Right, all they need to do is convince every end user they’re trying to distribute software to that they’re using the wrong OS and should replace their MacBook with something running Linux. No problem at all.
I decided to get into this subject in my comment before I edited it out because I thought it would be too much of a tangent/ruffle too many feathers.
But, yeah, macOS power users these days seem to spend a lot of time criticizing the OS and the company and never seem to just switch to something else.
Apple is the 4th most popular PC manufacturer on the market. You can use something else. It's not a monopoly, nor a duopoly like with iOS.
I switched to Linux, and I've been beyond shocked at how smooth it's been. It's been better than both Mac and Windows in more ways than I expected. And sure, not perfect, but still.
I can charitably believe this comment is not disingenuous, however, there are effectively two options, which are Windows and macOS, regardless of three manufacturers making more Windows machines than Apple at number four with Mac. I would call it an effective duopoly
There are effectively two options if you dismiss Linux a priori.
Which yes, many people do. There are plenty of people who have no desire to try Linux. And if you're a developer then you have to consider those people, because many of the people who use your software are the type with no desire to try Linux.
But there are fewer and fewer reasons not to try Linux, and that group of "I'd never use Linux", while still large, is slowly shrinking. I'd argue that Microsoft is doing more than Apple is to push people into reconsidering Linux (and, often, discovering that it's actually pretty good these days, and that your techie friend whom you call all the time to help you with Windows is actually happy to help you with your Linux questions instead).
But slowly, over time, it's making less and less sense to dismiss Linux a priori.
> But there are fewer and fewer reasons not to try Linux
Does my existing hardware connect to the internet and go to sleep when I close the lid? Does the hardware I can buy from major retailers do the same thing?
I know these are _technically_ vendor problems and not Linux problems, but I’ve got enough things to figure out without adding “what chipset does this high end laptop use” to the mix
The problem is that you're buying hardware designed for Windows, putting Linux on it instead, and expecting to have no issues whatsoever. I don't think that's practical.
When you try to run Windows on hardware designed for Linux, you run into similar fiddly problems. Exhibit A, the Steam Deck.
If you want a laptop that the manufacturer explicitly designed to be Linux compatible, the recent Frameworks are worth a look. Or System76.
No, the problem is I’m buying hardware that’s readily available to me.
The cheapest framework laptop I can assemble in the UK at the time of writing this is “estimated” at £1226. System76 seems to be us based and the pricing is similar. When I search for Linux laptops on Lenovo, I get chromebooks, dell’s cheapest option is £1399 and I can’t actually figure out what’s going on with HP.
> putting Linux on it instead, and expecting to have no issues whatsoever. I don't think that's practical.
I’m not looking for perfection - windows and Mac are both chock full of issues. But I do expect the basics to work.
You can just buy any regular reasonably popular laptop hardware it’s almost certainly going to work just fine with Linux.
You don’t need to buy a Lenovo that is Linux specific. They’re all just going to work.
This assumption that Linux is going to have hardware compatibility problems is super outdated.
And in the age of AI and
YouTube reviews it’s really not that hard to figure out if any old computer has decent compatibility. AI also makes initial setup and troubleshooting a lot easier.
I’m not sure we can say it’s an effective duopoly when the desktop gaming market has more Linux users than Mac users.
Think about it this way: for every four Mac users there is one Linux user. That sounds quite significant if you ask me, and that’s what the marketshare statistics say.
By what measure? HTML as they're describing it here includes CSS and presumably Javascript. Markdown has only a handful of elements and they're all more human readable in their unrendered form. Show both to someone who has never seen either and it's obvious which they would describe as "simpler".
They should have named this study the "The Turning test for Design." All they proved was that AI could convincly mimic long established human created norms in in visual communications. "Hey, our prompt output images that are competent enough"
Is anyone surprised that a diffusion model trained on petabytes of human created artifacts could properly mimic human created artifacts?
I'd still argue that there's this AI'ish veneer that's just slimy enough to pickup and tell.
The real benchmark in human creativity is originality / novelty. These look like they came off of every half-decent designer's Pinterest board.
It's pretty much a universal API credit policy at this point. I'm not sure if this legitimately escapes the prepaid gift card requirements or if the providers see nuance where there might not be any.
reply