As per subject, I have recently installed Linux Mint Cinnamon on our
trusty old 2014 MacBook Air, and it has been an excellent choice!
I have minimal experience with Linux, and with the recent purchase of a Macbook Neo for our son the Air suddenly found itself without a use (it
had previously been my son's daily driver, running Big Sur, and coping perfectly well with almost everything he could throw at it (even Roblox, although some of the sub-games he joined were pretty glitchy...)).
It is the entry-level variant of the model, with a 1.4Ghz CPU, 250GB SSD,
and 4GB RAM. It had always surprised me in recent years how well it
continued to perform, especially in the last 12 months as my son used it a lot - including for 3D design and printing - but since giving Linux Mint a spin on it I have been even more impressed; the system runs like lightning and, so far, I have not encountered any sluggish performance with any of
the apps I have run on it.
So, that's hopefully some useful info for anybody with an old Air kicking around - it could potentially be an excellent Linux-dedicated machine for you! Installation was very simple, too, with a bootable USB-stick made in
a few steps and less than 10 minutes total to complete the full
installation once begun.
I'm still finding my feet with Linux - there's a few strange quirls to it that my Mac-shaped brain is struggling to cope with - but everything is working well - trackpad, sound, wi-fi, I have encountered no hardware problems whatsoever (other than having to remember different keyboard shortcuts...).
Highly recommended!
Am 19.06.26 um 19:42 schrieb scole:<snip>
Highly recommended!
Nice to hear this report of your experience.
I'm running a late 2010 MacBook Air with Debian Trixie for 2 yrs. now,and excited.
It is uptodate, too. Very easy install of the OS Every software I installed worked as a charm.
Same is the hardware. There are points with hibernation and noveau
driver - sometimes the screen stays black. I'm always shutting the
machine down now.
The only issue is that I was informed the accumulator won't be available anymore, at least in Germany.
I'm unfamiliar with "the accumulator"...
On 20/06/2026 13:10, scole wrote:
I'm unfamiliar with "the accumulator"...
Rechargeable battery?
Am 20.06.26 um 15:42 schrieb The Natural Philosopher:
On 20/06/2026 13:10, scole wrote:
I'm unfamiliar with "the accumulator"...
Rechargeable battery?
Yes, that is meant. Thank you :)
JJenssen <joemajen@arcor.de> wrote:
Am 20.06.26 um 15:42 schrieb The Natural Philosopher:
On 20/06/2026 13:10, scole wrote:
I'm unfamiliar with "the accumulator"...
Rechargeable battery?
Yes, that is meant. Thank you :)
This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes, where the
only fully usable register is called the accumulator.
Thank you for the smile.--
Greetings
Marc
Am 20.06.26 um 15:42 schrieb The Natural Philosopher:
On 20/06/2026 13:10, scole wrote:
I'm unfamiliar with "the accumulator"...
Rechargeable battery?
Yes, that is meant. Thank you :)
In article <1117u54$iqhs$1@dont-email.me>, joemajen@arcor.de wrote:
Am 20.06.26 um 15:42 schrieb The Natural Philosopher:
On 20/06/2026 13:10, scole wrote:
I'm unfamiliar with "the accumulator"...
Rechargeable battery?
Yes, that is meant. Thank you :)
OK, understood. So far, there have been no problems with the battery - charges fine, the laptop works perfectly conencted to the charger and
while disconnected, all seems good.
One oddity I encountered last night, and have repeated a few times since (although not every time) is when I close the lid while the machine is
still on sometimes the machine turns itself off rather than go to sleep!
Like I said, it doesn't happen every time so I am trying to pin down which variable I am doing that causes it...
Other than that, all good!--
On 21/06/2026 14:21, scole wrote:
In article <1117u54$iqhs$1@dont-email.me>, joemajen@arcor.de wrote:Linux is rather skittish about resuming after suspending/hibernating. I think it has been one of the toughest nuts to crack.
Am 20.06.26 um 15:42 schrieb The Natural Philosopher:
On 20/06/2026 13:10, scole wrote:
I'm unfamiliar with "the accumulator"...
Rechargeable battery?
Yes, that is meant. Thank you :)
OK, understood. So far, there have been no problems with the battery -
charges fine, the laptop works perfectly conencted to the charger and
while disconnected, all seems good.
One oddity I encountered last night, and have repeated a few times since
(although not every time) is when I close the lid while the machine is
still on sometimes the machine turns itself off rather than go to sleep!
Like I said, it doesn't happen every time so I am trying to pin down
which
variable I am doing that causes it...
My laptop *generally* comes back and reconnects to the wifi. But it
hasn't always been the case with earlier versions.
There may be configuration on whether you are suspending hibernating or shutting down on lid close
On 2026-06-21 18:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Linux is rather skittish about resuming after suspending/hibernating.
I think it has been one of the toughest nuts to crack.
My laptop *generally* comes back and reconnects to the wifi. But it
hasn't always been the case with earlier versions.
There may be configuration on whether you are suspending hibernating or
shutting down on lid close
It varies over the years, same machine.
Mine sometimes freezes on lid opening. Random.
My desktop hibernates fine for about two or three weeks, then crashes:
new boot on wake up.
Another old and small laptop which I connect to the TV on sitting room
to watch movies, some times doesn't light up on wake up (either its own display or the TV display).
JJenssen <joemajen@arcor.de> wrote:
Am 20.06.26 um 15:42 schrieb The Natural Philosopher:
On 20/06/2026 13:10, scole wrote:Yes, that is meant. Thank you
I'm unfamiliar with "the accumulator"...
Rechargeable battery?
This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes, where the
only fully usable register is called the accumulator.
My laptop *generally* comes back and reconnects to the wifi. But it
hasn't always been the case with earlier versions.
There may be configuration on whether you are suspending hibernating or shutting down on lid close
JJenssen <joemajen@arcor.de> wrote:
Am 20.06.26 um 15:42 schrieb The Natural Philosopher:
On 20/06/2026 13:10, scole wrote:
I'm unfamiliar with "the accumulator"...
Rechargeable battery?
Yes, that is meant. Thank you :)
This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes, where the
only fully usable register is called the accumulator.
Thank you for the smile.
Greetings
Marc
My Lenovo T410, running Debian Bookworm, sometimes sits with a black
screen for as much as two minutes before waking up when I open the lid.
If it's really stubborn, I've found that pressing and holding the power button for a second or two (not enough to force a full power-down), will often give it the kick in the pants it seems to need.
If you're a idiot with more money than sense who gambles, then an >"accumulator" is also a term used in betting. Basically it is making a >single bet that four or more outcomes all happen, usually in order, so
the chances of winning are even smaller.
Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
If you're a idiot with more money than sense who gambles, then an
"accumulator" is also a term used in betting. Basically it is making a
single bet that four or more outcomes all happen, usually in order, so
the chances of winning are even smaller.
I didn't know that. Thanks for educating me. It's unlikely I'll ever
need that word in that context ;-)
Grüße--
Marc
I have never ised it in that sense although living at the centre of UK horseracing I know plenty who have, Every so often someone wins big and
takes his mates to a big champagne dinner and the local papers talk
about it.
On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 10:26:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I have never ised it in that sense although living at the centre of UK
horseracing I know plenty who have, Every so often someone wins big and
takes his mates to a big champagne dinner and the local papers talk
about it.
I don't think it's rare enough to make the papers but at least in the US a 'trifecta' is when you pick the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place horses in a single race. The concept has been expanded to the lotteries.
New York state was one of the first to start a state run lottery. There
was a bit of a scandal when someone found the winning ticket was pulled
from the set of all tickets printed, not the set of the tickets actually sold. An innocent mistake, I'm sure.
What odds are the books giving on your next PM? At least you can get rid
of the bastards in less than 4 years.
On 22/06/2026 07:13, Marc Haber wrote:
Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
If you're a idiot with more money than sense who gambles, then an
"accumulator" is also a term used in betting. Basically it is making a
single bet that four or more outcomes all happen, usually in order, so
the chances of winning are even smaller.
I didn't know that. Thanks for educating me. It's unlikely I'll ever
need that word in that context ;-)
I have never ised it in that sense although living at the centre of UK horseracing I know plenty who have, Every so often someone wins big and takes his mates to a big champagne dinner and the local papers talk
about it.
Etymologically it just means a place where stuff sticks around and gets bigger.
If its money its an accumulator bet. Or in fact a stock market fund
whose purpose is not to deliver income, but to grow capital worth. Electrically its a secondary cell - one in which charge can be actively stored.
On a CPU its the register where (most) results are placed - they may
not be additions in this context of course
My closet is an accumulator; it gathers junk and dust bunnies.
On 22/06/2026 15:03, rbowman wrote:
On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 10:26:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I have never ised it in that sense although living at the centre of UK
horseracing I know plenty who have, Every so often someone wins big
and takes his mates to a big champagne dinner and the local papers
talk about it.
I don't think it's rare enough to make the papers but at least in the
US a 'trifecta' is when you pick the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place horses in
a single race. The concept has been expanded to the lotteries.
New York state was one of the first to start a state run lottery. There
was a bit of a scandal when someone found the winning ticket was pulled
from the set of all tickets printed, not the set of the tickets
actually sold. An innocent mistake, I'm sure.
What odds are the books giving on your next PM? At least you can get
rid of the bastards in less than 4 years.
Odds on what? that he dies from a surfeit of peaches and cider?
My guess is he wont be able to do anything constructive, At best he may
do nothing at all.
On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 17:07:23 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
My closet is an accumulator; it gathers junk and dust bunnies.
You're lucky. I have a whole garden shed that does that. Maybe not bunnies but the random cat that gets nosy.
On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 17:25:47 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:99.999% sure.
On 22/06/2026 15:03, rbowman wrote:
On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 10:26:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I have never ised it in that sense although living at the centre of UK >>>> horseracing I know plenty who have, Every so often someone wins big
and takes his mates to a big champagne dinner and the local papers
talk about it.
I don't think it's rare enough to make the papers but at least in the
US a 'trifecta' is when you pick the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place horses in
a single race. The concept has been expanded to the lotteries.
New York state was one of the first to start a state run lottery. There
was a bit of a scandal when someone found the winning ticket was pulled
from the set of all tickets printed, not the set of the tickets
actually sold. An innocent mistake, I'm sure.
What odds are the books giving on your next PM? At least you can get
rid of the bastards in less than 4 years.
Odds on what? that he dies from a surfeit of peaches and cider?
My guess is he wont be able to do anything constructive, At best he may
do nothing at all.
I meant who are the odds makers saying will be the next up. Burnham?
least he lasted longer than Liz though he may have eclipsed Trump's record for going from shiny to shit.
I'm still finding my feet with Linux - there's a few strange quirls
to it that my Mac-shaped brain is struggling to cope with ...
This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes, where the
only fully usable register is called the accumulator.
On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 18:42:03 +0100, scole wrote:
I'm still finding my feet with Linux - there's a few strange quirls
to it that my Mac-shaped brain is struggling to cope with ...
Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it is
that Apple runs on its machines.
On 2026-06-24 01:24:17 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:
On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 18:42:03 +0100, scole wrote:
I'm still finding my feet with Linux - there's a few strange quirls
to it that my Mac-shaped brain is struggling to cope with ...
Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it is
that Apple runs on its machines.
Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.
Linux is a "Unix-like" operating system. MacOS X is built on Darwin
derived from BSD, which is also another Unix-like operating system.
Although neither is true Unix, MacOS X is certified by Unix, while
Linux is not ... so legally MacOS X can call itself Unix and Linux
cannot. :-p
On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 09:35:34 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes, where the
only fully usable register is called the accumulator.
“Accumulator” was a common synonym for “register” in the early days.
E.g. I think the PDP-10 had 4 accumulators. Their assembly-language
names were AC0, AC1, AC2, AC3.
Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.Noone cares about the brand any more.
Linux is a "Unix-like" operating system. MacOS X is built on Darwin
derived from BSD, which is also another Unix-like operating system.
Although neither is true Unix, MacOS X is certified by Unix, while
Linux is not ... so legally MacOS X can call itself Unix and Linux
cannot. 😛
On 2026-06-24 03:30, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 09:35:34 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes, where the
only fully usable register is called the accumulator.
“Accumulator” was a common synonym for “register” in the early days. >>
E.g. I think the PDP-10 had 4 accumulators. Their assembly-language
names were AC0, AC1, AC2, AC3.
An accumulator is not a register. It is different, you can do operations
on it. Maybe on current processors the difference is not that big.
Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.
Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.
Linux is a "Unix-like" operating system. MacOS X is built on Darwin derived from BSD, which is also another Unix-like operating system. Although neither is true Unix, MacOS X is certified by Unix, while
Linux is not ... so legally MacOS X can call itself Unix and Linux
cannot. :-p
Noone cares about the brand any more.
On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 18:42:03 +0100, scole wrote:
I'm still finding my feet with Linux - there's a few strange quirls
to it that my Mac-shaped brain is struggling to cope with ...
Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it is
that Apple runs on its machines.
An accumulator is not a register. It is different, you can do
operations on it. Maybe on current processors the difference is not
that big.
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 07:45:57 +0200
Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> wrote:
Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.
Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.
Linux is a "Unix-like" operating system. MacOS X is built on Darwin
derived from BSD, which is also another Unix-like operating system.
Although neither is true Unix, MacOS X is certified by Unix, while
Linux is not ... so legally MacOS X can call itself Unix and Linux
cannot. :-p
Noone cares about the brand any more.
Lawrence clearly does.
And then there's the 8086, in which all registers are*sorta* general- purpose, except they also all have special functions the others don't,
except when you can override them, but sometimes you can't... :/
On 24/06/2026 16:29, John Ames wrote:
And then there's the 8086, in which all registers are*sorta* general-
purpose, except they also all have special functions the others don't,
except when you can override them, but sometimes you can't... :/
Ah the joys of doing CISC with microcode 'we've got a few more opcode
slots we can use, what weird instructions can we put in them?
Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
On 2026-06-24 01:24:17 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:
On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 18:42:03 +0100, scole wrote:
I'm still finding my feet with Linux - there's a few strange quirls
to it that my Mac-shaped brain is struggling to cope with ...
Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it is
that Apple runs on its machines.
Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.
Linux is a "Unix-like" operating system. MacOS X is built on Darwin
derived from BSD, which is also another Unix-like operating system. >>Although neither is true Unix, MacOS X is certified by Unix, while Linux
is not ... so legally MacOS X can call itself Unix and Linux cannot.
:-p
Noone cares about the brand any more.
You can do operations on all registers too.
The accumulator is the register where the *results* of those operations typically get stored.
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 11:41:48 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
You can do operations on all registers too.
The accumulator is the register where the *results* of those operations
typically get stored.
On the Z80 the AF register pair were often called the accumulator but F
was the flag register.
JR NC, FOO does the relative jump if the last operation on A cleared the carry bit.
* so says the internet. I remember it as 'JNC FOO' but there was always
the confusion since Zilog couldn't use Intel's super duper patented mnemonics.
I figured that if they were going to do that, they might as well go
whole hog and have constructs like LD PC,<addr> for a jump, and LD A,@<portnum> for input (LD @<portnum>,A for output, of course).
I liked the Intel mnemonics better; they gave a clue as
to the operation of the instruction, which appealed to low-level
dweebs like me. I'm sure the CS weenies liked Zilog's mnemonics
better, where every data movement instruction seemed to be some
form of LD.
On 24/06/2026 06:45, Marc Haber wrote:
Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.
Linux is a "Unix-like" operating system. MacOS X is built on Darwin
derived from BSD, which is also another Unix-like operating system.
Although neither is true Unix, MacOS X is certified by Unix, while
Linux is not ... so legally MacOS X can call itself Unix and Linux
cannot. 😛
Noone cares about the brand any more.
Exactly,. we have and operating system that works pretty well available
for free across many hardware platforms. With a cute little mascot.
Let's call it the Penguin Operating System (POS) and have done with it :-)
On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 09:35:34 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes, where the
only fully usable register is called the accumulator.
"Accumulator" was a common synonym for "register" in the early days.
In article <111fbuv$2lq9d$8@dont-email.me>,
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 09:35:34 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes, where
the only fully usable register is called the accumulator.
"Accumulator" was a common synonym for "register" in the early days.
An accumulator is a register, but registers aren't necessarily
accumulators. The 6502 has one accumulator (A) and two index
registers (X and Y). Arithmetic and logic operations work on the
accumulator, but not on the index registers.
On 2026-06-24 03:30, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 09:35:34 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes, where
the only fully usable register is called the accumulator.
“Accumulator” was a common synonym for “register” in the early
days.
E.g. I think the PDP-10 had 4 accumulators. Their assembly-language
names were AC0, AC1, AC2, AC3.
An accumulator is not a register. It is different, you can do
operations on it.
On 24/06/2026 03:24, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 18:42:03 +0100, scole wrote:
I'm still finding my feet with Linux - there's a few strange
quirls to it that my Mac-shaped brain is struggling to cope with
...
Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.
In what way?
None of the standard software runs on [Linux] for a start - no
Adobe, no Microsoft, etc. ...
Too bad. I liked the Intel mnemonics better; they gave a clue as to the operation of the instruction, which appealed to low-level dweebs like
me. I'm sure the CS weenies liked Zilog's mnemonics better, where every
data movement instruction seemed to be some form of LD. I figured that
if they were going to do that, they might as well go whole hog and have constructs like LD PC,<addr> for a jump, and LD A,@<portnum> for input
(LD @<portnum>,A for output, of course). Then they could eliminate the now-redundant instruction mnemonic entirely; programs would be just a
long list of operands, with the operation implied.
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 19:42:20 GMT
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
I figured that if they were going to do that, they might as well go
whole hog and have constructs like LD PC,<addr> for a jump, and LD
A,@<portnum> for input (LD @<portnum>,A for output, of course).
MOV [operand], PC is actually a valid if non-conventional form of jump
on the PDP-11; the primary difference is that it sets the flags based
on the value of the target address. And, of course, it has memory-
mapped I/O, so MOV Rn, [port]/MOV [port], Rn is indeed how it's done ;)
On 2026-06-24 01:24:17 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:
Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.
Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.
None of the standard software runs on it for a start - no Adobe, no Microsoft, etc. ...
On 2026-06-24 10:36:04 +0000, The Natural Philosopher said:
On 24/06/2026 06:45, Marc Haber wrote:
Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.
Linux is a "Unix-like" operating system. MacOS X is built on Darwin
derived from BSD, which is also another Unix-like operating system.
Although neither is true Unix, MacOS X is certified by Unix, while
Linux is not ... so legally MacOS X can call itself Unix and Linux
cannot.
Noone cares about the brand any more.
Exactly,. we have and operating system that works pretty well
available for free across many hardware platforms. With a cute
little mascot.
Let's call it the Penguin Operating System (POS) and have done with it :-)
"PoS" is definitely he correct term for the numerous different Linux varities. None of the standard software runs on it for a start - no
Adobe, no Microsoft, etc., so if you need to use any of those to be
fully compatible ("alternatives" are never fully compatible, despite
what they like to claim), then you need to use a proper operating
system: MacOS X.
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:35:22 +1200, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-24 01:24:17 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:
Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.
Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.
While on Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:35:05 +1200, Your Name also wrote:
None of the standard software runs on it for a start - no Adobe, no
Microsoft, etc. ...
Interesting how you can claim, on the one hand, that Linux is not a
proper Unix-type system, yet the only examples you can offer of
software that won’t run on it is from companies that are not known for producing Unix-type software ...
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:35:05 +1200, Your Name wrote:
None of the standard software runs on [Linux] for a start - no Adobe,
no Microsoft, etc. ...
Microsoft 365 lists Linux as a supported platform, if you really want
that. (Most of us don’t.)
As for Adobe ... that doesn’t seem to get much use in high-end content creation, so who cares?
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:35:22 +1200, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-24 01:24:17 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:
Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.
Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.
While on Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:35:05 +1200, Your Name also wrote:
None of the standard software runs on it for a start - no Adobe, no
Microsoft, etc. ...
Interesting how you can claim, on the one hand, that Linux is not a
proper Unix-type system, yet the only examples you can offer of
software that won’t run on it is from companies that are not known for producing Unix-type software ...
On 2026-06-25, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:35:22 +1200, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-24 01:24:17 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:
Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it is
that Apple runs on its machines.
Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.
While on Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:35:05 +1200, Your Name also wrote:
None of the standard software runs on it for a start - no Adobe, no
Microsoft, etc. ...
Interesting how you can claim, on the one hand, that Linux is not a
proper Unix-type system, yet the only examples you can offer of
software that won’t run on it is from companies that are not known for
producing Unix-type software ...
This really sounded like coming from one of these people who believe
that Microsoft and friends are somehow the gate-keepers of computing
and that The Microsoft Way™ is the original way - which is quite funny, given how that proprietary, closed source approach was something that
had to impose itself on an universe where the source wasn't that
hidden, from what I understand...
It's as if Microsoft succeeded in rewriting history to pretend that
their way is the way things have always been done, and pretending that open-sourced software is something novel that people are trying to push
as some sort of extremist move to displace "standard software houses",
and implying that it will never be mature enough or the like, despite
many such projects being more mature than Microsoft software, besides
older.
And there indeed are people who believe this, people who will accuse
FLOSS projects of merely trying to be "cheap copies" of proprietary software.
On 2026-06-24, Your Name wrote:<snip>
On 2026-06-24 10:36:04 +0000, The Natural Philosopher said:
On 24/06/2026 06:45, Marc Haber wrote:"PoS" is definitely he correct term for the numerous different Linux
Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.
Linux is a "Unix-like" operating system. MacOS X is built on Darwin
derived from BSD, which is also another Unix-like operating system.
Although neither is true Unix, MacOS X is certified by Unix, while
Linux is not ... so legally MacOS X can call itself Unix and Linux
cannot.
Noone cares about the brand any more.
Exactly,. we have and operating system that works pretty well available >>> for free across many hardware platforms. With a cute little mascot.
Let's call it the Penguin Operating System (POS) and have done with it :-) >>
varities. None of the standard software runs on it for a start - no
Adobe, no Microsoft, etc., so if you need to use any of those to be
fully compatible ("alternatives" are never fully compatible, despite
what they like to claim), then you need to use a proper operating
system: MacOS X.
And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"?
On 2026-06-25 01:50:40 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:35:22 +1200, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-24 01:24:17 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:
Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.
Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.
While on Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:35:05 +1200, Your Name also wrote:
None of the standard software runs on it for a start - no Adobe,
no Microsoft, etc. ...
Interesting how you can claim, on the one hand, that Linux is not a
proper Unix-type system, yet the only examples you can offer of
software that won’t run on it is from companies that are not known
for producing Unix-type software ...
Those are two separate statements with no connection. :-\
Besides which, those companies do sell software for MacOS, which
technically / legally is Unix.
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:27:36 +1200, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-25 01:50:40 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:35:22 +1200, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-24 01:24:17 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:
Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.
Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.
While on Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:35:05 +1200, Your Name also wrote:
None of the standard software runs on it for a start - no Adobe, no
Microsoft, etc. ...
Interesting how you can claim, on the one hand, that Linux is not a
proper Unix-type system, yet the only examples you can offer of
software that won’t run on it is from companies that are not known for >>> producing Unix-type software ...
Those are two separate statements with no connection. :-\
Strange. You were intending both of them to try to rebut the same
statement of mine. The fact that they contradict one another just shows
how weak your attempt at rebuttal is.
On 2026-06-25 01:17:08 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:35:05 +1200, Your Name wrote:
None of the standard software runs on [Linux] for a start - no Adobe,
no Microsoft, etc. ...
Microsoft 365 lists Linux as a supported platform, if you really want
that. (Most of us don’t.)
"Microsfot 365" will work in anything because it's browser based ...
until Microsoft "upgrades" so it no longer works in an old web browser.
It's best to steer well clear of such silliness, as well as turning OFF auto-updtes in any subscribed apps (if you're silly enough to subscribe rather than actually buy your apps).
As for Adobe ... that doesn’t seem to get much use in high-end content
creation, so who cares?
Adobe is MAINLY used in "high-end content creation" such as magazines, movies, TV, etc. to the point of almost being industry standard.
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 12:07:47 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2026-06-24 03:30, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 09:35:34 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes, where
the only fully usable register is called the accumulator.
“Accumulator” was a common synonym for “register” in the early
days.
E.g. I think the PDP-10 had 4 accumulators. Their assembly-language
names were AC0, AC1, AC2, AC3.
An accumulator is not a register. It is different, you can do
operations on it.
Which one? What’s the point of having one where “you cannot do
operations on it”?
On 2026-06-25 01:50:40 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:35:22 +1200, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-24 01:24:17 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:
Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.
Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.
While on Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:35:05 +1200, Your Name also wrote:
None of the standard software runs on it for a start - no Adobe, no
Microsoft, etc. ...
Interesting how you can claim, on the one hand, that Linux is not a
proper Unix-type system, yet the only examples you can offer of
software that won’t run on it is from companies that are not known for
producing Unix-type software ...
Those are two separate statements with no connection. :-\
Besides which, those companies do sell software for MacOS, which
technically / legally is Unix.
"PoS" is definitely he correct term for the numerous different Linux >varities. None of the standard software runs on it for a start - no
Adobe, no Microsoft, etc.
Lawrence clearly does.
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:15:58 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 24/06/2026 03:24, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 18:42:03 +0100, scole wrote:
I'm still finding my feet with Linux - there's a few strange
quirls to it that my Mac-shaped brain is struggling to cope with
...
Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.
In what way?
One obvious one: a core part of the Unix tradition was separation of
the GUI from the OS kernel. Apple threw that one right out the window.
On 2026-06-25 08:27, Your Name wrote:
Those are two separate statements with no connection. :-\
Besides which, those companies do sell software for MacOS, which
technically / legally is Unix.
Unix with a big layer on top that is not Unix.
Is the graphic layer Unix?
Do those companies that sell software for macOS expect that particular graphical layer, or do they run directly on the Unix beneath?
On 2026-06-25 03:13, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 12:07:47 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2026-06-24 03:30, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 09:35:34 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes,
where the only fully usable register is called the accumulator.
“Accumulator” was a common synonym for “register” in the early >>>> days.
E.g. I think the PDP-10 had 4 accumulators. Their
assembly-language names were AC0, AC1, AC2, AC3.
An accumulator is not a register. It is different, you can do
operations on it.
Which one? What’s the point of having one where “you cannot do
operations on it”?
It just was so. The ALU wrote to the accumulator, not to other
registers.
On 25/06/2026 03:14, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:15:58 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 24/06/2026 03:24, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.
In what way?
One obvious one: a core part of the Unix tradition was separation
of the GUI from the OS kernel. Apple threw that one right out the
window.
How?
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:32:08 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 25/06/2026 03:14, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:15:58 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 24/06/2026 03:24, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.
In what way?
One obvious one: a core part of the Unix tradition was separation
of the GUI from the OS kernel. Apple threw that one right out the
window.
How?
By integrating its GUI tightly into its OS kernel.
On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said:
<snip>
And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"?
Most of the business world did years ago ...
On 2026-06-25 01:17:08 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:35:05 +1200, Your Name wrote:
None of the standard software runs on [Linux] for a start - no
Adobe, no Microsoft, etc. ...
Microsoft 365 lists Linux as a supported platform, if you really
want that. (Most of us don’t.)
"Microsfot 365" will work in anything because it's browser based ...
until Microsoft "upgrades" so it no longer works in an old web
browser. It's best to steer well clear of such silliness ...
As for Adobe ... that doesn’t seem to get much use in high-end
content creation, so who cares?
Adobe is MAINLY used in "high-end content creation" such as magazines, movies, TV, etc. to the point of almost being industry standard.
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said:
<snip>
And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"?
Most of the business world did years ago ...
Is this the same “business world” that has largely moved its
operations into the cloud these days? The cloud that is dominated by
Linux?
At Thu, 25 Jun 2026 23:22:35 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:32:08 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 25/06/2026 03:14, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:15:58 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 24/06/2026 03:24, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.
In what way?
One obvious one: a core part of the Unix tradition was separation
of the GUI from the OS kernel. Apple threw that one right out the
window.
How?
By integrating its GUI tightly into its OS kernel.
This has already been explained to you.
The OS kernel on a Mac is Darwin:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system)
https://www.puredarwin.org/
...but you're some kind of concern/Poe troll that is completely
intractable regarding MacOS.
And while you are fond of using the term *nix, there's nothing
wrong with saying "Unix" or "a Unix" to describe POSIX operating
systems like Linux or FreeBSD -- because those are not trademarks.
(Another term of art is "Unix-like".)
https://www.fosslinux.com/44623/top-unix-based-operating-systems.htm
UNIX(r), though, is a trademark. All-caps, with an (r) to
make sure you know those people Really Mean Business (oh yes).
Now go forth and sin no more.
On 2026-06-26 01:57:11 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said:
<snip>
And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"?
Most of the business world did years ago ...
Is this the same “business world” that has largely moved its
operations into the cloud these days? The cloud that is dominated by
Linux?
I think you need to get out into the real world more often, rather
than sitting in your own deluisonal little room by yourself. :-\
Another idiot added to the killfile.
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 11:26:47 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2026-06-25 03:13, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 12:07:47 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2026-06-24 03:30, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 09:35:34 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes,
where the only fully usable register is called the accumulator.
“Accumulator” was a common synonym for “register” in the early >>>>> days.
E.g. I think the PDP-10 had 4 accumulators. Their
assembly-language names were AC0, AC1, AC2, AC3.
An accumulator is not a register. It is different, you can do
operations on it.
Which one? What’s the point of having one where “you cannot do
operations on it”?
It just was so. The ALU wrote to the accumulator, not to other
registers.
There was also an older usage where “register” was a synonym for “memory location”. You’re not using it in that sense, are you?
Unix with a big layer on top that is not Unix.
Is the graphic layer Unix? Do those companies that sell software for
macOS expect that particular graphical layer, or do they run directly
on the Unix beneath?
On 2026-06-26 01:21, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 11:26:47 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2026-06-25 03:13, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 12:07:47 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2026-06-24 03:30, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 09:35:34 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes,
where the only fully usable register is called the accumulator.
“Accumulator” was a common synonym for “register” in the early >>>>>> days.
E.g. I think the PDP-10 had 4 accumulators. Their
assembly-language names were AC0, AC1, AC2, AC3.
An accumulator is not a register. It is different, you can do
operations on it.
Which one? What’s the point of having one where “you cannot do
operations on it”?
It just was so. The ALU wrote to the accumulator, not to other
registers.
There was also an older usage where “register” was a synonym for
“memory location”. You’re not using it in that sense, are you?
Nono, just some storage inside the CPU.
Later processors, like the 68000, could receive results on any register.
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said:
And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"?<snip>
Most of the business world did years ago ...
Is this the same “business world” that has largely moved its
operations into the cloud these days? The cloud that is dominated
by Linux?
On 2026-06-26, vallor wrote:
At Thu, 25 Jun 2026 23:22:35 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D’Oliveiro
<ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:32:08 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 25/06/2026 03:14, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:15:58 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 24/06/2026 03:24, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.
In what way?
One obvious one: a core part of the Unix tradition was separation
of the GUI from the OS kernel. Apple threw that one right out the
window.
How?
By integrating its GUI tightly into its OS kernel.
This has already been explained to you.
The OS kernel on a Mac is Darwin:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system)
https://www.puredarwin.org/
...but you're some kind of concern/Poe troll that is completely
intractable regarding MacOS.
And while you are fond of using the term *nix, there's nothing wrong
with saying "Unix" or "a Unix" to describe POSIX operating systems like
Linux or FreeBSD -- because those are not trademarks.
(Another term of art is "Unix-like".)
https://www.fosslinux.com/44623/top-unix-based-operating-systems.htm
UNIX(r), though, is a trademark. All-caps, with an (r) to make sure
you know those people Really Mean Business (oh yes).
Now go forth and sin no more.
But to go Forth, it probably helps to have an Apple PowerPC machine :-P
Are you kidding? M$ makes *bank* on Office 365, whether it's running asIs this the same “business world” that has largely moved its
operations into the cloud these days? The cloud that is dominated
by Linux?
Shhhhh... don't say that too loudly. Bill might not like it.
On 2026-06-26, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-26 01:57:11 +0000, Lawrence DOliveiro said:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said:
<snip>
And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"?
Most of the business world did years ago ...
Is this the same "business world" that has largely moved its operations >>> into the cloud these days? The cloud that is dominated by Linux?
I think you need to get out into the real world more often, rather than
sitting in your own deluisonal little room by yourself. :-\
Another idiot added to the killfile.
I think relativism from your part would improve matters too. It's not
even a de facto standard the way you stated it,
the business world is not synonymous with reality, and it may also have parts which blur the distinction between reality and beliefs (where corporate decisionmakers put money in what they think reality is, out
of some belief).
Just for one example: the tech world pretty much has as a sort of
guideline, if not "standard", that you don't top-post and you don't
destroy threading (by properly maintaining and extending References and In-Reply-To), and that you clearly denote quoted material with a
quoting level indicator on the left side. But some on the corporate
world think differently, and at least one company (MICROS~1) has tried
to push hard their own incompatible and problematic approach to e-mail, possibly arising out of some metaphor with paper documents flowing in
an office. That Microsoft chose to go with that doesn't make it a
standard, even though the disease (I'd avoid this wording, except this
is about top-posting and lack of quoting levels and mangling
references, so I'll go with "disease") spreads because of them.
On Fri, 26 Jun 2026 18:03:12 GMT
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
Is this the same "business world" that has largely moved its
operations into the cloud these days? The cloud that is dominated
by Linux?
Shhhhh... don't say that too loudly. Bill might not like it.
Are you kidding? M$ makes *bank* on Office 365, whether it's running as
a bloated Web app or a bloated native executable. *Herds* of CEOs who validate themselves by cutting checks for stuff they'll never have to
use have been inflicting this on their workers for like a decade now.
Satya could probably not give less of a shit whether he's getting paid $xxx/mo. a head for that on Chromium/Linux or Edge/Win11.
On Fri, 26 Jun 2026 09:09:00 +0100, Nuno Silva wrote:[...]
On 2026-06-26, vallor wrote:
On 24/06/2026 03:24, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it >>>>>>>> is that Apple runs on its machines.
This has already been explained to you.
The OS kernel on a Mac is Darwin:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system)
https://www.puredarwin.org/
...but you're some kind of concern/Poe troll that is completely
intractable regarding MacOS.
And while you are fond of using the term *nix, there's nothing wrong
with saying "Unix" or "a Unix" to describe POSIX operating systems like
Linux or FreeBSD -- because those are not trademarks.
(Another term of art is "Unix-like".)
https://www.fosslinux.com/44623/top-unix-based-operating-systems.htm
UNIX(r), though, is a trademark. All-caps, with an (r) to make sure
you know those people Really Mean Business (oh yes).
Now go forth and sin no more.
But to go Forth, it probably helps to have an Apple PowerPC machine :-P
Gforth works fine on Linux x64 distros. Well, as fine as Forth ever
worked.
On 2026-06-26, Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said:
And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"?<snip>
Most of the business world did years ago ...
Is this the same “business world” that has largely moved its
operations into the cloud these days? The cloud that is dominated
by Linux?
Shhhhh... don't say that too loudly. Bill might not like it.
On Fri, 26 Jun 2026 09:09:00 +0100, Nuno Silva wrote:
On 2026-06-26, vallor wrote:
At Thu, 25 Jun 2026 23:22:35 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
<ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:32:08 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 25/06/2026 03:14, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:15:58 +0200, John Bokma wrote:
On 24/06/2026 03:24, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it >>>>>>>> is that Apple runs on its machines.
In what way?
One obvious one: a core part of the Unix tradition was separation
of the GUI from the OS kernel. Apple threw that one right out the
window.
How?
By integrating its GUI tightly into its OS kernel.
This has already been explained to you.
The OS kernel on a Mac is Darwin:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system)
https://www.puredarwin.org/
...but you're some kind of concern/Poe troll that is completely
intractable regarding MacOS.
And while you are fond of using the term *nix, there's nothing wrong
with saying "Unix" or "a Unix" to describe POSIX operating systems like
Linux or FreeBSD -- because those are not trademarks.
(Another term of art is "Unix-like".)
https://www.fosslinux.com/44623/top-unix-based-operating-systems.htm
UNIX(r), though, is a trademark. All-caps, with an (r) to make sure
you know those people Really Mean Business (oh yes).
Now go forth and sin no more.
But to go Forth, it probably helps to have an Apple PowerPC machine :-P
Gforth works fine on Linux x64 distros. Well, as fine as Forth ever
worked.
Gforth also works on MacOS X (Intel and Apple Silicon), as do a lot of
other Forth options, so you can use a real operating system to create
apps using an ancient programming language. :-p
On Sat, 27 Jun 2026 15:52:33 +1200, Your Name wrote:
Gforth also works on MacOS X (Intel and Apple Silicon), as do a lot of
other Forth options, so you can use a real operating system to create
apps using an ancient programming language. :-p
The only Apple device I've ever had is an iPod Shuffle that was given to
me long ago.
Is this the same business world that has largely moved its
operations into the cloud these days? The cloud that is dominated
by Linux?
Shhhhh... don't say that too loudly. Bill might not like it.
Regardless of what BillG might think, Microsoft freely admit that
these days. Even their own cloud service is predominantly Linux-based,
and they see no shame in admitting it.
On 27/06/2026 05:12, rbowman wrote:
On Sat, 27 Jun 2026 15:52:33 +1200, Your Name wrote:
Gforth also works on MacOS X (Intel and Apple Silicon), as do a lot of
other Forth options, so you can use a real operating system to create
apps using an ancient programming language. :-p
The only Apple device I've ever had is an iPod Shuffle that was given to
me long ago.
I had a few power PCS back when I was married - my ex wife was a graphic designer weaned on MACs and Quark.
I used one as a daily drive for a year or so. Mac OS-X Tiger I think
Then I moved to linux and never looked back. Terrible machines.
They were essentially computers for people who knew nothing about
computers, and absolutely didn't want to know.
Even more than Windows there was One True Way™ to use them, and heaven forfend if you stepped off the One True Path ...
On Fri, 26 Jun 2026 18:03:12 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
On 2026-06-26, Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said:
And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"?<snip>
Most of the business world did years ago ...
Is this the same “business world” that has largely moved its
operations into the cloud these days? The cloud that is dominated
by Linux?
Shhhhh... don't say that too loudly. Bill might not like it.
Regardless of what BillG might think, Microsoft freely admit that
these days. Even their own cloud service is predominantly Linux-based,
and they see no shame in admitting it.
Microsloth Windoze and Orifice have unfortunately been basically
business standards for multiple decades now. Word was first released in
1983 and "Office" (with Excel, etc.) in 1989.
Even if people don't use Orifice themselves, almost every document you
come across (other than PDFs) is in .doc format because that gives the widest potential compatibility ... as long as it's a simple document.
If it's a complex document, then compatibility tends to go out the
window. (For example, TextEdit and QuickLook on the Mac can read and
write .doc / .docx format files, but even mildly complicated formatting
will end up looking a mess, especially in QuickLook.)
On 2026-06-27, Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2026 18:03:12 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
On 2026-06-26, Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said:
And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"?<snip>
Most of the business world did years ago ...
Is this the same “business world” that has largely moved its
operations into the cloud these days? The cloud that is dominated by
Linux?
Shhhhh... don't say that too loudly. Bill might not like it.
Regardless of what BillG might think, Microsoft freely admit that these
days. Even their own cloud service is predominantly Linux-based,
and they see no shame in admitting it.
Not like the old days, when IIS wasn't ready for prime time and they had
to resort to Linux-based web servers.
On 2026-06-26, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
Microsloth Windoze and Orifice have unfortunately been basically
business standards for multiple decades now. Word was first released in
1983 and "Office" (with Excel, etc.) in 1989.
Don't forget Outlook - which is more correctly pronounced "Look out!"
It is the biggest disease vector for top-posting.
My wife has drunk the Kool-Aid - she has a Macbook, an iPad, and an
iPhone.
On 2026-06-27, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 27/06/2026 05:12, rbowman wrote:
On Sat, 27 Jun 2026 15:52:33 +1200, Your Name wrote:
Gforth also works on MacOS X (Intel and Apple Silicon), as do a lot of >>>> other Forth options, so you can use a real operating system to create
apps using an ancient programming language. :-p
The only Apple device I've ever had is an iPod Shuffle that was given to >>> me long ago.
I had a few power PCS back when I was married - my ex wife was a graphic
designer weaned on MACs and Quark.
I used one as a daily drive for a year or so. Mac OS-X Tiger I think
Then I moved to linux and never looked back. Terrible machines.
They were essentially computers for people who knew nothing about
computers, and absolutely didn't want to know.
Even more than Windows there was One True Way™ to use them, and heaven
forfend if you stepped off the One True Path ...
My wife has drunk the Kool-Aid - she has a Macbook, an iPad, and an
iPhone. The Macbook's web browser has started getting slow and cranky -
she went to the Apple store and they told her that she needs a new
Macbook because her existing one is no longer secure - something about software updates not being available
until she takes another $3000 step on the upgrade treadmill. For now
she'll just use it for computing applications that don't need
bleeding-edge web security, or apps that pose as much of a risk as the
ones they claim to avoid. She uses the iPad and iPhone for just about everything anyway.
My impression of Apple gear on the few times I use it is that it feels
less like I'm using it than it's using me. Fortunately I discovered
that I can still open a terminal window and use rsync to transfer files
to and from my Linux boxes.
On 2026-06-26, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
Microsloth Windoze and Orifice have unfortunately been basically
business standards for multiple decades now. Word was first released in
1983 and "Office" (with Excel, etc.) in 1989.
Don't forget Outlook - which is more correctly pronounced "Look out!"
It is the biggest disease vector for top-posting.
Even if people don't use Orifice themselves, almost every document you
come across (other than PDFs) is in .doc format because that gives the
widest potential compatibility ... as long as it's a simple document.
If it's a complex document, then compatibility tends to go out the
window. (For example, TextEdit and QuickLook on the Mac can read and
write .doc / .docx format files, but even mildly complicated formatting
will end up looking a mess, especially in QuickLook.)
I've had pretty good results with LibreOffice, although I don't spend
much time in spreadsheet land. LO doesn't seem to be as fanatical
about meddling with your data - I've spent a lot of time designing my software to write CSV files that are
"Excel-proof". I'm tired of bringing up a file to view, and upon
quitting having Excel say, "Would you like to save the changes you've
just made?" Dammit - I didn't make _any_ changes! At the very least,
the message should read: "Would
you like to save the changes _I've_ made?" Yes, that includes Excel's
edict that all dates shall be in month/day/year format, and that
anything looking vaguely like a year/month/day date shall be
reformatted. And, of course, lines with trailing fields omitted shall
be padded with commas, quotes, etc.
In fact, I prefer LibreOffice's spreadsheet to Excel, primarily because
when I pull in a CSV file it automatically sets the column widths to something reasonable, rather than requiring you to manually select the hilariously-misnamed "Auto format".
In fact, I prefer LibreOffice's spreadsheet to Excel ...
On 2026-06-27 18:22:29 +0000, Charlie Gibbs said:[...]
On 2026-06-27, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 27/06/2026 05:12, rbowman wrote:
The only Apple device I've ever had is an iPod Shuffle that was given to >>>> me long ago.
I had a few power PCS back when I was married - my ex wife was a graphic >>> designer weaned on MACs and Quark.
I used one as a daily drive for a year or so. Mac OS-X Tiger I think
Then I moved to linux and never looked back. Terrible machines.
They were essentially computers for people who knew nothing about
computers, and absolutely didn't want to know.
Even more than Windows there was One True Way™ to use them, and heaven >>> forfend if you stepped off the One True Path ...
My wife has drunk the Kool-Aid - she has a Macbook, an iPad, and an
iPhone. The Macbook's web browser has started getting slow and
cranky -
she went to the Apple store and they told her that she needs a new
Macbook because her existing one is no longer secure - something
about software updates not being available
A web browser is just a web browser. The app itself can't get slower
than it was originally, except if you've got a ton of bookmarks or
keep lots of windows / tabs open all the time.
A "cranky" web browser may be too old for the websites you want to
use. Simply change to a more up-to-date web browser. Firefox lasts
longer than Safari.
On 2026-06-26 08:37:41 +0000, Nuno Silva said:[...]
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said:
And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"?
Most of the business world did years ago ...
I think relativism from your part would improve matters too. It's
not even a de facto standard the way you stated it,
The majority of businesses in the world use Microsloth Windoze (about 60%-66%*) and Microsloth Ofiice (about 82% in 2017*)... they *are*
basically the standard and have been for decades now. It may be slowly beginning to change.
* That figure is for those using the lastest versions Windowze 10 and 11,
so doesn't include all those still using older versions.
* A very quick search doesn't turn up more up-to-date figures for Microsloth
Office, only for the online Office 365 version, which doesn't include
offline users. In terms of just online office apps, Google currently has
the most users.
Probably the best known example was Microsloth Exploiter that pushed
its own way of doing things to the point that website makers had to
use a variety of techniques try to accomodate two different options, depending on which browser you were using. Those that simply went with Exploiter's way caused compatibility issues for people using other web browsers. This was usually most evident with government websites where
they never bothered to test things on any other browser or OS.
In fact, one charity company I worked for had to file monthly reports
to their main funder via a website system. They used Apple computers
and none of the web browsers would work properly with the website
report system (including Mac Exploiter). The only option was for them
to get a Windoze PC with Exploiter solely to do the monthly reports.
Such issues do still come up from time to time, especially with
government websites, but mainly if you're still using older versions
of web broswers.
On Sat, 27 Jun 2026 18:22:31 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
In fact, I prefer LibreOffice's spreadsheet to Excel ...
You’re not the only one. Actual researchers who have studied the issue
have come to the same conclusion <https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008984>:
don’t use spreadsheets to try to do professional-quality data
analyses, but if you must use a spreadsheet, LibreOffice Calc is
preferable to Microsoft Excel.
In general, I absolutely love the recommendations that they make. The
first one is a biggie:
Scripted analyses are preferred over spreadsheets. Gene name to
date conversion is a bug specific to spreadsheets and doesn’t
occur in scripted computer languages like Python or R. In
addition, analyses conducted with Python and R notebooks (eg:
Jupyter or Rmarkdown) capture computational methods and results in
a stepwise fashion meaning these workflows can be more readily
audited. These notebooks can therefore achieve a higher level of
computational reproducibility than spreadsheets. Although this
requires a big investment in learning a computer language, this
investment pays off in the longer term.
Note that bit: “capture computational methods and results in a
stepwise fashion meaning these workflows can be more readily audited”.
Here I thought reproducibility was an absolutely non-negotiable
foundation stone of scientific research, yet it seems people have been publishing results with nothing to back up their analyses other than
an Excel spreadsheet.
Like stats, such 'analysis' can be easily tweaked
to LIE - to support someones political/ideological/
positional CAUSE. Only look at what serves YOU and
hurts your opposition.
On 2026-06-27 18:22:31 +0000, Charlie Gibbs said:
In fact, I prefer LibreOffice's spreadsheet to Excel, primarily because
when I pull in a CSV file it automatically sets the column widths to
something reasonable, rather than requiring you to manually select the
hilariously-misnamed "Auto format".
Column widths are easily fixed quickly in Excel. Just click in the
corner "cell" above the row numbers and left of the column letters to
select the entire spreadsheet, then double-click the divider between
any column.
Similarly for row heights, although you may need to turn on the text-wrapping for all the cells first.
The biggest issue with Excel is that it is simply not accurate, and therefore untrustworthy. Because Microsoft stubbornly chose to do
decimal arithmatic in stupid way, that they claim is a "feature", it
means miniscule errors creep in, which can then get bigger when using
those error cells in other calculations. No other spreadsheet (or
database) that I've used has had this problem because they do decimal arithmatic properly.
Which can be translated in something like:
"We have realised that in some of the numeric files, like spreadsheets,
Faux disappeared or was translated in English and became false."
On 2026-06-27, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-26 08:37:41 +0000, Nuno Silva said:[...]
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said:
And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"?
Most of the business world did years ago ...
I think relativism from your part would improve matters too. It's
not even a de facto standard the way you stated it,
The majority of businesses in the world use Microsloth Windoze (about
60%-66%*) and Microsloth Ofiice (about 82% in 2017*)... they *are*
basically the standard and have been for decades now. It may be slowly
beginning to change.
* That figure is for those using the lastest versions Windowze 10 and 11,
so doesn't include all those still using older versions.
* A very quick search doesn't turn up more up-to-date figures for Microsloth >> Office, only for the online Office 365 version, which doesn't include
offline users. In terms of just online office apps, Google currently has >> the most users.
And Google Docs isn't exactly that good. I kept hitting "why doesn't it
have $BASIC_FEATURE_OOo_HAD_FOR_YEARS_BEFORE?", and the version control
being automatic is a bit too useless. For people who don't want to
bother with it? Maybe it's ok. But if I'm aware of it, I may want to
group the changes under a descriptive label, and make separate labels
for separate sets of changes.
On 2026-06-27 18:22:31 +0000, Charlie Gibbs said:
In fact, I prefer LibreOffice's spreadsheet to Excel, primarily because
when I pull in a CSV file it automatically sets the column widths to
something reasonable, rather than requiring you to manually select the
hilariously-misnamed "Auto format".
Column widths are easily fixed quickly in Excel. Just click in the
corner "cell" above the row numbers and left of the column letters to
select the entire spreadsheet, then double-click the divider between
any column.
Similarly for row heights, although you may need to turn on the text-wrapping for all the cells first.
The biggest issue with Excel is that it is simply not accurate, and therefore untrustworthy. Because Microsoft stubbornly chose to do
decimal arithmatic in stupid way, that they claim is a "feature", it
means miniscule errors creep in, which can then get bigger when using
those error cells in other calculations. No other spreadsheet (or
database) that I've used has had this problem because they do decimal arithmatic properly.
On 2026-06-27, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
On 2026-06-27 18:22:31 +0000, Charlie Gibbs said:
In fact, I prefer LibreOffice's spreadsheet to Excel, primarily because >>> when I pull in a CSV file it automatically sets the column widths to
something reasonable, rather than requiring you to manually select the
hilariously-misnamed "Auto format".
Column widths are easily fixed quickly in Excel. Just click in the
corner "cell" above the row numbers and left of the column letters to
select the entire spreadsheet, then double-click the divider between
any column.
Quickly? That sound pretty laborious to me, especially if there are a
lot of columns that need adjusting. If I'm forced to deal with Excel in
this situation, I select the entire spreadsheet and then use the above-mentioned "Auto format". LibreOffice gets it right in the first
place - no manual adjustments required.
Similarly for row heights, although you may need to turn on the
text-wrapping for all the cells first.
The biggest issue with Excel is that it is simply not accurate, and
therefore untrustworthy. Because Microsoft stubbornly chose to do
decimal arithmatic in stupid way, that they claim is a "feature", it
means miniscule errors creep in, which can then get bigger when using
those error cells in other calculations. No other spreadsheet (or
database) that I've used has had this problem because they do decimal
arithmatic properly.
Was Excel the one that thinks 1900 is a leap year? Or was that some
other M$ program? I once wound up with a lot of dates that were a day
off thanks to that one, whichever program did it.
On 28/06/2026 09:13, c186282 wrote:
Like stats, such 'analysis' can be easily tweaked
to LIE - to support someones political/ideological/
positional CAUSE. Only look at what serves YOU and
hurts your opposition.
The quintessential problem...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahgjEjJkZks
On 2026-06-28 09:02, Nuno Silva wrote:
On 2026-06-27, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-26 08:37:41 +0000, Nuno Silva said:[...]
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said:
And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"?
Most of the business world did years ago ...
I think relativism from your part would improve matters too. It's
not even a de facto standard the way you stated it,
The majority of businesses in the world use Microsloth Windoze (about
60%-66%*) and Microsloth Ofiice (about 82% in 2017*)... they *are*
basically the standard and have been for decades now. It may be slowly
beginning to change.
* That figure is for those using the lastest versions Windowze 10 and
11,
so doesn't include all those still using older versions.
* A very quick search doesn't turn up more up-to-date figures for
Microsloth
Office, only for the online Office 365 version, which doesn't include >>> offline users. In terms of just online office apps, Google
currently has
the most users.
And Google Docs isn't exactly that good. I kept hitting "why doesn't it
have $BASIC_FEATURE_OOo_HAD_FOR_YEARS_BEFORE?", and the version control
being automatic is a bit too useless. For people who don't want to
bother with it? Maybe it's ok. But if I'm aware of it, I may want to
group the changes under a descriptive label, and make separate labels
for separate sets of changes.
I have been using Google Calc spread sheet for some years, to track how
much gasoline I buy for the car, and how many kilometres it does.
Well, one day it lost me entries. It said there was some sync problem,
maybe it had stored a local copy that did not match the cloud version.
Now that file is impossible to open in the phone, it stalls. I could
open it on the computer and save to a different name, but one or two
lines are lost.
On 2026-06-27, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
On 2026-06-27 18:22:31 +0000, Charlie Gibbs said:
In fact, I prefer LibreOffice's spreadsheet to Excel, primarily because >>> when I pull in a CSV file it automatically sets the column widths to
something reasonable, rather than requiring you to manually select the
hilariously-misnamed "Auto format".
Column widths are easily fixed quickly in Excel. Just click in the
corner "cell" above the row numbers and left of the column letters to
select the entire spreadsheet, then double-click the divider between
any column.
Quickly? That sound pretty laborious to me, especially if there
are a lot of columns that need adjusting. If I'm forced to deal
with Excel in this situation, I select the entire spreadsheet and
then use the above-mentioned "Auto format". LibreOffice gets it
right in the first place - no manual adjustments required.
Similarly for row heights, although you may need to turn on the
text-wrapping for all the cells first.
The biggest issue with Excel is that it is simply not accurate, and
therefore untrustworthy. Because Microsoft stubbornly chose to do
decimal arithmatic in stupid way, that they claim is a "feature", it
means miniscule errors creep in, which can then get bigger when using
those error cells in other calculations. No other spreadsheet (or
database) that I've used has had this problem because they do decimal
arithmatic properly.
Was Excel the one that thinks 1900 is a leap year? Or was that
some other M$ program? I once wound up with a lot of dates that
were a day off thanks to that one, whichever program did it.
For me, the biggest issue with Excel opening CSV is because it assumes[...]
things and changes the document based of those fucking assumptions. And
once it's change, you can't do anything about it and you have to manage
your CSV file before opening it with Excel.
Some other articles spoke about Excel, I don't know about OpenOffice or OnlyOffice. But what I know is that OpenOffice and OnlyOffice let me
chose the field separator and the encoding before doing anything. So if everything is messed up, it's my fault and start again doing the right choices.
On 2026-06-28, Stphane CARPENTIER wrote:
[...]
[...]
For me, the biggest issue with Excel opening CSV is because it assumes
things and changes the document based of those fucking assumptions. And
once it's change, you can't do anything about it and you have to manage
your CSV file before opening it with Excel.
Some other articles spoke about Excel, I don't know about OpenOffice or
OnlyOffice. But what I know is that OpenOffice and OnlyOffice let me
chose the field separator and the encoding before doing anything. So if
everything is messed up, it's my fault and start again doing the right
choices.
Yeah, my thought while I was reading your post was "wait, Excel doesn't prompt for this"? I'm quite used to see the comprehensive CSV import
dialog in OOo/LibO, Excel doesn't do something comparable!?
On 2026-06-28, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
For me, the biggest issue with Excel opening CSV is because it assumes[...]
things and changes the document based of those fucking assumptions. And
once it's change, you can't do anything about it and you have to manage
your CSV file before opening it with Excel.
Some other articles spoke about Excel, I don't know about OpenOffice or
OnlyOffice. But what I know is that OpenOffice and OnlyOffice let me
chose the field separator and the encoding before doing anything. So if
everything is messed up, it's my fault and start again doing the right
choices.
Yeah, my thought while I was reading your post was "wait, Excel doesn't prompt for this"? I'm quite used to see the comprehensive CSV import
dialog in OOo/LibO, Excel doesn't do something comparable!?
LibreOffice does offer a dialog which lets me select from a range of >separators, but didn’t offer a way to treat ‘,’ as a decimal point, as >far as I could see.
On 6/28/26 06:51, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2026-06-28 09:02, Nuno Silva wrote:
On 2026-06-27, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-26 08:37:41 +0000, Nuno Silva said:[...]
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said:
And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"?
Most of the business world did years ago ...
I think relativism from your part would improve matters too. It's
not even a de facto standard the way you stated it,
The majority of businesses in the world use Microsloth Windoze (about
60%-66%*) and Microsloth Ofiice (about 82% in 2017*)... they *are*
basically the standard and have been for decades now. It may be slowly >>>> beginning to change.
* That figure is for those using the lastest versions Windowze 10
and 11,
so doesn't include all those still using older versions.
* A very quick search doesn't turn up more up-to-date figures for
Microsloth
Office, only for the online Office 365 version, which doesn't include >>>> offline users. In terms of just online office apps, Google
currently has
the most users.
And Google Docs isn't exactly that good. I kept hitting "why doesn't it
have $BASIC_FEATURE_OOo_HAD_FOR_YEARS_BEFORE?", and the version control
being automatic is a bit too useless. For people who don't want to
bother with it? Maybe it's ok. But if I'm aware of it, I may want to
group the changes under a descriptive label, and make separate labels
for separate sets of changes.
I have been using Google Calc spread sheet for some years, to track
how much gasoline I buy for the car, and how many kilometres it does.
The office gals used to write, then re-write, our
entire budget/payroll/expense system as spreadsheets
until quite recently. A dozen+ heavily-linked pages
at minimum.
They were trying to implement an expensive all-in-one
miracle office/biz system about the time I retired.
Best I could tell it didn't really have the nuance to
cope with anyone's Real World reliably. Stuff like
QuickBooks can SORT of do it ... but something is
ALWAYS different than the designers Vision.
Well, one day it lost me entries. It said there was some sync problem,
maybe it had stored a local copy that did not match the cloud version.
Now that file is impossible to open in the phone, it stalls. I could
open it on the computer and save to a different name, but one or two
lines are lost.
Complex sheets are notoriously difficult to diagnose/fix
when problems appear. Everything is linked to everything.
I guess they
expect comma-separated values to be comma-separated, which is not
_entirely_ unreasonable.
It is not complex at all, by computer standards. Just four hundred
lines and 15 columns, a table.
On Mon, 29 Jun 2026 10:53:46 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
It is not complex at all, by computer standards. Just four hundred
lines and 15 columns, a table.
There is an old engineering adage which says that, in any system,
complexity arises, not so much from the numbe of components, as from
the number of potential interactions between them.
This applies to both hardware and software.
| Sysop: | DaiTengu |
|---|---|
| Location: | Appleton, WI |
| Users: | 1,126 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 51:57:54 |
| Calls: | 14,414 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 186,401 |
| D/L today: |
11,529 files (3,173M bytes) |
| Messages: | 2,548,956 |
| Posted today: | 1 |