I did not say that. I did not say anything resembling that. It's an absurd claim.

What I said was:

«All the professionals evangelising Linux in the 20th century have moved to Macs now»

Which followed, and was in the context of, the sentence:

«reading other people's writing about it and where possible talking to them.»

In other words: the professional Linux advocates -- that means, the people who were advocating and recommending Linux to non-Linux users –- that I read and knew and sometimes have talked to -- switched.

Not people in the Linux biz talking to other people in the biz.

People like author Charlie Stross, who is occasionally cstross on here, who for years wrote the Linux column in the UK edition of Computer Shopper and was as such perhaps the most visible UK tech journalist writing about and recommending Linux.

Or Neal Stephenson, author of the seminal "In the Beginning was the Command Line", which if you have not read recently you need to.

Here's a free copy.

https://web.stanford.edu/class/cs81n/command.txt

Mac users now.

Context is important and must be considered. You apparently did not.

> and how Mac is the be-all end-all of computers.

I didn't say that either.

It's got a damned good case to be the most sophisticated general-purpose desktop/laptop there's ever been, though, and it's held that place pretty much the entire century so far.

Tastes differ. Not everyone likes it. That's fine. I am not saying everyone should.

But I'm saying that if you read the widest possible range of OS and UI discussion and debate, there is a fairly clear consensus that what was Mac OS X and is now macOS is, while flawed, about the best there is.

In other words: the professional Linux advocates -- that means, the people who were advocating and recommending Linux to non-Linux users –- that I read and knew and sometimes have talked to -- switched.

I'm sorry, but as a professional journalist surely you must know the contradiction you've introduced here with the difference between "all Linux evangelists moved to Macs now" and "all those I know and read of switched" because those two statements are not the same thing.

One statement deals in absolutes("all Linux evangelists switched to Mac") and can be supported by sources if so, the other is a opinion based on your bubble ("all that I know switched to Mac") which is just your opinion that's different than the situation in my bubble and holds just as much weight.

I said, and spelled out and clarified:

All *I KNOW*.

If you can falsify my argument by producing examples of people who recommended Linux as a general-purpose end-user OS before Mac OS X existed and did so publicly, in published or recorded work, and who have not switched to macOS since and persist in recommending Linux in preference to it, then I will concede your point.

I am not being confrontational for the sake of it. I think you are misinterpreting me and arguing with something I didn't say.

I'm not much of a Linux person, but I have been using Macs since 1986 (as a developer), so I can attest to most of Mr. Proven's statements, irt to the MacOS.

You're saying that like it should mean something. It's still the subjective opinion of a person. It holds no more or less value than the subjective opinion of another person. Being a journalist doesn't automatically make you the supreme authority on something, you're still just a professional opinionator (no offence), but that opinion can be different than other users.

>I have been using Macs since 1986 (as a developer)

That's an issue IMHO. Long term MacOS nerds are the ones who got used to all the quirks and can't see anything at fault as they molded themselves into he platform with age, developing muscle memory workarounds without realizing, so to them that status is perfection.

Meanwhile, new users to the platform will see things differently.

An easier way to phrase that is "people have confirmation bias." You clearly exhibit this in your post. New users depends on if they've used other desktop environments or not. I'm confident that someone who has never used a desktop computer before would be more productive on a Mac. Had they used Windows, they may be confused.

It depends on who "the person" is. In this case, it's a seasoned professional, who uses both operating systems regularly, at a fairly advanced level, and also explains this stuff to others, while being held to journalistic standards.

Also, The Register tends to hire pretty sharp folks.

> Meanwhile, new users to the platform will see things differently

That's always the case. Unless you are an invested user of a platform, it's likely to be uncomfortable. When folks ask me if they should get an Apple device, as opposed to an Android/Windows PC, they are often surprised, when I say they should probably get what they are already used to.

Truth be told, there's plenty of good in all UI (including CLI), and people get very efficient, using their UI of choice. I find that it's usually best, if they stay on it.

Having been an Apple developer for decades, I have been absolutely slathered in bile from Apple-haters. It seems to be pathological. I assume that's because of the "snottiness" of Apple's approach. It's actually deliberate, and part of their branding. It can get annoying, but I know why they do it. Personally, I don't feel that way, despite being invested in the Apple ecosystem, and I don't hate other approaches, either. I managed a multi-platform development team for a couple of decades. It was not conducive to effectiveness, for me (or any of my employees) to be jingoistic about platform choices.

Professional in what? I'm also a professional. Is my opinion not just as valid? Is MKBHD also a professional in this sense?

>who uses both operating systems regularly

I think many people on the planet, including children, can use two or more operating systems regularly and provide opinions on them, it's not a rare skill or something that requires academic degrees. Is their opinion not just as valid?

>while being held to journalistic standards

A lot of events proved that "journalistic standards" mean very little, especially in the modern era of online publications being dependent on click ad-revenue. For example look at the disconnect between critics ratings of movies and audience ratings, or between car reviewers and car owners. Similarly, Microsoft and Apple make OSs for users, not for professional critics or journalists.

It's still just someone's subjective opinion on an OS, not something numerically and logically quantifiable as being the right opinion. It's not like it's a debate with Linus Torvalds on the correct implementation of mutexes.

> I have been absolutely slathered in bile from Apple-haters.

What does this have to do with me? What's with this victimization attitude on people lately? Should I feel guilty or sorry about something some other random people said something mean to you in connection to this topic? It's a conversation between you and me, I don't care about what others did.

I am replying to you from my third mac. I got it less than a year ago and it is the first Mac I have used since 2010 or so. Sure I am getting used to it but it does surprise me how different some things are from my typical XFCE/Win10 environments. I know unintuitive is the wrong word but at least for my own intuition, it is unintuitive.

It is very much a thing of modern times to be lectured on, for instance, desktop design, when I am fairly confident I've used more different desktop environments than the person accusing me is even aware exists.

(I would estimate I've used 35-40 different desktops across over a dozen or more GUI OSes. The first I owned myself was an Acorn Archimedes with RISC OS 2, an environment far weirder than any hardcore Linux advocate could even imagine… a default editor with two separate independently-navigable cursors (source and destination), three mouse buttons all heavily used, and no permanently on-screen menus of any kind (only context menus).

Ah well. So it goes.

Where did I lecture you on that?

> when I am fairly confident I've used more different desktop environments

Does using more desktop environments makes one's opinion on a specific desktop design more valuable than everyone else's? It's not like you're designing them, you're just using them, just like me and millions of other people.

>than the person accusing me is even aware exists.

Care to point out what exactly did I accuse you of?

But, to answer one point: yes, I do think that broad experience of lots of different desktop GUIs does qualify someone for comparing them, and for identifying particular strengths or weaknesses of particular ones.

Who were you referring to in this statement?

>than the person accusing me is even aware exists