[wayneftw]

My work takes place at a beefy desktop machine. I wouldn't want it any other way... I get to plug in as many displays as I need, I get all the memory I need, I can add internal drives, there's no shortage of USB ports or expansion - and I get them cheap. For meetings or any kind of work away from my desk I'll remote in from one of my laptops.

All that and my preferred OS (Manjaro/XFCE), which runs on anything, has been more stable than any Mac I've ever owned. Every update to macOS has broken something or changed the UI drastically and in a way I have no control over...

If I ever switch away from desktops, it will be for a Framework laptop or something similar.

[zepto]

This is interesting - in the sense that you are someone who doesn’t want the UI to change, but it’s really not clear what this has to do with the question or the article.

[coupdejarnac]

I'm not the guy above, but I concur with the sentiments. After a while, adjusting to trivial UI changes becomes a huge chore and unnecessary cognitive overhead. It's relevant, because in order to use the M1, you have to buy into Apple's caprice.

[zepto]

Caprice seems like a weird way to characterize an aspect of the Mac a lot of people like.

I think it’s valid to want not to have to deal with the cognitive overhead of UI evolution.

It’s equally valid not to want to deal with the cognitive overhead of various attributes of Linux.

What’s not obvious is why people sneer about it.