Can LTT survive on Linux for a week?

[Drak3]

23 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

If you want to stretch it that far, then macOS is also technically Linux. 

No, OSX is not technically Linux. It's Unix, and a BSD derivative.

[straight_stewie]

9 hours ago, OnyxArmos said:

Why would anyone use Linux

I run a headless Ubuntu Server machine for development. I find that a command line only workflow is more immersive and faster than using an IDE. Plus, the machine only takes as long to boot as it does to open any of the big IDEs on any windows machines that I own anyway. So I leave it sit running in the background and I can just ssh into it from windows and get to work.

Posixy OSs are attractive to power users because they are often easier and faster to do many things with once you get used to them.

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, firelighter487 said:

you do for Windows games.

That would imply a need for playing Windows games, so why would anyone use Linux for that?

15 minutes ago, firelighter487 said:

also do you know what a rolling-release update model is? it means that i can install the OS and it will get continued support. there is no version 1 or version 2. there is one version that receives continued support. that saves you the trouble of downloading a 4 to 6gb update once or twice a year. also all your software and stuff is always the latest version. 

you do sacrifice some stability with an update model like this, but i've never had issues with a rolling-release distro due to updates. and i keep good backups anyway. if it bricks i can reinstall the OS and then reinstall all my software with one line in terminal that i can just copy-paste. 

You are confusing a different approach for a better approach. I don't need to worry about large update sizes nor initialising them. MacOS releases are good for 2/3 years after release and receive security updates. 

 

Linux isn't bad or good, but critical in determining a certain approach to using a computer. It is far better for hardware compatibility than MacOS, excels in computer-intensive tasks as it is lightweight. If you need fine-grain control over how the computer is used or over active programs, Linux is much better. Linux is also more customisable. There are numerous applications which are only supported on Linux.

[Ashleyyyy]

5 minutes ago, RorzNZ said:

That would imply a need for playing Windows games, so why would anyone use Linux for that?

maybe they do other things too but want to play the occasional game without having to dual-boot. 

 

also that technology can be used for other stuff too. video editing with full gpu acceleration using adobe stuff while using Linux for the host. 

 

6 minutes ago, RorzNZ said:

You are confusing a different approach for a better approach. I don't need to worry about large update sizes nor initialising them. MacOS releases are good for 2/3 years after release and receive security updates. 

macOS security updates are large though. 

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, firelighter487 said:

macOS security updates are large though

Not really.

[Ashleyyyy]

Just now, Drak3 said:

Not really.

the last one i installed was over 1GB IIRC. that's large for a security update. 

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, firelighter487 said:

the last one i installed was over 1GB IIRC. that's large for a security update. 

Then either it wasn't just a security update or you missed a bunch.

[Ashleyyyy]

Just now, Drak3 said:

Then either it wasn't just a security update or you missed a bunch.

it was labeled as a security update and i believe it updated iTunes as well. that was on High Sierra btw, not Mojave. 

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, firelighter487 said:

it was labeled as a security update and i believe it updated iTunes as well

So then it wasn't just a security update.

[Sauron]

2 hours ago, DrMacintosh said:

If you want to stretch it that far, then macOS is also technically Linux. 

Well not really, ChromeOS and Android both run Linux (which is a kernel) whereas MacOS doesn't. MacOS runs on BSD derived kernel and core utils (called Darwin). So while it's true neither Android nor ChromeOS are what people usually talk about when they refer to "Linux", they are by definition Linux based distributions. MacOS doesn't share a single line of code with the Linux kernel.

 

Generally when someone says Linux they mean a GNU/Linux distribution (you may have heard the meme), which is often a more significant distinction than what the kernel is. GNU/Linux is simply an operating system that uses the Linux kernel and GNU core utilities. ChromeOS and Android don't fit this definition.

[Drak3]

19 minutes ago, Finwillwin said:

Windows

Games. Software compatibility.

19 minutes ago, Finwillwin said:

macOS

Metal API. Final Cut/other Apple made softwares.

[JoostinOnline]

1 minute ago, Sauron said:

MacOS doesn't share a single line of code with the Linux kernel. 

That I VERY much doubt. Even if it's not intentional, there are bound to be plenty of identical lines.

[wasab]

3 hours ago, DrMacintosh said:

If you want to stretch it that far, then macOS is also technically Linux. 

No. Linux is defined by the Linux kernel which  chrome os and Android are part of. And you seem to have the misconception that Unix is an operating system when in fact it is a brand and certification. MacOS has no more share core compoenet with the earliest Unix and any other unixes for that matter. Linux on the other hand is not merely a brand. It is defined by it's kernel which is an actual software. Chrome OS and Android are 100% Linux as much as scorpions and lobsters are arthopads even if they look nothing alike. 

[Drak3]

3 minutes ago, wasab said:

And you seem to have the misconception that Unix is an operating system when in fact it is a brand and certification

Unix is a family of operating systems. To be officially considered a part of the Unix family, an OS has to be certified.

[Sauron]

45 minutes ago, JoostinOnline said:

That I VERY much doubt. Even if it's not intentional, there are bound to be plenty of identical lines.

One thing are identical lines, another are lines that actually do the same thing ^^ but sure, it's a hyperbole - the point is macOS is in no way based on Linux.

[Bananasplit_00]

12 hours ago, OnyxArmos said:

Why would anyone use Linux

to NOT use Spyware10? because MS is a POS? because OSX is crap? because i dont like an OS that wakes my computer for no reason? because forced restarts that murder work? there are loads of more reasons i could list.

 

i know im not installing windows ever again after how nicely games work on Linux now. games not running well or not at all is the only thing thats kept me off just using Mint for everything

[BuzzLookAnAlien]

1 minute ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

i know im not installing windows ever again after how nicely games work on Linux now

 

[wasab]

17 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Unix is a family of operating systems. To be officially considered a part of the Unix family, an OS has to be certified.

It is meaningless if they have nothing in common except certified to have a common file structures and command line utulity.

[Bananasplit_00]

3 minutes ago, OnyxArmos said:

 

not every game works, but with DXVK, Lutris and Proton its good enough for me to give up on windows forever. once this install shits itself im not reinstalling spyware10 again. m$ can go sell someone elses data

[wasab]

3 hours ago, RorzNZ said:

That’s the same as MacOS though  

Can MacOS be installed on non Mac computer effortlessly?

[Sauron]

11 minutes ago, OnyxArmos said:

 

You'd be surprised, dxvk is borderline miraculous. It's not perfect but its far better than what we had even a year ago.

[pipnina]

4 minutes ago, OnyxArmos said:

 

Well, I've only booted Windows a handful of times since feb 2017, and that was because I'd played Mass Effect 1 and 2 on Linux but 3 wouldn't work because of EA's always-online DRM. Now considering that Valve's Proton is a thing it becomes less and less likely that I'll ever have to boot into Windows again.

 

Also, you may be surprised to learn that 50%+ of Steam's entire game library work with gold+ rating on Linux. That's one-click to launch with minimal, no, or easily resolved issues. As Proton develops that number is going to go up. Expect a big jump when they get dotnet stuff working.

[Drak3]

Just now, wasab said:

It is meaningless if they have nothing in common except certified to have a common file structures and command line utulity.

Most (if not all) modern Unix distros are based on BSD, and prior to that, all Unix ditrobutions had to comply with set requirements regarding resource management and how tasks are performed.

 

You suggest that moving between Unix is like moving between Vulkan, DX12, and OpenGL.

 

Whereas it's really like moving between AMD and Nvidia implementations of DX12.

[wasab]

7 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Most (if not all) modern Unix distros are based on BSD, and prior to that, all Unix ditrobutions had to comply with set requirements regarding resource management and how tasks are performed.

 

You suggest that moving between Unix is like moving between Vulkan, DX12, and OpenGL.

 

Whereas it's really like moving between AMD and Nvidia implementations of DX12.

But very few BSD are certified as Unix  now is it?

[Drak3]

5 minutes ago, wasab said:

But very few BSD are certified as Unix  now is it?

That's not really all that relevant. The only thing being certified is good for is for the statement of being certified and not being grouped in with the "Unix-Like" riff raff.