It’s more expensive than it needs to be, but it looks really pretty, and fundamentally it’s still coffee, just like MacOS is Unix-based under the hood.
A chromebook is more like a can of coke. It’s caffeinated, has mass-market appeal, but nobody’s going to be spending hours talking about just how great their can of coke is vs. someone else’s can of coke. A high-end chromebook is maybe a glass bottle of Mexican Coke.
Windows would be coffee from a national chain, but when you take the lid off, there’s an ad under it, there’s an ad on the side of the cup, and at the very bottom of the cup there’s an ad that you don’t see until you’ve drank all the coffee. Oh and it comes with cream and sugar by default, even if you prefer it black. It also comes with ads for a subscription to a cream and sugar delivery service.
It’s great, Arch users can explain why i3 works so much better on Arch versus Ubuntu minimal because check notes… the installer of Arch Linux is 15 years behind the competition?
They had a lot of missteps over the years (e.g. at one point, they shipped with Amazon ads in the OS). Currently it’s the way they’re pushing Snap (which is a lot like Flatpak, but proprietary and only really used by Canonical (because it’s proprietary)).
As someone who has been down the rabbit hole, I was running Gentoo with linux-libre with my use flags all set up to install only what my machine and set up needed. This is the correct answer.
I’ve been back on Kubuntu for about 8 years because it works for me.
It’s a Linux flavor used by novices, it’s straightforward to install and requires very little configuration to be usable as a document editing workstation.
Because it is maintained by a for profit company and because I believe it defaults to sending back telemetry data to said company, though you can opt out of that. Those are the reasons I’m aware of anyway.
Desktop Linux is becoming more mature so there is less need for an “easy” distro. Also, Canonical (company behind Ubuntu) has been pushing their tech (Mir, snaps) instead of contributing to really open alternatives that everyone else uses.
Coffee filter machines are also old and reliable, very traditional (where I live, at least; French presses are a newer trend compared to that) and very practical-minded (IMO it usually tastes like crap, but you can make a lot of it at once and it stays warm for a long time).
Add comment