MacOS is the most boring OS in existence

>decide to try out macOS, it must be somewhat decent, right?
>the whole OS feels like a mix of Gnome and XFCE
>nothing special, besides keyboard shortcuts in applications being different for no reason
>realize I would be better off buying a ThinkPad and installing Linux on it
Why is macOS so popular then when most of the proprietary apps can run on Linux with WINE? I mean seriously, there is nothing special about macOS besides it looking different.

Attached: LinusTechTips.png (639x349, 158K)

Other urls found in this thread:

opengroup.org/openbrand/register/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

I've recently bought an used MBP 13' 2015, and I ask myself the same question. The only interesting thing about Apple ecosystem is the integration of their devices+icloud.

It's the best desktop OS because it has the best middle ground between the software compatibility of Windows and the flexibility of Linux with it being Unix based. The only problem is that you either have to buy Apple hardware or fuck around with Hackintoshes that can be a real pain in the ass to get running.

Boring is what I like about it. It's cleanly designed and reliable. Don't need an OS (or a computer for that matter) to be exciting

Gestures, it "werks" with a few things if you have multiple apple devices I guess. There's not much about it honestly. It's the worst at anything games, that's for sure. One thing it gets right though, that for me consistently has been a pain on linux, is anything related to desktop composition, animations and screen tearing. There's no shitty input latency, there's no tearing on anything, it's smooth. No headaches there.

>with it being Unix based
can we stop with this meme

Because of the logo on the backside of the screen. Seriously, I tried it today too. It's so goddam deprecated.

I can't speak for other macOS users, so my answers are only my own.

>Why is macOS so popular then when most of the proprietary apps can run on Linux with WINE?
In my experience they can't, but that's beside the point. I don't use macOS primarily for the "proprietary apps" but for stability, battery life and the full ecosystem. Before getting my MBP back in 2015, I had been using Linux since 2005 and the experience of using Linux on your PC hasn't really changed that much in those 10 years; UI design is still clunky, day-to-day applications such as email clients and browsers are still heavily underprioritised on Linux and sound drivers were and still are a mess. I've experienced bugs with GDM/LightDM and Unity and Gnome and KDE and Xfce that I've never seen on macOS (or Windows for that matter).

>I mean seriously, there is nothing special about macOS besides it looking different.
I agree wholeheartedly that there's nothing "special" about it, but it really just works.

For specific applications, and obviously for my work, I will always use Linux. But for day to day stuff, macOS is just nicer to deal with.

For someone who doesn't use a computer for games or anything else besides word processing and studying, is Mac worth buying?

>user pls port our android to ios
>needs a macbook and iphone to legally deploy apps into itunes store

People say macs are easy to use and good for noobs. Let me say, MacOS has the worst interface I've seen in my life and it's not even close. I have no problem quickly adapting to whatever shit. Even trying gnome 3 for the first time many years ago it didn't bother me at all. But this is too much, I simply can't understand who designed this and the target audience.

Unless you absolutely need to run Pages or Microsoft Word then you'll manage just fine with Libreoffice on Linux

Linux is a kernel.
Also, being Unix-based is not a virtue.

Linux are different operating systems based on the Linux kernel

Read your post again and notice how self-contradictory it is.

>Two different things can't have the same name
You have autism

I used hackintosh El Capitan, Sierra and High Sierra for a while. I think I used the system for about a year and a half or so. It had really good things, it had terrible things.

Good things:
-Updates were few and far between, but quite stable. Sure hackintosh -can- break if you update to a major release (so 10.12 to 10.13 or something like that) or if you don't even bother putting the right things in the right place, but as long as you learn that it was cool.
-Everything looked pretty much consistent. I wouldn't say it's a mix of gnome and xfce, because at least everything except for legacy stuff (that's quite old, like Cog) didn't exhibit any design flaws or inconsistencies
-File management was quite nice, hell I don't get why people hate finder so much. I remember the copying and replacing file meme and all I can say is, learn how to do your shit. It had a fuckload of neat little tricky shit like automated folders and most applications were almost aware of each other. If I thought "hey, dragging this shit could work" it turned out it would. It's braindead but it's there.
-Next to 0 issues with anything that was external, except for my hard drive
-Parallels worked quite nice for some light gaming, weirdly enough
-It still had the adobe shit, and some applications that (although they cost money) just fucking work
-No fiddling with my GPU at all
-Safari was real fucking fast, I felt bad about having to switch to other browsers for plugin support

Bad things:
-The things that didn't work, like my dedicated sound card, but that's to be expected
-The things that half worked, like NTFS support. Why the fuck do you have to pay to get reliable NTFS writing support?
-Anything that was a bit niche was out of the fucking way in terms of software
-Performance about 30, maybe 40% lower on almost any graphical task or actual games, a bit terrible
-You were fucked out of luck if you wanted to benchmark and test stuff out.
-Some of the default software is absolute garbage

>Why is macOS so popular then when most of the proprietary apps can run on Linux with WINE?
Businesses don't run WINE. Businesses want something reliable and certified.

>Why the fuck do you have to pay to get reliable NTFS writing support?
Developers developers developers developers

Attached: balmer.jpg (500x500, 34K)

Not boring; STOLEN. As in STOLEN.

Why would anyone want NTFS support? It's the worst filesystem in existence and should never be used.

Pages I would put in a different category. It's not as good for anything serious, but to quickly put together a tutorial with random graphics and tables it's pretty fucking straight to the point.

I have to deal with external drives from other people on the regular, I can't afford to tell them all to install my snowflake OS with a snowflake filesystem (which by the way isn't that good either)

Sounds like you're an OS is something for you to play with, not do something with. Another person whose time is worthless.

Wintoddlers just need to drop their awful special snowflake filesystem and use something that other people use.

You can tell them to format it in ExFAT though.

I only mentioned it because he was asking if he should be using MacOS or not, with Pages not being compatible with Windows or Linux

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.

Attached: 1521276633044.jpg (480x640, 63K)

Why does every desktop OS other than macOS suck so bad at keyboard shortcuts and trackpad gestures?

Because macOS is the continuation of NeXTSTEP, while GNUSTEP is dead.

Honestly I have realized that I don't play that many games that often anymore and I've been thinking about doing this hackintosh thing. Has mojave been fuckier than previous versions when it comes to hackintosh? I remember that in High Sierra I required up to date files for apfs support and used whatevergreen for this shit.

But it has neither. It's literally the worst of both worlds

Why is pajeetOS such a shitheap anyone can login with root and a blank password?

Only if you didn't set the root password, which all self-respecting unix user would do anyway.

>self-respecting unix user
>using pajeetOS
Pick one.

Almost all FreeBSD devs use Macs.

Isn't Windows pajeetOS?

>unix
When will you redditors stop getting off cool tech words you don't understand?

macOS is Unix. Deal with it.

...

opengroup.org/openbrand/register/

It's not a meme, Apple is just not paying the Unix license, therefore it's not official.

>NOOOO NO NO NO NO macos can't be unix REEEEEEE

>therefore it's not official.
It is official, see

MacOS is not Unix. Unix was an OS in the 70s. MacOS is merely UNIX certified, because Apple actually bothered to pay for it. If anything, MacOS is a broken Franken-BSD, pissed and what on with proprietary garbage.

Unix has always been proprietary. What are you on about? macOS is Unix. You clearly don't even know what Unix is.

>Unix was an OS in the 70s.
Hurr durr SysV was the last UNIX durr


>proprietary
UNIX has always been proprietary, since version 4.

Name a single UNIX that wasn't proprietary, user.

>HP-UX, Solaris, SCO, AIX aren't UNIX
Do *you* know what UNIX is?

I didn't say it wasn't proprietary. Learn to read.

WINJEET BTFO
>He doesn't even know what Unix is.

Attached: 1547887297652.jpg (317x299, 71K)

>when most of the proprietary apps can run on Linux with WINE

yeah, they realistically run almost 90% of 50% of the time. deluded freetard.
how do you expect to do any work on something like that?

Learn what unix is you dumb Windows nigger.