After 40 years of being free Microsoft has added a paywall to Notepad
-
No, only in so far as the button to use it existing passively
No
And no
-
Nothing I could find immediately. I found an Arch Wiki entry which shows that most features work out of the box. Not sure if that's your exact model and can't comment on how reliable the information presented is too.
-
You mean the entire fucking world where *BSD is basically dead and Linux is fucking everywhere? Yeah… sure, buddy.
This is not a valid argument and also you are quite ignorant of what's everywhere and what is dead.
*BSD has always been a poor alternative to Linux
The other way around technically, one came before the other and was a more mature system, with ongoing lawsuits however.
Also SunOS 4 and Ultrix are BSD, if you didn't know. Commercial high-end OSes before Linux even started. About "poor alternatives".
because of design decisions,
You don't know what you're talking about, anything but this argument. BSDs' design decisions allow them to solve the same problems orders of magnitude cheaper (in human effort) than Linux. That's how they still survive.
Under FreeBSD there are GEOM, netgraph, properly working ZFS since long ago, proper separation of base system and packages, the ports system, Linux emulation for legacy software, all orderly and clean. Under Linux the horrible mess starts with Debian netinstall.
By the way, you don't even know your own team, Eric S. Raymond of the "cathedral vs bazaar" glory notoriously disagreed with you, despite the comparison being supposed to put Linux on top. His point was that if you allow thousands of monkey developers, they might not do things so well, but they'll do so much more that it's justified, and thus Linux wins due to having shittier architecture, but developing faster.
poor hardware support,
Go use Windows then, it has almost perfect hardware support.
and a garbage license that allows non-free software to “steal” (take) and use your code irresponsibly.
So Google uses GPL code responsibly, right? Microsoft? Apple? Meta?
This argument is obsolete.
I dunno where the circus is, but the clowns are already here.
-
You can buy a top CPU laptop then upgrade or even pay to upgrade with high quality ram and storage modules and you would still be paying less than an equivalent Mac. Which you can't upgrade of course, because the only option is buying as is out of the gate. No matter what Apple says, 32 GB of ram simply doesn't cost $300, their pricing is meant to fleece customers.
-
This is always so unfair to XFCE. Sure it is low impact on resources but it is also very flexible and customizable. Most people sleep on how good it can be outside of the low resources need.
-
Thanks! Looks like on the talk page there's doubt about whether it even has a touchscreen, which is a little discouraging. I guess I can just try, but It's good to know a resource like this exists.
-
It’s part of the KDE Plasma desktop.
KDE is not "The OS".
-
They really do seem to be on a mission to cram it into everything
-
Is there a particular model you're thinking of? Not just the line. I usually find that the Windows laptops don't have enough cooling or make other sacrifices. If you want good cooling, good power (CPU and GPU), good screen, good keyboard, good battery, good WiFi, etc: the options get limited pretty quick.
Even the RAM cost misses some of the picture. Apple Silicon's RAM is available to the GPU and can run local LLMs and other machine learning models. Pre-AI-hype Macs from 2021 (maybe 2020) already had this hardware. Compare that to PC laptops othe same era. Even in this era, try getting Apple's 200-400GB/s RAM performance on a PC laptop.
PC desktop hardware is the most flexible option at any budget, and pretty cost effective and most budgets. For laptops, Apple dominate their price points, even pre-Apple-silicon.
The OS becomes the final nail in the coffin. Linux is great, but the reality is a lot of software still only supports Windows and Apple; and Linux support for the latest/current hardware can be a hit or miss (My three-year-old, 12th gen Thinkpad just started running good). If the choice is between Mac OS or Windows 11, is there really much of a choice? Does that change if a company wants to buy it, manage it, and support it? Which model should we be looking at? It's about time to replace my Thinkpad.
-
Yeah. This is why I've disabled copilot and Gemini on my devices altogether. It's not worth it to have this nonsense filling up everything you use or rely on on a daily basis.
-
You're sounding like one of those people that says "ummm ackshully it's GNU + Linux"
Yes, you can have a desktop without a desktop environment. Well done. Nobody does that in the desktop space. Kate is an OS program.
If you install a distro with KDE, you will have Kate. It's an OS program.
Case in point, you can install Kate, and Dolphin, on FreeBSD. And on Windows.
Pahahaha, that's not what defines whether a program is an OS one or not. You can run paint on Linux if you wanted to. Based on your definition, Paint therefore isn't part of the Windows app suite.
-
Yeah my only complaints with gnome are the lack of system tray and the fact that sticky keys don't work well
-
You’re sounding like one of those people that says “ummm ackshully it’s GNU + Linux, not Linux”
No, I'm one of those people that understand that a DE is not the OS. A DE is a component one can install, but doesn't have to, in order to have a fully functional OS. Most certainly one does not require Kate in order to have a Linux OS installed. I have thousands of linux machines I manage that DON'T have Kate installed.
If you install a distro with KDE, you will have Kate. It’s an OS program.
Weird, because I only have Kate because I asked for it to get installed. It didn't come along for the ride when I installed KDE.
Pahahaha, that’s not what defines whether a program is an OS one or not. You can run paint on Linux if you wanted to. Based on your definition, Paint therefore isn’t part of the Windows app suite.
Paint comes on the MS Windows ISO (Or did), and with zero choice given, ever, MS Paint gets installed.
I installed MX Linux yesterday, and Kate was not installed.
I installed KDE on Freebsd a couple of weeks ago, and Kate was not installed.
Let’s get back on topic - do you think a normal user will hear “Kate” and think “ah, that must be the text editor!”, do you think they’ll hear “Dolphin” and think “ah, that must be a file manager of some kind!”?
I don't think any of that matters, tbh. Every user will have things to learn, once they switch to a new OS.
-
The devs have the same kind of “we know better than you do” mentality towards design
It's not "we know better than you do"
It's "we have a vision for the desktop environment"
If you granted the user every little thing they wanted, you don't become a better piece of software. You end up middle of the road. There are limited resources and by keeping a limited scope and having a clear idea of what you want to accomplish- you can do what you aim to do really well. Instead of being mediocre at a lot of things.
My experience with Gnome- it does 95% of what I need a Desktop Environment to do (and certain things others don't do very well). Some features like
- Being able to push a button, start typing an application's name, and push enter to start that application
- Being able to push a button, and immediately see at a glance all of the windows I have open and quickly navigate to them
- Being able to easily set keyboard hotkeys so that I launch applications and can run my own custom scripts with the push of a button
Example- I have a script that I set to "Control+Num Pad 5" that opens up a Gnome folder search dialog. I navigate to a folder and click "Ok" and then 4 terminals open on my left monitor. Three small ones stacked on top of each other on the left, one big one on the right. Basically like a tiling window manager. This script has custom commands that run depending on the directory. If I open a react-native folder, it runs an Android emulator and neovim on the big terminal.
- Being able to easily run scripts on files and directories directly from Nautilus (Gnome's file manager)
Example- When I right click on a pdf file in Nautilus, I have custom scripts that I can run. One is "splitPdf" which creates a new folder called "split" and then creates n.pdf files where n is the number of pages. I also have "compressPdf" which will compress the pdf as much as possible and pops up a notification showing you how much. I have one for .xlsx and .doc files called "printPdf" that converts those to pdf files.
Those 4 things I think Gnome does better than any other default desktop environment I've ever used and I've used a lot over the course of my life. The remainder of the items (the 5% of stuff Gnome can't do) I have found custom plugins and in one scenario it took me a couple hours to write my own custom plugin.
MacOS does #2 and #4 well by default (although it's harder to write scripts with their clunky apple script language whereas with Gnome because you can just use regular old fish or bash scripts). With certain applications (like better-touch-tools or karabiner) you can get similar functionality as Gnome.
Windows with Autohotkey does #3 although you have to again use a clunky language (even clunkier than Apple script)
KDE can do #1 (search/launch apps), but feels slower and less streamlined than Gnome's immediate overview. It does #2 (window overview) and #3 (keyboard shortcuts), but buries these features under layers of settings and inconsistent menus. For #4 (file manager scripts), Dolphin technically supports actions, but configuring them requires wrestling with clunky .desktop files whereas on Gnome you just use fish or bash or python or javascript or whatever the hell you want and stick it in a directory.
In my opinion, Gnome is miles ahead of KDE and while it's obviously not as polished as MacOS, it has accomplished so much more with its limited resources than a megacorp like Apple does.
-
I have always been partial to gedit, kate aint bad either.
-
Running LLMs is not a feature that 99% of users need or want. Look at all the AI laptops flopping in sales. People don't care about RAM soldered to the motherboard to squeeze a milisencond on a feature they don't use. It's a money grubbing strategy, plain and simple.
-
CheomeOS: Let Google silently start tracking your kids until they are old enough to sell all of that accumulated data.
-
Holy fuck, I swear. This is exactly why I tell people that if they think Linux people are delusional, they know absolutely nothing about delusional because they've never seen a fucking *BSD luser try to argue his way out of a wet paper bag and fail.
So the idea that the overwhelming majority of every single place/person/entity that wants a free UNIX-like OS with a choice choosing Linux over *BSD is somehow not valid? Sure, buddy. *BSD had its time to rise up and win over Linux and it did not. It failed because of the reasons I said. It has zero advantages over Linux and so many disadvantages.
Of course, *BSD came first, but even back then, *BSD wasn't the primary system, UNIX and other systems like MINIX and the ones you mentioned were so much more popular than *BSD ever was. But when Linux arrived, *BSD began to die out. *BSD was a poor afterthought, even before Linux. There's a good reason the "*BSD is dying" meme appeared very early in internet culture even back when Slashdot was a huge thing, because it was absolutely based on the reality of the world.
Don't make me laugh about *BSD's "design decisions", ones that basically create a system that is much more difficult to work with because it has a much more simplistic base than the much more robust Linux ecosystem. The idea of separation of base system and packages has nothing to do with efficiency and more to do with a simple design option, something Linux can also do with atomic distributions, which while not quite equal to what *BSD does but has the same idea of separation of base OS and packages, have their certain advantages but aren't flexible enough to do more advanced, low-end system work, which gives Linux an advantage by far.
ESR's Cathedral and the Bazaar arguments have been repeatedly argued against as a good model for Free software development for a very long time, and Linux wins because of more flexible development done by more people but with a very strong and centralized point of vetting said code for most Linux software, which means it's not just "thousands of monkey developers" randomly throwing code at Linux. Your use of ESR as an argument against Linux shows how out of time you are with understanding Free software and how it all works to come together to create a great system.
No one wants to use non-free hardware support, troll.
If Google, Microsoft, Apple, or Meta were caught using GPL against its license, they'd be sued to oblivion and they know it. That's why they don't. If you think GPL is unenforceable, you are a fool. Meanwhile, ALL of those companies are, in fact, using the hell out of *BSD licensed code and you fucking know it. Your garbage development model helps those garbage companies exist.
Your argument is obsolete, and the clowns are all in the *BSD tent.
-
Sounds like everyone is going to have to upgrade to Notepad ++ but honestly why are people even using Windows anymore and who even uses Notepad. I wanna see those numbers, like what... 5000 active users of notepad and they are just grandparents whose grandkids couldn't be bothered to install anything else. Seriously though Android, Mac OS, Steam OS, Android TV, Chrome OS, Debian, hell Ubuntu, Linux Mint so why are people making excuses to use Windows other than because it's on a work computer. Microsoft is lost in the sauce like hey guys let's make the operating system free and people pay for Notepad. You know what that sounds like, a car manufacturer giving away cars and charging to use the radio radio. When Windows became free the quality became identical to the price.
-
I don't want to continue this useless conflict, your comments read as if chatgpt wrote them.
Just a few bits to help you:
UNIX and other systems like MINIX and the ones you mentioned were so much more popular than *BSD ever was.
UNIX obviously was more popular than specifically BSD UNIX, but you don't seem to understand that one is a subset of the other. You might want to read of "Unix wars" and how BSD UNIX became just BSD and then a bunch of *BSDs.
Minix was an education kit.
No one wants to use non-free hardware support, troll.
You are, in fact, using mostly non-free firmware, as in "binary blobs", for a lot of your hardware to function under Linux.
It has zero advantages over Linux and so many disadvantages.
You keep writing such sentences about four distinct operating systems, each with its own advantages and disadvantages.
Don’t make me laugh about *BSD’s “design decisions”, ones that basically create a system that is much more difficult to work with because it has a much more simplistic base than the much more robust Linux ecosystem.
This sentence means nothing.
If Google, Microsoft, Apple, or Meta were caught using GPL against its license, they’d be sued to oblivion and they know it. That’s why they don’t. If you think GPL is unenforceable, you are a fool.
I said it's enforceable and they are still using it just as "responsibly" and they do with BSD, MIT, ISC licenses, which is the point.
OK, done
