XPost: comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.sys.mac.advocacy   
   From: crude@sausa.ge   
      
   On 2026-01-04 10:48 p.m., Alan wrote:   
   > On 2026-01-04 19:33, CrudeSausage wrote:   
   >> On 2026-01-04 21:41, Alan wrote:   
   >>> On 2026-01-04 18:33, CrudeSausage wrote:   
   >>>> On 2026-01-04 19:29, Alan wrote:   
   >>>>> On 2026-01-03 18:15, CrudeSausage wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> they can depend on to obfuscate their drawbacks and   
   >>>>>>>> exaggerate their better features, making it seem like   
   >>>>>>>> the investment in a Mac isn't overpaying Apple but in   
   >>>>>>>> fact an upgrade over its competition, a proposition   
   >>>>>>>> easily refuted by actually using the three platforms   
   >>>>>>>> enough to see how mediocre Apple's crapware really is.   
   >>>>>>> And yet you can never actually articulate something that   
   >>>>>>> either Linux or Windows does better.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Servers and supercomputers for Linux, gaming for Windows.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> First: not what people care about for a PERSONAL computer.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> You asked what Linux does better (still available to quote   
   >>>> above) and I told you.   
   >>>   
   >>> In the context of what APPLE provides, yes.   
   >>>   
   >>> Do you see the difference?   
   >>   
   >> Theoretically, if Apple were to decide to produce a server product   
   >> again, I'm sure that the line of processors would do the job and   
   >> the product would be quite impressive. Nevertheless, it would   
   >> inevitably cost more and provide little to no benefit over the lower-   
   >> cost, more easily maintained Linux servers. I think Apple realized   
   >> that it's not a market they can easily penetrate.   
   >   
   > But this discussion is about how Apple was supposedly "crapware"   
   > compared to Linux or Windows.   
   >   
   > So none of what you said about servers is in any way relevant.   
      
   Well, since you insist on me being on point, Apple is crapware because   
   the moment the NVMe your machine comes from which also can't be replaced   
   reaches its TBW, the computer becomes a literal paperweight because the   
   component sends a signal to the rest of the machine to prevent it from   
   turning on. I believe that is the definition of crap. I'm happy that I'm   
   now back on point.   
      
   >>>>> Second: "more" is not "better".   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Being able to play every game under the sun and with excellent   
   >>>> performance is a lot more important to a gamer than knowing that   
   >>>> two or three titles Apple selected run fine on Apple's hardware.   
   >>>> So yes, _more_ games and _more_ frames are indeed better, Linux   
   >>>> is a better option that MacOS for gamers who don't want to use   
   >>>> Windows, but Windows is still king for now.   
   >>> It isn't BETTER from a computing standpoint.   
   >>>   
   >>> But if you want to make that your standard, then Linux is clearly   
   >>> MUCH "worse" than Apple...   
   >>>   
   >>> ...because Apple provides far more of the software packages that   
   >>> people want to use.   
   >>>   
   >>> Same standard, you agree, right?   
   >>>   
   >>> (Man, you are bad at this!)   
   >>>   
   >>> (BTW, that was all AMUSEMENT. :-) )   
   >>   
   >> You're moving goal posts. You're talking about what MacOS's   
   >   
   > Nope!   
   >   
   > I adopted YOUR goalposts.   
   >   
   >> competition does better and I mentioned gaming which, whether you   
   >   
   > But the topic was how Apple COMPUTERS were supposedly worse AS COMPUTERS.   
      
   My computers don't self-destruct, Apple's do.   
      
   >> like it or not, is still something people do on their _desktops_ and   
   >> _laptops_, a segment Apple caters to. As it is, Linux has already   
   >> conquered the portable gaming market as companies see the benefit of   
   >> using the Linux-based SteamOS on portable devices rather than   
   >> Windows. Still with Steam and Proton, Linux will allow you to play   
   >> 90% or more of what's available for Windows with a small performance   
   >> penalty on NVIDIA GPUs and better performance on AMD GPUs. MacOS's   
   >> compatibility with the large number of titles already available for   
   >> Windows is nowhere near 90%. In most cases, Apple users have to hope   
   >> that someone is nice enough to port a game.   
   >>   
   >> So not only can Linux do everything the Mac can but it can also:   
   >>   
   >> 1) Run servers and provide a complete set of tools for remote access   
   >> and maintenance. 2) Play about 90% of all games ever released.   
   >>   
   >> Both of those at _no_ extra charge and on hardware that costs half   
   >> of what Apple charges.   
   >   
   > None of which is relevant to the topic that was being discussed.   
   >   
   > You're not just repeating yourself.   
      
   You're right, I'm back on point and I present this as evidence of what   
   I'm talking about. Woe is me that instead of doing everything this   
   gentleman does to fix a dead MacBook, I can simply pull the old NVMe out   
   and put in a new one. We're missing out on Apple's greatest feature, I   
   suppose.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)