XPost: comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.sys.mac.advocacy   
   From: nuh-uh@nope.com   
      
   On 2025-08-24 21:36, vallor wrote:   
   > On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 18:12:53 -0400, "Joel W. Crump"    
   > wrote in :   
   >   
   >> On 8/24/2025 5:31 PM, Alan wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>>> More specifically, if you're "not wired for Apple", because you   
   >>>>> replaced it with Windows, what makes you more "wired" for that?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Windows is just WYSIWYG, Mac is quirky.  Linux requires comprehension,   
   >>>> which I have, but I'm not disliking using Windows again, for now.  I   
   >>>> haven't made my decision about replacing it with Linux on this mini PC.   
   >>>   
   >>> Unresponsive.   
   >>>   
   >>> In what way is Windows any more WYSIWYG than macOS?   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> I could be out of date, I guess, having used macOS during Snow Leopard,   
   >> but then again it hasn't really changed fundamentally, it's   
   >> counterintuitive to me.  They are on a lower intellectual level than   
   >> Microsoft, and definitely the GNU/Linux realm.  People who click with   
   >> macOS are willing to pay for the privilege, but damn it's pricey, the   
   >> hardware options not competitive with Windows devices.   
   >   
   > Well, we bought a Mac Studio, which is a low-end UNIX(r) workstation,   
   > not comparable to a Windows desktop.   
   >   
   > However, for $4K more, I bought this Linux workstation from System76,   
   > and it runs rings around the Mac for my workloads.   
      
   I'm sorry.   
      
   Are you saying you spent $4K more than you spend on a Mac Studio...   
      
   ...or that you spent $4K on another machine?   
      
      
      
   >   
   > When it comes to computers, I like to buy one that will last for a while,   
   > giving it some future-proofing.  For example, my Linux workstation has   
   > two 10Gbase-T Ethernet ports, one of which I use to talk to my NAS   
   > at 10Gbits/s.   
      
   And what do you do with the other one?   
      
   >   
   > Hugh posted a link that you should read about "boots theory":   
   >   
   > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory   
   >   
   > Going back to the Mac, I think Thunderbolt supports 40Gbits/s connections.   
   > (Someone please correct me if I'm wrong -- it may be faster now.)   
      
   I think 40Gbits/s is correct.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)