeSausage wrote:
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their computer. TheyI fall into that category, but I use Linux.
don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and compliment the thing in
the hope that it won't off itself like Linux and Windows computers do.
Having tried all the others
]
A good chunk of Mac users used to be Windows and Linux users.
A good chunk of linux users used to me Mac and windows users - so what?
On 22/04/2026 19:24, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 1:49 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:¿ That makes no sense at all.?
CrudeSausage wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
<snip>
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their computer. They
don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and compliment the thing in >>>> the hope that it won't off itself like Linux and Windows computers do.
I think most people who buy computers buy them to perform tasks,
even if, for some, that task is "just" gaming.
I certainly do a lot of tasks in Linux.
All of those tasks are repairing the operating system to keep it working.
Even were it true, that would be better than a Mac where you have to reinstall the whole operating system to repairr it periodically...
Mac users are the vegans of the computing world.
On Tue, 21 Apr 2026 16:05:17 -0700, Daniel wrote:
Mac users are the vegans of the computing world.
They like to say they are using “Unix”, as though that makes them
better than Windows users, even though they have no idea what that
term means.
On 2026-04-22 3:49 p.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/04/2026 19:24, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 1:49 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:¿ That makes no sense at all.?
CrudeSausage wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
<snip>I think most people who buy computers buy them to perform tasks,
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their computer. They >>>>> don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and compliment the thing in >>>>> the hope that it won't off itself like Linux and Windows computers do. >>>>
even if, for some, that task is "just" gaming.
I certainly do a lot of tasks in Linux.
All of those tasks are repairing the operating system to keep it
working.
Even were it true, that would be better than a Mac where you have to
reinstall the whole operating system to repairr it periodically...
I would bet that absolutely none of the Mac users in
comp.sys.mac.advocacy have had to do that in the entire time they've
used their Apple hardware. They might reinstall before selling it to someone, but there is otherwise no need to do so.
On 2026-04-22 16:21, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2026 16:05:17 -0700, Daniel wrote:
Mac users are the vegans of the computing world.
They like to say they are using “Unix”, as though that makes them
better than Windows users, even though they have no idea what that
term means.
Utterly wrong.
Most Mac users have no idea what "Unix" is, I would wager.
On 2026-04-22 16:09, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 3:49 p.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/04/2026 19:24, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 1:49 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:¿ That makes no sense at all.?
CrudeSausage wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
<snip>
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their computer. They >>>>>> don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and compliment the
thing in
the hope that it won't off itself like Linux and Windows computers >>>>>> do.
I think most people who buy computers buy them to perform tasks,
even if, for some, that task is "just" gaming.
I certainly do a lot of tasks in Linux.
All of those tasks are repairing the operating system to keep it
working.
Even were it true, that would be better than a Mac where you have to
reinstall the whole operating system to repairr it periodically...
I would bet that absolutely none of the Mac users in
comp.sys.mac.advocacy have had to do that in the entire time they've
used their Apple hardware. They might reinstall before selling it to
someone, but there is otherwise no need to do so.
Again, I can attest to this.
In the 30 plus years I've been supporting Mac systems, I don't believe
I've had to do a full wipe and reinstall to fix a problem more than once
or twice.
On 2026-04-22 9:30 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2026-04-22 16:21, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2026 16:05:17 -0700, Daniel wrote:
Mac users are the vegans of the computing world.
They like to say they are using “Unix”, as though that makes them
better than Windows users, even though they have no idea what that
term means.
Utterly wrong.
Most Mac users have no idea what "Unix" is, I would wager.
They might be aware that the Mac offers "something or other" with UNIX
if they read the specifications of the machine they're buying, but they probably don't concern themselves with it too much.
On 22/04/2026 19:24, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 1:49 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
CrudeSausage wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their
computer. They don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and
compliment the thing in the hope that it won't off itself like
Linux and Windows computers do.
I think most people who buy computers buy them to perform tasks,
even if, for some, that task is "just" gaming.
I certainly do a lot of tasks in Linux.
All of those tasks are repairing the operating system to keep it
working.
¿ That makes no sense at all.?
Even were it true, that would be better than a Mac where you have to reinstall the whole operating system to repairr it periodically...
On 2026-04-21 16:05, Daniel wrote:Instead of cheap and nasty it was expensive and nasty?
[email protected] (Stefan Ram) writes:
Rich <[email protected]d> wrote or quoted:
:The /typical/ Mac user [1] who is the person Apple targets in their
:marketing is someone who views "a computer" as simply a tool to
:accomplish some other task(s), in the same way that most automobile
owners
:view their car as a "means for personal transportation from point A to
:point B".
A scientist who uses Linux to study frequencies of words or
diseases is someone who wants to use his computer as a tool
to accomplish some other task, too.
So, I appreciate your attempt to clarify what is special about
Mac users, but I'm not sure whether your current wording is
already the most accurate wording possible. Maybe someone can
improve it.
Mac users are the vegans of the computing world.
For years I was rather neutral about Apple but grew to hate it more than
I do Microsoft.
And your rational reasons for that hatred were...?
¿ That makes no sense at all.?
Even were it true, that would be better than a Mac where you have to
reinstall the whole operating system to repairr it periodically...
I would bet that absolutely none of the Mac users in
comp.sys.mac.advocacy have had to do that in the entire time they've
used their Apple hardware. They might reinstall before selling it to someone, but there is otherwise no need to do so.
At most... ...even Apple doesn't mention it's Unix foundation in any of
its marketing anymore.
On 2026-04-22 3:49 p.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/04/2026 19:24, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 1:49 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:¿ That makes no sense at all.?
CrudeSausage wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
<snip>I think most people who buy computers buy them to perform tasks,
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their computer. They >>>>> don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and compliment the thing in >>>>> the hope that it won't off itself like Linux and Windows computers do. >>>>
even if, for some, that task is "just" gaming.
I certainly do a lot of tasks in Linux.
All of those tasks are repairing the operating system to keep it
working.
Even were it true, that would be better than a Mac where you have to
reinstall the whole operating system to repairr it periodically...
I would bet that absolutely none of the Mac users in
comp.sys.mac.advocacy have had to do that in the entire time they've
used their Apple hardware. They might reinstall before selling it to someone, but there is otherwise no need to do so.
The Natural Philosopher <[email protected]d> writes:
On 22/04/2026 19:24, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 1:49 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
CrudeSausage wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their
computer. They don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and
compliment the thing in the hope that it won't off itself like
Linux and Windows computers do.
I think most people who buy computers buy them to perform tasks,
even if, for some, that task is "just" gaming.
I certainly do a lot of tasks in Linux.
All of those tasks are repairing the operating system to keep it
working.
¿ That makes no sense at all.?
Even were it true, that would be better than a Mac where you have to
reinstall the whole operating system to repairr it periodically...
I’ve been using Linux, macOS and Windows for decades.
I’ve reinstalled macOS precisely zero times. I think Linux got
reinstalled once in 1995 or so, but my main Linux system has been continuously upgraded since then without a single reinstall.
On 2026-04-22 1:49 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
CrudeSausage wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
<snip>
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their computer. They
don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and compliment the thing in
the hope that it won't off itself like Linux and Windows computers do.
I think most people who buy computers buy them to perform tasks,
even if, for some, that task is "just" gaming.
I certainly do a lot of tasks in Linux.
All of those tasks are repairing the operating system to keep it working.
In the 30 plus years I've been supporting Mac systems, I don't believe
I've had to do a full wipe and reinstall to fix a problem more than once
or twice.
On 2026-04-22 18:59, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 9:30 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2026-04-22 16:21, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2026 16:05:17 -0700, Daniel wrote:
Mac users are the vegans of the computing world.
They like to say they are using “Unix”, as though that makes them
better than Windows users, even though they have no idea what that
term means.
Utterly wrong.
Most Mac users have no idea what "Unix" is, I would wager.
They might be aware that the Mac offers "something or other" with UNIX
if they read the specifications of the machine they're buying, but
they probably don't concern themselves with it too much.
At most... ...even Apple doesn't mention it's Unix foundation in any of
its marketing anymore.
On 22/04/2026 18:45, CrudeSausage wrote:
A good chunk of Mac users used to be Windows and Linux users.
Or still use Linux / Windows besides Mac. Also, with Mac ports or
homebrew one can use quite some Linux tools.
The Natural Philosopher <[email protected]d> writes:You've been around for decades yet never heard the expression "offing oneself?"
On 22/04/2026 19:24, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 1:49 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
CrudeSausage wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their
computer. They don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and
compliment the thing in the hope that it won't off itself like
Linux and Windows computers do.
I think most people who buy computers buy them to perform tasks,
even if, for some, that task is "just" gaming.
I certainly do a lot of tasks in Linux.
All of those tasks are repairing the operating system to keep it
working.
¿ That makes no sense at all.?
Even were it true, that would be better than a Mac where you have to
reinstall the whole operating system to repairr it periodically...
I’ve been using Linux, macOS and Windows for decades.
I’ve reinstalled macOS precisely zero times. I think Linux got
reinstalled once in 1995 or so, but my main Linux system has been continuously upgraded since then without a single reinstall.
Windows XP might have got reinstalled once around 2006 but I couldn’t
swear to that and even then it might have been due to a disk failure
around that time, which tells you nothing about the operating system’s stability and more about the famously abysmal reliability of OCZ SSDs.
As for the other remarks I am not constantly repairing Linux installs to
keep them working, and my Linux and Windows installs have never ‘offed themselves’, whatever that means exactly.
On 23/04/2026 00:09, CrudeSausage wrote:Show us all evidence that the battery's health was still 100% when they
¿ That makes no sense at all.?
Even were it true, that would be better than a Mac where you have to
reinstall the whole operating system to repairr it periodically...
I would bet that absolutely none of the Mac users in
comp.sys.mac.advocacy have had to do that in the entire time they've
used their Apple hardware. They might reinstall before selling it to
someone, but there is otherwise no need to do so.
Well that shows they never really used it,.
Just turned it on and admired their brilliance in buying it
On 2026-04-23 09:26, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <[email protected]d> writes:
On 22/04/2026 19:24, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 1:49 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
CrudeSausage wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their
computer. They don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and
compliment the thing in the hope that it won't off itself like
Linux and Windows computers do.
I think most people who buy computers buy them to perform tasks,
even if, for some, that task is "just" gaming.
I certainly do a lot of tasks in Linux.
All of those tasks are repairing the operating system to keep it
working.
¿ That makes no sense at all.?
Even were it true, that would be better than a Mac where you have to
reinstall the whole operating system to repairr it periodically...
I’ve been using Linux, macOS and Windows for decades.
I’ve reinstalled macOS precisely zero times. I think Linux got
reinstalled once in 1995 or so, but my main Linux system has been
continuously upgraded since then without a single reinstall.
Same here.
On 23/04/2026 00:09, CrudeSausage wrote:
¿ That makes no sense at all.?
Even were it true, that would be better than a Mac where you have to
reinstall the whole operating system to repairr it periodically...
I would bet that absolutely none of the Mac users in
comp.sys.mac.advocacy have had to do that in the entire time they've
used their Apple hardware. They might reinstall before selling it to
someone, but there is otherwise no need to do so.
Well that shows they never really used it,.
Just turned it on and admired their brilliance in buying it
On 4/22/26 19:09, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 3:49 p.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/04/2026 19:24, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 1:49 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:¿ That makes no sense at all.?
CrudeSausage wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
<snip>
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their computer. They >>>>>> don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and compliment the
thing in
the hope that it won't off itself like Linux and Windows computers >>>>>> do.
I think most people who buy computers buy them to perform tasks,
even if, for some, that task is "just" gaming.
I certainly do a lot of tasks in Linux.
All of those tasks are repairing the operating system to keep it
working.
Even were it true, that would be better than a Mac where you have to
reinstall the whole operating system to repairr it periodically...
I would bet that absolutely none of the Mac users in
comp.sys.mac.advocacy have had to do that in the entire time they've
used their Apple hardware. They might reinstall before selling it to
someone, but there is otherwise no need to do so.
I'm starting to think about doing that.
Its on a 2012 Mac Pro that's never had it done since new, and its still running for some noncritical tasks (for day-to-day, it was effectively replaced in 2022). It has developed a glitch where it won't shut down automatically; I suspect that its probably due to some sort of SSD
hardware failure/corruption on an 7-8 year old SSD. Since my only need
for it to shut down is from power failures, its a very low priority.
Other than this "maybe", I don't recall wiping the PMG5 Mac prior to
that, so my anecdotal incidence rate is lower than "0 for 20 years"
-hh
On 23/04/2026 03:03, Alan wrote:
At most... ...even Apple doesn't mention it's Unix foundation in any
of its marketing anymore.
"!We arent really system engineers any more, so we ripped off a free operating system from the Unix community and ported a lot of flashy shit
on tip to justify and elevated price tag' hardly reflects the Mac image
they want to portray...
" We aren't selling electric guitars, we are selling dreams"
On 22/04/2026 23:33, Alan wrote:
On 2026-04-21 16:05, Daniel wrote:Instead of cheap and nasty it was expensive and nasty?
[email protected] (Stefan Ram) writes:
Rich <[email protected]d> wrote or quoted:
:The /typical/ Mac user [1] who is the person Apple targets in their
:marketing is someone who views "a computer" as simply a tool to
:accomplish some other task(s), in the same way that most automobile
owners
:view their car as a "means for personal transportation from point A to >>>> :point B".
A scientist who uses Linux to study frequencies of words or
diseases is someone who wants to use his computer as a tool
to accomplish some other task, too.
So, I appreciate your attempt to clarify what is special about
Mac users, but I'm not sure whether your current wording is
already the most accurate wording possible. Maybe someone can
improve it.
Mac users are the vegans of the computing world.
For years I was rather neutral about Apple but grew to hate it more than >>> I do Microsoft.
And your rational reasons for that hatred were...?
On 2026-04-23 01:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/04/2026 03:03, Alan wrote:
At most... ...even Apple doesn't mention it's Unix foundation in any
of its marketing anymore.
"!We arent really system engineers any more, so we ripped off a free
operating system from the Unix community and ported a lot of flashy
shit on tip to justify and elevated price tag' hardly reflects the Mac
image they want to portray...
" We aren't selling electric guitars, we are selling dreams"
Would an absolute of bullshit.
On 2026-04-23 01:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/04/2026 23:33, Alan wrote:
On 2026-04-21 16:05, Daniel wrote:Instead of cheap and nasty it was expensive and nasty?
[email protected] (Stefan Ram) writes:
Rich <[email protected]d> wrote or quoted:
:The /typical/ Mac user [1] who is the person Apple targets in their >>>>> :marketing is someone who views "a computer" as simply a tool to
:accomplish some other task(s), in the same way that most
automobile owners
:view their car as a "means for personal transportation from point
A to
:point B".
A scientist who uses Linux to study frequencies of words or
diseases is someone who wants to use his computer as a tool
to accomplish some other task, too.
So, I appreciate your attempt to clarify what is special about
Mac users, but I'm not sure whether your current wording is
already the most accurate wording possible. Maybe someone can
improve it.
Mac users are the vegans of the computing world.
For years I was rather neutral about Apple but grew to hate it more
than
I do Microsoft.
And your rational reasons for that hatred were...?
No actual reason give ("nasty" isn't a reason).
On 2026-04-23 3:26 a.m., Richard Kettlewell wrote:[...]
As for the other remarks I am not constantly repairing Linux installs
to keep them working, and my Linux and Windows installs have never
‘offed themselves’, whatever that means exactly.
You've been around for decades yet never heard the expression "offing oneself?"
Well as the technical support contractor who maintained their Mac
network (AppleTalk on thinnet Ethernet: remember that; terminators!),
I was disassembling everything when I came upon the machine in the
bottom of a closet I knew was there from the existence of zones on
the AppleTalk network, but had never seen.
In a closet, where it had been running continuously for something
like 10 years, there was a Mac II ci.
Oh, but for mac users, emotion is everything.
There is no RATIONAL reason to buy a Mac
As for the other remarks I am not constantly repairing Linux installs to
keep them working, and my Linux and Windows installs have never ‘offed themselves’, whatever that means exactly.
On 2026-04-23 02:36, -hh wrote:
On 4/22/26 19:09, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 3:49 p.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/04/2026 19:24, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 1:49 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:¿ That makes no sense at all.?
CrudeSausage wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
<snip>
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their computer. >>>>>>> They
don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and compliment the
thing in
the hope that it won't off itself like Linux and Windows
computers do.
I think most people who buy computers buy them to perform tasks,
even if, for some, that task is "just" gaming.
I certainly do a lot of tasks in Linux.
All of those tasks are repairing the operating system to keep it
working.
Even were it true, that would be better than a Mac where you have to
reinstall the whole operating system to repairr it periodically...
I would bet that absolutely none of the Mac users in
comp.sys.mac.advocacy have had to do that in the entire time they've
used their Apple hardware. They might reinstall before selling it to
someone, but there is otherwise no need to do so.
I'm starting to think about doing that.
Its on a 2012 Mac Pro that's never had it done since new, and its
still running for some noncritical tasks (for day-to-day, it was
effectively replaced in 2022). It has developed a glitch where it
won't shut down automatically; I suspect that its probably due to some
sort of SSD hardware failure/corruption on an 7-8 year old SSD. Since
my only need for it to shut down is from power failures, its a very
low priority.
Other than this "maybe", I don't recall wiping the PMG5 Mac prior to
that, so my anecdotal incidence rate is lower than "0 for 20 years"
-hh
I remember when a (former) client was moving the printing and video
product departments (the only ones using Macs and hence the reason they needed an outside contractor for support) from an outbuilding to the
head office building.
This was back in...2002, maybe?
Well as the technical support contractor who maintained their Mac
network (AppleTalk on thinnet Ethernet: remember that; terminators!), I
was disassembling everything when I came upon the machine in the bottom
of a closet I knew was there from the existence of zones on the
AppleTalk network, but had never seen.
In a closet, where it had been running continuously for something like
10 years, there was a Mac II ci.
On 2026-04-23 01:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/04/2026 23:33, Alan wrote:
On 2026-04-21 16:05, Daniel wrote:Instead of cheap and nasty it was expensive and nasty?
[email protected] (Stefan Ram) writes:
Rich <[email protected]d> wrote or quoted:
:The /typical/ Mac user [1] who is the person Apple targets in their >>>>> :marketing is someone who views "a computer" as simply a tool to
:accomplish some other task(s), in the same way that most
automobile owners
:view their car as a "means for personal transportation from point
A to
:point B".
A scientist who uses Linux to study frequencies of words or
diseases is someone who wants to use his computer as a tool
to accomplish some other task, too.
So, I appreciate your attempt to clarify what is special about
Mac users, but I'm not sure whether your current wording is
already the most accurate wording possible. Maybe someone can
improve it.
Mac users are the vegans of the computing world.
For years I was rather neutral about Apple but grew to hate it more
than
I do Microsoft.
And your rational reasons for that hatred were...?
No actual reason give ("nasty" isn't a reason).
On 23/04/2026 16:21, Alan wrote:
On 2026-04-23 01:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/04/2026 23:33, Alan wrote:
On 2026-04-21 16:05, Daniel wrote:Instead of cheap and nasty it was expensive and nasty?
[email protected] (Stefan Ram) writes:
Rich <[email protected]d> wrote or quoted:
:The /typical/ Mac user [1] who is the person Apple targets in their >>>>>> :marketing is someone who views "a computer" as simply a tool to
:accomplish some other task(s), in the same way that most
automobile owners
:view their car as a "means for personal transportation from point >>>>>> A to
:point B".
A scientist who uses Linux to study frequencies of words or
diseases is someone who wants to use his computer as a tool
to accomplish some other task, too.
So, I appreciate your attempt to clarify what is special about >>>>>> Mac users, but I'm not sure whether your current wording is
already the most accurate wording possible. Maybe someone can >>>>>> improve it.
Mac users are the vegans of the computing world.
For years I was rather neutral about Apple but grew to hate it more >>>>> than
I do Microsoft.
And your rational reasons for that hatred were...?
No actual reason give ("nasty" isn't a reason).
Oh, but for mac users, emotion is everything.
There is no RATIONAL reason to buy a Mac
CrudeSausage <[email protected]> writes:
On 2026-04-23 3:26 a.m., Richard Kettlewell wrote:[...]
As for the other remarks I am not constantly repairing Linux installs
to keep them working, and my Linux and Windows installs have never
‘offed themselves’, whatever that means exactly.
You've been around for decades yet never heard the expression "offing
oneself?"
Not really the point. But since you ask, I have heard and used it many
times, but I didn’t want to make assumptions about the specific intended meaning here.
On 2026-04-23 11:11 a.m., Alan wrote:It was something pre-Mac OS X... ...but it's been so long I couldn't
On 2026-04-23 02:36, -hh wrote:
On 4/22/26 19:09, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 3:49 p.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/04/2026 19:24, CrudeSausage wrote:I would bet that absolutely none of the Mac users in
On 2026-04-22 1:49 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:¿ That makes no sense at all.?
CrudeSausage wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
<snip>
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their computer. >>>>>>>> They
don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and compliment the >>>>>>>> thing in
the hope that it won't off itself like Linux and Windows
computers do.
I think most people who buy computers buy them to perform tasks, >>>>>>> even if, for some, that task is "just" gaming.
I certainly do a lot of tasks in Linux.
All of those tasks are repairing the operating system to keep it
working.
Even were it true, that would be better than a Mac where you have
to reinstall the whole operating system to repairr it periodically... >>>>
comp.sys.mac.advocacy have had to do that in the entire time they've
used their Apple hardware. They might reinstall before selling it to
someone, but there is otherwise no need to do so.
I'm starting to think about doing that.
Its on a 2012 Mac Pro that's never had it done since new, and its
still running for some noncritical tasks (for day-to-day, it was
effectively replaced in 2022). It has developed a glitch where it
won't shut down automatically; I suspect that its probably due to
some sort of SSD hardware failure/corruption on an 7-8 year old SSD.
Since my only need for it to shut down is from power failures, its a
very low priority.
Other than this "maybe", I don't recall wiping the PMG5 Mac prior to
that, so my anecdotal incidence rate is lower than "0 for 20 years"
-hh
I remember when a (former) client was moving the printing and video
product departments (the only ones using Macs and hence the reason
they needed an outside contractor for support) from an outbuilding to
the head office building.
This was back in...2002, maybe?
Well as the technical support contractor who maintained their Mac
network (AppleTalk on thinnet Ethernet: remember that; terminators!),
I was disassembling everything when I came upon the machine in the
bottom of a closet I knew was there from the existence of zones on the
AppleTalk network, but had never seen.
In a closet, where it had been running continuously for something like
10 years, there was a Mac II ci.
Out of curiosity, which version of MacOS was it running? I am surprised
a classic version of MacOS could run for that long without crashing.
On 23/04/2026 16:21, Alan wrote:Sure there is.
On 2026-04-23 01:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/04/2026 23:33, Alan wrote:
On 2026-04-21 16:05, Daniel wrote:Instead of cheap and nasty it was expensive and nasty?
[email protected] (Stefan Ram) writes:
Rich <[email protected]d> wrote or quoted:
:The /typical/ Mac user [1] who is the person Apple targets in their >>>>>> :marketing is someone who views "a computer" as simply a tool to
:accomplish some other task(s), in the same way that most
automobile owners
:view their car as a "means for personal transportation from point >>>>>> A to
:point B".
A scientist who uses Linux to study frequencies of words or
diseases is someone who wants to use his computer as a tool
to accomplish some other task, too.
So, I appreciate your attempt to clarify what is special about >>>>>> Mac users, but I'm not sure whether your current wording is
already the most accurate wording possible. Maybe someone can >>>>>> improve it.
Mac users are the vegans of the computing world.
For years I was rather neutral about Apple but grew to hate it more >>>>> than
I do Microsoft.
And your rational reasons for that hatred were...?
No actual reason give ("nasty" isn't a reason).
Oh, but for mac users, emotion is everything.
There is no RATIONAL reason to buy a Mac
On 23/04/2026 16:20, Alan wrote:Cites, please!
On 2026-04-23 01:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/04/2026 03:03, Alan wrote:
At most... ...even Apple doesn't mention it's Unix foundation in any
of its marketing anymore.
"!We arent really system engineers any more, so we ripped off a free
operating system from the Unix community and ported a lot of flashy
shit on tip to justify and elevated price tag' hardly reflects the
Mac image they want to portray...
" We aren't selling electric guitars, we are selling dreams"
Would an absolute of bullshit.
True anecdote
On 2026-04-23 12:04 p.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Oh, but for mac users, emotion is everything.
There is no RATIONAL reason to buy a Mac
1) Extra long battery life.
2) Exceptional warranty coverage.
3) Low power consumption.
4) The same excellent performance whether using the battery or on AC.
That's four.
On 2026-04-23 13:31, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-23 11:11 a.m., Alan wrote:It was something pre-Mac OS X... ...but it's been so long I couldn't
On 2026-04-23 02:36, -hh wrote:
On 4/22/26 19:09, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 3:49 p.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/04/2026 19:24, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 1:49 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:¿ That makes no sense at all.?
CrudeSausage wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
<snip>
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their
computer. They
don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and compliment the >>>>>>>>> thing in
the hope that it won't off itself like Linux and Windows
computers do.
I think most people who buy computers buy them to perform tasks, >>>>>>>> even if, for some, that task is "just" gaming.
I certainly do a lot of tasks in Linux.
All of those tasks are repairing the operating system to keep it >>>>>>> working.
Even were it true, that would be better than a Mac where you have >>>>>> to reinstall the whole operating system to repairr it
periodically...
I would bet that absolutely none of the Mac users in
comp.sys.mac.advocacy have had to do that in the entire time
they've used their Apple hardware. They might reinstall before
selling it to someone, but there is otherwise no need to do so.
I'm starting to think about doing that.
Its on a 2012 Mac Pro that's never had it done since new, and its
still running for some noncritical tasks (for day-to-day, it was
effectively replaced in 2022). It has developed a glitch where it
won't shut down automatically; I suspect that its probably due to
some sort of SSD hardware failure/corruption on an 7-8 year old SSD.
Since my only need for it to shut down is from power failures, its a
very low priority.
Other than this "maybe", I don't recall wiping the PMG5 Mac prior to
that, so my anecdotal incidence rate is lower than "0 for 20 years"
-hh
I remember when a (former) client was moving the printing and video
product departments (the only ones using Macs and hence the reason
they needed an outside contractor for support) from an outbuilding to
the head office building.
This was back in...2002, maybe?
Well as the technical support contractor who maintained their Mac
network (AppleTalk on thinnet Ethernet: remember that; terminators!),
I was disassembling everything when I came upon the machine in the
bottom of a closet I knew was there from the existence of zones on
the AppleTalk network, but had never seen.
In a closet, where it had been running continuously for something
like 10 years, there was a Mac II ci.
Out of curiosity, which version of MacOS was it running? I am
surprised a classic version of MacOS could run for that long without
crashing.
tell you.
On 23/04/2026 22:40, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-23 12:04 p.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
[...]
Oh, but for mac users, emotion is everything.
There is no RATIONAL reason to buy a Mac
1) Extra long battery life.
2) Exceptional warranty coverage.
3) Low power consumption.
4) The same excellent performance whether using the battery or on AC.
That's four.
5) good resell value.
6) works very well with iPhone and iPad.
On 2026-04-23 5:19 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2026-04-23 13:31, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-23 11:11 a.m., Alan wrote:It was something pre-Mac OS X... ...but it's been so long I couldn't
On 2026-04-23 02:36, -hh wrote:
On 4/22/26 19:09, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 3:49 p.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/04/2026 19:24, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 1:49 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:¿ That makes no sense at all.?
CrudeSausage wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
<snip>
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their
computer. They
don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and compliment the >>>>>>>>>> thing in
the hope that it won't off itself like Linux and Windows
computers do.
I think most people who buy computers buy them to perform tasks, >>>>>>>>> even if, for some, that task is "just" gaming.
I certainly do a lot of tasks in Linux.
All of those tasks are repairing the operating system to keep it >>>>>>>> working.
Even were it true, that would be better than a Mac where you have >>>>>>> to reinstall the whole operating system to repairr it
periodically...
I would bet that absolutely none of the Mac users in
comp.sys.mac.advocacy have had to do that in the entire time
they've used their Apple hardware. They might reinstall before
selling it to someone, but there is otherwise no need to do so.
I'm starting to think about doing that.
Its on a 2012 Mac Pro that's never had it done since new, and its
still running for some noncritical tasks (for day-to-day, it was
effectively replaced in 2022). It has developed a glitch where it >>>>> won't shut down automatically; I suspect that its probably due to
some sort of SSD hardware failure/corruption on an 7-8 year old
SSD. Since my only need for it to shut down is from power failures, >>>>> its a very low priority.
Other than this "maybe", I don't recall wiping the PMG5 Mac prior
to that, so my anecdotal incidence rate is lower than "0 for 20 years" >>>>>
-hh
I remember when a (former) client was moving the printing and video
product departments (the only ones using Macs and hence the reason
they needed an outside contractor for support) from an outbuilding
to the head office building.
This was back in...2002, maybe?
Well as the technical support contractor who maintained their Mac
network (AppleTalk on thinnet Ethernet: remember that;
terminators!), I was disassembling everything when I came upon the
machine in the bottom of a closet I knew was there from the
existence of zones on the AppleTalk network, but had never seen.
In a closet, where it had been running continuously for something
like 10 years, there was a Mac II ci.
Out of curiosity, which version of MacOS was it running? I am
surprised a classic version of MacOS could run for that long without
crashing.
tell you.
The reason I ask is because classic MacOS had a reputation for being unstable. Technology historians on YouTube re all too happy to claim
that MacOS was so unstable that it made Windows 95 look rock solid. Of course, my experience with the classic operating system was limited, but
I don't recall any time where it was anywhere near as bad as Windows
was. In fact, when I worked in customer service at an ISP during the
late 90s and early 2000s, not only did we never get many Mac calls, but fixing their issues was trivial whereas fixing Windows issues were a nightmare. This is during the Winmodem era where those $30 pieces of
poop wouldn't connect to an ISP no matter what you did, but Macs had no trouble whatsoever.
Richard Kettlewell wrote:
CrudeSausage <[email protected]> writes:
On 2026-04-23 3:26 a.m., Richard Kettlewell wrote:[...]
Not really the point. But since you ask, I have heard and used itAs for the other remarks I am not constantly repairing Linux installs
to keep them working, and my Linux and Windows installs have never
‘offed themselves’, whatever that means exactly.
You've been around for decades yet never heard the expression "offing
oneself?"
many
times, but I didn’t want to make assumptions about the specific intended >> meaning here.
It is rather easy to figure out: without user intervention of any
kind, both Linux and Windows do a wonderful job of breaking. Windows
is particularly bad about it since it forces you to update the system
and because its system restoration features don't actually work. In
Linux's case, the only sure way of making sure that it continues to
work right is to never update it once you've installed a working
desktop.
No actual reason give ("nasty" isn't a reason).
I wonder what is nasty about Apple's hardware. My students admire the machine I bring to class, and they're incredibly superficial.
On 2026-04-23 09:03, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/04/2026 16:20, Alan wrote:Cites, please!
On 2026-04-23 01:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/04/2026 03:03, Alan wrote:
At most... ...even Apple doesn't mention it's Unix foundation in
any of its marketing anymore.
"!We arent really system engineers any more, so we ripped off a free
operating system from the Unix community and ported a lot of flashy
shit on tip to justify and elevated price tag' hardly reflects the
Mac image they want to portray...
" We aren't selling electric guitars, we are selling dreams"
Would an absolute of bullshit.
True anecdote
On 2026-04-23 16:59, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-23 5:19 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2026-04-23 13:31, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-23 11:11 a.m., Alan wrote:It was something pre-Mac OS X... ...but it's been so long I couldn't
On 2026-04-23 02:36, -hh wrote:
On 4/22/26 19:09, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 3:49 p.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/04/2026 19:24, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 1:49 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:¿ That makes no sense at all.?
CrudeSausage wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
<snip>
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their
computer. They
don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and compliment the >>>>>>>>>>> thing in
the hope that it won't off itself like Linux and Windows >>>>>>>>>>> computers do.
I think most people who buy computers buy them to perform tasks, >>>>>>>>>> even if, for some, that task is "just" gaming.
I certainly do a lot of tasks in Linux.
All of those tasks are repairing the operating system to keep >>>>>>>>> it working.
Even were it true, that would be better than a Mac where you
have to reinstall the whole operating system to repairr it
periodically...
I would bet that absolutely none of the Mac users in
comp.sys.mac.advocacy have had to do that in the entire time
they've used their Apple hardware. They might reinstall before
selling it to someone, but there is otherwise no need to do so.
I'm starting to think about doing that.
Its on a 2012 Mac Pro that's never had it done since new, and its >>>>>> still running for some noncritical tasks (for day-to-day, it was
effectively replaced in 2022). It has developed a glitch where it >>>>>> won't shut down automatically; I suspect that its probably due to >>>>>> some sort of SSD hardware failure/corruption on an 7-8 year old
SSD. Since my only need for it to shut down is from power
failures, its a very low priority.
Other than this "maybe", I don't recall wiping the PMG5 Mac prior >>>>>> to that, so my anecdotal incidence rate is lower than "0 for 20
years"
-hh
I remember when a (former) client was moving the printing and video >>>>> product departments (the only ones using Macs and hence the reason
they needed an outside contractor for support) from an outbuilding
to the head office building.
This was back in...2002, maybe?
Well as the technical support contractor who maintained their Mac
network (AppleTalk on thinnet Ethernet: remember that;
terminators!), I was disassembling everything when I came upon the
machine in the bottom of a closet I knew was there from the
existence of zones on the AppleTalk network, but had never seen.
In a closet, where it had been running continuously for something
like 10 years, there was a Mac II ci.
Out of curiosity, which version of MacOS was it running? I am
surprised a classic version of MacOS could run for that long without
crashing.
tell you.
The reason I ask is because classic MacOS had a reputation for being
unstable. Technology historians on YouTube re all too happy to claim
that MacOS was so unstable that it made Windows 95 look rock solid. Of
course, my experience with the classic operating system was limited,
but I don't recall any time where it was anywhere near as bad as
Windows was. In fact, when I worked in customer service at an ISP
during the late 90s and early 2000s, not only did we never get many
Mac calls, but fixing their issues was trivial whereas fixing Windows
issues were a nightmare. This is during the Winmodem era where those
$30 pieces of poop wouldn't connect to an ISP no matter what you did,
but Macs had no trouble whatsoever.
The problem with classic Mac OS mostly came along when third-party "extensions" (INIT files and cdev files) were added.
If you ran a single use machine (such as an AppleTalk router) and only
ran the stock OS with Apple's routing software, it could be very stable.
And of course, it was set to automatically reboot after a power loss, so occasional building outages would have resulted in some restarts.
:-)
CrudeSausage <[email protected]> writes:
Richard Kettlewell wrote:
CrudeSausage <[email protected]> writes:
On 2026-04-23 3:26 a.m., Richard Kettlewell wrote:[...]
Not really the point. But since you ask, I have heard and used itAs for the other remarks I am not constantly repairing Linux installs >>>>> to keep them working, and my Linux and Windows installs have never
‘offed themselves’, whatever that means exactly.
You've been around for decades yet never heard the expression "offing
oneself?"
many
times, but I didn’t want to make assumptions about the specific intended >>> meaning here.
It is rather easy to figure out: without user intervention of any
kind, both Linux and Windows do a wonderful job of breaking. Windows
is particularly bad about it since it forces you to update the system
and because its system restoration features don't actually work. In
Linux's case, the only sure way of making sure that it continues to
work right is to never update it once you've installed a working
desktop.
Most users don’t find either of these operating systems break every time they update. If your experience is different then maybe it’s time to
have a think about what you’re doing differently.
it remains a problem that the kernel and other packages do not always properly respond to an update to the NVIDIA driver.
However, even without such a GPU, Linux still has a lot of trouble with waking from suspend or support for certain components on a computer. For instance, if you have an audio system which can be enhanced by Dolby
Atmos, Linux has no solution for you. The result is a lower volume that
also lacks the punch you might get using the same hardware in Windows.
On 24/04/2026 13:41, CrudeSausage wrote:
<https://professionalsupport.dolby.com/s/article/Apple-macOS-Overview?language=en_US>However, even without such a GPU, Linux still has a lot of trouble
with waking from suspend or support for certain components on a
computer. For instance, if you have an audio system which can be
enhanced by Dolby Atmos, Linux has no solution for you. The result is
a lower volume that also lacks the punch you might get using the same
hardware in Windows.
I wonder if MAC OSX would even recognise such hardware.
On 24/04/2026 13:41, CrudeSausage wrote:
it remains a problem that the kernel and other packages do not alwaysIve not had any issues with Nvidia drivers in the last ten years. They
properly respond to an update to the NVIDIA driver.
Just Work.,
However, even without such a GPU, Linux still has a lot of trouble
with waking from suspend or support for certain components on a
computer. For instance, if you have an audio system which can be
enhanced by Dolby Atmos, Linux has no solution for you. The result is
a lower volume that also lacks the punch you might get using the same
hardware in Windows.
I wonder if MAC OSX would even recognise such hardware.
The reason I ask is because classic MacOS had a reputation for being unstable. Technology historians on YouTube re all too happy to claim
that MacOS was so unstable that it made Windows 95 look rock solid.
On 2026-04-23 10:32 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2026-04-23 16:59, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-23 5:19 p.m., Alan wrote:
On 2026-04-23 13:31, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-23 11:11 a.m., Alan wrote:It was something pre-Mac OS X... ...but it's been so long I couldn't
On 2026-04-23 02:36, -hh wrote:
On 4/22/26 19:09, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 3:49 p.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:I'm starting to think about doing that.
On 22/04/2026 19:24, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-22 1:49 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:¿ That makes no sense at all.?
CrudeSausage wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
<snip>
People who buy Macs intend to perform tasks with their >>>>>>>>>>>> computer. They
don't buy one hoping to constantly massage and compliment >>>>>>>>>>>> the thing in
the hope that it won't off itself like Linux and Windows >>>>>>>>>>>> computers do.
I think most people who buy computers buy them to perform tasks, >>>>>>>>>>> even if, for some, that task is "just" gaming.
I certainly do a lot of tasks in Linux.
All of those tasks are repairing the operating system to keep >>>>>>>>>> it working.
Even were it true, that would be better than a Mac where you >>>>>>>>> have to reinstall the whole operating system to repairr it >>>>>>>>> periodically...
I would bet that absolutely none of the Mac users in
comp.sys.mac.advocacy have had to do that in the entire time
they've used their Apple hardware. They might reinstall before >>>>>>>> selling it to someone, but there is otherwise no need to do so. >>>>>>>
Its on a 2012 Mac Pro that's never had it done since new, and its >>>>>>> still running for some noncritical tasks (for day-to-day, it was >>>>>>> effectively replaced in 2022). It has developed a glitch where >>>>>>> it won't shut down automatically; I suspect that its probably due >>>>>>> to some sort of SSD hardware failure/corruption on an 7-8 year
old SSD. Since my only need for it to shut down is from power
failures, its a very low priority.
Other than this "maybe", I don't recall wiping the PMG5 Mac prior >>>>>>> to that, so my anecdotal incidence rate is lower than "0 for 20 >>>>>>> years"
-hh
I remember when a (former) client was moving the printing and
video product departments (the only ones using Macs and hence the >>>>>> reason they needed an outside contractor for support) from an
outbuilding to the head office building.
This was back in...2002, maybe?
Well as the technical support contractor who maintained their Mac >>>>>> network (AppleTalk on thinnet Ethernet: remember that;
terminators!), I was disassembling everything when I came upon the >>>>>> machine in the bottom of a closet I knew was there from the
existence of zones on the AppleTalk network, but had never seen.
In a closet, where it had been running continuously for something >>>>>> like 10 years, there was a Mac II ci.
Out of curiosity, which version of MacOS was it running? I am
surprised a classic version of MacOS could run for that long
without crashing.
tell you.
The reason I ask is because classic MacOS had a reputation for being
unstable. Technology historians on YouTube re all too happy to claim
that MacOS was so unstable that it made Windows 95 look rock solid.
Of course, my experience with the classic operating system was
limited, but I don't recall any time where it was anywhere near as
bad as Windows was. In fact, when I worked in customer service at an
ISP during the late 90s and early 2000s, not only did we never get
many Mac calls, but fixing their issues was trivial whereas fixing
Windows issues were a nightmare. This is during the Winmodem era
where those $30 pieces of poop wouldn't connect to an ISP no matter
what you did, but Macs had no trouble whatsoever.
The problem with classic Mac OS mostly came along when third-party
"extensions" (INIT files and cdev files) were added.
If you ran a single use machine (such as an AppleTalk router) and only
ran the stock OS with Apple's routing software, it could be very stable.
And of course, it was set to automatically reboot after a power loss,
so occasional building outages would have resulted in some restarts.
:-)
So we don't know how often those machines were restarted, but they presumably were. Either way, that's a serious victory for MacOS classic since nobody really ever considers them to be appropriate for server work.
On 23/04/2026 22:21, Alan wrote:
On 2026-04-23 09:03, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/04/2026 16:20, Alan wrote:Cites, please!
On 2026-04-23 01:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/04/2026 03:03, Alan wrote:
At most... ...even Apple doesn't mention it's Unix foundation in
any of its marketing anymore.
"!We arent really system engineers any more, so we ripped off a
free operating system from the Unix community and ported a lot of
flashy shit on tip to justify and elevated price tag' hardly
reflects the Mac image they want to portray...
" We aren't selling electric guitars, we are selling dreams"
Would an absolute of bullshit.
True anecdote
I only ever wrote it down here.
I.e. I am the original source. It was made to me by my boss when for a
brief while I worked for a company building electric guitars.
The first 'anecdote' is made up, as it accurately reflects my experience
of all people working in consumer oriented companies.
What counts is not the product, but the marketing.
Consumers are stupid, emotional, and will buy whatever everyone in their peer group is buying.
Middle managers in large companies will buy whatever wont get themUmmmmm...no.
sacked. Usually Windows and a very expensive support contract.
Only high up technical people who are not afra9id of getting sacked
actually bother to work out things like LCO and buy the product with the best service availability per dollar.
Which is why airlines buy their engines from Pratt and Whitney, or Rolls Royce, and not Apple...
On 2026-04-23 12:35 p.m., Richard Kettlewell wrote:
CrudeSausage <[email protected]> writes:
On 2026-04-23 3:26 a.m., Richard Kettlewell wrote:[...]
As for the other remarks I am not constantly repairing Linux installs
to keep them working, and my Linux and Windows installs have never
‘offed themselves’, whatever that means exactly.
You've been around for decades yet never heard the expression "offing
oneself?"
Not really the point. But since you ask, I have heard and used it many
times, but I didn’t want to make assumptions about the specific intended >> meaning here.
It is rather easy to figure out: without user intervention of any
kind, both Linux and Windows do a wonderful job of breaking. Windows
is particularly bad about it since it forces you to update the system
and because its system restoration features don't actually work.
In--
Linux's case, the only sure way of making sure that it continues to
work right is to never update it once you've installed a working
desktop.
On 2026-04-24 4:14 a.m., Richard Kettlewell wrote:
CrudeSausage <[email protected]> writes:
Richard Kettlewell wrote:
CrudeSausage <[email protected]> writes:
On 2026-04-23 3:26 a.m., Richard Kettlewell wrote:[...]
Not really the point. But since you ask, I have heard and used itAs for the other remarks I am not constantly repairing Linux installs >>>>>> to keep them working, and my Linux and Windows installs have never >>>>>> ‘offed themselves’, whatever that means exactly.
You've been around for decades yet never heard the expression "offing >>>>> oneself?"
many
times, but I didn’t want to make assumptions about the specific intended >>>> meaning here.
It is rather easy to figure out: without user intervention of any
kind, both Linux and Windows do a wonderful job of breaking. Windows
is particularly bad about it since it forces you to update the system
and because its system restoration features don't actually work. In
Linux's case, the only sure way of making sure that it continues to
work right is to never update it once you've installed a working
desktop.
Most users don’t find either of these operating systems break every time >> they update. If your experience is different then maybe it’s time to
have a think about what you’re doing differently.
My rebuttal only requires one sentence: I use an NVIDIA GPU. If I were running a machine with an integrated GPU, Linux would work quite well
on it. It might still break, but the chance of it doing so is reduced
by a significant percentage. However, it still means that my graphical capabilities are compromised. I know that it's not Linux's fault that
NVIDIA doesn't offer open-source drivers, but it remains a problem
that the kernel and other packages do not always properly respond to
an update to the NVIDIA driver.
However, even without such a GPU, Linux still has a lot of trouble
with waking from suspend or support for certain components on a
computer.
For instance, if you have an audio system which can be
enhanced by Dolby Atmos, Linux has no solution for you. The result is
a lower volume that also lacks the punch you might get using the same hardware in Windows.
On Thu, 23 Apr 2026 08:26:49 +0100, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
As for the other remarks I am not constantly repairing Linux installs to
keep them working, and my Linux and Windows installs have never ‘offed
themselves’, whatever that means exactly.
I've overwritten Linux systems with other distros but have had few
problems upgrading an existing distro. I did have to download a new
Broadcom driver when Linux Mint went to a newer kernel and a Fedora
upgrade to 43 introduced Python 3.14 that PySide6 didn't support.
The only Windows reinstall was when I was on the Insider network and they juggled the 'channels' to Dev and Canary and what I had wouldn't update. Quite a few people on the forum had the same problem.--
On 2026-04-24 01:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/04/2026 22:21, Alan wrote:
On 2026-04-23 09:03, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/04/2026 16:20, Alan wrote:Cites, please!
On 2026-04-23 01:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/04/2026 03:03, Alan wrote:
At most... ...even Apple doesn't mention it's Unix foundation in >>>>>>> any of its marketing anymore.
"!We arent really system engineers any more, so we ripped off a
free operating system from the Unix community and ported a lot of >>>>>> flashy shit on tip to justify and elevated price tag' hardly
reflects the Mac image they want to portray...
" We aren't selling electric guitars, we are selling dreams"
Would an absolute of bullshit.
True anecdote
I only ever wrote it down here.
I.e. I am the original source. It was made to me by my boss when for a
brief while I worked for a company building electric guitars.
The first 'anecdote' is made up, as it accurately reflects my
experience of all people working in consumer oriented companies.
So NOT an anecdote.
Got it.
What counts is not the product, but the marketing.
Indeed.
Consumers are stupid, emotional, and will buy whatever everyone in
their peer group is buying.
But not you!
You're too smart for tht!
Ummmmm...no.
Middle managers in large companies will buy whatever wont get them
sacked. Usually Windows and a very expensive support contract.
Only high up technical people who are not afra9id of getting sacked
actually bother to work out things like LCO and buy the product with
the best service availability per dollar.
Which is why airlines buy their engines from Pratt and Whitney, or
Rolls Royce, and not Apple...
First of all, airlines by airplanes. Airplane manufacturers by engines.
Second, the reason those manufacturers don't by engine from Apple is the same reason they don't by them from HP, or Dell, or ASUS, or Samsung:I see analogy is an an altitide above your head as much as correct
NONE OF THE MANUFACTURER ENGINES
What an utterly specious claim to make.
On 2026-04-23, CrudeSausage wrote:There have been numerous articles on Windows updates bricking computers.
On 2026-04-23 12:35 p.m., Richard Kettlewell wrote:
CrudeSausage <[email protected]> writes:
On 2026-04-23 3:26 a.m., Richard Kettlewell wrote:[...]
As for the other remarks I am not constantly repairing Linux installs >>>>> to keep them working, and my Linux and Windows installs have never
‘offed themselves’, whatever that means exactly.
You've been around for decades yet never heard the expression "offing
oneself?"
Not really the point. But since you ask, I have heard and used it many
times, but I didn’t want to make assumptions about the specific intended >>> meaning here.
It is rather easy to figure out: without user intervention of any
kind, both Linux and Windows do a wonderful job of breaking. Windows
is particularly bad about it since it forces you to update the system
and because its system restoration features don't actually work.
If Windows NT's system restore points did not work, Windows Update would
not be known for updates failing to apply and being rolled back. But
from what I've seen a lot, NT 6.1 does exactly that.
I can even complain about Windows Update not performing some checks
(such as free disk space or licensing) *before* applying big updates,
leading to massive installs followed by massive rollbacks if something
is not right, but system restore is definitely doing its job...
On 2026-04-24, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-24 4:14 a.m., Richard Kettlewell wrote:
CrudeSausage <[email protected]> writes:
Richard Kettlewell wrote:
CrudeSausage <[email protected]> writes:
On 2026-04-23 3:26 a.m., Richard Kettlewell wrote:[...]
Not really the point. But since you ask, I have heard and used itAs for the other remarks I am not constantly repairing Linux installs >>>>>>> to keep them working, and my Linux and Windows installs have never >>>>>>> ‘offed themselves’, whatever that means exactly.
You've been around for decades yet never heard the expression "offing >>>>>> oneself?"
many
times, but I didn’t want to make assumptions about the specific intended
meaning here.
It is rather easy to figure out: without user intervention of any
kind, both Linux and Windows do a wonderful job of breaking. Windows
is particularly bad about it since it forces you to update the system
and because its system restoration features don't actually work. In
Linux's case, the only sure way of making sure that it continues to
work right is to never update it once you've installed a working
desktop.
Most users don’t find either of these operating systems break every time >>> they update. If your experience is different then maybe it’s time to
have a think about what you’re doing differently.
My rebuttal only requires one sentence: I use an NVIDIA GPU. If I were
running a machine with an integrated GPU, Linux would work quite well
(You realize there are manufacturers of chips used in dedicated GPUs
other than nVidia, right?)
on it. It might still break, but the chance of it doing so is reduced
by a significant percentage. However, it still means that my graphical
capabilities are compromised. I know that it's not Linux's fault that
NVIDIA doesn't offer open-source drivers, but it remains a problem
that the kernel and other packages do not always properly respond to
an update to the NVIDIA driver.
There is a FLOSS driver for at least some nVidia GPUs, although it might
be lacking in some areas.
Either way, this is, from what I understand, not that different from
Apple devices being tailored to specific hardware, so things may appear
to work better, but would perhaps just trigger problems in similar ways
if MacOS were not running mainly on Apple-branded devices, and was
instead a general-purpose OS for the field that is sometimes regarded as "PC-compatibles" (possibly a misnomer, given a few probably aren't
actually compatible with software and OSes released for the PC?).
However, even without such a GPU, Linux still has a lot of trouble
with waking from suspend or support for certain components on a
computer.
Not something I do now, but a long time ago I used sleep states
extensively, and those just worked. Similar to above, in which you'd
usually research your hardware for compatibility issues, as you ought to
do when it's an OS meant for a general platform with lots of variables,
and not something tailored for vendor-locked devices.
I recall being told by Linux advocates in the late 90s that theFor instance, if you have an audio system which can be
enhanced by Dolby Atmos, Linux has no solution for you. The result is
a lower volume that also lacks the punch you might get using the same
hardware in Windows.
I don't know what Dolby Atmos is, but audio has worked in Linux-land for *decades*, so this is hardly an argument against e.g. GNU/Linux.
| Sysop: | DaiTengu |
|---|---|
| Location: | Appleton, WI |
| Users: | 1,114 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 492507:08:44 |
| Calls: | 14,267 |
| Calls today: | 3 |
| Files: | 186,320 |
| D/L today: |
16,391 files (5,000M bytes) |
| Messages: | 2,518,271 |
