Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #104813

Re: Poor "Snit"

From Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Newsgroups comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.sys.mac.system, alt.comp.os.windows-10, alt.cellular-phone-tech
Subject Re: Poor "Snit"
Date 2017-04-21 08:44 -0700
Message-ID <D51F76D9.A0A04%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> (permalink)
References (8 earlier) <odbcnp$7ba$1@dont-email.me> <200420171900239610%nospam@nospam.invalid> <odceeg$h8p$1@dont-email.me> <j8tjfcd65h0qkr37dt6drjbgvf8j28ej5l@4ax.com> <210420171013485537%nospam@nospam.invalid>

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show all headers | View raw


On 4/21/17, 7:13 AM, in article 210420171013485537%nospam@nospam.invalid,
"nospam" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <j8tjfcd65h0qkr37dt6drjbgvf8j28ej5l@4ax.com>, chrisv
> <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> 
>>>> the real question is why anyone would willingly do that because by
>>>> doing so, they won't be able to use the vast amount of mac/windows
>>>> software that is not available in linux. it's a downgrade.
>>> 
>>> Whereas windows or Mac will never run more than a small part of linux
>>> software. The little bit which is ported makes only a small portion of the
>>> available software
>> 
>> It's an example of the closed, unimaginative mindset so typical of a
>> Mac fan.  He can't think of any reason why anyone would need more
>> freedom.
> 
> there is no lack of freedom on a mac. anyone can do whatever the hell
> they want with it.
> 
> there's actually *more* freedom with a mac because a mac can natively
> run all mac, windows, linux and bsd apps, the widest choice of any
> platform.

I see both points of view: on a Mac you cannot see the code to the OS. You
cannot change it. If I want to make it so I see 100 recent files and only 5
recent servers I cannot hack the OS and make that change and Apple does not
have that as an option. Even if you can find work-arounds, this is a
limitation.

Of course, almost nobody is going to make such changes. Say you do on KDE or
Gnome or whatever. You update and your change is likely gone and you have to
re-patch. Or your program stops working. But maybe you get lucky and it does
not. It is possible.

But that is minor. Look at the actual usage. What benefits does Linux grant?
What tasks are done better and fast and more efficiently? Not many.

One of the things the Linux users love to brag about it portability of
programs -- a program made for one distro will work the same on another and
even the same on other UNIX systems. This means, by design, the GOAL is to
make programs that work to the lowest common denominator.

As a specific example, look at LibreOffice on macOS and Linux (a program
which is not really done well on the Mac in the first place):

LibreOffice on the Mac:

* A saved status indicator. At a glance know if your file is
  changed.

* Right-click on name in title bar to get full path to the file.
  This is an "active" list: click on any part of the path to get
  there.

* Proxy icon to allow for copies or aliases (links) from the open
  window, or to allow you to drag the file to email it or drag it
  to another program

* Access to your media browser to help select an image directly
  from whatever category you want: moments, collections, years,
  places, or albums.

* Terms and placement and hotkeys for quitting and preferences
  which are consistent with the system.

* Help system where you can type the name of any menu command and
  easily find it, even if in a submenu.

* Full screen system which ties into the system's full screen /
  workspace manager

* Recent items from the launcher... and it works even if the file
  has been renamed or moved (though it does not show the correct
  name in that case, it does still open the file)

* Print to PDF to any program you want... for example converting
  it to a PDF and sending it to a mail program or chat client or
  the like.

* You can close all the windows and not have to have the start
  screen as a place holder.

* It shows not just recent files but currently open files in the
  launcher.

* If you copy from it then close the program you can still paste
  elsewhere.

* In the system itself you can use QuickLook to view files (in the
  Finder, Mail, etc.).
  
* Ties into the standard system Print and File dialogs

* Drag and drop installer, and program can be moved easily (though Linux has
it tying into its installation system so maybe this is not as big of a deal)

LibreOffice on Linux:

* Window widgets (things such as window shade and keeping the window
  on top)
  
* Copy on select (a mixed blessing)

To use Linux means you accept such limitations, at least for now. Maybe
someday that will change (and I and others are supporting that while the
"advocates" push back against such progress).



-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

Back to comp.sys.mac.system | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar


Thread

Re: Poor "Snit" Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2017-04-20 14:23 -0500
  Re: Poor "Snit" "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2017-04-20 15:41 -0400
    Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-20 12:57 -0700
      Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-20 13:01 -0700
      Re: Poor "Snit" "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2017-04-20 16:06 -0400
        Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-20 16:20 -0400
          Re: Poor "Snit" "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2017-04-20 18:32 -0400
            Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-20 15:36 -0700
              Re: Poor "Snit" "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2017-04-20 21:13 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-20 18:29 -0700
            Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-20 19:00 -0400
              Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-20 16:17 -0700
              Re: Poor "Snit" Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2017-04-21 10:07 +0200
                Re: Poor "Snit" chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 07:11 -0500
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 10:13 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2017-04-21 16:19 +0200
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 10:32 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 09:19 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 12:34 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 09:38 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 13:25 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 11:52 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 15:07 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 12:41 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 18:17 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 08:47 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 09:19 -0500
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 10:32 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 09:39 -0500
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 10:45 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 09:21 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" Silver Slimer <sl@im.er> - 2017-04-21 11:59 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 09:25 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 09:18 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 08:48 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" Silver Slimer <sl@im.er> - 2017-04-21 11:56 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 12:14 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Silver Slimer <sl@im.er> - 2017-04-21 12:24 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 09:36 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 12:23 -0500
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 13:26 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 12:39 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 11:17 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 12:43 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 09:24 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 08:44 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 13:25 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 11:20 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 08:23 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 13:25 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 11:18 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 10:13 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 08:21 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2017-04-21 12:13 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 15:19 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Silver Slimer <sl@im.er> - 2017-04-21 17:40 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 15:13 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 18:20 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 18:17 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 12:42 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2017-04-21 17:21 -0400
                Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-21 15:15 -0700
                Re: Poor "Snit" nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-21 18:17 -0400
        Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-20 13:35 -0700
  Re: Poor "Snit" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-20 12:53 -0700

csiph-web