Timeline for Why do programmers use or recommend Mac OS X?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
42 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 26, 2013 at 9:52 | history | edited | vartec | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 156 characters in body
|
| Dec 11, 2012 at 16:39 | comment | added | bgs | @vartec good on point security. it is not a petty problem (+1). there are also always some paranoid rules we could setup just in case or gateway your net MBP through some busybox. Still OSX is a great dev machine. :) | |
| Dec 11, 2012 at 15:48 | comment | added | vartec | @kwa: These things hinder productivity. Apparently not only for me. You call it petty.. That’s just like, your opinion, man. Even if they are (srsly, lack of security is "petty problem"?), each minute spent dealing with them is minute not spent being productive. Besides, paying $1000-$3000 for a MBP one expects OS that's close to perfection, not some beta crap that has some "petty issues", which are not present in Linux which is completely free. It's basically "just works" rhetoric biting them in the back side. | |
| Dec 11, 2012 at 15:32 | comment | added | bgs | @vartec that is not my argument. OSX and Linux are pretty darn good systems for developers. Both borrow (in some way) from each other heavily. Not sure why an answer listing a "combination of bug tracking problems" got upvoted so much when they are really petty issues. They all sound like "I c4nn0t adjust my wallp4perz c0l0rs and the alpha channel is not quite there in emacs". Congrats on getting some rep pts for this answer. We should get youtube to come down and tape this. | |
| Dec 11, 2012 at 10:14 | comment | added | vartec | @kwa: so your argument is "OSX isn't as good as Linux, but I don't understand why the only answer pointing that is upvoted"? | |
| Dec 11, 2012 at 2:00 | comment | added | bgs | mac osx is a really nice product. everything about is a job well done. I can too combine bug tracking lists of several products and list them as reasons not to use it osx. Unless you really have a specific tool, can't really port one & transplant to github, these reasons look more capricious than actual problems. OS x usually has an alternative, different command option and/or your C macros will have to get more elaborate. Not sure why your answer got upvoted so much. | |
| May 7, 2012 at 10:04 | history | edited | vartec | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| May 7, 2012 at 9:26 | history | edited | vartec | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 376 characters in body
|
| Apr 3, 2012 at 15:03 | history | edited | vartec | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 14 characters in body
|
| Apr 3, 2012 at 14:56 | history | edited | vartec | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 14 characters in body
|
| Apr 3, 2012 at 14:44 | history | edited | vartec | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 96 characters in body
|
| Apr 3, 2012 at 14:29 | history | edited | vartec | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 495 characters in body
|
| Sep 5, 2011 at 11:34 | history | edited | vartec | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 10 characters in body
|
| Sep 5, 2011 at 11:27 | history | edited | vartec | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 12 characters in body
|
| Sep 5, 2011 at 11:18 | history | edited | vartec | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 21 characters in body
|
| Sep 5, 2011 at 10:55 | history | edited | vartec | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 259 characters in body
|
| Sep 2, 2011 at 16:17 | comment | added | Adam Lear♦ | @vartec That's fine. That's not an excuse to start insulting people, however. Every point you have made in this thread could be made without belittling your opposition. | |
| Sep 2, 2011 at 16:05 | comment | added | vartec | @Anna: I have no problem with ppl making their choices. What I do have problem with, is rationalizing their choices in a way, which insults logic and common sense. | |
| Sep 2, 2011 at 15:26 | comment | added | vartec | @philosodad: "inability to write short scripts, use basic terminal commands, or install one of the many free automator apps that will put this a right-click away does not translate to a failure of the OS" funny, if I wouldn't know the context, I'd say it's a quote from some GNU fanboi from early 1990's. | |
| Sep 2, 2011 at 15:15 | comment | added | Adam Lear♦ | I cleaned up most of the comments that contained more incendiary rhetoric than facts. vartec, please respect other people's choices of OS. Just because someone disagrees with you does not mean they do not understand what you're saying. Let us all remember the part of the FAQ that tells us to "be nice". | |
| Aug 25, 2011 at 22:01 | history | edited | vartec | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1 characters in body
|
| May 9, 2011 at 14:20 | history | edited | vartec | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 391 characters in body
|
| Apr 18, 2011 at 5:18 | comment | added | philosodad | @vartec I've read your many other comments on this question. Clearly, you have a personal bias against macs and anyone who doesn't hate the OS like you do. Basically, it boils down to this: what you wrote here is factually inaccurate on at least one count, and pretty much FUD on the security front. I don't think this discussion is productive, and I'm ending my participation here. The -1 stays for factual inaccuracy. | |
| Apr 18, 2011 at 5:13 | comment | added | philosodad | @vartec no, that's like saying that anyone who has any business at all complaining about the terminal (you) should not find 'open [dir]' to be a cryptic command. Your inability to write short scripts, use basic terminal commands, or install one of the many free automator apps that will put this a right-click away does not translate to a failure of the OS. You not realizing that the terminal application has tabs and Unicode support does not translate to those things not being there. | |
| Apr 17, 2011 at 17:16 | comment | added | vartec |
@philosdad: it's like saying that regedit is not cryptic and it's GUI utility... The thing is, that in Windows you don't need to edit registry for change as basic as showing hidden files.
|
|
| Apr 17, 2011 at 17:08 | comment | added | philosodad | trac.macports.org/wiki/MacPortsGUI | |
| Apr 17, 2011 at 17:04 | comment | added | philosodad | @vartec: You don't have to run cryptic commands from the CLI (although I'm not sure why a developer would have trouble using a terminal), you can make the change in a GUI utility. And open /var (or /usr, /etc) is hardly cryptic! | |
| Apr 17, 2011 at 16:36 | comment | added | Jano | As pointed above, there are no systems without problems. Both OS X and Ubuntu violate Fitt's law with their menu bars. Go with whatever you like the most and drop the religious war. | |
| Apr 17, 2011 at 16:30 | history | edited | vartec | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 181 characters in body
|
| Apr 17, 2011 at 16:25 | comment | added | vartec | @philosodad: sorry, you apparently can't tell between reality and "reality distortion field". As for the bug in GCC, yes it was resolved in GCC 4.3. Which isn't included in any software update for OSX 10.6. In other words, bug in OSX is still there. Homebrew? Sorry, we're not in 1990's. To see dir structure is "simple flag change"? More MacTruth, in reality it requires running cryptic commands from CLI. | |
| Apr 17, 2011 at 16:06 | comment | added | philosodad | @vartec: there are several things that are inaccurate in your post. Terminal does not have the flaws you claim it does. MacPorts is not your only choice for OS software (much OS software has .dmg files available, for example, and there's also homebrew). Your link to a bug that you claim won't be fixed shows the bug as resolved. You can show hidden folders with a simple flag change and see your structure, or you can open /var from the terminal and browse in the finder. And the fact that security experts want a mac (which is what Pwn2Own measures) doesn't actually say anything about security. | |
| Apr 17, 2011 at 15:54 | comment | added | vartec | @philosodad: inaccurate? what's inaccurate about fact, that application's menu is on the "main" screen, instead of being on the same screen on which application is open? And no, I don't want to switch main screen each time I switch application, I'm not into that kind of "thinking different". | |
| Apr 17, 2011 at 15:34 | history | edited | vartec | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 563 characters in body
|
| Apr 16, 2011 at 17:30 | history | edited | vartec | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 359 characters in body; added 6 characters in body
|
| Apr 16, 2011 at 15:29 | comment | added | nobody | Terminal.app does have tabs. The feature wasn't added until 10.5, but that came out over three years ago. 1.bp.blogspot.com/_p64VvtgZDp4/R5Qs-ZlhkvI/AAAAAAAAAHU/… | |
| Apr 15, 2011 at 23:07 | comment | added | philosodad | -1 for basically just being wrong. I've usually got ten or more terminals open in several workspaces, all using UTF-8, most with multiple tabs. And ff you need your application menus on screen n screen just set that screen to be a workspace. | |
| Apr 13, 2011 at 10:22 | history | edited | vartec | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 92 characters in body
|
| Apr 6, 2011 at 15:41 | history | edited | vartec | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 234 characters in body; added 130 characters in body
|
| Apr 6, 2011 at 15:30 | history | edited | vartec | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 219 characters in body; added 9 characters in body
|
| Apr 5, 2011 at 18:47 | comment | added | mipadi | A few of your points are wrong. For FUSE, there's MacFUSE. Also, Terminal.app supports UTF-8. | |
| S Apr 5, 2011 at 17:42 | history | answered | vartec | CC BY-SA 2.5 | |
| S Apr 5, 2011 at 17:42 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki |
