[Tfug] OSX

[Bexley Hall]

Hi,

--- Jim Secan <jim at nwra.com> wrote:

> If you're not willing to get a newer machine and run
> at least 10.4, I'd say don't bother.

No, I have no interest in moving all my tools (many
tens of kilobucks  :< ) over to a Mac (and having to
buy them *again* -- assuming I can even do so!)

> If you love X11, you can download and install it to
> run on OSX.  There are also various better
> alternatives to the Mac terminal. 
> If you live on Linux, and you like fiddling and
> being able to get "down to
> the metal" to make things work the way you want,
> don't bother with OSX
> unless you have a business need (as in a customer
> that wants stuff that works on OSX).

It would be nice to have this capability for the
"occasional user" that I bump into with a Mac.
My installing 10.2 was just out of curiosity -- I
was planning on scrapping the machine and figured
it would be silly to not, at least, take a peek at
what it looked like.

> I use Linux for my heavy lifting (mostly scripting
> and command-line use) and OSX for my desktop
> needs.

In my case, NetBSD and Solaris serve those roles
(writing code).

> I had planned to move exclusively to Linux,
> ridding myself of my Windoze box for desktop needs,
> but Linux is too high-maintenance and RTFM-ridden
> for my liking.

In my case, the tools that I run under W2K are just
not available under NetBSD (and, if they *were*
available under *Linux*, I'd have to repurchase them
and then be stuck with version X Linux kernel and
version Y <flavorofthemonth> distro.  I figure that's
no improvement over being "stuck" with Windows
(and, the Windows port of my tools will most probably
be *much* better supported than some random Linux
port!)

> I use computers to do my real job, and the less
> time I have to spend in computer care-and-feeding
> the better.

Exactly!  I have no particular interest in silly
"features" that "almost work", etc.  I want to
be able to turn a box on and *use* it (vs. PLAY
with it).  For much the same reason, you'll note
that I said W2K -- not XP, not Vista, etc.  (If
my tools *work* under W2K, *why* would I want to
"upgrade"?  :>

> This combination of OSX for the desktop and Linux
> for the heavy-duty processing is a good mix that
> works for me.

Agreed.  Except that in my case it is W2K and
NetBSD/Solaris.

I had thought there would be something interesting
or worthwhile seeing in OSX (*greatly* improved
performance, rock-solid stability, "killer app",
etc.) to make it worth "considering".  But, it seems
like its 6-of-one, half-dozen-of-another.  :-(

Thanks!
--don


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?  
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.  http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping