TECH MINIMALISM

>but you aren't running Darwin
*you are running Darwin plus an entire Desktop environment plus an entire suite of software.

It's like calling Windows minimal because at one point the NT kernel was a small piece of software.

Not op, but can this please be an actual productive thread instead of another mac vs whatever shit flinging thread?
Please just let it go bro, I'm honestly interested in what the minimum would be for a lot of people.

>*you are running Darwin plus an entire Desktop environment plus an entire suite of software.
You don't have to run those, though. You don't know what bloat is.
>It's like calling Windows minimal because at one point the NT kernel was a small piece of software
No, NT has always been a bloated piece of shit. Toy kernel for a toy OS.

>Bloat is software performing unneeded tasks.
Yes, eg. the DE included in MacOS, Siri and all the rest of the garbage included in MacOS.

>macOS is less bloated than GNU/Linux.
By which metric?
Certainly any Linux system can be made more minimal by virtue of having less software installed.

Literally all of these points are wrong. You're baiting, right?

>Yes, eg. the DE included in MacOS, Siri and all the rest of the garbage included in MacOS.
How is that an example? You just named software, not what it is doing.
>Certainly any Linux system can be made more minimal by virtue of having less software installed.
That isn't what bloat is.
Hi, winjeet. We get it, you love Microsoft. You don't have to shill in every thread.

>You don't have to run those, though.
You probably should be running Darwin, for very OBVIOUS reasons, because it is the basis of your OS. Without it you have a fancy brick.

Do you think your Computer is magic?

Referring to the "plus" part, genius.

>You just named software, not what it is doing.
So what is your metric?

Is a computer more minimal the fewer CPU cycles it does per second? Because that is what you are arguing...

Yes and on Linux you don't have to run anything too...

So what is your point?
What metric are you using for "minimal"? Average CPU instructions executed per second?

No, software is more minimal when it achieves its goal with the fewest actions. So you could say "CPU cycles", but that is vague and pointless.

>Yes and on Linux you don't have to run anything too...
But you have to run Linux, which is bloated shit compared to XNU.

>No, software is more minimal when it achieves its goal with the fewest actions.
But that usually means more complex software is more minimal.

A highly complex implementation can be far better optimized then the trivial one...

And even then, do you use your aqua and the rest?

>But you have to run Linux, which is bloated shit compared to XNU.
What evidence do you have for that?

Have you looked at the CPU cycles for each syscall and compared them?

My old and cum stained T60 of course.

>implying you need computer tech to survive
also sage for aplel shill

Attached: 1521035502992.jpg (1748x2048, 294K)

>A highly complex implementation can be far better optimized then[sic] the trivial one...
So? Minimal doesn't mean small.
>And even then, do you use your aqua and the rest?
No, I don't use anything extra. Why would I? Everything can be done through a shell.
Linus Torvalds himself admits it.

>Hi, winjeet. We get it, you love Microsoft. You don't have to shill in every thread.
Thanks for confirming. Here's your you

>Linus Torvalds himself admits it.
That the Linux Kernel uses more CPU cycles for each system call then Darwin?

>No, I don't use anything extra.
I hope you load the drivers for your hardware and the other software that comes with your MacOS System, else you have a fancy brick.

And certainly you do not use an iPhone, right?

>Minimal doesn't mean small.
So by what metric is Darwin more "minimal".

>That the Linux Kernel uses more CPU cycles for each system call then Darwin?
Yes.
>I hope you load the drivers for your hardware and the other software that comes with your MacOS System
XNU does that.
>And certainly you do not use an iPhone, right?
iPhones also run on XNU.
>So by what metric is Darwin more "minimal".
Performs its function with the least overhead possible.

>Yes.
Link?

>XNU does that.
No, XNU is a kernel. It doesn't include user software you would use to interact with the system.

>iPhones also run on XNU.
But it's a useless brick without software that allows you to interact with it.

>Link?
Linus Torvalds said it. Check the mailing list.
>No, XNU is a kernel. It doesn't include user software you would use to interact with the system.
It loads the drivers for I/O, which is just the keyboard and the display.
>But it's a useless brick without software that allows you to interact with it.
And? I can run the software I like.

>Linus Torvalds said it.
So you are making stuff up...
Good to know.

>It loads the drivers for I/O, which is just the keyboard and the display.
I hope it also loads drivers for all the other stuff, a shell and user space programs.

>And? I can run the software I like.
Like what? A bloat shell? Bloat user

>So you are making stuff up...
What do you want me to do, bring up the specific email? I bet you use a search engine, you pseud.
>I hope it also loads drivers for all the other stuff, a shell and user space programs.
I store them in ROM.
>Like what? A bloat shell? Bloat user
Which shell do you think is bloated? You think root is bloated? How so? Oh right, you have no idea what bloat actually is.

>Bloat user
*Bloat user space programs?

Why even use a kernel? Then, just manually set the instructions for the CPU...

Because the kernel isn't bloated.

>bring up the specific email? I
Yes.

>Which shell do you think is bloated?
All of them, they are useless overhead and not part of the kernel.

It literally wastes millions of CPU cycles a minute, just interact with the hardware directly bloattard.

Go use wangblows bloattard.

>Yes
Well, you can worry about that. I already know it to be true.
>All of them, they are useless overhead and not part of the kernel.
Outline what makes them bloated then, specifically. Start with zsh.
>It literally wastes millions of CPU cycles a minute, just interact with the hardware directly bloattard.
Yeah, you don't know what bloat is.

>Well, you can worry about that. I already know it to be true.
So you are just lying.

>Start with zsh.
They are OVERHEAD.
Imagine all the code that is running just to do a simple thing like define a variable...

Just let the CPU execute the OP codes.

>Yeah, you don't know what bloat is.
By your definition it's things that are executed with more overhead then necessary.
If you want a calculation done, just enter the OP codes into the CPU, no need to use a bloated Kernel...

So you have literally nothing else? No refrigerator? No oven? No toaster? No light bulbs?

>So you are just lying.
Look, just because you aren't on the mailing list doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
>They are OVERHEAD.
No they aren't. They can potentially HAVE overhead. You seriously must be trolling at this point. Go back to your Arch + dwm install, suckless faggot.
>By your definition it's things that are executed with more overhead then necessary.
Yep, you don't know what bloat is. And evidently you can't read either.

Just imagine if you want to calculate 2+2 on your machine, instead of entering the correct OP code into the CPU and getting the answer, you start a kernel which takes billions of CPU cycles, then start a shell another couple of millions, enter your calculations, causing interruptions each time you type, then your text is send to an interpreter and THEN your calculation is executed.
If that isn't bloat I don't know what is.

Go use Windows bloattard.

>Look, just because you aren't on the mailing list doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
It isn't on the mailing list, I checked,you are lying,bloat tard.

>I don't know what is.
You can say that again, Archfag.

Nothing. You could throw me naked into the woods in the middle of bum fuck nowhere, I'm pretty sure I would survive just fine.

See your definition "Performs its function with the least overhead possible."
A kernel is bloat, you can do everything on a computer without using one.

Or answer me this, what thing on your computer do you absolutely NEED a kernel for?

Go use Windows bloattard.

You don't even know the difference between software and hardware, you stupid suckless queer.

Also good one, ignoring that I demonstrated you lying about what Torvalds said.

How do you know I'm lying? Can you give me a source on that?

What single thing do you NEED the kernel for bloattard?

Everything can be done more efficient without it.

gr8b8m8

congratulations on ruining your own thread by sissy slapfighting about cpu cycles or whatever the fuck, op

>How do you know I'm lying?
It's not on the mailing list.

>Can you give me a source on that?
Look here: lkml.org/
Linus never said what you claimed he said.

>It's not on the mailing list.
Retard.
>Linus never said what you claimed he said.
Yes he did.

>Implying this wasn't OP's intention

>Yes he did.
Nope, nowhere on the mailing list did he say that.
I have you the source.

Now stfu bloattard.

He clearly did, just before your time I would say, kid.

>He clearly did
Nope. Not on the mailing list, I gave you the source.

Now install Windows or whatever bloat with a Kernel you use.

He said it, kid. I was there. Now go back to your """minimal"""" dwm install.

>He said it, kid.
Nope, not on he mailing list.

Then it was in our private emails.

So you admit to being a liar.>Check the mailing list.

BTW, Jobs, in personal communication with me, admitted that he planned to ditch MacOS and replace it with Arch Linux, shortly before he died.
He said this was because his engineers informed him that arch Linux was more minimal then even the XNU itself.

But keep using Kernel bloat, idiot.

How is that lying? I misremembered something from 15 years ago. Get a life, Ben Shapiro.

>I misremembered something from 15 years ago.
And kept insisting on it.

Now delete XNU and install arch with i3wm, that is how Jobs wanted it, because it was more minimal.

I could probably live with a Nokia 8110 and a laptop of some kind, but at the moment I have too many devices

It's still true, suckless faggot. Linux is bloated crap.

>Linux is bloated crap.
Steve Jobs didn't think so.

xD epic meme

?

>I'm down
Yeah, we can clearly see that. Only down syndrome owners can buy iToys.

Currently 12" Macbook, iPhone and earbuds. If I absolutely had to, I could do my work with an iPhone alone but that'd go from minimalism to self-crippling.

>autism

MacOS is still full with bloat, bruv. All the Siri/maps/news/homekit shit is a waste of space.

>software is more minimal when it achieves its goal with the fewest actions
Under that definition MacOS would easy qualify though. It's by far the most complete out of the box and most people wouldn't even need to install addition software to do everything they want right away. For specific cases is too complicated to rank.

You don't know what bloat is, wintoddler.

>wintoddler
Great reading comprehension.

I will never understand chasing the minimalism meme

I could survive with just a decent laptop and dumbphone like I used to. Smartphones and tablets are nice but unnecessary.

To feel like you’ve accomplished something when you can’t accomplish anything else.

>minimalism
posts pic w multiple devices having speakers, and speaker in the same picture
posts pic of more than 1 device having screen
posts fucking lamp
posts desk
do i need to go on?

>Q: WE HEAR YOU’RE NOT THAT KEEN ON TECHNOLOGY...
>A: I don’t have an internet connection, or a mobile phone, or a TV signal. I can play [digital] music on the television, or on the computer I suppose, but I don’t. I am pretty much cut off from the 21st century. It’s like culturally I’m trying to establish a kind of sensory deprivation tank for myself, whereby I am receiving no modern signals whatsoever, because I’ve heard that after a while in a sensory deprivation tank you start to hallucinate and have all sorts of strange experiences, so I’m waiting for that to happen.

>Q: HOW DO YOU MANAGE WITHOUT THE INTERNET?
>A: It seems to work. I am pretty much cut off from the majority of the 21st century, but not much escapes me. You hear about everything, because you’re talking to people, you’re absorbing a lot of this information as if by osmosis, just through the pores of your skin. I have said that by embracing the internet in the way that it has done, which was kind of inevitable, society has embarked on a massive experiment without having any idea of the various ways in which those technologies will impact upon us socially, politically and psychologically. So I so think if there’s this huge experiment going on, it’s best that I remain outside the petri dish, as a kind of control, so that we’ll be able to see how badly the rest of you have mutated, by comparing you with me as a kind of baseline.
>>>interview with Alan Moore

Attached: 1566044076192.jpg (403x292, 14K)

Sounds like he took the tedpill.

>AVC: A lot of writers—if they don’t use typewriters or write longhand—claim to only use computers without an Internet connection, because the distraction is too readily available, and no work gets done.
>JF: Absolutely. I have one of those nine-pound Dell laptops you can get for $389 because nobody ended up buying that model, for obvious reasons. I took the wireless card out immediately, and I plugged up the Ethernet hole with superglue. The biggest struggle was getting Hearts and Solitaire off of it. I did work on a DOS machine until about five years ago. It ran WordPerfect 5.0, which is still the best software ever written for a writer, I think. But now, obviously, I work on a Windows machine, and Windows just will not let you de-install a Solitaire program. It puts it back whenever you try to remove it.

>It’s doubtful that anyone with an Internet connection at his workplace is writing good fiction.

Attached: franzen-photo.jpg (1044x1156, 307K)

No, we already noticed your autism, thanks

>can remove his wireless card but can’t install freedos

Attached: image.jpg (288x288, 62K)

Interacting with and being influenced by people that are part of the experiment doesn't sound like a control.