Old School

[1042686]

I do it to stay hip with the Millennials.

 

[z970]

I know MR labeled me "newbie", but I've been lurking around here for a long time. I've seen your debunking, and your points are well taken, but I don't share your opinion.

All my PPC Macs, except one, are G4's. I've tried Debian and Ubuntu on some of the more powerful ones, and the experience left me lacking. If I had a working G5, I'd happily give PPC64 Linux a go, but me and G5's don't seem to get along. I've got a couple gathering dust because they're temperamental machines and I lack the time and patience to get them going; so if it's PowerPC, for me, it's going to be OS X for the foreseeable future.

Oh, sorry. I thought you were talking about it as a whole, like on Intel.

For PowerPCs, then yes, OS X is going to give you better results all around. Maybe in time, this can change as Debian Sid gets better and better with the platform, but for the moment it just isn't quite a reality.

I'm sure that, at this point, I've carved out some kind of broken-record, preaching neighborhood fool reputation for myself...

Eh...
[doublepost=1535067844][/doublepost]

I do it to stay hip with the Millennials.

I think you're going to need the latest iPhone for that.

 

[eyoungren]

Yeah, I think I did that. Sorry, I know that gets tedious.

Nah, it wasn't about tedious (the reason I posted that). It was more to point out that there are a variety of PowerPC users with a variety of reasons for using PowerPC.

I like PowerPC. At first it was because of budget, then it was because of dependability and quality of build, then it was just because it was what I was used to. After that it became a challenge and later something that others were curious about.

Now it's becoming a badge of honor as the challenges increase in difficulty and soon it will be a fond memory of a series of years working with and enjoying all the Mac models I liked and couldn't afford to get when they released.

I'm still here because they are still capable. But there are many here that are diehard PowerPC fans and will use them no matter what. I like PowerPC, but I've never been die hard. I need my computers to do what I require of them and increasingly that's more difficult to ask out of PowerPC - no matter how much magic I throw at things.

It just makes me one of the less common users in this forum is all.
[doublepost=1535068091][/doublepost]

I do it to stay hip with the Millennials.

I do it because Gen-X is used to fending for themselves.

 

[1042686]

Nah, it wasn't about tedious (the reason I posted that). It was more to point out that there are a variety of PowerPC users with a variety of reasons for using PowerPC.

I like PowerPC. At first it was because of budget, then it was because of dependability and quality of build, then it was just because it was what I was used to. After that it became a challenge and later something that others were curious about.

Now it's becoming a badge of honor as the challenges increase in difficulty and soon it will be a fond memory of a series of years working with and enjoying all the Mac models I liked and couldn't afford to get when they released.

I'm still here because they are still capable. But there are many here that are diehard PowerPC fans and will use them no matter what. I like PowerPC, but I've never been die hard. I need my computers to do what I require of them and increasingly that's more difficult to ask out of PowerPC - no matter how much magic I throw at things.

It just makes me one of the less common users in this forum is all.
[doublepost=1535068091][/doublepost]
I do it because Gen-X is used to fending for themselves.

Oh dang - You’re telling me that because I enjoy computers I can actually fix - that this act of self reliance has made me unilaterally uncool in the eyes of Millennials?


Some days You just can’t win.

 

[Raging Dufus]

Oh, sorry. I thought you were talking about it as a whole, like on Intel.

Actually, I think it was me that wasn't being clear.

My only actual experience with Linux has been on PowerPC, and I didn't find that up to par with OS X.

If I ever try it again, it will be on Intel, either my current MBP or another x86/64 machine. There are some 64-bit distros like Elementary OS that look like they might deliver a better experience than what I've had.

 

[z970]

Actually, I think it was me that wasn't being clear.

My only actual experience with Linux has been on PowerPC, and I didn't find that up to par with OS X.

If I ever try it again, it will be on Intel, either my current MBP or another x86/64 machine. There are some 64-bit distros like Elementary OS that look like they might deliver a better experience than what I've had.

That's how I discovered it. Around mid-2017 or so, I was looking for options to keep my G5 relevant down the line. I found Ubuntu 12.04, fell in love with Lubuntu 12.04, researched a bit, found 16.04, experimented some, trial-and-error, hit brick walls many times, then gave up.

I still liked what I saw though, so I eventually threw in the towel and got a Mac Pro, tried again in April '18, and the experience has been great ever since. I don't need it to do anything other than what it already does fantastically. It treats my computer like a capable, serious workstation (finally feels like one) and doesn't pull any punches in anything it does. If you've got something very weak or very strong, you can adjust your experience with great ease and get on with your day just as quickly.

Finding myself booting into OS X less and less...

But as for my G5, full Linux reliance is still a current work-in-progress. The situation gets better by the week however, so there is advancement present.

-

It's not quite for everybody yet, but that range is slowly growing with each passing year. Try it, see if you like it. You might find yourself to be one of the mentally-ill ones and fall in love.

You never know.

 

[pl1984]

We have had a few discussions here in the past on what PowerPC can and cannot do and who will upgrade based on whatever preference or requirement.

This thread seems to be moving into that territory. So…I'll just say (again) that it all comes down to meeting your need or not.

That was not my intent. AphoticD made the following statement:

This alternative architecture provides a unique angle on computing and can allow us to be creative in ways which would otherwise become washed out with the multitude of software options provided by modern systems.​

Unless the creativity being referred to is trying to get an old system to perform modern tasks I'm not sure what creative things they can do that a modern system cannot.

The comment was not about why one chooses to use a PPC system but what creative ideas one can have on PPC that they cannot on a modern system. The reasons are varied and we all have our own no matter how trivial others may find them to be.

I'm a fan of retro computing owning two G5's, a G4 iBook, and a G3 iBook (to run OS 9 natively). I also have a Macintosh IIci along with a couple of Apple //c systems (which I've enjoyed restoring). But I do not see anything these systems can do which a modern system cannot. This should not be taken as an argument to move away from PPC. If they work for the user then I'm all for using them.

 

[Raging Dufus]

Finding myself booting into OS X less and less...

Sooner or later my PowerPC's will become toys to play with (some of them have been for a while) instead of tools, because Tiger/Leopard will have completely run out of steam for the modern web. I'm not any kind of power user, though, so that point is probably further away for me than most.

But I don't like the direction that Apple has taken with either their hardware or their software; and Microsoft just annoys me. So Linux on x86/64 is definitely in my future, whether it be on early Intel-based Mac hardware or something I build myself.

 

[1042686]

That was not my intent. AphoticD made the following statement:

This alternative architecture provides a unique angle on computing and can allow us to be creative in ways which would otherwise become washed out with the multitude of software options provided by modern systems.​

Unless the creativity being referred to is trying to get an old system to perform modern tasks I'm not sure what creative things they can do that a modern system cannot.

The comment was not about why one chooses to use a PPC system but what creative ideas one can have on PPC that they cannot on a modern system. The reasons are varied and we all have our own no matter how trivial others may find them to be.

I'm a fan of retro computing owning two G5's, a G4 iBook, and a G3 iBook (to run OS 9 natively). I also have a Macintosh IIci along with a couple of Apple //c systems (which I've enjoyed restoring). But I do not see anything these systems can do which a modern system cannot. This should not be taken as an argument to move away from PPC. If they work for the user then I'm all for using them.

Hmm ... I interpreted that as powerPC being a different way to get from point A to B, not so much that the old and new softwares were not geared towards same/similar uses & purpose. Walking down that road, perhaps this was also a nod to the homogenization in design & function of modern software apps? Perhaps in Big Ds eyes, PPC apps provide a more unique user experience & with that unique experience ppc apps support a more creative workflow?

I dunno. Just thinking out loud - peeing at cheerios. Yanno, it's early and I haven't had any coffee yet LOL

 

[eyoungren]

That was not my intent. AphoticD made the following statement:

This alternative architecture provides a unique angle on computing and can allow us to be creative in ways which would otherwise become washed out with the multitude of software options provided by modern systems.​

Unless the creativity being referred to is trying to get an old system to perform modern tasks I'm not sure what creative things they can do that a modern system cannot.

The comment was not about why one chooses to use a PPC system but what creative ideas one can have on PPC that they cannot on a modern system. The reasons are varied and we all have our own no matter how trivial others may find them to be.

I'm a fan of retro computing owning two G5's, a G4 iBook, and a G3 iBook (to run OS 9 natively). I also have a Macintosh IIci along with a couple of Apple //c systems (which I've enjoyed restoring). But I do not see anything these systems can do which a modern system cannot. This should not be taken as an argument to move away from PPC. If they work for the user then I'm all for using them.

Well, speaklng solely for myself and probably not necessarily what was meant.

As you may know, I am a graphic designer. My job requires that my tools be reasonably up to date. However, at home the best I can do (because of the OS limitations) is QuarkXPress 8 and Adobe CS4.

Those are still very capable tools and I could still go to press using them. I use them in my own way at home to be creative and my wife often takes advantage of that fact.

But I think, ultimately, what was meant by that comment is that modern software has automated some things to an extent that it's removed some creativity from the process. I don't know if I necessarily agree because there were creative ways I used to get things done on PowerPC (design work) that because of modern software I've been able to eliminate from my workflows.

 

[pl1984]

Well, speaklng solely for myself and probably not necessarily what was meant.

As you may know, I am a graphic designer. My job requires that my tools be reasonably up to date. However, at home the best I can do (because of the OS limitations) is QuarkXPress 8 and Adobe CS4.

Those are still very capable tools and I could still go to press using them. I use them in my own way at home to be creative and my wife often takes advantage of that fact.

I'm a big supporter of using what works. If that's a 15 year old computer with its contemporary software than so be it. In fact my primary Windows system is twelve years old now (though it's running the latest copy of Windows).

But I think, ultimately, what was meant by that comment is that modern software has automated some things to an extent that it's removed some creativity from the process. I don't know if I necessarily agree because there were creative ways I used to get things done on PowerPC (design work) that because of modern software I've been able to eliminate from my workflows.

This is more about software and not the underlying hardware. A modern system is perfectly capable of running PPC "type" software if it were ported to the new architecture.

If AphoticD was referring to the time period of the PPC I can definitely see his point. In fact, depending on how far back one wants to go, I could say the same about the classic Mac OS era. I love classic Mac OS. It's too bad Apple didn't make OS X behave like classic Mac OS. I understand the reasons why they didn't but I really liked it.

 

[z970]

But I don't like the direction that Apple has taken with either their hardware or their software; and Microsoft just annoys me. So Linux on x86/64 is definitely in my future, whether it be on early Intel-based Mac hardware or something I build myself.

I get the feeling this is a growing sentiment shared by many (except trendy Apple hipsters that only need Instagram). We could see the industry shift as we get into the 2020s, especially as macOS pisses off more people, Windows frustrates an increasing number (considering how its current affairs are in security, privacy, and ease of use), and Linux gets more and more refined + compatible, as well as more and more companies porting or making available their software for the platform, because at this point, all that's really left is software compatibility and consumer will.

I really do think there will be some kind of adjustment in the 20's. I see it coming.

But besides that,

and Microsoft just annoys me.

Has to be one of the greatest statements ever. Microsoft annoys everyone.

It's their job.

 

[vddrnnr]

Hi all,

My 2 cents
For me the main thing is "Why are these macs not capable of running new things?".
As far as I've gathered it's just because it wasn't tried before or wanted, even the last G5s were already
64 bit CPUs which no one ( especially apple ) took or could take advantage off.
The HTML5 era or CorePlayer I think are explicit cases for this, in many situations you can now ( 10 to 13 years later)
have those macs performing better than when they were sold.

THE WORD IS OPTIMISATION. These days "nothing" is very optimised except maybe smart phones and
even there it's not always the case because phone CPUs are getting a lot better at what they do.

This for me regarding Apple and PPC is that they gave everyone the ideia that newer macs were much better
than PPCs and it was purely a comercial strategy ( a sound one for them ) but in no way the technical reality ( I know they didn't get a G5 on a laptop ).
But I think we all remember the Intel Pentium4 era and how that turned out. The P3's came back in the
form of the CoreDUOs/Solos or whatever.
Even the development of Rosetta for SL acknowledges that PPC was important to give continuity to
software projects when the PPC hardware era ended.

Just for "reality's" sake I use all kinds of machines from PPC to Intel, ARM with OSX, Windows, Android in bare metal or VMs, depending on what suits better my needs and I think all have their place.
I am fortunate to have been "technology active" since the ZX spectrum era to see all this evolution.
But unfortunately in many cases when someone wants to justify "change" the first thing that's usually
done is to mix everything in the same bowl and compare apples with oranges even when it's not rational to
do so.

PS. I really hope PPCs, CoreDUOs, whatever stay for as long as possible because diversity and choice
are the only things that will bring a better future and the possibility to use what better suits your needs
as opposed to what others think you need.

Regards,
voidRunner

 

[pl1984]

I get the feeling this is a growing sentiment shared by many (except trendy Apple hipsters that only need Instagram). We could see the industry shift as we get into the 2020s, especially as macOS pisses off more people, Windows frustrates an increasing number (considering how its current affairs are in security, privacy, and ease of use), and Linux gets more and more refined + compatible, as well as more and more companies porting or making available their software for the platform, because at this point, all that's really left is software compatibility and consumer will.

IME Linux still requires work in the user interface department. It's a great OS but they need to agree on a common interface and then refine it. Until then Linux doesn't have much chance on the desktop.

 

[z970]

IME Linux still requires work in the user interface department. It's a great OS but they need to agree on a common interface and then refine it. Until then Linux doesn't have much chance on the desktop.

Good point.

GNOME is a pretty safe bet.

 

[mmphosis]

The problem I find with Linux, and open source for that matter, is that there are often too many choices, too many versions, too many project forks, too many distros, ..., agreeing on a common anything is very difficult. It's taken me some work (a lot of learning) to move to Linux (on crappy Intel PC hardware only for now .) I started with Ubuntu because they make it easy to install (partition managers used to scare me.) I've moved on to Xubuntu, and Xfce works for me for now -- I am not so sure about upgrading to Xubuntu 18.04. I am betting against GNOME (GTK) and systemd even though I currently use these subsystems. I would like to move to a leaner OS that doesn't have systemd. I find the desktops somewhat limited (yes, I know I can mix and match and bloat up my system with a myriad of various layers and configurations.) Between KDE (Plasma) and GTK (Gnome), I will stick to GTK for a while, but I would prefer other options -- maybe lower level: X, Wayland, Linux framebuffer. I certainly miss Mac OS X, so using a PowerBook G4 and other PowerPC Macs satisfy this longing.

I'll give you my Command key when you pry it from my cold, dead hands:

/usr/bin/setxkbmap -option ctrl:swap_lalt_lctl

 

[Amethyst1]

Good point.

GNOME is a pretty safe bet.

If you're suggesting GNOME 3 should be the common UI for Linux to be agreed upon and all others dropped, Linux will be doomed on the desktop IMO because GNOME 3 is a resource-hungry nightmare which tries to hide customisation options from its "poor" users. While I recognise the inherent ambiguity because it may look intimidating to someone not used to it, choice is what makes Linux great. If I want to have something forced upon me, I'll use another OS.

Don't like GNOME? There's many alternatives. Don't like systemd? Use another init. I'd never want to give up that kind of freedom.

Besides, we might have a de facto standard Linux desktop – GNOME, because that happens to be the desktop Ubuntu now ships with, and Ubuntu is the most widely used Linux distribution.

Disclaimer: I've been using Linux since 1999 (KDE 1 anyone?) so my views may be biased. Things were very different back then.

 

[pl1984]

If you're suggesting GNOME 3 should be the common UI for Linux to be agreed upon and all others dropped, Linux will be doomed on the desktop IMO because GNOME 3 is a resource-hungry nightmare which tries to hide customisation options from its "poor" users. While I recognise the inherent ambiguity because it may look intimidating to someone not used to it, choice is what makes Linux great. If I want to have something forced upon me, I'll use another OS.

Don't like GNOME? There's many alternatives. Don't like systemd? Use another init. I'd never want to give up that kind of freedom.

Besides, we might have a de facto standard Linux desktop – GNOME, because that happens to be the desktop Ubuntu now ships with, and Ubuntu is the most widely used Linux distribution.

Disclaimer: I've been using Linux since 1999 (KDE 1 anyone?) so my views may be biased. Things were very different back then.

Therein lies a problem. One of Linux's strengths is also one of its largest liabilities. Too many alternatives, too many options all with the potential to result in compatibility issues. macOS and Windows are no strangers to constant UI changes there's only one per version of the OS. Linux, OTOH, has so many variations it's difficult for a software developer to ensure their software will work on any specific version.

I like Linux (and other UNIX variants) but flexibility, one of its strengths, is also a huge weakness.

 

[z970]

If you're suggesting GNOME 3 should be the common UI for Linux to be agreed upon and all others dropped, Linux will be doomed on the desktop IMO because GNOME 3 is a resource-hungry nightmare which tries to hide customisation options from its "poor" users. While I recognise the inherent ambiguity because it may look intimidating to someone not used to it, choice is what makes Linux great. If I want to have something forced upon me, I'll use another OS.

Don't like GNOME? There's many alternatives. Don't like systemd? Use another init. I'd never want to give up that kind of freedom.

Besides, we might have a de facto standard Linux desktop – GNOME, because that happens to be the desktop Ubuntu now ships with, and Ubuntu is the most widely used Linux distribution.

Disclaimer: I've been using Linux since 1999 (KDE 1 anyone?) so my views may be biased. Things were very different back then.

I agree with you, the options and variety available should not disappear, but I also agree with pl1984 in that there needs to be a de-facto environment that everyone thinks of when they hear "Linux". Right now, most of them think of a command line, but something like the fluid, consistent, well-done environments that the GNOME project consistently has to offer would likely be a well-advised choice.

Yes, GNOME 3 could be a little lighter on its toes, but I think it's pretty good. Unapologetically, I believe it's definitely one of the community's best done, most polished and original efforts. Also probably the most funded too.

Of course, let's not forget Windows and macOS's requirements by themselves. When you give it context, GNOME 3 is less intensive than both, or certainly at least macOS.

If you're counting servers. Otherwise, Linux Mint is the most popular desktop distribution as of now.

 

[Amethyst1]

Therein lies a problem. One of Linux's strengths is also one of its largest liabilities. Too many alternatives, too many options all with the potential to result in compatibility issues. macOS and Windows are no strangers to constant UI changes there's only one per version of the OS. Linux, OTOH, has so many variations it's difficult for a software developer to ensure their software will work on any specific version.

I like Linux (and other UNIX variants) but flexibility, one of its strengths, is also a huge weakness.

This is what I meant by "inherent ambiguity". As for ensuring compatibility with specific versions, commercial developers often test compatibility with and support only a handful of distributions, i.e. if you require support, your choice of distribution is severely impacted.
[doublepost=1535145805][/doublepost]

I agree with you, the options and variety available should not disappear, but I also agree with pl1984 in that there needs to be a de-facto environment that everyone thinks of when they hear "Linux". Right now, most of them think of a command line, but something like the fluid, consistent, well-done environments that the GNOME project consistently has to offer would likely be a well-advised choice.

"Linux" is just the kernel. It doesn't even have a command line. You need to combine Linux with a userland, such as GNU's, to even have a basic command line; this combination is usually referred to as "GNU/Linux". Then, you can start adding higher-level components such as X, Wayland, desktop environments, graphical applications to have a full-fledged installation.

Note: I don't mean to nitpick or educate, I'm just teasing.

Yes, GNOME 3 could be a little lighter on its toes, but I think it's pretty good. Unapologetically, I believe it's definitely one of the community's best done, most polished and original efforts. Also probably the most funded too.

That's your opinion or preference. But that doesn't mean it must become the standard. Plasma 5 isn't too bad either, by the way.

 

[z970]

"Linux" is just the kernel. It doesn't even have a command line. You need to combine Linux with a userland, such as GNU's, to even have a basic command line; this combination is usually referred to as "GNU/Linux". Then, you can start adding higher-level components such as X, Wayland, desktop environments, graphical applications to have a full-fledged installation.

Note: I don't mean to nitpick or educate, I'm just teasing.

No need to get politically correct here. For all intents and purposes + for the sake of simplification, GNU/Linux/X.Org/Wayland/Blah IS "Linux".

That's your opinion or preference. But that doesn't mean it must become the standard. Plasma 5 isn't too bad either, by the way.

Plasma 5 strikes me as that it's trying too hard. It's harder to get things done in that environment than it is in something like Xfce or MATE. Also, the task bar looks and feels wonky. To contrast, GNOME is an almost objectively smoother and more intuitive environment. It also happens to be a completely original layout, which we need more of in the Linux world to help distinguish itself.

Plasma 5 is also far more similar to something like a fancy (well-polished too) Windows in comparison, which GNOME has long evolved from. There's also too many Windows-like environments as is to begin with. Xfce, LXDE, Cinnamon, KDE... Can't these people think of anything else besides a single bar at the bottom of your screen??

But I digress. At this point, we're only stating personal preferences and idealistic outlooks.

We'll see where the market goes in the future. Something completely unexpected could happen. Microsoft could cancel Windows, Apple could merge iOS & OS X, hell, everyone might end up switching to phone-desktop hybrids full-time.

Given that, I respect your environment of choice and hope you come to appreciate even more of it over time. It's this kind of healthy debate and extra opportunity that makes Linux already so strong in what it does and contributes so much to the ecosystem in general. And with that said, good day to you.

 

[Raging Dufus]

But I think, ultimately, what was meant by that comment is that modern software has automated some things to an extent that it's removed some creativity from the process. I don't know if I necessarily agree because there were creative ways I used to get things done on PowerPC (design work) that because of modern software I've been able to eliminate from my workflows.

One of the things that makes me miss my Power Macs, and their unchanging feature set, is that I had established a workflow of sorts - though nothing like yours or others who use their Macs for graphics work or other "power" reasons. My primary use for my Macs is writing; and for that, a G4 with Leopard is, and will remain for some time, a very capable combination. For that matter, even older combos of Mac hardware/software remain very capable for writing. Writing is not a very complex task.

But somewhere along the way between Snow Leopard and El Capitan (I have no experience with any versions between those two), things happened which changed the way I now have to get my work done in El Cap. And, I can see no reason, apart from Apple trying to discourage certain behavior, for some of these changes. In other words, the change didn't suit any productive reason that I can see; although, I don't own an iPhone or any other iOS device, so I have no knowledge of how some of these changes may benefit iOS integration.

I don't mind El Cap, I'm getting used to it. But, I'd really love it if I could just simply use it the way I used to use Leopard. For example:

• Dashboard. I never see anyone talking about it, but it was a Tiger/Leopard feature of which I made extensive use, especially the Dictionary, Unit Conversion, Calculator, and Symbol Caddy widgets. In El Cap, you can access it the same way (F12 or by clicking the dock icon); but its function is fundamentally different. It no longer appears floating over your desktop, while you remain able to read whatever document/browser window/whatever is underneath. Instead, in El Cap it occupies its own space, completely obscuring your desktop...and you can no longer get rid of it with a mouse click, you must either press F12 again, or ESC, on the keyboard. The only possible reason I can see for Apple changing this functionality is to try and wean us legacy users off of Dashboard; which irritates me more than a little. It's my damn computer, let me use it my way.

• Language integration. This is a minor annoyance, but still - El Cap's "rootless" structure precludes my ability to use Monolingual or some other slimming tool to get rid of language localizations for which I will never, ever have any use. It wouldn't be an issue if my drive space wasn't so small - I have a 100GB SSD in my MBP - but here again: It's MYYYYY computer! Why do I have to put up with my limited storage space being taken up with things which are useless to me?

There are other things. I don't find El Cap's version of Disk Utility to be very useful. I just about lost my mind over what Apple calls "natural scrolling" on my MBP's trackpad, before I figured out how to change it. There may be fixes for some of my other gripes, too, which I simply haven't discovered yet; I'm still learning, but until/unless I make those discoveries, Apple's version of "progress" makes my life harder, not easier.

Still, it was my choice. Silly Dufus.

 

[eyoungren]

One of the things that makes me miss my Power Macs, and their unchanging feature set, is that I had established a workflow of sorts - though nothing like yours or others who use their Macs for graphics work or other "power" reasons. My primary use for my Macs is writing; and for that, a G4 with Leopard is, and will remain for some time, a very capable combination. For that matter, even older combos of Mac hardware/software remain very capable for writing. Writing is not a very complex task.

But somewhere along the way between Snow Leopard and El Capitan (I have no experience with any versions between those two), things happened which changed the way I now have to get my work done in El Cap. And, I can see no reason, apart from Apple trying to discourage certain behavior, for some of these changes. In other words, the change didn't suit any productive reason that I can see; although, I don't own an iPhone or any other iOS device, so I have no knowledge of how some of these changes may benefit iOS integration.

I don't mind El Cap, I'm getting used to it. But, I'd really love it if I could just simply use it the way I used to use Leopard. For example:

• Dashboard. I never see anyone talking about it, but it was a Tiger/Leopard feature of which I made extensive use, especially the Dictionary, Unit Conversion, Calculator, and Symbol Caddy widgets. In El Cap, you can access it the same way (F12 or by clicking the dock icon); but its function is fundamentally different. It no longer appears floating over your desktop, while you remain able to read whatever document/browser window/whatever is underneath. Instead, in El Cap it occupies its own space, completely obscuring your desktop...and you can no longer get rid of it with a mouse click, you must either press F12 again, or ESC, on the keyboard. The only possible reason I can see for Apple changing this functionality is to try and wean us legacy users off of Dashboard; which irritates me more than a little. It's my damn computer, let me use it my way.

• Language integration. This is a minor annoyance, but still - El Cap's "rootless" structure precludes my ability to use Monolingual or some other slimming tool to get rid of language localizations for which I will never, ever have any use. It wouldn't be an issue if my drive space wasn't so small - I have a 100GB SSD in my MBP - but here again: It's MYYYYY computer! Why do I have to put up with my limited storage space being taken up with things which are useless to me?

There are other things. I don't find El Cap's version of Disk Utility to be very useful. I just about lost my mind over what Apple calls "natural scrolling" on my MBP's trackpad, before I figured out how to change it. There may be fixes for some of my other gripes, too, which I simply haven't discovered yet; I'm still learning, but until/unless I make those discoveries, Apple's version of "progress" makes my life harder, not easier.

Still, it was my choice. Silly Dufus.

I use Dashboard for one specific application and that is to place a widget on my desktop that is unavailable by any other means. That's on one Mac. For all the rest, I don't use it and try to kill it as quickly as possible on new installs.

I agree with you on Monolingual.

But we all use our Macs differently.

I have a MacPro at work that I won't update past Yosemite (OS X 10.10) simply because of some software compatibilies.

Apple annoyed me in Lion because they changed the minimum Finder window width to something higher than the widths I had on Leopard. I have a lot of open Finder windows at work for well used folders. They are made certain widths and placed certain places so I can access their content at any time. I am now forced to use an Applescript to make their width smaller than the set default.

That's one of my major irritations. Another was the SMB2 (networking) bug that Apple didn't fix until Yosemite. In a mixed PC/Mac environment with a Windows Server this is a big issue. You only get 24 hours to use InDesign before any work you do to files residing on the server ends by ID quitting abrutly. That's because the SMB2 bug severs the connection to the server which causes ID to quit. I had to use a slower workaround.

But what I meant as far as creativity was more software. I need the tools to be able to open modern filetypes and repurpose the content that's in them. Lots of people make PDFs now with modern software that Acrobat 6 (what I was using way back when) just cannot cope with. Illustrator 10 and Photoshop 7 are ancient.

So, to be able to use the tools I need to get my work done I have to have a Mac that can run an OS that lets me use those tools. I could get away with sending PDFs made from InDesign CS4 to our printer. In fact, I did so on this MP from 2013 to earlier this year (before upgrading to Adobe CC17). But if I am upgrading my tools to OPEN files I should also be upgrading my tools to SAVE files.

At home it's an entirely different thing. A PDF is a PDF and I have the means to get things open and make proper use of the content as well as being able to send usable PDFs. But I don't have that kind of time at work.

It's always going to be this way. The design industry is all about change and if you pick any particular spot to stay put at you will quickly be left behind. In time sensitive materials such as what I work in (newspapers) that's a problem. And we aren't even a daily, we're a weekly.

But sooner or later, even at home, there will be eventual forced upgrades. I could NOT and would NOT do the things at home that I do now using QuarkXpress 4.11, Photoshop 6, Illy 8 and Acrobat 5. It certainly could be done, but that is now beyond my patience when later versions of these apps that still run on PowerPC make the workflow faster and easier.

Those eventual forced upgrades on me (under that sliding needs scale I mentioned earlier) are going to mean more modern Macs at some point.

You are a writer so what you have going for you works for you. But I would argue that the filetypes you deal in change very little between programs so this will continue to work for you - at least until Microsoft changes their format again.

But there is a big difference between a PDF made with Acrobat 5 and one made with Acrobat DC or InDesign CC17 and it comes down to what features are allowed in each version. Acrobat 5 isn't going to help with with an Acrobat 8 format PDF that's using new features it can't render.

That's just one of the reasons behind my updating at work.

 

[z970]

I don't mind El Cap, I'm getting used to it. But, I'd really love it if I could just simply use it the way I used to use Leopard. For example:

• Dashboard. I never see anyone talking about it, but it was a Tiger/Leopard feature of which I made extensive use, especially the Dictionary, Unit Conversion, Calculator, and Symbol Caddy widgets. In El Cap, you can access it the same way (F12 or by clicking the dock icon); but its function is fundamentally different. It no longer appears floating over your desktop, while you remain able to read whatever document/browser window/whatever is underneath. Instead, in El Cap it occupies its own space, completely obscuring your desktop...and you can no longer get rid of it with a mouse click, you must either press F12 again, or ESC, on the keyboard. The only possible reason I can see for Apple changing this functionality is to try and wean us legacy users off of Dashboard; which irritates me more than a little. It's my damn computer, let me use it my way.

• Language integration. This is a minor annoyance, but still - El Cap's "rootless" structure precludes my ability to use Monolingual or some other slimming tool to get rid of language localizations for which I will never, ever have any use. It wouldn't be an issue if my drive space wasn't so small - I have a 100GB SSD in my MBP - but here again: It's MYYYYY computer! Why do I have to put up with my limited storage space being taken up with things which are useless to me?

For what it's worth, you can still use Monolingual in El Capitan (I've done it), and you can make Dashboard appear as an on-screen overlay from a setting.

The way I see it, Sierra and later are much worse. What with this Siri integration, general bugginess, etc. and whatnot, El Capitan is the last OS X I'll use.

But that's me.

 

[Raging Dufus]

But we all use our Macs differently.

Oh, I don't disagree. By no means am I saying that everyone - or anyone, for that matter - should continue using PPC and/or older versions of OS X. To each his/her own.

So, to be able to use the tools I need to get my work done I have to have a Mac that can run an OS that lets me use those tools.

That's exactly why I went to the MBP w/El Cap. That one piece of software - exam security software at my law school - required it. So I completely understand where you're coming from here.

But sooner or later, even at home, there will be eventual forced upgrades. I could NOT and would NOT do the things at home that I do now...

Yep, I get that too. I could have stayed with my PowerBook, and just used it all semester for my writing needs; and then either hand wrote my exams or pull out the MBP solely for that purpose. But I quickly dismissed both of those options as being more trouble than they are worth. I hate writer's cramp, and using an OS that's foreign to me while doing something as important as taking an exam seemed unwise. Sucking it up and learning El Cap seemed the best option.

You are a writer so what you have going for you works for you. But I would argue that the filetypes you deal in change very little between programs so this will continue to work for you - at least until Microsoft changes their format again.

Quite true.
[doublepost=1535217287][/doublepost]

For what it's worth, you can still use Monolingual in El Capitan (I've done it), and you can make Dashboard appear as an on-screen overlay from a setting.

Didn't know that about Dashboard, thanks, I'll look into it. As for Monolingual, I tried it, but what it managed to remove was pretty paltry compared to the difference I'm used to seeing from using it on previous versions of OS X. I'm convinced that it didn't get all that I told it to get, especially things like printer drivers, etc. (don't remember if that was even an option on the El Cap version of Monolingual, but it sure used to be).

For that matter, why wouldn't El Cap let me customize my installation to exclude those things from the get-go? I used to be able to do that in Tiger/Leopard.
[doublepost=1535217391][/doublepost]

For what it's worth, you can still use Monolingual in El Capitan (I've done it), and you can make Dashboard appear as an on-screen overlay from a setting.

The way I see it, Sierra and later are much worse. What with this Siri integration, general bugginess, etc. and whatnot, El Capitan is the last OS X I'll use.

But that's me.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

EDIT: Why does MR keep merging my replies? I've looked for a setting to stop this behavior, but haven't found any.