Forum: Ruby on Rails Macbook for Rails Development

Announcement (2017-05-07): www.ruby-forum.com is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see rubyonrails.org/community and ruby-lang.org/en/community for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
0727907ae68db2e8ebc1ea1b01f00d69?d=identicon&s=25 Dan Webb (Guest)
on 2006-03-19 20:15
(Received via mailing list)
Hi All,

I've finally got fed up of struggling with Windows and am on the verge
of splashing out on a Macbook for Ruby/Rails development.  I've seen
DHH's post about it on loudthinking but I wondered if anyone else has
any more wisdom...

Is it worth it over a powerbook?  Any tips on good OSX apps for Rails
dev (textmate, i know already)?  Anything not working well on it?

Thanks,

--
Dan Webb
http://www.danwebb.net
429500a5a54600958c9c7ac032a37f66?d=identicon&s=25 Joe (Guest)
on 2006-03-19 20:23
I'm thinking about getting a 14" iBook, since I can live with a 14"
screen (as opposed to 17", which is more money, of course, and a bit
bigger than I want to be lugging around; besides, I have a 20" monitor
at home.). I think it will be powerful enough for my needs.

Joe
40db9e75b3f5899258e3bdc0c9210154?d=identicon&s=25 Conrad Taylor (Guest)
on 2006-03-19 20:51
(Received via mailing list)
Hey Dan, it should be an excellent RoR development once you get things
installed and configured.  Yes, it's well worth the cost being that
Apple doesn't really raise prices all that much between the older and
newer hardware.  However, the later models have the most "bang for the
buck".  For example, the MacBook Pro has definitely much faster than
its predecessor (i.e. PowerBook) because I was simply clicking on the
iLife 06 apps and they were starting within one bounce and this isn't
the case with the PowerBook.  Also, you're getting an internal iSight
camera that the PowerBook doesn't have and will not have being that
it's the last model that will be released by Apple.  BTW, I have been
doing some in store testing and I truly like what I see and my
purchase is eminent and I'm currently doing my RoR development on a G5
2.5 GHz Quad with 2 GB Ram and 2 23" Cinema HD displays.  This machine
is used for all my development and animation activities.  Thus, my
recommendation would be to go with the MacBook Pro.  Next, if you need
more screen space while working from home, I would recommend adding a
monitor.  Finally, I like both radrails and textmate for actual
development but you need to find what works the best for you.  Well, I
wish that the info helps and good luck in your purchasing decisions.

Peace,

-Conrad
Bc80625db60e9db4394c51d6c1892b49?d=identicon&s=25 Derrick Spell (Guest)
on 2006-03-19 21:03
(Received via mailing list)
Definitely worth it.  I love mine.  Haven't really had any problems
with compatibility.  Everything rails-related runs smoothly.
Installation was a breeze, etc...  And yes, I've put my macbook next
to a powerbook - the speed is noticable.  Worth the money.

Oh, and contrary to Joe's post, the Macbook Pro has a 15" screen.

-Derrick
429500a5a54600958c9c7ac032a37f66?d=identicon&s=25 Joe (Guest)
on 2006-03-19 21:18
Conrad Taylor wrote:
> I'm currently doing my RoR development on a G5
> 2.5 GHz Quad with 2 GB Ram and 2 23" Cinema HD displays.

Wow. You're rich!

> Finally, I like both radrails and textmate

How do they compare? Isn't radrails lacking a lot of stuff?

Oh, and contrary to Derrick's post, I never said the Macbook Pro doesn't
have a 15" screen. But it is rather wide for a laptop that I want to be
lugging around (and a bit more expensive).

Joe
66247570dbe0c350a165cdabc2769ba1?d=identicon&s=25 Paul Robinson (Guest)
on 2006-03-19 21:39
(Received via mailing list)
On 19 Mar 2006, at 19:15, Dan Webb wrote:

> I've finally got fed up of struggling with Windows and am on the verge
> of splashing out on a Macbook for Ruby/Rails development.  I've seen
> DHH's post about it on loudthinking but I wondered if anyone else has
> any more wisdom...

Well, for what it's worth, I posted this to the FreeBSD mailing list:

http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-chat/20...

about 30 days before ordering myself a 12" iBook which has been my
only machine for about a year now. So don't trust any of my opinions,
as they change rapidly. :-D

When I have more money, I need to upgrade to get more RAM and
something lighter, and yeah, I'll probably go with Apple hardware,
probably a Macbook Pro.

If you're a Unix guy (which I am), the advantage I suppose is that
under the Terminal it's FreeBSD userland. I'm a BSD guy, so for me,
this is great.

If you're a pure Windows guy, I have no idea how difficult or
otherwise it'll be to transform your working style. I use my iBook as
a kind of a Unix box with a better GUI than KDE or Gnome and with
some commercially available software that is quite nice (like
Textmate), so my working style is likely to be different to yours.

For what it's worth, I did do some work in Radrails on XP last year,
and personally I found it to be OK, but just a little unfamiliar. Do
not invest heavily in another architecture and OS and development
environment just because you like the sound of Textmate - do so
because you think you'll become more productive in ALL your tasks or
do what I did and get fed up building X and windows managers and just
want something that you take out of the box, turn on, and you're
running, but it's still Unix under the hood.

Your choice of Internet bank, accounting package, games and other
software will all be dictated from that switch point on, so be sure
you mean it.

> Is it worth it over a powerbook?  Any tips on good OSX apps for Rails
> dev (textmate, i know already)?  Anything not working well on it?

In Ruby/Rails terms? Well, depends on how you're handing your package
management with fink or darwin ports, but MySQL can be a bit weird
getting running first time, but is now a well-documented process. In
general, everything is pretty straight forward.

For some reason, if you're using the ajax_scaffold generator, and
you're generating on OS X, the resulting code is riddled with bugs,
but I know that is getting eyeballed as I type and should be fixed in
a few weeks.

As Rails core are all OS X guys, chances are for Rails dev, you're
actually going to be better supported in some respects on OS X than
you are on Windows.

When you're developing in a team, if the rest of the team aren't on
OS X, things like the socket line in database.yml can throw you, as
can the shebang line in the public/dispatch.* files. You can work
around those. Also, if you're using any UML tools, or your team is,
or your clients are, realise you are probably not going to be able to
play along easily. Ditto if they insist on MS Project or other
Windows-only tools.

You should also know if a lot of your clients/customers/colleagues
work with you via MSN or Skype, the Mac clients for both suck. Skype
is passable (unless, like me, you use Virtual Desktops, in which case
it is just plain stupid), but the MSN client is like going into the
dark ages. The jabber clients out there are a bit rubbish as well.
Colloquy is OK for IRC.

Oh, and of course you aren't testing code in IE any more (IE for Mac
really isn't IE. No, really...), so be careful about playing with too
much CSS that is on the edge, and be wary of IE-specific bugs you
might not catch.

As far as Unixes go though, it's OK. Some guys dual-boot Linux but
they tend to be the militant GPL types IME. Compared to Windows?
Well, apart from online banking I don't boot Windows any more. I hope
that will change this year too.

P.S. - if you work in a Uni/school or know somebody who does, order
via the Education site. Discounts on Apple hardware used to be 20%+
from list when I was working at a University (last year), yet you're
still buying direct from Apple.
429500a5a54600958c9c7ac032a37f66?d=identicon&s=25 Joe (Guest)
on 2006-03-19 21:49
Paul Robinson wrote:

> Your choice of Internet bank, accounting package, games and other
> software will all be dictated from that switch point on, so be sure
> you mean it.

Can you elaborate? I don't see how choice of Internet bank would be
affected, since it's accessed via a browser. Checking out the software
at the Apple store the other day, I saw a lot of familiar packages:
TurboTax, Doom 3, etc. There's also that virtual PC package, but I hear
it's slow.

> In Ruby/Rails terms? Well, depends on how you're handing your package
> management with fink or darwin ports, but MySQL can be a bit weird
> getting running first time, but is now a well-documented process. In
> general, everything is pretty straight forward.

I've heard that fink and darwin ports leave a lot to be desired, and
many prefer to only use dmg files.

Joe
66247570dbe0c350a165cdabc2769ba1?d=identicon&s=25 Paul Robinson (Guest)
on 2006-03-19 22:30
(Received via mailing list)
On 19 Mar 2006, at 20:49, Joe wrote:

> Can you elaborate? I don't see how choice of Internet bank would be
> affected, since it's accessed via a browser.

A lot of Internet banks require ActiveX controls. Dumb, yes. But
quite common, particularly for business accounts in the UK. In fact,
I don't know of a UK business bank account that works in anything
outside of IE + Windows.

Trust me, this bothers me. A lot. I expect it will change in a couple
of years though. If it doesn't, I'll move my business account off-
shore if I have to. That'll make the customs and excise people
happy. :-)

> Checking out the software
> at the Apple store the other day, I saw a lot of familiar packages:
> TurboTax, Doom 3, etc. There's also that virtual PC package, but I
> hear
> it's slow.

Virtual PC isn't just slow, it's painful. I imagine if you're buying
Intel hardware though, a newer version will be released which will be
a bit fruitier.

There are apps out there, sure, just be aware that there aren't as
many as there are for Windows. Nearly all my applications are Unix
based, so for me it's a problem. If after research you think it's not
a problem for you, cool. If it is, well, try and switch apps. :-)

> I've heard that fink and darwin ports leave a lot to be desired, and
> many prefer to only use dmg files.

Well, being a BSD user, I'm used to /usr/ports but DarwinPorts isn't
up to that standard yet. I tend to stick with .dmg files myself quite
often, but occasionally you're going to have to get down and dirty
with the command line.

--
Paul Robinson
2899cec9af525f7953e19c8210aca97c?d=identicon&s=25 Jason Perkins (Guest)
on 2006-03-19 22:40
(Received via mailing list)
On Mar 19, 2006, at 3:29 PM, Paul Robinson wrote:

> On 19 Mar 2006, at 20:49, Joe wrote:
>
>> Can you elaborate? I don't see how choice of Internet bank would be
>> affected, since it's accessed via a browser.
>
> A lot of Internet banks require ActiveX controls. Dumb, yes. But
> quite common, particularly for business accounts in the UK. In
> fact, I don't know of a UK business bank account that works in
> anything outside of IE + Windows.

FWIW, I've never had any problems using one of the larger banks here
in the US online via Safari.

>> I've heard that fink and darwin ports leave a lot to be desired, and
>> many prefer to only use dmg files.
>
> Well, being a BSD user, I'm used to /usr/ports but DarwinPorts
> isn't up to that standard yet. I tend to stick with .dmg files
> myself quite often, but occasionally you're going to have to get
> down and dirty with the command line.

I used DarwinPorts to install subversion, ruby, rubygems, fcgi and
lighty on my MacBook Pro with no problems. Once those were installed
I went to town with gem to install rails, capistrano, feedtools,
flexmock, rake, etc. I did have to build DarwinPorts from source, but
that was trivial and painlessly fast on the MBP.

--
Jason Perkins
jperkins@sneer.org

"The computer allows you to make mistakes
faster than any other invention, with the
possible exception of handguns and tequila."
Fd1769776698da69ffd5bdda094d8581?d=identicon&s=25 Jon Evans (Guest)
on 2006-03-19 22:42
(Received via mailing list)
Hi,

On 19 Mar 2006, at 20:49, Joe wrote:

> Paul Robinson wrote:
>
>> Your choice of Internet bank, accounting package, games and other
>> software will all be dictated from that switch point on, so be sure
>> you mean it.
>
> Can you elaborate? I don't see how choice of Internet bank would be
> affected, since it's accessed via a browser.

<hollow laugh>

Well, that's quite a reasonable statement.  But you might well find
(as I did initially) that your bank is merely omitting the word
"Explorer", and their product should more properly be called
"Internet Explorer Banking".

I bank with First Direct.  It was quite a while before their core
internet banking product was supported in any browser except IE, but
I've been using it fine in Firefox & Safari for a few years now.  A
year or so ago they brought out an advanced internet banking product,
which (last time I checked) is only accessible with IE running on a PC.

Anyway, I'm typing this on a 15" PowerBook, my first Mac, which I
bought a couple of years ago.  Last weekend I bought an Intel iMac,
and it's fantastic for Rails development.  Really fast.  I have to
admit though, it used to swap a fair bit before I put in an extra 1GB
RAM.  It runs really smooth now.  A new MacBook is definitely on the
cards, once my finances have recovered from buying the iMac. :)

Jon
429500a5a54600958c9c7ac032a37f66?d=identicon&s=25 Joe (Guest)
on 2006-03-19 22:50
Yeah, I've heard of ActiveX sites persisting, but I can't think of any
offhand that I regularly visit. I do run into sites that use Java
applets once in a while. I don't think I've ever used an Internet bank
that required ActiveX (I use - via Firefox - Paypal, Bank of the West,
and Netbank (long time ago)), but I'm not saying they don't exist ;) (I
wouldn't use one anyway).

Joe
24e30ea2f4bfda89a9a915dd18247d05?d=identicon&s=25 Jeremy Huffman (Guest)
on 2006-03-19 23:41
(Received via mailing list)
For typical rails development I think the MacBook may be overkill, or
at least more than you really need. I can develop adequately on my Mac
Mini with only 512MB ram although it could really use 1.25GB like my
12" PowerBook has.

I was able to justify the 12" powerbook because I use it in so many
casual ways around the house, its a coffee table computer and its also
my primary development environment for Rails. I dont have much use for
a large MacBook, but obviously others have different working needs.

I have to say as someone who switched about a year ago that its not
totally painless, joyous and free. I've used Linux and Unix for years
but never as my primary computer - I'm just nowhere near as
comfortable with those systems as I am with Windows and many basic
tasks are done differently in Mac from Linux anyway - either way it
takes getting used to.

Also there are some frustrating things, it took hours to figure out
how to print to a shared LaserJet 1012 (hint, you can't use HP's
driver use GIMP instead). I'd have to shell out extra money to sync my
windows smartphone with the Mac. I can't run RealRhapsody or
PokerStars.

I'd almost recommend you get a small PB or iBook and just try it out
for awhile. Actually I don't have a rave review of the 12" powerbook
either its too hot and the fan is too noisy and now the battery won't
sit flush so it wobbles a little on a table sometimes.

Still I am quite fond of OS X in general, apps like QuickSilver and
TextMate in particular and I do like have the UNIX subsystem while my
wife and I can both use Safari for browsing in the living room etc.

On 3/19/06, Dan Webb <dan@danwebb.net> wrote:
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Dan Webb
> http://www.danwebb.net
> _______________________________________________
> Rails mailing list
> Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
>


--
Jeremy Huffman
http://www.jeremyhuffman.com
0727907ae68db2e8ebc1ea1b01f00d69?d=identicon&s=25 Dan Webb (Guest)
on 2006-03-20 00:43
(Received via mailing list)
Thanks for all the feedback everyone.  The reason Im getting a mac is
because I need a *nix environment but linux seems to just eat time
while you continually try to make it work in one way or another.
Plus, it shows that the core team all work on macs, Ive lost count of
the amount of times Ive ended up hacking rails scripts to get them to
work on Windows and then deploy well on our debian servers without
loads of fooling around.  It sounds like the mac book is good for
rails development by your comments so im sold.

Cheers,

Dan




On 3/19/06, Jeremy Huffman <jeremy@jeremyhuffman.com> wrote:
> I have to say as someone who switched about a year ago that its not
> PokerStars.
> On 3/19/06, Dan Webb <dan@danwebb.net> wrote:
> > Thanks,
>
> --
> Jeremy Huffman
> http://www.jeremyhuffman.com
> _______________________________________________
> Rails mailing list
> Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
>


--
Dan Webb
http://www.danwebb.net
429500a5a54600958c9c7ac032a37f66?d=identicon&s=25 Joe (Guest)
on 2006-03-20 00:53
Dan Webb wrote:
> Thanks for all the feedback everyone.  The reason Im getting a mac is
> because I need a *nix environment but linux seems to just eat time
> while you continually try to make it work in one way or another.
> Plus, it shows that the core team all work on macs, Ive lost count of
> the amount of times Ive ended up hacking rails scripts to get them to
> work on Windows and then deploy well on our debian servers without
> loads of fooling around.

I don't even bother setting up Rails on my Windows machines - I just
edit stuff remotely. Pretty easy with netdrive or any editor that
supports FTP (like Editplus or I think Ultraedit).

As for Linux desktops, I have very unfond memories of spending copious
amounts of time getting ridiculous stuff like mice, video cards, etc. to
work. I recently tried out Ubuntu, spent half an hour trying to get my
wifi card to work (unsuccessfully), then said "f that" and went back to
Windows. But, yeah, OS X seems to be the best package out there.

Joe
0004e098c1882b1245ab74822fb7b725?d=identicon&s=25 Jim Zajkowski (Guest)
on 2006-03-20 00:56
(Received via mailing list)
On Sun, 19 Mar 2006, Jeremy Huffman wrote:

> I'd almost recommend you get a small PB or iBook and just try it out
> for awhile. Actually I don't have a rave review of the 12" powerbook
> either its too hot and the fan is too noisy and now the battery won't
> sit flush so it wobbles a little on a table sometimes.

Having worked with both the PB12 and the iBook, I would recommend you
look
closely to see if the iBook can do everything you have in mind.  The
PB12
is not, IMHO, good enough to justify the price difference.

--Jim
678aa0aabf79a4933b7efc6d585dc141?d=identicon&s=25 Matt White (Guest)
on 2006-03-20 02:09
(Received via mailing list)
I'm going on day 3 on my new MacBook. I left Windows for it, and so
far it just rocks. I keep laughing like a fool when I discover new
things about how smooth the OSX experience is. I've had some trouble
getting the rails stack up and running, but I've chalked that up to my
own cluelessness. I've been able to use Locomotive and SVN for
Capistrano deployment without problems. I'm still having problems
getting my apps to connect to mysql, though, which is making me think
I need to suck it up and install the whole stack without Locomotive.
(which sucks, because Locomotive is cool). Overall, the MacBookPro
experience itself has been very rewarding so far.

Matt
Eea7ad39737b0dbf3de38874e0a6c7d8?d=identicon&s=25 Justin Forder (Guest)
on 2006-03-20 02:29
(Received via mailing list)
Jim Zajkowski wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Mar 2006, Jeremy Huffman wrote:
>
>> I'd almost recommend you get a small PB or iBook and just try it out
>> for awhile. Actually I don't have a rave review of the 12" powerbook
>> either its too hot and the fan is too noisy and now the battery won't
>> sit flush so it wobbles a little on a table sometimes.
>
> Having worked with both the PB12 and the iBook, I would recommend you
> look closely to see if the iBook can do everything you have in mind.
> The PB12 is not, IMHO, good enough to justify the price difference.

I bought the entry-level iBook just after it was upgraded to Tiger +
512MB. I added another 1GB of third-party RAM, and I am very happy with
it. I confess I dithered for a while between iBook and 12" powerbook,
but now I'm glad I took the cheaper option.

UK prices: 699 pounds for the 12" iBook, 1099 pounds for the 12"
powerbook... and now 1429 pounds (1.83GHz/512MB) or 1779 pounds
(2GHZ/1GB) for the MacBook Pro - price ratios 1 : 1.57 : 2.04 : 2.55

   Justin
66247570dbe0c350a165cdabc2769ba1?d=identicon&s=25 Paul Robinson (Guest)
on 2006-03-20 10:53
(Received via mailing list)
On 19 Mar 2006, at 23:56, Jim Zajkowski wrote:

> Having worked with both the PB12 and the iBook, I would recommend
> you look closely to see if the iBook can do everything you have in
> mind.  The PB12 is not, IMHO, good enough to justify the price
> difference.

I went for an iBook as well, because at the time the internals of the
PB12 and a 12" iBook were effectively identical - one was in a white
chunky case, the other was in a slightly smaller silver case, that
was it.

In addition, because I was at a Uni, for less than a grand (GBP) I
could get in the form of the iBook a 12" laptop with integrated WiFi,
bluetooth, 512Mb RAM, 60Gb disk and DVD drive, and in November 2004
that was a very good deal indeed.

My reason for switching was not being able to stomach the fight to
get all the weird hardware on a laptop working smoothly with FreeBSD
as well. I do miss the Thinkpad package - the hardware is much, much,
much better*, IMHO - but OS X isn't a half-bad OS on the whole.

* - better keyboard, lighter, smaller, better screen, Ultrabay slots,
etc., etc... it's just that at the time I was buying with edu
discount, Apple hardware was cheaper(!!)

--
Paul Robinson
1274a7b1e244f663b967aec378f9f525?d=identicon&s=25 Casey Cady (Guest)
on 2006-03-20 19:50
(Received via mailing list)
I'm using a MacBook for Rails development as well, and by far the
best instructions I've seen for getting RoR up and running under
Tiger are here:

http://hivelogic.com/articles/2005/12/01/ruby_rail...

That article was linked to from Apple's own article on Rails
development under Tiger, which is here:
http://developer.apple.com/tools/rubyonrails.html

--Casey
0727907ae68db2e8ebc1ea1b01f00d69?d=identicon&s=25 Dan Webb (Guest)
on 2006-03-20 21:31
(Received via mailing list)
Well, I made the plunge.  Got Rails and all other bits going really
easily.  It's already loads better than Windows.  Looking very good.

Just got to get used to that Apple key business...

On 3/20/06, Casey Cady <ccady@ubermind.com> wrote:
> --Casey
> > I need to suck it up and install the whole stack without Locomotive.
> >>> either its too hot and the fan is too noisy and now the battery
> >>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rails mailing list
> Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
>


--
Dan Webb
http://www.danwebb.net
429500a5a54600958c9c7ac032a37f66?d=identicon&s=25 Joe (Guest)
on 2006-03-20 22:35
Dan Webb wrote:

> Just got to get used to that Apple key business...

What's that? SSH keys or something?

Joe
720fde074c77f4c9692dd6f05802d581?d=identicon&s=25 Nithin Reddy (jashugan)
on 2006-03-21 00:23
(Received via mailing list)
I think he means using the Apple (Command) key for cutting, pasting,
etc.
24e30ea2f4bfda89a9a915dd18247d05?d=identicon&s=25 Jeremy Huffman (Guest)
on 2006-03-21 03:56
(Received via mailing list)
Welcome to the cult. Grats.

On 3/20/06, Dan Webb <dan@danwebb.net> wrote:
> > http://hivelogic.com/articles/2005/12/01/ruby_rail...
> > > far it just rocks. I keep laughing like a fool when I discover new
> > >
> > >> you look
> > >>
> >
>
>
> --
> Dan Webb
> http://www.danwebb.net
> _______________________________________________
> Rails mailing list
> Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
>


--
Jeremy Huffman
http://www.jeremyhuffman.com
77961c972c437d6801714f45c3f2cc3c?d=identicon&s=25 Raphael Schmid (rapha)
on 2006-03-21 09:13
> As for Linux desktops, I have very unfond memories of spending copious
> amounts of time getting ridiculous stuff like mice, video cards, etc. to
> work. I recently tried out Ubuntu, spent half an hour trying to get my
> wifi card to work (unsuccessfully), then said "f that" and went back to
> Windows. But, yeah, OS X seems to be the best package out there.

Just to say: if I was to switch from Ubuntu to Windows, I'd give it more
time than just half an hour to get everything working. You can't really
expect it to be different the other way around.

Aside from the OS switching stuff, Ubuntu makes for a damn good
environment
for RoR development. Well, since RadRails, that is.

-- Raphael
429500a5a54600958c9c7ac032a37f66?d=identicon&s=25 Joe (Guest)
on 2006-03-21 09:53
Raphael Schmid wrote:
>> As for Linux desktops, I have very unfond memories of spending copious
>> amounts of time getting ridiculous stuff like mice, video cards, etc. to
>> work. I recently tried out Ubuntu, spent half an hour trying to get my
>> wifi card to work (unsuccessfully), then said "f that" and went back to
>> Windows. But, yeah, OS X seems to be the best package out there.
>
> Just to say: if I was to switch from Ubuntu to Windows, I'd give it more
> time than just half an hour to get everything working. You can't really
> expect it to be different the other way around.
>
> Aside from the OS switching stuff, Ubuntu makes for a damn good
> environment
> for RoR development. Well, since RadRails, that is.

Yeah, I probably should, but I didn't see anything to get excited about.
Looked pretty much the same as the Linux desktops of years ago - the
Gimp and whatever other software. And my screen was kinda flickering
too. Based on my previous experience, I'm afraid it may very well take
me copious amounts of time again to figure out the trivialities of
getting my wifi card working (heck, maybe I can even take a stab at
writing a driver!) and making the screen work, but, been there, done
that. I just want something that works, and has a lot of great stuff.
Desktop Linux still feels like it's for hobbyists, and still suffering
from a dearth of kick-ass apps.

Joe
77961c972c437d6801714f45c3f2cc3c?d=identicon&s=25 Raphael Schmid (rapha)
on 2006-03-21 10:00
> Yeah, I probably should, but I didn't see anything to get excited about.
> Looked pretty much the same as the Linux desktops of years ago - the
> Gimp and whatever other software. And my screen was kinda flickering
> too. Based on my previous experience, I'm afraid it may very well take
> me copious amounts of time again to figure out the trivialities of
> getting my wifi card working (heck, maybe I can even take a stab at
> writing a driver!) and making the screen work, but, been there, done
> that. I just want something that works, and has a lot of great stuff.
> Desktop Linux still feels like it's for hobbyists, and still suffering
> from a dearth of kick-ass apps.

I wasn't trying to persuade you into using Linux, if Linux is not "what
works for you". All I'm saying is, there's people who it _does_ work
for,
or who it _might_ work for, if it weren't for bad word of mouth.

For the hardware I have standing around at home, plus my girlfriends
laptop, installation of Ubuntu was very easy and straight-forward. In
fact, she installed the last version all by herself ("I've watched you
do it the last two times [Warty, Hoary] and I don't see why I couldn't
do it myself. You could prepare dinner.").

So there's a large gap between your and my (our) installation
experience.
I doubt it'll be different for "availabilty of kick-ass apps".

Don't make it bad for everybody else just because it doesn't work for
you.

-- Raphael
429500a5a54600958c9c7ac032a37f66?d=identicon&s=25 Joe (Guest)
on 2006-03-21 11:09
Hey, I'm just sharing my experience, which wasn't necessarily bad, but
less mediocre, and unless by some conspiracy I got slipped a foobar'd
copy I suspect others will have more or less the same experience.

That reminds me - loading up Ubuntu from the CD took *forever* (well,
about 15 minutes, seriously). Ack.

Joe
77961c972c437d6801714f45c3f2cc3c?d=identicon&s=25 Raphael Schmid (rapha)
on 2006-03-21 11:13
> Hey, I'm just sharing my experience, which wasn't necessarily bad, but
> less mediocre, and unless by some conspiracy I got slipped a foobar'd
> copy I suspect others will have more or less the same experience.

That's what I was trying to counter since it's definitely not my
experience. :-)

> That reminds me - loading up Ubuntu from the CD took *forever* (well,
> about 15 minutes, seriously). Ack.

Well, it's a live CD...

May I ask what kind of hardware you were trying this on and with what
Ubuntu CD / version?

-- Raphael
Fcdafe495dccc04d27f6dbbcdf54aecc?d=identicon&s=25 Woei Shyang (generik)
on 2006-03-21 11:32
Have you ever considered a Core Duo Mac mini?

I got one of those beauties lately and with 2GB of ram it is quite a
steal! :)
9d7d8ef2179661d6b30e180fa588cd45?d=identicon&s=25 Calle Dybedahl (Guest)
on 2006-03-21 11:40
(Received via mailing list)
>>>>> "Raphael" == Raphael Schmid <raphael@schwarzschmid.de> writes:

> That's what I was trying to counter since it's definitely not my
> experience. :-)

Unless you're also trying to reinforce the stereotype of Linux users
as proselytizing fanboys, please move the discussion to a more
suitable forum.
--
		     Calle Dybedahl <calle@cyberpomo.com>
		 http://www.livejournal.com/users/cdybedahl/
   "Do any churches offer gluten-free body of christ? Just in case some
of
  their flock have problems digesting their saviour?" -- Rob Blake,
BofhNet
77961c972c437d6801714f45c3f2cc3c?d=identicon&s=25 Raphael Schmid (rapha)
on 2006-03-21 11:51
"Raphael" == Raphael Schmid <raphael@schwarzschmid.de> also wrote:

> I wasn't trying to persuade you into using Linux, if Linux is
> not "what works for you".

That means: "if Windows is what works best for you, use Windows".
Linux *happens* to be working best for *me*, which doesn't mean
that I go around and make Windows fishy.

Sorry, if I was being a "proselytizing fanboy". EOC.

-- Raphael
B2ee3ee5087b7aa7202a98da372cae00?d=identicon&s=25 Yaroslav Markin (Guest)
on 2006-03-21 20:22
(Received via mailing list)
It looks like they are going to release MacBook 13" at April 1st.. This
is _the_ killer.
429500a5a54600958c9c7ac032a37f66?d=identicon&s=25 Joe (Guest)
on 2006-03-21 21:10
Yaroslav Markin wrote:
> It looks like they are going to release MacBook 13" at April 1st.. This
> is _the_ killer.

I'd rather have a 14", I think.

One other thing that appeals to me about OS X is that there is only ONE
VERSION. No crippled home version, and a pro version for twice the
price. Or a confusing array of upcoming new editions. Or scores of
various distros created by whatever fanboy thinks they can do it better.
One version. But it's lame that minor upgrades (10.3 to 10.4) cost ($129
currently).

Joe
1e99128ebac5ca41c91940291d315332?d=identicon&s=25 Luke Redpath (lukeredpath)
on 2006-03-21 21:22
Joe wrote:
> I'm thinking about getting a 14" iBook, since I can live with a 14"
> screen (as opposed to 17", which is more money, of course, and a bit
> bigger than I want to be lugging around; besides, I have a 20" monitor
> at home.). I think it will be powerful enough for my needs.
>
> Joe

I'm a new Mac switcher and have just bought my first MacBook Pro and all
I can say is that its a wonderful machine and I'll be doing most of my
Rails (and PHP) development on it - I'm afraid my pretty decent Windows
box has been relegated to doing nothing more than serving up my mp3s
with slimserver, general office tasks/word processing/accounts etc. (ms
office is too slow for me on my MBP under rosetta with only 512MB of
RAM...perhaps when I get some more it will be better) and general web
browsing/email duties and gaming.

I don't find it too big for carrying around though and I've bought
myself a nice be.ez lebag for it too. I personally couldn't use anything
less than the 15" screen - anything smaller would be too cramped for me
(I'd go bigger if it wasn't impractical).

Only downside to my MBP is that it has the whining issue that many
people have reported but I'm not going to bother sending it back for a
repair/replacement until there is some concrete announcement from Apple
on the issue -in the meantime I'm using the QuietMBP app that keeps the
CPU running at 8% in the background which gets rid of the noise at the
expense of about 30-45 minutes of battery time.
678aa0aabf79a4933b7efc6d585dc141?d=identicon&s=25 Matt White (Guest)
on 2006-03-21 21:24
(Received via mailing list)
I can't live with anything less than a 15", but that must be because of
my
genetically poor eyesight and my dual 19" LCD's on my desktop.

An update to my experience thus far, I've managed to install the Rails
stack
using the tutorial mentioned earlier, and everything is working awesome.
Locomotive was cool, but I think the "real" install is going to be quite
a
bit more realistic for me, especially since I'm using gems that aren't
in
the Locomotive distro (pdf-writer). AND I might want to try Edge Rails.
Ff82af3238a57fbd1212832ec1a19f28?d=identicon&s=25 Dylan Stamat (Guest)
on 2006-03-21 22:41
(Received via mailing list)
Color me an total dork, but I'm going to have TWO laptops in a couple
weeks:

1 MBP to do development with (and graphics, presentations... etc)
1 Thinkpad with OpenBSD... so I can keep hacking at the BSD kern.

Yes, OSX is "BSD"('ish) ... but... no way am I studying the innards of
OSX.
OpenBSD forever !!!
E2489efc6ec10ec818b71965909ea109?d=identicon&s=25 Jin Lee (Guest)
on 2006-03-21 22:53
(Received via mailing list)
I wish I can go back to my first time on a Mac. Its kind of like
watching
the Matrix for the first time... you think you might know what Mac and
OS X
is all about, but after about a weeks worth of actual computing time,
you'll will be bursting with excitement and discovery, not to mention
productivity.

I have 2 laptops (thinkpad, powerbook) and I cringe everytime I have to
boot
up the thinkpad. I know this sounds like Im going way over the top, but
the
powerbook has changed the way I work from top to bottom. Im simply more
organized and efficient. Add ruby and rails and you'll be bleeding
productivity.

>From here on out, unless there is a big reason to 'switch' back, the rest of
my future purchases are apple (i.e: 13" macbook)

Jin
0091f92762685860109bbcb02edfdf27?d=identicon&s=25 Alain Ravet (Guest)
on 2006-03-22 00:20
(Received via mailing list)
Matt
    > Locomotive was cool, but I think the "real" install is going to
    > be quite a bit more realistic for me, especially since I'm using
gems
    > that aren't in the Locomotive distro (pdf-writer). AND I might
want to
    > try Edge Rails.


You can use EdgeRails and install gems with Locomotive too. Just open
the terminal, and type "rake freeze_edge", or gem install..

Alain
678aa0aabf79a4933b7efc6d585dc141?d=identicon&s=25 Matt White (Guest)
on 2006-03-22 02:21
(Received via mailing list)
Yeah, I know that... My only concern is what happens when Locomotive is
updated. I was under the impression that I'd lose all of the gems that
I'd
installed from the terminal when I install a new Locomotive package.

Am I mistaken?

Matt
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.