The word “Linux” isn’t even on the page. Did they call out a specific distro that I glazed over?
But regardless, the point of the article is about running an Apple OS on non-Apple hardware. Running a non-Apple OS on Apple hardware is literally the total opposite of the piece.
The article mentioned buying Apple Intel hardware now, even though it will be EOL in the eyes of Apple.
Expanding on that statement, I mention that Linux runs great on Intel Macs and that the hardware is just fine for future use. I even gave a real world example.
Show me you weren’t trying to be a dick, and discuss that.
I don’t understand how steering the conversation back to the article’s central topic is “being a dick.”
On Lemmy, people often read the comments before the article to get a sense of what is being discussed in the article. When I saw that comment, I was given the impression that the author was trying to breathe life back into old Apple hardware.
I thought it worthwhile to mention that the author was actually trying to unlock MacOS, not Apple’s old hardware. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
It’s not your job to steer someone else’s comment.
And regarding people reading the article… I quoted from the article. So clearly I read it. Maybe if you had read the article first you would have recognized the quote.
Perhaps next time you have the urge grab the wheel, just don’t. 🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️
I thought the community would find my comment moderately interesting / useful, and given the upvotes / downvotes in this thread, I don’t think I was too far off base.
You brought them up. My initial comment was doing fine before you decided to “moderate.” The downvotes are because of the comment thread (me returning the dick), not the top level comment.
I don’t need you to agree with me to know that you were being a dick.
The word “Linux” isn’t even on the page. Did they call out a specific distro that I glazed over?
But regardless, the point of the article is about running an Apple OS on non-Apple hardware. Running a non-Apple OS on Apple hardware is literally the total opposite of the piece.
Cool, but my quote was, so it’s relevant.
The article mentioned buying Apple Intel hardware now, even though it will be EOL in the eyes of Apple.
Expanding on that statement, I mention that Linux runs great on Intel Macs and that the hardware is just fine for future use. I even gave a real world example.
Show me you weren’t trying to be a dick, and discuss that.
I don’t understand how steering the conversation back to the article’s central topic is “being a dick.”
On Lemmy, people often read the comments before the article to get a sense of what is being discussed in the article. When I saw that comment, I was given the impression that the author was trying to breathe life back into old Apple hardware.
I thought it worthwhile to mention that the author was actually trying to unlock MacOS, not Apple’s old hardware. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
It’s not your job to steer someone else’s comment.
And regarding people reading the article… I quoted from the article. So clearly I read it. Maybe if you had read the article first you would have recognized the quote.
Perhaps next time you have the urge grab the wheel, just don’t. 🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️
I thought the community would find my comment moderately interesting / useful, and given the upvotes / downvotes in this thread, I don’t think I was too far off base.
Oh, so you did it for updoots. Got it. (That’s the part that makes you a dick)
Nope. Just using that as an indicator of what dialog the community wants to promote.
If I cared about upvotes, I wouldn’t be hanging out in a 260 user-a-day Lemmy community.
You brought them up. My initial comment was doing fine before you decided to “moderate.” The downvotes are because of the comment thread (me returning the dick), not the top level comment.
I don’t need you to agree with me to know that you were being a dick.
How long do Lemmy comment threads go?