It's got good hardware, but there's nothing being done with that hardware. The pricepoint kept there from being any broad dev support, so its basically a gimmicky paperweight that costs $3500. At least Microsoft will directly work with industry partners for Hololens development, but there's nothing like that with Apple to help pave over the notoriously rough super-early adoption era.
Damn, you're really good at identifying miniscule differences!
Seriously though, I was attempting to highlight how truly unremarkable these changes are when viewed from a grand enough scale. That's not to say I dont understand, I do, and nuclear/particle physics are fields absolutely filled to the brim with things worth waxing poetic about. And when viewed from a field that deals with meta-analysis of physical laws themselves, the differences that people are excited for start to appear... pretty mundane. Every person on earth is similar yet different, but we all avoid that guy who shares his life story at the drop of a hat because, to (badly) paraphrase Syndrome, "once everything is unique, nothing is."
The nihilist vs. absurdist meme is popular now and does seem to serve this example well - It's not that these changes dont matter or aren't cool, it's that nothing matters and probably everything is arbitrary, and that is in of itself cool! It raises so many unanswered questions that string theorists would love to tell you the answers to but no! I cast you out, you and your vile "branes"! Back! Back in your caves you slime beasts! We shall not treat your physics fanfic this day! that we just don't even have guesses as to what could maybe possibly be the answers yet! Hell, we're not even sure the holographic universe theory is right, but more than half the physics community is convinced enough to get published in Nature while assuming it.
There's so much wild stuff being discovered right now, I guess it's just sad to see people hung up on physical properties that were largely solved more than 50 years ago.
Nah dude, they're basically the same thing. Both have a composition of protons/neutrons, both undergo a phase change to a plasma state at incredibly low temperatures, both interact with other atoms via the fundemental forces, both can (hypothetically, we can't actually fuse anything above boron for complicated reasons I'll pretend I remember) form one another via fusion, both are actually composites formed from tossing the fundemental particles in a blender, etc.
The differences we see are, when considered within the scope of all the possible arrangements of particles and forces we could have gotten, impossibly minor.
Yeah the Church-Turing thesis holds that you can run an LLM on a casio wrist watch (if for some reason you wanted to do that). I can't imagine this is exactly what you'd call 'good'...
Seriously though, cliche flaming aside, why did you come into this with such hostility? The initial poster was just talking about a situation where ubuntu is clearly the preferable option - installing an OS with the minimum of time invested. What does it accomplish, coming in and talking at length about why actually Arch is the best choice in this case but only if you're skilled enough? The initial call out for elitism wasn't based on it being about Arch, though Arch very much attracts people who say things like this, it's based on you quite literally derailing the conversation to talk about how good you are with the software. I doubt you intended it to be interpreted like that, but it comes across so smug and self-centered that it's almost painful to read. That is the introspection I was hoping for, that your comments are not read in the manner you intend.
Ohhh, thank you.