I always dislike the nostalgia for the Classic. When brand new, it was already nostalgia bait and seriously under specced for the price. The original 9" Macs I really like, worked with and owned as a retro computer (I owned a contemporary LC). The Classic I always thought was a cash grab.

Colour Classic...yeah maybe, and again as a retro machine I like them. As a contemporary machine though they were way overpriced for what they were.

Can confirm Bazzite. 85/90% there I'd say, which means there's still a bit of "tread carefully" for people. I'm very happy with the running, but I'd be less than truthful if I said it was completely frictionless.

For example, 90% of my gaming is on Elder Scrolls Online, the 'play' button on Steam runs the Zenimax launcher not the game itself and there's also an annoying recent'ish (few months) bug where it seems games launched from a 3rd party launcher don't know they've got the foreground focus. Steam thinks the launcher has the foreground., andn ESO this manifests as not autoswitching to the main game window after you've gone through the Zenimax launcher, no sound and sometimes stuttering frames because the ESO game window still thinks its in the background somehow. Random'ish alt-tabbing and clicking will bring it back, but it means there's a a) a small bit of friction where there was previously none and b) some change or regression because all this used to run fine without that issue.

I played Rez:Infinite. Great game, but it has an "Attack" mode which will crash after the third level or so. Again, friction.

I play Skyrim. Setting both Skyrim and ESO up for modding, including running some Windows binaries required by the mods, was a relatively painful learning experience.

I have a friend who wanted to switch but didn't because of kernel DRM in some of the Windows games. Once again, friction.

I'm very happy with the switch and wouldn't go back, but I'm experienced with Linux (Slackware 0.9 alpha being my first distro, and I'd installed before distros like that existed as well - anyone for Minix on an Atari ST?). I can see people not quite as annoyed with Windows as me not really seeing the benefit. For me, it was one giant Co-pilot advert too far that made me say "right then, done". After I'd told it no god knows how many flaming times, Windows popped up some "Let's get ready in your new Co-Pilot account!" thing that literally just had me hard power off and wipe the OS away. My PC is purely for gaming, I use a Mac laptop for my desktop work, so I get that luxury.

(as an aside, I do wish Steam would ban using launchers when it itself is the launcher. There's no reason for that Zenimax launcher to exist in the Steam version of the game, and it's annoying as hell because it prevents me from using Big Picture mode and just treating the whole thing like a console. That's true for either Windows or Linux, this is a 3rd party launcher thing and not an OS thing).

Mostly agree. I abandoned the Mac around Systen 7.5 era for the 486DX 66Mhz. The multitasking and protected memory spaces put it in advance of the Mac, and the CPUs started to lag the competition as well.

I came back in the OS X era (can't remember if I ever had Cheetah, but I definitely had Jaguar) where although the chips were a bit slower overall it didn't matter much because the OS was just better. Now the chips are better, the OS is better (for versions of 'better' that don't include gaming)...but the OS as compared to its own standards is worse than it used to be. Better than Win 11 - hmm. Not the highest bar anymore.

Which, to be honest, fundamentally misunderstands used RAM readings. Vast majority of that 'used' RAM is in easily discardable caches - Apple had the same PR problem with misleading reports when they released whatever the version was about 4-5 years ago and their tools reported full memory.

Windows does use more RAM than most, but it showing almost all the RAM full is the same kind of caching strategy that macOS uses. Apple eventually started calling this "Memory Pressure" and gave it a simple traffic light system. RAM is doing you no good if it's free, might as well use it to cache if there's not a hard requirement for it right that moment.

I strongly believe Word peaked with Word 4.2 on the Mac - System 6, 1Mb RAM. There are those who would argue 5.1a on the Mac because it included envelope printing, but it was much, much slower and needed more like 2 or 4Mb.

Then they unified the version numbers across the platforms and moved to this pcode stuff in v6. This was so bad and so slow on the Mac that they actually issued an apology for it. Things have gone downhill since then, and v6 was released 1994.

I'll bet. His case has less than no chance in court.

You haven't? How about this evidence, or this evidence, or perhaps this evidence, or...

You get the idea. The article doesn't say anything about a court order one way or the other, so we simply don't know the state there. Given previous track record, it's likely the request was made legally if Apple complied with it.

It's good. Until it isn't.

I'm a computer scientist with three decades of expertise in computer networking. There's this one AI-based job board that keeps trying to match me with delivery driver jobs.

You''ve added the word 'more' here and that wasn't in the original statement. The original statement is 100% correct. It would also be correct for Java, Javascript , C#...but it's still correctly used here.

That other things are also bad is no reason to not try to look at and change your own situation.

If I could paraphrase slightly - "other than the primary use case, there are no use cases". What you describe is exactly the use case - people running full desktop environments or closed-off deployment environments on top of a VMware frame.

A migration for many organisations would be huge to organise and costly since big bang-style would be out of the question. Lots of migrations that kick off let's say today wouldn't have concluded within 3-5 years. Would not shock me if longer exists as well.

Designing a structure with withstand a major act of war basically means digging it far enough underground that nothing can reach it. It was a stupid rule.

Thanks for your questions, Freenet caches data but it isn’t meant to be a long-term storage network. It’s better to think of it as a communication system. Data persists as long as at least one node remains subscribed to it. If nobody subscribes (including the author), it will eventually disappear from the network. So yes, if only your node subscribes then the data will only exist there and won’t be available when your machine is offline. But if other nodes subscribe it will be replicated automatically and remain available even if your node goes offline.

Not from 2023, the linked video is from last month. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

In what way is it locked? It's a Unix box with a pretty front end, it doesn't restrict software installed and you can swap out anything.

iOS - yes, and I can't really think of a good use of an iPad for me. But the Mac is an open machine.