|
ya it truly looks like quite the experience. thats a desktop grade os if ive seen one. an A+ desktop experience, on superior hardware
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 01:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jan 20, 2025 19:23 |
|
|
apple mac os 10.10 yosemite imac retina
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 01:20
|
|
|
the true yosemite experience irl all the stuff looks painted on the screen lol
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 01:22
|
|
|
the ultimate desktop
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 01:27
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:debian is a real democracy. everything is run by committee. screaming shitfits are mostly performed in public. it is arguable that it is possible to abuse process by design I'd even agree w this, but gently caress that guy
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 03:30
|
|
|
theadder posted:the ultimate desktop congratulations on your ability to select and purchase consumer goods. you must be an upstanding citizen to whom visa and mastercard kowtow monthly! i assume you're gonna install linux on it because you keep shitposting in the linux thread
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 04:02
|
|
|
whoa man quit harshin on his mel
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 04:10
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:congratulations on your ability to select and purchase consumer goods. you must be an upstanding citizen to whom visa and mastercard kowtow monthly! The os is free. Unlike your machine for which you paid the Microsoft tax so you could install Linux.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 04:22
|
|
|
haha i never thought of it like that: os x is now free and it is a much better value than some free cobbled together open sores poo poo
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 04:26
|
|
|
Optimus_Rhyme posted:The os is free. Unlike your machine for which you paid the Microsoft tax so you could install Linux. what slashdot comment is this from
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 04:36
|
|
|
Optimus_Rhyme posted:The os is free. Unlike your machine for which you paid the Microsoft tax so you could install Linux. joke's on you i install linux on macs
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 04:42
|
|
|
for a few years linus torvalds used a dual-cpu power mac g5 for his work desktop that was primo hardware for desktop linux at the time
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 04:43
|
|
|
I dunno just saw some poo poo on reddit about someone getting their Microsoft tax back and I was like 'is that still a thing?' And then there was this thread where everyone is arguing like it's Slashdot 1999 and it just came to me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 04:47
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:joke's on you eh, i think thats ok, everyone has useless hobbies like installing hobbyist unfinished OSs onto their machines. if u have the income, i say why not. probably cheaper than painting warhammer dolls or w/e
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 04:49
|
|
|
Optimus_Rhyme posted:The os is free. Unlike your machine for which you paid the Microsoft tax so you could install Linux. ill eat the $50 or whatever MS charged the OEM instead of paying the extra hardware premium for a macbook.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 04:56
|
|
|
IPvSH6T posted:ill eat the $50 or whatever MS charged the OEM instead of paying the extra hardware premium for a macbook. lol
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 04:59
|
|
|
lol
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 05:01
|
|
|
good stuff
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 05:05
|
|
|
Last Chance posted:everyone has useless hobbies like installing hobbyist unfinished OSs onto their machines i wouldn't say apple is useless
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 05:05
|
|
|
incidentally apple gives no fucks if you install linux on their poo poo. it is supported in the sense that they are totally cool w/ it @ the apple store. they boot their own media to run diagnostics anyway the even pro-er choice for linux is lenovo. they have a long list of laptop SKUs that are "certified for linux," where they actually guarantee drivers exist and poo poo. unfortunately lenovo usually costs slightly more than apple if you want lenovo's actually-good hardware Notorious b.s.d. fucked around with this message at 05:12 on Oct 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 05:10
|
|
|
the best is when some dumb baby bought a netbook and somehow managed to get it without windows installed and he waas just *outraged* that it cost only $10 less.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 05:13
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:the best is when some dumb baby bought a netbook and somehow managed to get it without windows installed and he waas just *outraged* that it cost only $10 less. if you are trying to save money with a linux desktop you are doing it wrong. historically linux has required gobs more RAM than windows, back when RAM was expensive. it also used to have the practical requirement of SCSI to get reasonable performance and bug-free operation. ide "worked" but holy poo poo so many buggy controllers out there now the big thing is wireless/bt/rfkill: you are gonna want intel wireless + bluetooth, so you are gonna want an intel laptop w/ all the expensive stuff and naturally the best laptops to run linux are the most expensive ones on the market: lenovo's business-class offerings
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 05:17
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:historically linux has required gobs more RAM than windows, back when RAM was expensive. oh so that's why linux always demanded a swap partition? i could never work that out
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 11:00
|
|
|
is that true to this day? (srs) i always read from nerds how they use linux for minimal systems. Has linux become efficient or are these nerds just idiots?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 11:03
|
|
|
qntm posted:oh so that's why linux always demanded a swap partition? i could never work that out the swap partition is needed because Linux is piss garbage for poors and they literally couldn't afford to hire someone to figure out how to just loving use a page file
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 11:06
|
|
|
does linux support swap/hibernate files yet?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 11:08
|
|
|
Ericadia posted:is that true to this day? (srs) i always read from nerds how they use linux for minimal systems. Has linux become efficient or are these nerds just idiots? I haven't tried to install linux in years, but I seem to recall at the time asking my install-linux-advocate friend "what is this swap partition thing it's asking for" and him explaining that linux needs that as somewhere to put stuff that won't fit in RAM, and I don't remember asking the obvious question "why does linux need that, windows never did" but I imagine the reply would have been a hurriedly changed subject
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 11:10
|
|
|
qntm posted:I haven't tried to install linux in years, but I seem to recall at the time asking my install-linux-advocate friend "what is this swap partition thing it's asking for" and him explaining that linux needs that as somewhere to put stuff that won't fit in RAM, and I don't remember asking the obvious question "why does linux need that, windows never did" but I imagine the reply would have been a hurriedly changed subject pagefile.sys lol
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 13:07
|
|
|
linux has had good support for swap files since 2.6 and you can suspend or hibernate to a swap file just fine.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 13:28
|
|
|
Ericadia posted:is that true to this day? (srs) i always read from nerds how they use linux for minimal systems. Has linux become efficient or are these nerds just idiots? minimal systems these days still have way more ram than the average 486 did.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 14:22
|
|
|
Ericadia posted:is that true to this day? (srs) i always read from nerds how they use linux for minimal systems. Has linux become efficient or are these nerds just idiots? a "minimal system" in 2014 has like 512 mb of ram e:f;b Notorious b.s.d. fucked around with this message at 14:49 on Oct 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 14:46
|
|
|
Deus Rex posted:linux has had good support for swap files since 2.6 and you can suspend or hibernate to a swap file just fine. swap files have always worked, but they have always had disadvantages e.g. you still can't use kdump
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 14:47
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:historically linux has required gobs more RAM than windows, back when RAM was expensive. it also used to have the practical requirement of SCSI to get reasonable performance and bug-free operation. ide "worked" but holy poo poo so many buggy controllers out there IDE was basically the winmodem of drive connectors so burning a cd in the 90s would just make a coaster if you moved the mouse cursor around at the same time penus was doing you a favor
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 15:07
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:a "minimal system" in 2014 has like 512 mb of ram this is a gross exaggeration, look at any consumer router for a counterexample
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 15:16
|
|
|
Mr Dog posted:this is a gross exaggeration, look at any consumer router for a counterexample i got the 512 mb number from logging into my consumer router
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 15:30
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:swap files have always worked, but they have always had disadvantages kdump has never worked in any meaningful sense
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 15:47
|
|
|
pseudorandom name posted:kdump has never worked in any meaningful sense i've used kdump many times. the only reliable way to get a kernel problem fixed w/out being a kernel developer is to send kdump data to red hat.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 15:55
|
|
|
Ericadia posted:is that true to this day? (srs) i always read from nerds how they use linux for minimal systems. Has linux become efficient or are these nerds just idiots? when I started using it around 2005, it ran as fast as or faster than windows 2000 on my glorious PII+192MB RAM shitbox
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
IPvSH6T posted:when I started using it around 2005, it ran as fast as or faster than windows 2000 on my glorious PII+192MB RAM shitbox i totally believe the PII part. i have used linux on systems slower than a PII and found it to be pretty ok it's the memory bit. windows 2000 + ie6 will happily co-exist inside of 64 mb of ram. firefox alone, in 2005, would hit 192 mb just loading "about :blank"
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 20:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jan 20, 2025 19:23 |
|
|
qntm posted:I haven't tried to install linux in years, but I seem to recall at the time asking my install-linux-advocate friend "what is this swap partition thing it's asking for" and him explaining that linux needs that as somewhere to put stuff that won't fit in RAM, and I don't remember asking the obvious question "why does linux need that, windows never did" but I imagine the reply would have been a hurriedly changed subject you dont ~need~ swap, you can run without it (this is how most cloud vms come, from digital ocean/aws etc) you can also change the kernel param vm.swappiness to 0 so it won't put unused stuff into swap but if you hit max memory without swap the oom killer will just start blowing up potentially important stuff
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 22:21
|
|