After you log in to iCloud, of course. And then you have to download the Xcode tools, which is fine because it only takes ~8 hours. You'll probably want to reboot after the latest version of Monterey downloads, but make sure you do this after the Xcode tools are done downloading. While you're at it, you should also disable SIP so you can use the filesystems on your external drive, and you'll also want to double-check that your docks/Ethernet components are all MacOS-compatible. You'll also need a copy of GNU's coreutils, so grab those after installing Homebrew/Nix or else you'll get dozens of bash errors. Can't forget Docker, either! That's okay, just go to the Docker website and download their Commercial Client, and only run it when you need a container. We can't just run Docker in the background of a modern OS, can we?
Depending on your workflow, MacOS is fully capable of wasting your time. Especially if you're a developer, MacOS will frequently go out of it's way to deliver you a worse UNIX environment than Linux. If MacOS makes you happy, use it - but nobody is deploying their web infrastructure to MacOS. You're beholden to Linux usage whether you like it or not.
Um, what? Can't say as I've experienced this. Only time I ever felt like this is when I was downloading rustc and cargo from the FreeBSD repos.
The rest is semi-fair, if not completely understanding of the trade offs (rootless is mostly good, lots of people use docker on Linux, no one is deploying their web infrastructure on MacOS, not because you couldn't, but because it's not free, etc.)
As always, use what works for you! I made a joke about how this OpenBSD desktop has like Linux of 25 years ago vibes ... which I'd amend to say, and Linux has a MacOS of 5-10 year ago vibes without the apps (all the love in the world for Linux and the BSDs, and my M1 Macbook Air too).
I'm only taking issue with the "Just Works" comment, because it's most certainly not true when you're talking about development workflows. If you're a video editor or a music producer, MacOS becomes a much better value proposition. For developers though, MacOS gets treated like a second-class citizen. Entire swaths of Open-Source software will not run on MacOS out of the box. You don't even get a package manager without installing it yourself!
All of this is to say, everyone is going to have a different set of needs from their OS. Honestly, I agree with your "MacOS of 5-10 years ago" comment, and it's great that Linux continues to pick up the slack when MacOS "moves on" from various technologies. If I could still run Mojave, I would. Linux really does feel like the next-best thing, and with NixOS I hardly spend 3 minutes setting up my entire system (symlink /etc/nixos/ from my git repo and I'm done).
At least MacOS isn't as bad as Windows in the dev environment sense.
> Can't say as I've experienced this.
That was MacOS' estimate, in reality it only took ~4 hours. Still extremely frustrating when all I need is a 32mb git binary...
> I'm only taking issue with the "Just Works" comment,
I take your point, but "Just Works" on Linux can be a more difficult road than maybe we often care to acknowledge. If you didn't go through the "OMG why won't my laptop suspend properly" years (which maybe still haven't left us...?), then let me tell you UGH, give me a Macbook as my Unix desktop/laptop experience.
I really think it's mostly what you're comfortable/familiar with. Mention NixOS to me and I think interesting, but it actually sounds more complicated than a Time Machine backup on a ZFS NAS to me (although probably much more elegant).
NixOS is definitely more complicated than an OS snapshot - but that's why I like it. That kinda flexibility is what makes Linux great and completely unapproachable, which is why I won't make a bid for Linux domination any time soon. For developers and certain gamers, though, Linux could be a direct upgrade from Windows on their current hardware.
PS, if you are interested in shooting the shit about NixOS, it's actually quite neat. All the time-consuming Linux setup that people loathe can be mostly automated with a config file or two[0]. The package manager (Nix[1]) is pretty badass, and worth checking out if you are on Mac. I much prefer it to Homebrew for dependency management.
Why would you do all that when the minimalist desktop apparently is running a mail client, an irc client and an ftp client?
You can do all that minimal desktop does and much more without MacOS ‘wasting your time’. Do you really want to pretend this minimalist desktop includes Docker?
This was true 3-5 years ago, but you can now buy OEM laptops with Linux preinstalled that "just work" the same as a Mac. Granted, in the long run I don't expect many to be able to maintain Linux unless they're pretty technical. But the whole "waste hours" idea just isn't true these days.
> This was true 3-5 years ago, but you can now buy OEM laptops with Linux preinstalled that "just work" the same as a Mac.
With the trackpad working as good as it does in Mac? And Bluetooth/WiFi? And as good of battery life due to strong hibernate/standby/sleep when you close the lid working? And equal support for external displays?
If Ubuntu is really 1:1 on par with Mac OS X in all categories, I'd be surprised.
Linux != Ubuntu, but yeah, while no one beats Apple's trackpad tech, the rest is there.
The biggest gotcha is still vendor hardware choices that don't follow spec. Appreciating that MacOS doesn't work on any laptops Apple doesn't make, it's pretty amazing how great the baseline for support is with any general Linux distro, even on Macs.
Also, Mac wifi and BT use some proprietary magic that isn't OS dependent. Just to emphasize that the hardware and OS are separate things.
I'm currently using a Magic Trackpad 2 with my KDE desktop (5.26). Gesture support is now 1:1 with MacOS, giving you silky-smooth kinetic gestures for changing desktops, going into Overview, etc. If you're using Wayland, it should also have fairly good support on GNOME too. The only thing you're missing is Force Touch, but I didn't even use that on MacOS.
“Just works”, unless you’re doing anything remotely technical. I like macOS, I use it daily, but unless you’re popping open a browser and checking email and that’s it, there’s nothing out-of-the box about it. You’re likely going to set aside some time to set it up for actual work.
I run xfce on my Linux machine and find that it does what I want out of the box.
I'm sure most of the people here complaining about custom configs can't be bothered to read documentation and hope the gui gives them enough hints to stumble through using it. And this has worked well enough for simple programs as visual hints allow one to stumble through the interface using trial and error.
The gui as documentation has done massive amounts of damage because you can only hint so much before the idea breaks down in the face of 100's of knobs and levers. Then the GUI becomes a liability because once the program becomes stable management (or bored oss devs) find reasons to change the gui breaking the user experience by corrupting the documentation. Now the user has to re-learn everything. The web then becomes a graveyard of obsolete how-to guides.
Goes to show you why emacs or vi and their clones haven't changed much ui wise yet visual studio and other monster ide's are moving targets. man pages and command driven interfaces are very stable.
I enjoy KDE more than Gnome nowadays but it's far from being more minimalistic; it has way too much options, applications, dropdowns, buttons, etc. compared to Gnome and pretty much any other DE.
It DOES run great though, but I think they'd do a good job by simplifying some aspects of it, too bad the community seems to be mostly opposed to that as they want KDE to remain a more power-user friendly desktop.
I haven't tried it out in awhile, but I wonder if LXQt might be worth looking at for something more configurable than GNOME, yet more simple than KDE. Of course, there's also always XFCE, MATE, and Cinnamon. I just don't see LXQt mentioned much.
I prefer Gnome but I also use KDE because that's what's on my Steam Deck.
Both work great and have all the features I need, but KDE feels a bit boring, a bit "Windows XP" while Gnome seems like a more modern desktop to me. I much prefer Gnome's dock to KDE's "start menu" with so many things cramed at the same place (well, like Windows).
I think the parent comment's choice of "minimal work" was key. In my experience, KDE requires quite a bit of work to set up because it encourages you to adapt the system for your workflow. GNOME, on the other hand, encourages you to adapt your workflow to the system, which is minimal out-of-the-box, and IMO doesn't take much effort or work to do so.
Regardless, I think once KDE is set up to one's workflow properly, it stays out of the way and can remain out of the way on new systems by transferring the config files. It just may take a lot of upfront work to get to that point and you can get easily distracted tweaking the minutiae over time. For that particular reason, I also prefer just using vanilla GNOME (with only the AppIndicator extension for DropBox and Steam tray icons). Granted, that's a "me problem" because I get easily distracted and can never stick with a specific setup when there's so many options available for me to tweak.
TL;DR: Both KDE and GNOME can be minimal, but the latter requires "minimal work" because it's minimal out-of-the-box and there's not much work that can be done.
> If I were less addicted to web browsing I would probably use plan 9.
You can run a linux vm using vmx on 9front and run a browser in there. Not fast as lots of vm work is still needed to improve guest performance (send patches.)
That's why I run Mac OS X and don't waste hours setting up a machine/operating system that could just work out of the box.