On 2008-08-31, Timberwoof <timberwoof.spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> In article <wfm1ehm4a873.lc7tvefo2i3o$.dlg@xxxxxxxxxx>,
> "Moshe Goldfarb." <brick_n_straw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 01:05:58 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>
>> > Moving from Mac to Ubuntu: Why I¹m switching
>> >
>> > ,----[ Quote ]
>> >| Why I¹m leaving Mac
>> >|
>> >| 1. Crap file management.The Finder doesn¹t work for me. No location bar
>> >| and no tree strucure side panel makes it difficult to navigate folders
>> >| and
>> >| move files around the way I want to.
>
> The Finder has three different ways to look at files:
>
> 1. Each window is a view into one directory with each thing in the
> directory as its own icon.
>
> 2. A window is a view into a folder with a list of everything in the
> directory. Folders have little triangles that you click on to reveal the
> contents of the folders.
>
> 3. A window has columns; each column shows the contents of the item
> selected in the column to the left.
>
> I use them all; it depends on what I'm doing. I hate Windows'
> inconsistent file browser, and Red Hat Linux's file browser feels
> crunchy.
>
> The author is merely complaining that the Finder doesn't work the way he
> wants. (This is, of course okay. Extending the Windows-Macintosh Double
> Standard to Linux, it is perfectly okay to complain that Mac OS doesn't
> work the way you want to, but you cannot complain that Windows or Linux
> doesn't.)
No. There is quite a difference, A HUGE difference, between saying that
something is not to your tastes versus saying that it is "inherently wrong"
for not doing things your way or what you view to be the "one true way".
Linux (and to a much lesser degree Windows) is much more tolerant and
accomodating of other approaches to the same problem.
>
>> >| 2. Insufficient panels & customization. In Ubuntu I can have as many
>> >| panels I want, can put all kinds of stuff on them, and can arrange them
>> >| however I want. In OSX You just have the dock, and you can really only
>> >| put
>> >| applications or files on them, and you can¹t even put in a separator to
>> >| keep them organized.
>
> One could probably find a custom finder replacement, but the author will
One could also probably find a colony of rhesus monkeys in your pants.
> never be happy with OS X. Linux application UIs are generally built with
> several principles in mind:
>
> 1. They should be built by command-line gurus who don't understand why
> anyone would want to use a graphical UI. For example, the MySQL
> graphical database browser doesn't actually let you browse a database
> visually; it still requires you to hand-craft queries.
Funny that. I had no problem doing this.
>
> 2. The more knobs to frob, the better. All knobs must be instantly
> visible on the main window of the application.
Sounds like confusing visual noise.
>
>> >| 3. Various other annoyances. Such as:
>> >| * program menus are glued to the top of the screen on one
>> >| monitor
>> >| only, which detaches them from the window. This is especailly
>> >| annoying when the program you¹re using is on the second monitor.
>
> This is another aspect of complaining that the OS does not work the way
> I want it to, which is only valid against OS X. Becuase of the Double
> Standard, one is prohibited from making that complaint against Linux or
> Windows. Early Apple research resulted in Fitt's Law, which states that
Nope. Complain often enough and loud enough and someone might implement
a workalike. Infact, for any complaint you have about Linux for which you
think Linux doesn't have one Linux probably already does.
> the time it takes to click on a UI widget depends somewhat on the
> distance from the mouse pointer to the widget and inversely on the size
> of the widget. The bigger the widget, the less time it takes. When the
> menu is stuck to the ceiling like that, each item in the menu is
> effectively 68 miles tall, which enables you to just slam the mouse
> pointer up there very quickly.
>
> My complaint against menus attached to windows is that it's often hard
> to tell which of several visible menus is the one I actually want. if I
> click the wrong one I've activated some other window.
>
>
>> >| * the date/time doesn¹t open to a navigable calendar. I often
>> >| use
>> >| this to check dates in the past or future.
>
> That's a cool feature request. Submit it to Apple!
>
> On OS X I can configure the clock/calendar to be a clock and calendar,
> and licking on it always gives me the complete current date and time. On
> Windows I have to move the mouse over there, and if the OS feels like
> it, it will tell me the date. On red Hat Linux ... there isn't one.
>
>> >| * you can¹t see hidden files unless you run a command from the
>> >| terminal to turn them on. Thus, hidden files are either always
>> >| on
>> >| or always off.
>
> You could WTFCY and make an Applescript or BASH shell command which will
> do that.
This is EXTRAORDINARILY LAME. In an OS like MacOS, this really is a
completely intolerably user hostile situation. No Apple Cheerleader with
an ounce of shame should make up excuses for it or suggest such a crude
manual hack.
>
>> > http://meganmcdermott.com/2008/08/29/moving-mac-ubuntu-switching/
>>
>> Wonderful, some idiots blog...
>> Great source you have there Roy Schestowitz.
>>
>>
>> > Why Switch to Linux?
>>
>> Good question.
>> Evidently 99 percent of the people have not done it.
>> Maybe you better investigate, Roy Schestowitz.
>
> Linux is good for servers and embedded systems. It's too crunchy for a
> desktop system. I particularly despise its second-rate terminal
Well, at least I don't have to send someone to the termainal if
they want their hidden files visible. That's even worse than Windows.
> application. OS X's is very good, with direct keyboard support for copy
> and paste and nice integration with the Finder. For instance, if I need
> to know the complete path to some file, I can just type ls and then drag
> the icon for the file to the terminal. It then pastes the path onto the
> command line for me. Under Linux, every application has its own
> standards for how to implement copy and paste. On some, I MUST use a
> menu; on others I can use the misplaced control key.
Ah... no.
There is infact an X standard for cut & paste that many of us have
been using with Linux and Unixen before it quite possibly since before
you started computing and possibly even before you were born.
>
> The Gnome desktop is extremely well documented for developers, but not
> for users. For instance, I once searched all up and down the web to find
> instructions on how the damn menu is configured and how to add things to
> it. I had installed some cool applications onto Linux, and I wanted to
You mean you missed that little icon on the bottom "Add/Remove"?
> have them in the menu ... but nothing would tell me how to do that. I
> can add things to the top menu. And forget being able to create my own
> icons for things.
That's pretty trivial too.
>
> I've used Linux, Windows, and OS X. I prefer OS X. Someone else
> switching back to Linux will not convince me to.
>
--
OpenDoc is moot when Apple is your one stop iShop. |||
/ | \
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
|
|
