What the last straw that made you give up on linux?

What the last straw that made you give up on linux?

Attached: tux.jpg (222x227, 7K)

I haven't. But I will if a better kernel comes along.

epic strawman, libtard

The Dick became acceptable

I found out OS X didn't suck. It does now though

Linux is the best kernel.

I gave up on Windows when I saw ads on start menu.

>changing your whole OS just because of a kernel
WTF?

Show me how to replace XNU with Linux and I'll give it a go.

>Show me how to replace XNU with Linux
You're locked out of doing that on macOS. But you can use many different kernels with GNU or non-macOS BSD.

You don't seem to follow, I switched to OS X because I preferred it over any OS with Linux as the kernel (worded this way because I know you'll sperg if I use "Linux" as the colloquialism we both know it is). I "changed my whole OS" not because of my problems with Linux, but with the userlands available for Linux.

I’m all in baby.

Attached: 316441DD-2322-4665-8EE1-8F0748C925F5.jpg (988x613, 103K)

thanks for taking care of us and not having us sperg out
(。•ω•。)

>because I preferred it over any OS with Linux as the kernel
You could have just replaced Linux rather than throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Read the rest of the post
>I "changed my whole OS" not because of my problems with Linux, but with the userlands available for Linux. I've got nothing against the kernel, it's the distros.

>I "changed my whole OS" not because of my problems with Linux, but with the userlands available for Linux
I read that, it contradicts what the first part says.
>I've got nothing against the kernel, it's the distros.
Then why are you specifically blaming Linux?

>I read that, it contradicts what the first part says.
Not in the slightest.
>Then why are you specifically blaming Linux?
I never did that.

>Not in the slightest.
>I never did that.
>I switched to OS X because I preferred it over any OS with Linux as the kernel
Why are you naming Linux here specifically then?

Jesus Christ, user, how many times do I have to spell it out for you? I'm naming Linux specifically because the thread's asking why I dropped Linux. I dropped Linux because of the fucking operating systems based on Linux.

It isn't based on Linux any more than it based on any other software. Linux is just a kernel. You specifically named Linux as an issue. Don't do that in the future if you don't mean it.

Again, I never named Linux as an issue. I named the operating systems that use it as the issue.

Why did you say Linux, then?

Because the thread's asking why I stopped using it. Again, I stopped because of the OSs that use it.

Why didn't you just write your own OS that uses Linux if you still want to use Linux?

Why would I have created yet another OS not as good as OS X when I could've switched to OS X?

Are you not confident in your own ability?

Dude I was like 15 when I did that. Besides, I'm not a big fan of reinventing the wheel.

Shill threads on Jow Forums.

You said there is a deficiency, so how would it be reinventing the wheel to fill it?

Because OS X already filled it.

OS X hasn't been around for years at this point.

First of all, I don't give a flying fuck what Apple renames it to, it's still OS X. Secondly, if you want to play the semantics game we're actually talking about Mac OS X.

Yes, but they rebranded it years ago. There is never going to be a Mac OS 11, so stop calling it OS X (pronounced as "ten"). It is just macOS now.

The naming doesn't happen retroactively. 10.0-10.7 is still "Mac OS X" and 10.8-10.11 are still "OS X." We're discussing Mac OS X.

Games

The community

oh look another shill thread...

Attached: faggotpolice.png (500x354, 220K)

They're too old.

That couldn't possibly be less relevant to this discussion.

Far too old.

Again, that couldn't possibly be less relevant. I'm not talking about using Mac OS X in 2019, you dumbass.

Then this is irrelevant to the thread.

>thread about what made me give up Linux
>the thing that made me give up Linux is irrelevant
You're a special kind of stupid, aren't you?

You didn't give up Linux, though, you said you still like it.

Liking something is not the same thing as using something.

Give up on means to lose faith in it.

Stupid shill threads on Jow Forums.

Koikatsu doesn't run on wine

Not much faith to be had in a kernel with no decent OS. While the kernel is good, I've essentially given up on it because using it is a pain.

>give up on linux

Attached: implying.png (500x500, 48K)

Stop associating Linux with an OS. It is entirely independent.

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you’re referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called “Linux”, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project. There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use.
Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine’s resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called “Linux” distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

A kernel's not worth much on its own, it needs an OS to accompany it.

So does all software, but to judge Linux based on something it has no domain over is just silly.

I'm not judging Linux, just pointing out that until the issues are fixed it's a good kernel for shit operating systems.

I had a lobotomy. But everything is perfect, now I can post shill threads on Jow Forums all day, and I don't need a Lincucks for that

It can be used in any operating system. It isn't limited to one variety.

We already went over replacing XNU with Linux, you want to cover replacing NT with it now?

Those operating systems are proprietary, so you would need access to the source code before replacing the kernel and rewriting the userland. Could be done with minimal effort, however.

In other words you fucking can't.

You just need access to the source code. Would be easy if it were available.

But it's not available.

Yes. But to do it you just need access to the source code. Would be easy if it were available.

But it fucking isn't.

I said that.

I did too, yet you keep trying to tell me you can do it.

I didn't want a CoC in my ass. Once the CoC was strapped on, it became a tranny dick-weilding SJW, pushing it over the edge of a system already packed with shit which I felt some distrust for.

Scroll up. I said if it were available it would be easy. Try to keep up, kid.

And I said it's not available so it's not easy. Don't tell people ahead of you to keep up, you dolt.

>And I said it's not available so it's not easy.
That doesn't make sense. It still is easy regardless of whether we have the source or not. It isn't difficult to get, it just has to be given.
>Don't tell people ahead of you to keep up, you dolt.
You just seem very confused.

>That doesn't make sense. It still is easy regardless of whether we have the source or not. It isn't difficult to get, it just has to be given.
In order to do it you need to access the source code, which is no trivial task. In other words, it's not easy.
>You just seem very confused
Says the guy that claims it'd be trivial to replace XNU or NT with Linux while ignoring the fact that the necessary source code isn't available.

Latency. That's why I use linux-rt.
Mainline latency is too shitty for desktop use.

>which is no trivial task
Yes it is. All you need to do is be granted access. It isn't a question of difficulty at all.
>Says the guy that claims it'd be trivial to replace XNU or NT with Linux while ignoring the fact that the necessary source code isn't available.
I didn't ignore that. You must either be illiterate or trolling. I hope it is the latter for your sake, kid.

Let's break this down into steps, all must be completed for this task to be successful
>obtain source code
>shoehorn Linux into it
Since you can't easily do both tasks, you can't easily replace NT or XNU with Linux, kid.

>Since you can't easily do both tasks
Actually, the first step CAN be completed easily. You just need to be given the source code.
The second step is also easy, it just takes a bit of rewriting.

>Actually, the first step CAN be completed easily. You just need to be given the source code.
Send MS and Apple some emails asking for the source, see how far that gets you.

>Send MS and Apple some emails asking for the source, see how far that gets you.
It was a hypothetical, dipshit. Are you seriously this retarded? Microdick or Crapple COULD just give it to me, hypothetically.

And since they won't help you with the first step the second step is impossible.

They could, however.

I'll believe it when I see it.

It's a hypothetical, dipshit.

Which is irrelevant. Hypothetically being able to create a franken OS doesn't help me in the real world.

>Which is irrelevant
Why? My original statement depended on it, so it is anything but irrelevant.
>Hypothetically being able to create a franken OS doesn't help me in the real world.
Why does merely changing the kernel make it a "franken OS" in your opinion? Does changing the email client also make it a franken OS?

>Why? My original statement depended on it, so it is anything but irrelevant.
It's irrelevant.
>Why does merely changing the kernel make it a "franken OS" in your opinion? Does changing the email client also make it a franken OS?
I don't know what your idea of a franken something is but mine's cramming things that don't belong together together.

>It's irrelevant.
Then why have you been discussing it for the last thirty minutes?
>I don't know what your idea of a franken something is but mine's cramming things that don't belong together together.
A kernel doesn't necessarily belong with certain programs, so I don't see how Linux does not belong on Windows.

When you want a software for example
For your Linux
You gonna get literally cancer
You gonna have mass because everything is so close
You need sudo
And you maybe get a bit cancer on how to run stuff and compile

It got to be a way to not make it less retard

I'm not gay when there is a file I want to run I run it just click on it
Want to compile a software fine install that and that
On Linux you need to install 2000 stuff that you go no idea you need
And blablalbalal
Why there is no config.cfg file for whatever settings and to compile type on the terminal
Command.exe compile --86x

But no to change stuff you need to scan everything
But nooo Linus wants to over smart us

What a nigger

>Then why have you been discussing it for the last thirty minutes?
The impossibility of your dumb idea.
>A kernel doesn't necessarily belong with certain programs, so I don't see how Linux does not belong on Windows.
OS X was designed for XNU; Windows was designed for NT.

Why I don't use that trash os as my desktop because it's literally mass!

>The impossibility of your dumb idea.
It isn't impossible. Learn what that means.
>OS X was designed for XNU; Windows was designed for NT.
No they weren't. They were adapted for those kernels, you geek, especially Windows. They can be adapted for Linux easily.

Which OS?

>It isn't impossible. Learn what that means.
Something that's never going to happen is impossible.
>No they weren't. They were adapted for those kernels, you geek, especially Windows. They can be adapted for Linux easily.
Whatever you say, kid.

>What the last straw that made you give up on linux?
no usable lightweight DE besides autistic tiling dogshit meme hacker wm #8192753

Linux

>Something that's never going to happen is impossible.
Impossible means it cannot happen. But I could be given the source right now. It is possible.
>Whatever you say, kid.
You got owned.
That is a kernel, not an OS.

>Impossible means it cannot happen. But I could be given the source right now. It is possible.
I see we're back to semantics. It's so highly improbable that it's not worth mentioning. So give it up.
>You got owned.
Sure thing, kid.

There isn't any decent userland.
It's either gnu-bloat, redhat backdoor, or 3 guys in a basement doing something for their specific workflow that works great for it but then it doesnx for any other need you have.
Linux great kernel. But there isn't any good userland for it.
OSX has a decent (not great) kernel, but has a user land miles ahead of any userland available for the linux kernel.

>I see we're back to semantics
I'm just teaching you what words mean, kid.
>It's so highly improbable that it's not worth mentioning
No, that isn't up to you to decide and is irrelevant anyway.
>Sure thing, kid.
Nice meme.

>OSX has a decent (not great) kernel, but has a user land miles ahead of any userland available for the linux kernel.
When are you going to update? 10.11 is fairly old at this point.

>I'm just teaching you what words mean, kid.
I know what words mean, kid.
>No, that isn't up to you to decide and is irrelevant anyway.
It's not up to you to decide what's up to me to decide.
>Nice meme.
You're the one that started calling me kid, kid.

>I know what words mean, kid.
Evidently not. Or were you just trolling?
>It's not up to you to decide what's up to me to decide.
I'm the messenger here, dickweed.
>You're the one that started calling me kid, kid.
That is not what I was referring to, you illiterate bung smuggler.