Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #695757 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-08-24 04:52 -0400 |
| Last post | 2025-08-31 08:23 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 333 — 17 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
"Sorry, Linux Fans: This OS Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement" "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 04:52 -0400
Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-24 09:32 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 05:44 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 11:23 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 16:36 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 14:34 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 18:16 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-24 22:24 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 15:36 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 18:47 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 15:53 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-08-25 05:42 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-26 18:18 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-08-29 16:21 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-24 23:37 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Tyrone <none@none.none> - 2025-08-27 01:36 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-27 04:56 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-27 09:43 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Tyrone <none@none.none> - 2025-08-28 17:57 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-02 07:10 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-09-02 19:46 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-02 20:12 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-08-25 05:32 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-25 05:34 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-08-26 09:06 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-27 00:35 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-27 08:58 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 15:54 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Tom Elam <thomas.e.elam@gmail.com> - 2025-09-05 15:21 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> - 2025-08-24 22:18 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 18:33 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 15:45 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 19:06 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 16:18 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 19:39 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 18:16 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 18:22 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 21:38 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 19:41 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-08-25 04:11 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 22:12 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-08-27 03:13 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-08-26 20:24 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-08-27 04:09 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-27 04:58 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-08-27 05:44 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-27 09:39 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Tyrone <none@none.none> - 2025-08-27 14:17 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-28 04:12 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-28 10:53 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-28 12:12 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Daniel <me@sc1f1dan.com> - 2025-08-28 09:40 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-28 14:31 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-28 19:23 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-28 21:12 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-29 10:16 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-30 12:12 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-30 08:29 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-30 12:11 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-30 12:35 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-31 00:08 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-31 07:14 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-29 00:53 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-29 08:43 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-01 02:57 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-01 08:53 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-02 03:57 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-28 19:19 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-28 21:12 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-29 08:44 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-29 10:36 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-30 08:35 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-29 10:21 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-29 16:27 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-29 16:55 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-30 12:13 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-28 21:45 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-29 10:26 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement (was: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement) Tyrone <none@none.none> - 2025-08-30 04:41 +0000
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement (was: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement) chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-08-30 10:36 -0500
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-30 12:06 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-30 13:30 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-30 13:35 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-30 13:54 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-30 14:39 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> - 2025-08-31 00:22 +0000
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-30 20:53 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-31 14:37 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> - 2025-08-31 19:37 +0000
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-31 16:21 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-01 08:29 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-01 11:48 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-01 13:23 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-01 19:47 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-02 17:05 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-03 04:17 +0000
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-03 11:01 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-03 19:10 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-03 19:32 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-31 22:13 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-01 08:34 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-09-01 13:23 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-02 07:04 +0000
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-02 16:56 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-09-03 09:50 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-03 11:06 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-09-03 12:20 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-03 17:33 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-09-04 09:15 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-04 15:45 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-09-04 18:46 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-09-05 07:18 -0500
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-09-03 00:55 +0000
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> - 2025-09-03 01:14 +0000
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-09-03 09:57 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-09-03 21:52 +0000
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-09-04 09:36 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-09-04 18:15 +0000
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-04 07:30 +0000
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-09-04 08:31 +0000
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-09-04 09:42 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-04 09:31 -0700
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-01 11:43 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-02 20:14 -0700
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-03 19:15 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-03 16:23 -0700
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-03 21:00 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-03 19:17 -0700
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-04 09:55 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-04 09:09 -0700
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-04 19:36 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-04 16:45 -0700
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-04 19:57 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-04 17:13 -0700
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-04 21:30 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-04 21:53 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-04 19:12 -0700
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-04 22:24 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-04 20:32 -0700
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-04 23:54 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-04 23:22 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-04 19:11 -0700
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-05 09:28 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-09-05 16:41 -0500
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-05 17:50 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-05 14:57 -0700
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-05 18:09 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-05 15:12 -0700
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-05 18:33 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-05 15:54 -0700
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-05 19:13 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-05 16:15 -0700
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-05 19:39 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-05 16:58 -0700
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-05 20:02 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> - 2025-09-06 00:51 +0000
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-05 18:01 -0700
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-05 21:55 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-05 19:02 -0700
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-06 12:43 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Tom Elam <thomas.e.elam@gmail.com> - 2025-09-06 15:44 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-06 13:32 -0700
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-04 20:09 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-04 15:52 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-04 13:14 -0700
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-04 10:35 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-04 09:16 -0700
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-04 12:42 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-04 10:11 -0700
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-04 14:41 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> - 2025-09-01 20:29 +0000
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-01 19:53 -0400
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> - 2025-09-02 00:34 +0000
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-02 12:12 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-30 08:35 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-27 09:37 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-27 09:36 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-08-24 09:45 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 13:59 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 11:24 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 16:39 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-08-24 16:55 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 17:05 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-08-24 20:26 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2025-08-25 01:41 +0100
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 20:57 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-08-25 14:47 -0500
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-08-25 18:42 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 20:52 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2025-08-25 02:00 +0100
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 21:29 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-25 01:22 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-25 09:04 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-26 00:42 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-27 09:58 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-08-25 13:13 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-26 00:45 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-25 21:24 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-08-26 09:36 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-27 00:37 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-27 09:48 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 14:30 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 18:07 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 15:13 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-08-25 03:53 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-08-25 14:52 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 09:47 -0700
Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the WAY Better Windows Replacement Nick Charles <blankety_blank@blank> - 2025-08-24 13:35 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the WAY Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-24 21:56 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the WAY Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 15:12 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the WAY Better Windows Replacement vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-08-25 04:26 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the WAY Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-25 04:32 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 14:01 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 11:17 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 14:26 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 11:38 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 16:42 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 14:31 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 18:12 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 15:27 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 18:53 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 15:57 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 19:17 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 16:21 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-24 23:40 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 18:18 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-25 08:56 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-25 06:58 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-25 12:45 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-26 18:27 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-26 19:34 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-26 21:17 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-27 08:59 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-27 09:29 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-27 14:51 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-27 15:41 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-27 19:18 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-30 12:16 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-30 12:37 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-30 22:03 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-31 07:10 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-31 22:14 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-01 08:35 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-08-25 04:36 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 21:51 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-08-25 06:19 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-25 02:39 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-26 18:40 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-26 18:52 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-26 21:29 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-26 21:37 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-27 09:28 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-27 10:02 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-27 10:31 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-27 10:44 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-08-29 10:25 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-29 10:55 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-08-29 12:52 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-30 08:23 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-08-30 14:16 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-30 14:43 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-30 22:03 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-31 15:54 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-31 22:16 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-01 11:37 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-01 13:20 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-30 22:51 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-08-30 19:16 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-30 08:41 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Tyrone <none@none.none> - 2025-08-27 14:52 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-28 04:13 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-29 16:22 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-08-29 19:17 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-29 19:46 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-30 08:44 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-26 19:37 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-26 21:30 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-27 09:03 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-27 09:27 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-27 14:50 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-08-25 18:37 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-26 00:40 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-08-26 09:02 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-27 00:30 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-24 22:26 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2025-08-24 23:49 +0100
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 15:57 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2025-08-25 00:25 +0100
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 19:13 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 16:20 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2025-08-25 00:34 +0100
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-24 23:42 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 18:20 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-24 23:44 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2025-08-25 01:15 +0100
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-25 01:20 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 18:24 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2025-08-25 02:26 +0100
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-24 18:20 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-25 08:49 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-25 06:59 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-25 12:55 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-26 00:46 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-26 18:42 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-08-26 19:38 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-27 10:32 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-08-25 13:58 -0500
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-08-26 18:44 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-08-28 07:07 -0500
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-04 00:37 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-03 20:48 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-05 01:53 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-05 09:23 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Tom Elam <thomas.e.elam@gmail.com> - 2025-09-05 15:33 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> - 2025-09-05 20:06 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-05 13:17 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> - 2025-09-05 20:59 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-05 17:06 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> - 2025-09-05 21:17 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-05 18:13 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-05 18:36 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-05 14:19 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> - 2025-09-06 13:02 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-06 11:17 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> - 2025-09-06 20:40 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2025-09-06 13:51 -0700
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> - 2025-09-06 21:51 +0000
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-07 18:31 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-05 18:12 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-09-05 18:02 -0400
Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-05 23:17 +0000
Re: "Sorry, Linux Fans: This OS Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement" Borax Man <boraxman@geidiprime.invalid> - 2025-08-30 07:12 +0000
Re: "Sorry, Linux Fans: This OS Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement" RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-08-31 08:23 +0000
Page 6 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 17 Next page →
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-01 08:34 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement |
| Message-ID | <IpgtQ.66667$9wA1.52206@fx36.iad> |
| In reply to | #696312 |
On 2025-08-31 10:13 p.m., Alan wrote: > On 2025-08-31 14:37, Joel W. Crump wrote: >> On 8/30/2025 8:22 PM, pothead wrote: >> >>>> I gave away a $200 Windows license to switch to Linux, and I've donated >>>> money to a distro. >>> >>> You paid $200 for a Windows license? >> >> >> That's the retail price of Windows Pro, yes, I had the money at the >> time and while it turned out my existing license was transferable from >> my 2010 computer (just using the Win7 Pro key I had purchased with its >> parts), it doesn't bother me because unlike some cheapskate fuckwads >> I'm not afraid of paying my way, even if it's to a company "with a >> billion dollars" or whatever, they didn't make a billion by not >> selling their wares, FFS. >> >> >>> You can get it legally for ~$20. >> >> >> Those licenses work, and my new mini PC basically has one (the China- >> based manufacturer used multiple activation key to activate what they >> produced, not a true Microsoft OEM therefore but it is a legit >> license), but I would never buy from the people selling them, what I >> got with my new device is OK for what it is, but in its case I didn't >> purchase the license myself, so it's not really my responsibility when >> Microsoft is tolerating the practice. >> >> >>> Too many red pills mixed with the blue ones? >> >> >> You're free to be a cheapskate all you want, don't judge me for doing >> the right thing, sheesh. > The irony of someone who complains about the cost of Apple's devices > calling someone else a "cheapskate"... To be fair, Apple's devices can be obtained for a fair price in their default configurations. Sure, the storage might be smaller than expected and they might have less RAM than computers at the same price, but the screen quality and battery life need to be considered. However, upgrading that default configuration is prohibitively expensive. -- God be with you, CrudeSausage Islam is the enemy John 14:6
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-01 13:23 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement |
| Message-ID | <1094kq6$3snn8$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #696329 |
On 9/1/25 08:34, CrudeSausage wrote: > ... > > To be fair, Apple's devices can be obtained for a fair price in their > default configurations. Sure, the storage might be smaller than expected > and they might have less RAM than computers at the same price, but the > screen quality and battery life need to be considered. However, > upgrading that default configuration is prohibitively expensive. "Expensive" ... if one only focuses on "TB of Storage" and ignores the net performance levels obtained. A classical example is assuming that all SSDs perform the same, so since one can get a 1TB SATA SSD for $25 at WalMart, that therefore any other SSD configuration must be a 'rip off'/// No matter how much higher its bandwidth is: SATA-3 SSD: ~550MB/sec NVMe PCIe Gen 3 SSD: ~3,500MB/sec 2022 Mac Studio M1 Max: ~5000(R) to 6,500(W) MB/sec -hh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-02 07:04 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Sorry, Mac Fans: Linux Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement |
| Message-ID | <10964tc$bco7$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #696348 |
On Mon, 1 Sep 2025 13:23:18 -0400, -hh wrote: > On 9/1/25 08:34, CrudeSausage wrote: >> >> To be fair, Apple's devices can be obtained for a fair price in >> their default configurations. Sure, the storage might be smaller >> than expected and they might have less RAM than computers at the >> same price, but the screen quality and battery life need to be >> considered. However, upgrading that default configuration is >> prohibitively expensive. > > "Expensive" ... if one only focuses on "TB of Storage" and ignores > the net performance levels obtained. Particularly since smaller storage can be read/written so much quicker, because there is so much less data to transfer!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-02 16:56 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement |
| Message-ID | <oSItQ.28417$rQG1.21491@fx37.iad> |
| In reply to | #696348 |
On 2025-09-01 1:23 p.m., -hh wrote: > On 9/1/25 08:34, CrudeSausage wrote: >> ... >> >> To be fair, Apple's devices can be obtained for a fair price in their >> default configurations. Sure, the storage might be smaller than >> expected and they might have less RAM than computers at the same >> price, but the screen quality and battery life need to be considered. >> However, upgrading that default configuration is prohibitively expensive. > > "Expensive" ... if one only focuses on "TB of Storage" and ignores the > net performance levels obtained. > > A classical example is assuming that all SSDs perform the same, so since > one can get a 1TB SATA SSD for $25 at WalMart, that therefore any other > SSD configuration must be a 'rip off'/// > > > No matter how much higher its bandwidth is: > > SATA-3 SSD: ~550MB/sec > NVMe PCIe Gen 3 SSD: ~3,500MB/sec > 2022 Mac Studio M1 Max: ~5000(R) to 6,500(W) MB/sec I notice you omit Gen 4, which was already available on PCs in 2022. According to the PCI Express table on Wikipedia, they can get to 7,877 GB/s at x4 which is the most common rate. Did you purposefully ignore that information to make the Apple "deal" on storage prices appear better? What about PCI Express 5.0, which is also already available on PCs and doubles that rate? -- God be with you, CrudeSausage Islam is the enemy John 14:6
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-03 09:50 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement |
| Message-ID | <1099h2g$15ic0$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #696421 |
On 9/2/25 16:56, CrudeSausage wrote: > On 2025-09-01 1:23 p.m., -hh wrote: >> On 9/1/25 08:34, CrudeSausage wrote: >>> ... >>> >>> To be fair, Apple's devices can be obtained for a fair price in their >>> default configurations. Sure, the storage might be smaller than >>> expected and they might have less RAM than computers at the same >>> price, but the screen quality and battery life need to be considered. >>> However, upgrading that default configuration is prohibitively >>> expensive. >> >> "Expensive" ... if one only focuses on "TB of Storage" and ignores the >> net performance levels obtained. >> >> A classical example is assuming that all SSDs perform the same, so >> since one can get a 1TB SATA SSD for $25 at WalMart, that therefore >> any other SSD configuration must be a 'rip off'/// >> >> >> No matter how much higher its bandwidth is: >> >> SATA-3 SSD: ~550MB/sec >> NVMe PCIe Gen 3 SSD: ~3,500MB/sec >> 2022 Mac Studio M1 Max: ~5000(R) to 6,500(W) MB/sec > > I notice you omit Gen 4, which was already available on PCs in 2022. Sure because we've been talking about real world systems that posters here like Joel own, and presently I don't own a Gen 4 system yet. Reason being is a combination of purchase cycles / lifecycles, as well as not having an objective performance requirement for it: as I already have mentioned, my current system is capable of 8K video editing, and since my best system is capable of 4K, I don't need it yet. > According to the PCI Express table on Wikipedia, they can get to 7,877 > GB/s at x4 which is the most common rate. Did you purposefully ignore > that information to make the Apple "deal" on storage prices appear better? Keyword being "can". My own benchmarking tests have found that I "can" hit ~6300 MB/sec, but that's not the minimum. > What about PCI Express 5.0, which is also already available on PCs and > doubles that rate? And "what about" the current M4 series Mac Studio too? As I've alluded to, higher system capabilities are relevant when there's a reasonable objective need, which can also be informed by near term 'future proofing' plans. For example, 8K video has hit the early adopter market, such as the MSRP $4500 Canon EOS R5, which informed my future capability plan. For the 4K 'early mainstream' market, the Canon EOS R6 is closer to my price point, at roughly half the R5's retail price. Moving to Smartphones, there's of course going to be a pretty big gulf in image quality between any smartphone and a 24x35mm full frame sensor, but for those who don't care, 4K's been around for quite awhile and Apple doesn't offer 8K yet, although there's been a few Androids for those who care. Looking another generation down the road beyond 8K, that's 12K video; Blackmagic has a system which starts at $7K (body only). Of course there will also be crappy quality smartphone sized systems too for the people who don't know better and/or only care about "Sunny 16" conditions. -hh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-03 11:06 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement |
| Message-ID | <uPYtQ.492598$P2c3.271459@fx12.iad> |
| In reply to | #696467 |
On 2025-09-03 9:50 a.m., -hh wrote: > On 9/2/25 16:56, CrudeSausage wrote: >> On 2025-09-01 1:23 p.m., -hh wrote: >>> On 9/1/25 08:34, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>> ... >>>> >>>> To be fair, Apple's devices can be obtained for a fair price in >>>> their default configurations. Sure, the storage might be smaller >>>> than expected and they might have less RAM than computers at the >>>> same price, but the screen quality and battery life need to be >>>> considered. However, upgrading that default configuration is >>>> prohibitively expensive. >>> >>> "Expensive" ... if one only focuses on "TB of Storage" and ignores >>> the net performance levels obtained. >>> >>> A classical example is assuming that all SSDs perform the same, so >>> since one can get a 1TB SATA SSD for $25 at WalMart, that therefore >>> any other SSD configuration must be a 'rip off'/// >>> >>> >>> No matter how much higher its bandwidth is: >>> >>> SATA-3 SSD: ~550MB/sec >>> NVMe PCIe Gen 3 SSD: ~3,500MB/sec >>> 2022 Mac Studio M1 Max: ~5000(R) to 6,500(W) MB/sec >> >> I notice you omit Gen 4, which was already available on PCs in 2022. > > Sure because we've been talking about real world systems that posters > here like Joel own, and presently I don't own a Gen 4 system yet. > > Reason being is a combination of purchase cycles / lifecycles, as well > as not having an objective performance requirement for it: as I already > have mentioned, my current system is capable of 8K video editing, and > since my best system is capable of 4K, I don't need it yet. Since Gen 4 machines have been available for years now with Gen 5 being the current default, there is no reason to suggest that these kinds of systems aren't real. >> According to the PCI Express table on Wikipedia, they can get to 7,877 >> GB/s at x4 which is the most common rate. Did you purposefully ignore >> that information to make the Apple "deal" on storage prices appear >> better? > > Keyword being "can". My own benchmarking tests have found that I "can" > hit ~6300 MB/sec, but that's not the minimum. I'm nowhere near that for now, but my machine supports PCIe 3.0 x4 at best. Still, it's more than fast enough for my needs. >> What about PCI Express 5.0, which is also already available on PCs and >> doubles that rate? > > And "what about" the current M4 series Mac Studio too? As far as I know, the Mac Studio is nowhere near as affordable as typical machine with PCIe 5.0. < snip > -- God be with you, CrudeSausage Islam is the enemy John 14:6
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-03 12:20 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement |
| Message-ID | <1099psm$17jlg$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #696477 |
On 9/3/25 11:06, CrudeSausage wrote: > On 2025-09-03 9:50 a.m., -hh wrote: >> On 9/2/25 16:56, CrudeSausage wrote: >>> On 2025-09-01 1:23 p.m., -hh wrote: >>>> On 9/1/25 08:34, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>>> ... >>>>> >>>>> To be fair, Apple's devices can be obtained for a fair price in >>>>> their default configurations. Sure, the storage might be smaller >>>>> than expected and they might have less RAM than computers at the >>>>> same price, but the screen quality and battery life need to be >>>>> considered. However, upgrading that default configuration is >>>>> prohibitively expensive. >>>> >>>> "Expensive" ... if one only focuses on "TB of Storage" and ignores >>>> the net performance levels obtained. >>>> >>>> A classical example is assuming that all SSDs perform the same, so >>>> since one can get a 1TB SATA SSD for $25 at WalMart, that therefore >>>> any other SSD configuration must be a 'rip off'/// >>>> >>>> >>>> No matter how much higher its bandwidth is: >>>> >>>> SATA-3 SSD: ~550MB/sec >>>> NVMe PCIe Gen 3 SSD: ~3,500MB/sec >>>> 2022 Mac Studio M1 Max: ~5000(R) to 6,500(W) MB/sec >>> >>> I notice you omit Gen 4, which was already available on PCs in 2022. >> >> Sure because we've been talking about real world systems that posters >> here like Joel own, and presently I don't own a Gen 4 system yet. >> >> Reason being is a combination of purchase cycles / lifecycles, as well >> as not having an objective performance requirement for it: as I >> already have mentioned, my current system is capable of 8K video >> editing, and since my best system is capable of 4K, I don't need it yet. > > Since Gen 4 machines have been available for years now with Gen 5 being > the current default, there is no reason to suggest that these kinds of > systems aren't real. Its not that Gen4 isn't real, but rather than they're not yet widely deployed long enough yet to have a large enough marketshare in the installed base to make their performance all that relevant yet. Its basically because PCI 4 had "bad" timing: it didn't get deployed on consumer platforms until it had a suitable chipset which was circa early 2020...which aligns with the onset of CoVid. With PCI 4 deployment caught in the supply chain mess, it missed the boat (literally). The demand surge for telework/school/etc prompted buying "off the shelf" in stock PCs because of timelines & supply chain shortages, and these were PCI 3 systems. After 2020, even with supply chains recovering, much of the home PC market was in a lull, because their normal replacement cycles had been disrupted by the 2020 demand surge. With their home PCs from CoVid now hitting five years old, they're just starting to enter the market for its replacement, which of course will be PCI 4 when they do buy. With tariffs and an economic downturn risk, there's likely going to be another demand lull. For businesses who CoVid-surged PCs too, they will also be factoring in their IRS tax depreciation of five (5) years: (3/2020 +60mo) = 4/2025: this window has literally just opened. >>> According to the PCI Express table on Wikipedia, they can get to >>> 7,877 GB/s at x4 which is the most common rate. Did you purposefully >>> ignore that information to make the Apple "deal" on storage prices >>> appear better? >> >> Keyword being "can". My own benchmarking tests have found that I >> "can" hit ~6300 MB/sec, but that's not the minimum. > > I'm nowhere near that for now, but my machine supports PCIe 3.0 x4 at > best. Still, it's more than fast enough for my needs.Which is the whole point: if one's needs don't merit faster I/O, then one shouldn't be criticizing those who do & pay more for higher I/O. Ditto other metrics vulnerable to gross oversimplification, such as claiming that all SSDs are "rip offs" because hard drives are cheaper per TB: on tech-savvy newsgroups, we should be expected to be better. >>> What about PCI Express 5.0, which is also already available on PCs >>> and doubles that rate? >> >> And "what about" the current M4 series Mac Studio too? > > As far as I know, the Mac Studio is nowhere near as affordable as > typical machine with PCIe 5.0. > > < snip > Care to provide an example of one of these "typical" PCIe 5 PCs? FWIW, I did spend a little bit of time looking at a Dell Alienware which advertised PCIe 5, but an element which stood out at me was that had a 16x lane slot for a GPU, but since PCIe 5 specs are gamer-centric and has up to 16 CPU PCIe 5.0 lanes and up to four CPU PCIe 4.0 lanes, the ramifications here are that if all 16x went to the GPU, that only leaves a PCIe 4 4x slot for its NVMe slot ... which isn't a performance boost at all for onboard storage. After all, a standard PCIe-5 slot has half the bandwidth of a PCIe-4's 4x slot: ~The Devil's in the Details!~ -hh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-03 17:33 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement |
| Message-ID | <lu2uQ.1378578$xyt3.1179778@fx15.iad> |
| In reply to | #696491 |
On 2025-09-03 12:20 p.m., -hh wrote: < snip > >> As far as I know, the Mac Studio is nowhere near as affordable as >> typical machine with PCIe 5.0. >> >> < snip > > > Care to provide an example of one of these "typical" PCIe 5 PCs? MSI's offerings as of 2023: <https://www.techspot.com/news/97168-msi-new-laptops-among-first-feature-pcie-5.html> > FWIW, I did spend a little bit of time looking at a Dell Alienware which > advertised PCIe 5, but an element which stood out at me was that had a > 16x lane slot for a GPU, but since PCIe 5 specs are gamer-centric and > has up to 16 CPU PCIe 5.0 lanes and up to four CPU PCIe 4.0 lanes, the > ramifications here are that if all 16x went to the GPU, that only leaves > a PCIe 4 4x slot for its NVMe slot ... which isn't a performance boost > at all for onboard storage. > > > After all, a standard PCIe-5 slot has half the bandwidth of a PCIe-4's > 4x slot: ~The Devil's in the Details!~ I do believe that you are correct here, which would probably explain why most of the machines I looked at had PCIe 4.0 written as the type of NVMe. -- God be with you, CrudeSausage Islam is the enemy John 14:6
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-04 09:15 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement |
| Message-ID | <109c3dp$17jlg$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #696522 |
On 9/3/25 17:33, CrudeSausage wrote: > On 2025-09-03 12:20 p.m., -hh wrote: > > < snip > > >>> As far as I know, the Mac Studio is nowhere near as affordable as >>> typical machine with PCIe 5.0. >>> >>> < snip > >> >> Care to provide an example of one of these "typical" PCIe 5 PCs? > > MSI's offerings as of 2023: <https://www.techspot.com/news/97168-msi- > new-laptops-among-first-feature-pcie-5.html> "The models featuring PCIe 5 are likely to be expensive. Tom's Hardware reports that the flagships will break the $5,000 mark, but the lower-end Pulse, Katana, and Cyborg systems will be more affordable." There should be updates on those price estimates by now; for basic reference, the M4 Max Studio starts at $2K, although there's also other Macs and other M4's, such as the mini with an M4 for $600, or an M4 Pro for $1400, as well as thread-relevant updated M4 Macbook Air for $1K. Plus a pretty loaded base M4 Max MacBook Pro for $3200 (14/32 cores with 36GB RAM/1TB SSD). >> FWIW, I did spend a little bit of time looking at a Dell Alienware >> which advertised PCIe 5, but an element which stood out at me was that >> had a 16x lane slot for a GPU, but since PCIe 5 specs are gamer- >> centric and has up to 16 CPU PCIe 5.0 lanes and up to four CPU PCIe >> 4.0 lanes, the ramifications here are that if all 16x went to the GPU, >> that only leaves a PCIe 4 4x slot for its NVMe slot ... which isn't a >> performance boost at all for onboard storage. >> >> >> After all, a standard PCIe-5 slot has half the bandwidth of a PCIe-4's >> 4x slot: ~The Devil's in the Details!~ > > I do believe that you are correct here, which would probably explain why > most of the machines I looked at had PCIe 4.0 written as the type of NVMe. It was an unexpected & interesting find on my part, although it does make sense: the customer demand pull is gaming, so that's where the focus is. In the meantime, NVMe on PCIe-4 4x meets current "working purposes" capability needs, as illustrated by how my older system benches fine for editing 8K video, and 12K only effectively exists in the 'even more professional' realm, which means that NVMe only needs to be one step ahead of the capability need instead of two steps ahead. For what lies ahead, my guess is that the next step is more probably to go to "PCIe-5.1" so as to expand out to more PCIe-5 lanes instead of going to a PCIe-6 to double speeds without as much lane expansion. Either way, time will tell. -hh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-04 15:45 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement |
| Message-ID | <U%luQ.533290$LeZ.444858@fx11.iad> |
| In reply to | #696560 |
On 2025-09-04 9:15 a.m., -hh wrote: > On 9/3/25 17:33, CrudeSausage wrote: >> On 2025-09-03 12:20 p.m., -hh wrote: >> >> < snip > >> >>>> As far as I know, the Mac Studio is nowhere near as affordable as >>>> typical machine with PCIe 5.0. >>>> >>>> < snip > >>> >>> Care to provide an example of one of these "typical" PCIe 5 PCs? >> >> MSI's offerings as of 2023: <https://www.techspot.com/news/97168-msi- >> new-laptops-among-first-feature-pcie-5.html> > > "The models featuring PCIe 5 are likely to be expensive. Tom's Hardware > reports that the flagships will break the $5,000 mark, but the lower-end > Pulse, Katana, and Cyborg systems will be more affordable." > > There should be updates on those price estimates by now; for basic > reference, the M4 Max Studio starts at $2K, although there's also other > Macs and other M4's, such as the mini with an M4 for $600, or an M4 Pro > for $1400, as well as thread-relevant updated M4 Macbook Air for $1K. > Plus a pretty loaded base M4 Max MacBook Pro for $3200 (14/32 cores with > 36GB RAM/1TB SSD). Good catch. While they are available, only the most dedicated gamers will see a point to spending that much. I'm more of a casual gamer and always have been, and I'm quite good with the RTX 3060 mobile from 2021 too. Heck, I just learned that an RTx 5060 mobile is only 43% faster than what I have, and my PCIe 3.0 x4 is always way faster than I would need to play a game. >> I do believe that you are correct here, which would probably explain >> why most of the machines I looked at had PCIe 4.0 written as the type >> of NVMe. > > It was an unexpected & interesting find on my part, although it does > make sense: the customer demand pull is gaming, so that's where the > focus is. In the meantime, NVMe on PCIe-4 4x meets current "working > purposes" capability needs, as illustrated by how my older system > benches fine for editing 8K video, and 12K only effectively exists in > the 'even more professional' realm, which means that NVMe only needs to > be one step ahead of the capability need instead of two steps ahead. > > For what lies ahead, my guess is that the next step is more probably to > go to "PCIe-5.1" so as to expand out to more PCIe-5 lanes instead of > going to a PCIe-6 to double speeds without as much lane expansion. > Either way, time will tell. I think that computers have been, for a while now, at a point where they're still getting faster, but there is no point to upgrading unless they break. I'm sure that even the 2010 laptop I replaced in 2015 would have done a decent job of completing most of my work today given a chance. I wouldn't be editing 4k video, but I don't even do that now. -- God be with you, CrudeSausage Islam is the enemy John 14:6
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-04 18:46 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement |
| Message-ID | <109d4s9$20433$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #696583 |
On 9/4/25 15:45, CrudeSausage wrote: > On 2025-09-04 9:15 a.m., -hh wrote: >> On 9/3/25 17:33, CrudeSausage wrote: >>> On 2025-09-03 12:20 p.m., -hh wrote: >>> >>> < snip > >>> >>>>> As far as I know, the Mac Studio is nowhere near as affordable as >>>>> typical machine with PCIe 5.0. >>>>> >>>>> < snip > >>>> >>>> Care to provide an example of one of these "typical" PCIe 5 PCs? >>> >>> MSI's offerings as of 2023: <https://www.techspot.com/news/97168-msi- >>> new-laptops-among-first-feature-pcie-5.html> >> >> "The models featuring PCIe 5 are likely to be expensive. Tom's >> Hardware reports that the flagships will break the $5,000 mark, but >> the lower-end Pulse, Katana, and Cyborg systems will be more affordable." >> >> There should be updates on those price estimates by now; for basic >> reference, the M4 Max Studio starts at $2K, although there's also >> other Macs and other M4's, such as the mini with an M4 for $600, or an >> M4 Pro for $1400, as well as thread-relevant updated M4 Macbook Air >> for $1K. Plus a pretty loaded base M4 Max MacBook Pro for $3200 (14/32 >> cores with 36GB RAM/1TB SSD). > > Good catch. While they are available, only the most dedicated gamers > will see a point to spending that much. I'm more of a casual gamer and > always have been, and I'm quite good with the RTX 3060 mobile from 2021 > too. Heck, I just learned that an RTx 5060 mobile is only 43% faster > than what I have, and my PCIe 3.0 x4 is always way faster than I would > need to play a game. Agreed - the rational consumer only buys the capabilities that they actually need (plus realistic expectations/contingencies too). >> ... > > I think that computers have been, for a while now, at a point where > they're still getting faster, but there is no point to upgrading unless > they break. PC's reached the point of pragmatic "good enough" for most applications probably a decade or so ago, so their lifecycle is now "run them until they die", unless there's some other capability need or motivation. One can notice this with the rise of laptops & demise of the tower desktops (latter was a compromise of size for more power) since 2008. > I'm sure that even the 2010 laptop I replaced in 2015 would > have done a decent job of completing most of my work today given a > chance. Probably, although keeping up-to-date on software & OS is a factor too; on the Windows side, Win11 needs TPM 2.0, which didn't hit the market until after 2015. Personally, I replaced a seven year old (2017) laptop last year partly because it was fading (battery was starting to go, and MacOS 14 (Sonoma) didn't support it), but also because I could: it had already been fully depreciated and a good priced replacement afforded itself. > I wouldn't be editing 4k video, but I don't even do that now. I knew that 4K video was in my roadmap when I bought this 2022 desktop. I was already paying attention (not quite 'shopping') and found what I wanted in 2023. -hh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-05 07:18 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement |
| Message-ID | <92llbkdbv1segmqq53ejtl4se278khubcn@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #696560 |
-hh wrote: >In the meantime, NVMe on PCIe-4 4x meets current "working >purposes" capability needs, I should say so! For most uses, SATA SSD's are plenty fast. >as illustrated by how my older system >benches fine for editing 8K video, and 12K only effectively exists in >the 'even more professional' realm, which means that NVMe only needs to >be one step ahead of the capability need instead of two steps ahead. Transferring video files around will push any system, of course.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-03 00:55 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement |
| Message-ID | <mhphvoF2rq2U4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #696348 |
On Mon, 1 Sep 2025 13:23:18 -0400, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote in <1094kq6$3snn8$3@dont-email.me>: > On 9/1/25 08:34, CrudeSausage wrote: >> ... >> >> To be fair, Apple's devices can be obtained for a fair price in their >> default configurations. Sure, the storage might be smaller than expected >> and they might have less RAM than computers at the same price, but the >> screen quality and battery life need to be considered. However, >> upgrading that default configuration is prohibitively expensive. > > "Expensive" ... if one only focuses on "TB of Storage" and ignores the > net performance levels obtained. > > A classical example is assuming that all SSDs perform the same, so since > one can get a 1TB SATA SSD for $25 at WalMart, that therefore any other > SSD configuration must be a 'rip off'/// > > > No matter how much higher its bandwidth is: > > SATA-3 SSD: ~550MB/sec > NVMe PCIe Gen 3 SSD: ~3,500MB/sec > 2022 Mac Studio M1 Max: ~5000(R) to 6,500(W) MB/sec > > -hh Have you priced out 10Gbit/s Ethernet NICs for Macs? Maybe I'm missing something, but most are over $100. Can get one for PC for consumer prices, some less than $50: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01LWU8BEB -- -v System76 Thelio Mega v1.1 x86_64 NVIDIA RTX 3090Ti 24G OS: Linux 6.16.4 D: Mint 22.1 DE: Xfce 4.18 NVIDIA: 580.76.05 Mem: 258G "I was the next door kid's imaginary friend."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-03 01:14 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement |
| Message-ID | <10984p9$s3q9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #696438 |
On 2025-09-03, vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> wrote: > On Mon, 1 Sep 2025 13:23:18 -0400, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> > wrote in <1094kq6$3snn8$3@dont-email.me>: > >> On 9/1/25 08:34, CrudeSausage wrote: >>> ... >>> >>> To be fair, Apple's devices can be obtained for a fair price in their >>> default configurations. Sure, the storage might be smaller than expected >>> and they might have less RAM than computers at the same price, but the >>> screen quality and battery life need to be considered. However, >>> upgrading that default configuration is prohibitively expensive. >> >> "Expensive" ... if one only focuses on "TB of Storage" and ignores the >> net performance levels obtained. >> >> A classical example is assuming that all SSDs perform the same, so since >> one can get a 1TB SATA SSD for $25 at WalMart, that therefore any other >> SSD configuration must be a 'rip off'/// >> >> >> No matter how much higher its bandwidth is: >> >> SATA-3 SSD: ~550MB/sec >> NVMe PCIe Gen 3 SSD: ~3,500MB/sec >> 2022 Mac Studio M1 Max: ~5000(R) to 6,500(W) MB/sec >> >> -hh > > Have you priced out 10Gbit/s Ethernet NICs for Macs? > > Maybe I'm missing something, but most are over $100. > > Can get one for PC for consumer prices, some less than $50: > > https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01LWU8BEB > In my experience Macs excel in several areas and those are: 1. Plug it in and it's ready to go other than updates. 2. Consistency across Apple devices like iPads, Apple watches and so forth. Literally plug a new device in and answer a few very basic questions and it's good to go. 3. Resale value of Apple devices is quite high. They typically retain their value. Exceptions are when Apple changes major things like when they from Intel to ARM. But in general that older iPhone will still get a good price on the resale market. 4. No screwing around with the OS or applications. Things just work. Disadvantages: 1. Better buy it the way you want it and include future needs because upgrade-ability is spotty. 2. Do it Apple's way or take the highway. Alternative solutions are out there but really require jumping through hoops in some cases although this has been improving. 3. Value for the money. This one is tough as you simply can't compare MIPS, processor types and so forth. It's more a matter of HOW does XYZ application run on a Mac compared to windows or Linux. It's kinda complex and user experiences are the best source of information. 4. Cost. Debatable but still similar class Apple devices are more expensive than PC's. Final advice: My advice, for what that is worth and it ain't much, is to look carefully at your software needs and pick the platform that has the best support for what you require. All are excellent platforms, just different and targeted at different audiences. Of course this is only scratching the surface, but it's a start. -- pothead "Our lives are fashioned by our choices. First we make our choices. Then our choices make us." -- Anne Frank
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-03 09:57 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement |
| Message-ID | <1099hgo$15ibu$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #696438 |
On 9/2/25 20:55, vallor wrote: > On Mon, 1 Sep 2025 13:23:18 -0400, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> > wrote in <1094kq6$3snn8$3@dont-email.me>: > >> On 9/1/25 08:34, CrudeSausage wrote: >>> ... >>> >>> To be fair, Apple's devices can be obtained for a fair price in their >>> default configurations. Sure, the storage might be smaller than expected >>> and they might have less RAM than computers at the same price, but the >>> screen quality and battery life need to be considered. However, >>> upgrading that default configuration is prohibitively expensive. >> >> "Expensive" ... if one only focuses on "TB of Storage" and ignores the >> net performance levels obtained. >> >> A classical example is assuming that all SSDs perform the same, so since >> one can get a 1TB SATA SSD for $25 at WalMart, that therefore any other >> SSD configuration must be a 'rip off'/// >> >> >> No matter how much higher its bandwidth is: >> >> SATA-3 SSD: ~550MB/sec >> NVMe PCIe Gen 3 SSD: ~3,500MB/sec >> 2022 Mac Studio M1 Max: ~5000(R) to 6,500(W) MB/sec >> >> -hh > > Have you priced out 10Gbit/s Ethernet NICs for Macs? Yup. > Maybe I'm missing something, but most are over $100. The Synology OEM PCIe card is ~$110 retail. > Can get one for PC for consumer prices, some less than $50: > > https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01LWU8BEB Don't need it for desktop, as the Macs now build that in. I've been wondering what 3rd party PCIe cards might work in the NAS, but haven't invested that much time in it, as saving just $60 on a non-OEM card might be a false economy if it breaks the OEM auto-updating firmware/software stuff, particularly since its only one of the costs: I want to provision a 10G switch, and since lot of $150 stuff that tends to have high failure rates, I'm leaning towards a $300 Ubiquiti. -hh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-03 21:52 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement |
| Message-ID | <mhrrljFhi69U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #696469 |
On Wed, 3 Sep 2025 09:57:44 -0400, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote in <1099hgo$15ibu$1@dont-email.me>: > On 9/2/25 20:55, vallor wrote: >> On Mon, 1 Sep 2025 13:23:18 -0400, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> >> wrote in <1094kq6$3snn8$3@dont-email.me>: >> >>> On 9/1/25 08:34, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>> ... >>>> >>>> To be fair, Apple's devices can be obtained for a fair price in their >>>> default configurations. Sure, the storage might be smaller than expected >>>> and they might have less RAM than computers at the same price, but the >>>> screen quality and battery life need to be considered. However, >>>> upgrading that default configuration is prohibitively expensive. >>> >>> "Expensive" ... if one only focuses on "TB of Storage" and ignores the >>> net performance levels obtained. >>> >>> A classical example is assuming that all SSDs perform the same, so since >>> one can get a 1TB SATA SSD for $25 at WalMart, that therefore any other >>> SSD configuration must be a 'rip off'/// >>> >>> >>> No matter how much higher its bandwidth is: >>> >>> SATA-3 SSD: ~550MB/sec >>> NVMe PCIe Gen 3 SSD: ~3,500MB/sec >>> 2022 Mac Studio M1 Max: ~5000(R) to 6,500(W) MB/sec >>> >>> -hh >> >> Have you priced out 10Gbit/s Ethernet NICs for Macs? > > Yup. > > >> Maybe I'm missing something, but most are over $100. > > The Synology OEM PCIe card is ~$110 retail. Both the Synology's I bought have multiple 10G connectors built-in. But I was comparing oranges to oranges -- if one wants to upgrade a Mac Studio, one has to block down ~$120 or so. PC, it's less than $50. > >> Can get one for PC for consumer prices, some less than $50: >> >> https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01LWU8BEB > > Don't need it for desktop, as the Macs now build that in. That doesn't help those of us who already bought a Mac Studio. > > I've been wondering what 3rd party PCIe cards might work in the NAS, but > haven't invested that much time in it, as saving just $60 on a non-OEM > card might be a false economy if it breaks the OEM auto-updating > firmware/software stuff, particularly since its only one of the costs: > I want to provision a 10G switch, and since lot of $150 stuff that tends > to have high failure rates, I'm leaning towards a $300 Ubiquiti. > > > -hh -- -v System76 Thelio Mega v1.1 x86_64 NVIDIA RTX 3090Ti 24G OS: Linux 6.16.4 D: Mint 22.1 DE: Xfce 4.18 NVIDIA: 580.82.07 Mem: 258G "Reality seems to be a constant intrusion on my dreams!"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-04 09:36 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement |
| Message-ID | <109c4ke$17jlg$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #696528 |
On 9/3/25 17:52, vallor wrote: > On Wed, 3 Sep 2025 09:57:44 -0400, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> > wrote in <1099hgo$15ibu$1@dont-email.me>: > >> On 9/2/25 20:55, vallor wrote: >>> On Mon, 1 Sep 2025 13:23:18 -0400, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> >>> wrote in <1094kq6$3snn8$3@dont-email.me>: >>> >>>> On 9/1/25 08:34, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>>> ... >>>>> >>>>> To be fair, Apple's devices can be obtained for a fair price in their >>>>> default configurations. Sure, the storage might be smaller than expected >>>>> and they might have less RAM than computers at the same price, but the >>>>> screen quality and battery life need to be considered. However, >>>>> upgrading that default configuration is prohibitively expensive. >>>> >>>> "Expensive" ... if one only focuses on "TB of Storage" and ignores the >>>> net performance levels obtained. >>>> >>>> A classical example is assuming that all SSDs perform the same, so since >>>> one can get a 1TB SATA SSD for $25 at WalMart, that therefore any other >>>> SSD configuration must be a 'rip off'/// >>>> >>>> >>>> No matter how much higher its bandwidth is: >>>> >>>> SATA-3 SSD: ~550MB/sec >>>> NVMe PCIe Gen 3 SSD: ~3,500MB/sec >>>> 2022 Mac Studio M1 Max: ~5000(R) to 6,500(W) MB/sec >>>> >>>> -hh >>> >>> Have you priced out 10Gbit/s Ethernet NICs for Macs? >> >> Yup. >> >> >>> Maybe I'm missing something, but most are over $100. >> >> The Synology OEM PCIe card is ~$110 retail. > > Both the Synology's I bought have multiple 10G connectors > built-in. Ah, that's right. If I recall, you opted for an ~eight spindle NAS, whereas mine is just four in the DS923+ > But I was comparing oranges to oranges -- if one wants to upgrade > a Mac Studio, one has to block down ~$120 or so. 10Gbe Ethernet comes standard on the Mac Studio. Maybe you're thinking of the mini? Its a $100 option there to upgrade from 1Gbe to 10Gbe. > PC, it's less than $50. I believe you...I'm not presently in the Windows PCIe slot market at present; the one desktop that I currently have is IIRC running Vista and is probably too old to accommodate 10Gbe. >>> Can get one for PC for consumer prices, some less than $50: >>> >>> https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01LWU8BEB >> >> Don't need it for desktop, as the Macs now build that in. > > That doesn't help those of us who already bought a Mac Studio. My 2022 M1 Max Studio came standard with 10Gbe, so I'd recommend checking to see what version Ethernet port your Studio has. FWIW, I did check out the specs on the M4 based MBP and there is no Ethernet port ... just Thunderbolt 5's. Looking quickly at TB-to-Ethernet adapters, looks like the market is still pricey for 10Gbe, regardless of if one shops for Thunderbolt or just USB-C. -hh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-04 18:15 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement |
| Message-ID | <mhu39nFhi69U3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #696561 |
On Thu, 4 Sep 2025 09:36:14 -0400, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote in <109c4ke$17jlg$5@dont-email.me>: > My 2022 M1 Max Studio came standard with 10Gbe, so I'd recommend > checking to see what version Ethernet port your Studio has. Well, I'll be dipped. It does have 10Gbe. I stand corrected! (And happy that I didn't buy an interface for it!) -- -v System76 Thelio Mega v1.1 x86_64 NVIDIA RTX 3090Ti 24G OS: Linux 6.16.4 D: Mint 22.1 DE: Xfce 4.18 NVIDIA: 580.82.07 Mem: 258G "Ethernet n.: something used to catch the etherbunny."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-04 07:30 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement |
| Message-ID | <109bf6u$1kigl$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #696469 |
On Wed, 3 Sep 2025 09:57:44 -0400, -hh wrote: > ... I want to provision a 10G switch, and since lot of $150 stuff that > tends to have high failure rates, I'm leaning towards a $300 Ubiquiti. There is a lot of Cisco stuff on the second-hand market, still useful even though it might be a decade or more old and no longer officially supported. And the range of functionality is just breathtaking. I have been learning about some of it lately, for a client. One switch I have here is running an OS called “Open IOS XE”, which uses a Linux kernel and even lets you write Python code to run on it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-04 08:31 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Sorry, Linux Fans: Mac Is Actually the Better Windows Replacement |
| Message-ID | <mht136Fhi69U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #696549 |
On Thu, 4 Sep 2025 07:30:38 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote in <109bf6u$1kigl$2@dont-email.me>: > On Wed, 3 Sep 2025 09:57:44 -0400, -hh wrote: > >> ... I want to provision a 10G switch, and since lot of $150 stuff that >> tends to have high failure rates, I'm leaning towards a $300 Ubiquiti. > > There is a lot of Cisco stuff on the second-hand market, still useful > even though it might be a decade or more old and no longer officially > supported. And the range of functionality is just breathtaking. > > I have been learning about some of it lately, for a client. One switch I > have here is running an OS called “Open IOS XE”, which uses a Linux > kernel and even lets you write Python code to run on it. The switch I bought that supports LACP is this thing: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CR5NBC3B That's to replace the Netgear that I have, which supports link aggregation, but only static (no LACP support). Furthermore, on a bonded connection, I can't talk to the management port on the switch. Will report on how well the QNAP works. (It's a little pricer than some alternatives, but it's not made in China.) -- -v System76 Thelio Mega v1.1 x86_64 NVIDIA RTX 3090Ti 24G OS: Linux 6.16.4 D: Mint 22.1 DE: Xfce 4.18 NVIDIA: 580.82.07 Mem: 258G "Hm..what's this red button fo:=/07<NO CARRIER"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 17 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web