I don't understand why this is a problem at all. AFAIK macOS is UNIX, so you can create user accounts and run programs as separate users. This is what I routinely do on Linux to run coding tools or other programs that should not have "full disk access," in particular to the files and mounts of my main user.
Imagine having a personal assistant paid by a sketchy surveillance company. They can't do personal assistant stuff without full access to your email, calendar, etc., but the company paying them wants to harvest your personal data.
Personal assistants are realistic for very rich people because they can be paid an extravagant wage and punished for disloyalty. A personal assistant costing pennies to someone else, with access to data worth more than its salary, makes no sense.
No, the winning strategy was to release a conventional-looking truck, say something that very much looks like an F150 or a Silverado.
The Cybertruck, or what it should have been, was never meant to be an entry-level truck like the Slate, and the market for trucks clearly shows people are wanting to spent money on big trucks.
They (Elon) gambled they could reduce the price of the rest of the truck enough to make an “affordable” BEV by radical changing how it was built - turns out that wasn’t possible.
Ford gambled they could build a BEV truck like an F150 and make it affordable enough to attract their normal buyers. Turns out that wasn’t possible.
I’m not sure I see why one failure was better than the other.
> Turns out F150 Lightning was not the winning strategy.
Keep in mind that this wasn't a truck designed to be an EV from the ground up, it's merely an adaptation of the gas-powered F150. What Tesla could have brought to the table was an EV-native truck. The Cybertruck is more or less that, but the goofy design is probably what killed it.
What maintenance do they actually need? Tires, brakes, wiper blades, air filter, washer fluid? All fairly trivial to DIY. One thing that I would do is disable the cellular modem, to prevent unwanted "upgrades."
When you bought a BEV and need to recharge on a road trip. And have the car prepare the battery for charging. And make sure the charging station will be working and available when you arrive.
It must be hard for Windows users to imagine that on Linux there are is no activation, no Microsoft account, no cloud backup, and no pop-up requesting that you install crapware when you plug in a peripheral.[0] You also own your disk encryption keys and are not assigned an identifier that can be used against you.[1]
Meanwhile Linux updates and upgrades have given me grief far more than Windows ones have, FWIW. As does the UX, all the time. As do a million other things I have no energy to list. Every OS has nonsense you have to wade through. It's just that love is blind, and Windows's feels like it's more out of spite than ignorance.
As much as I love how fast and efficient it is to update every single package on my linux machines, I can count in double figures the number of times there's been a package conflict and I've had to google how to fix it.
For better or worse that doesn't happen in windows update
I've had a pretty good track record with Fedora Atomic / Silverblue. The thing I like best about it is that I can have updates safely staged in the background invisibily. And next time I reboot my computer, I boot into that new version. No waiting around or anything.
That's not to say it's perfect. There was a pretty bad bug maybe around 2 years ago where upgrades just stopped working and without any warnings. You had a notice the issue and run a special command to fix the issue. I've also had quite a few AMD/kernel regressions recently that resulted in artifacts in the desktop and AV1 video decode.
I wish there was like a Debian but atomic that has broad support like Fedora does. Though I did see that openSUSE leap 16.1 introduced an immutable option.
In the age of nix + LLMs, other distros through distrobox, brew on Linux, and virtual machines as a last resort its pretty hard to not be able to get the software you need.
> how often do you run into the software you want not being built for your distro?
Is this even the right question? The whole reason humans create software is to accomplish something. If software a is not available, but software b is and does the same thing nearly as well, why not spend 5 minutes to learn the thing?
Because in practice it's never 5 minutes nor "nearly as well". And because you got some software you need to build and it expects xyz library on that platform as a dependency, not abc library, despite your wishes.
Do you happen to be running Ubuntu? They have made updates terrible in their effort to try and make snaps a thing. I experience far less grief on other distros.
Yeah, though this was always the case for me, not just since snaps came along. I've had breakages on other distros too, just (like you say) not as massive, but still more than on Windows.
>Stick to base community-developed distros like Arch, Debian and Fedora.
Since when is Fedora community developed? It's basically the testing arm of Red Hat and implements their corporate policies that will be added to Red Had in the near future. It's as corporate as it gets, just like Ubuntu.
Someday I'd like to see someone do a similar parody of Linux where your job is to get a printer working in Kubuntu. Preferably on a laptop with a HiDPI monitor.
Ubuntu 26.04 regularly, automatically adds a duplicate of our HP network printers, using a slightly different driver and defaulting to Letter (the printer default is A4 and my locale is Ireland). If I try to print a label into a specific quadrant using Document Viewer, it slaps it in the top-left. At least once per week, jobs just disappear without reaching the printer. If you want to print images, you'd better learn ImageMagick incantations or accept whatever scaling and positioning lands on the paper. It's far easier to use the cloud services than to set up network scanning.
The Windows process isn't necessarily better (unless your only concern is reliability and you don't have a Brother) but it is certainly different.
......? Windows 95 to Vista all had similar installation workflows to Linux sans an extra step to enter the install key. 7 and 10 made it easier since the hardware ID would make having to enter the key manually on hardware unnecessary. Until 11, there was no need for MS account, cloud, etc.
Windows 10 definitely begged you to use a Microsoft account to log in. IIRC you couldn't even set it up with a local account unless you told the install process you didn't have internet. I believe it also moved your home folder to onedrive without asking with no way to fully undo that
Not sure about the one drive stuff, but I always clicked the button and it was smooth bypass so to me it's not really an impediment, especially since it didn't matter if the system was internet hooked up or not. And for people that were tied into the Microsoft account eco system it did have it's benefits; AFAIK there are people using One Drive and Office 365 for personal stuff. So at least to me I didn't begrudge them for putting in a prompt that says, "Please use a microsoft account." It's a legitimate use case.
Windows 11 crossed the line big time though. Having the option right there to bypass is fine; Having to enter in an obscure key stroke sequence and rebooting while making sure your system is not hooked to the internet basically soured me off 11 so far. Especially now they're trying to rip it out that workflow.
This is true for essentially all Win32 programs too, including the ones that have started to appear in the MS Store. Developers can play in the sandbox from the get go by using Windows Runtime, but no one wants to rewrite their application with a library or environment that Microsoft is going to deprecate and replace in 6 months time.
It's not like Flatpak is perfect, but at least it uses primitives that we understand through containers, and can apply to already existing programs. Even though they were written without playing in the sandbox and might expect full access to services and files, we can fudge it for the most part with bind mounts and open up safer doors through Portal and widget toolkits over time.
I haven't used Windows in a long time, but IIRC Windows behaves the same way. At least, on Linux, there is an expectation that user accounts be actively used, and this is indeed the model followed by most critical software like nginx, postfix, dovecot, etc.
> A few of my most visited websites have issues on FF
I use FF with FingerprintResist on, and many things such as WebGL outright disabled, on top of very restrictive DNS blacklist and uBlock Origin, and even despite all of that I find Firefox very usable. I can make online payments and book flights and other such things normally. I rarely, if ever, have to use a clean, stock Firefox profile or fall back to Chromium. On machine at least, Firefox gets a higher Speedometer 3.1 score than Chromium.
I never said FF is unusable, I said some websites I frequent have issues in FF. Why is it so difficult to understand what I said? Is my English bad or what?
I won't be using Brave until it is built and packaged by a mainstream Linux distribution, following a process I can trust. I absolutely do not trust Brave's binaries. The company has a history of deceiving users (it was caught injecting affiliate links) and is openly hostile to forks, very ironically. The fact that it comes bundled with crapware is concerning enough.
Is it just me that think injecting affiliate is fair game?
I hate with a passion all the sponsor segments everyone has now, grifting for something they pretend to use.
I find it better if that affiliate money goes to a product i actually use and makes my life better.
Brave origin is that, it solved my issue i had with regular brave. And i tried firefoz based browser but they are not up to par, they work for basic browsing, but struggle with video playback of jellyfin, some dont even have option to use mt own serxng service as search engine
reply