Prove to me it's better to have a computer than a phone

Prove to me it's better to have a computer than a phone
>Protip you can't

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/9-nezImUP0w
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system)
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

>windows phone
Stop being a faggot

what's a phone?

Checked debil trips

How do watch anything that's worth watching properly on a phone though? Too small a screen and too shaky from having to hold it. Checkmate.

My phone uses Android. The pic is not related.

>better processor
>more RAM
>more storage
>better gpu
>USB slots
>costs the same as a phone
should i keep going?

Op has severe autism and cant properly use a desktop computer/laptop

video games

>Prove to me it's better to have a computer than a phone
>>Protip you can't
I can't use Illustrator and Photoshop on a phone.

Wow, that was easy.

...

have fun playing OSU! on a phone

this
if you familiarize yourself with the OS a PC can do tenfold that what a mobile phone can do at the moment

Try loading excel with a couple thousand data points in your phone

Computers are more suitable for productivity and multi tasked usage.
With a phone you have to switch between multiple application, that are often needed to be reloaded before resuming an activity. It’s only a few seconds, but it adds up for a massive loss of time and lots of frustration. Computers can handle many different file types, and can be made to be compatible with new file systems with driver updates. Phones also have limited storage capacity, sacrifices will have to be made around what you need to do with a scarcity of storage.

Who the fuck doesn’t have both?

1/10 bait, try harder
>sage

>Phone
Underpowered, keyboard is shit, touchscreen is meme...
>Laptop
Less underpowered, keyboard is acceptable, touchpad is acceptable, trackpoint is awesome, big screen is awesome. Truely productive machine, that can do anything. Try compiling kernel on Android phone... It will take forever.

You need both.

> Windows Phone
Fuckn fag

You MORON! What's the use of that overpriced tiny screen that's too big to even fit comfortably in your pocket? It's not a good computer and not a good phone.

This.
Plus a big luxurious screen, being able to fit in any backpack, actually having a keyboard and numpad and actually being able to do something called WORK and typing. Able to run useful programs and software instead of just silly games. Can store way more files. Really, a laptop does everything 1,000 times better than a phone, especially if you want to do anything more than browse the web on a tiny little screen you can barely type on.

So what? That depends on the application. For browsing Sup Forums and other private consumtion a phone is alright, but it's unsuitable for real multitasking (browsing while music plays doesn't count), typing out longer texts and/or actually creating something you can't get around a computer.

eat shit, phone fag

Show me any phone ever made with an 802.11 chipset that supports packet injection.

I'm pretty sure the ex|phone can do that:

youtu.be/9-nezImUP0w

try harder apple marketing

Regardless, you can do it with a fucking $40 raspberry pi 3. Checkmate, mate.

>buy Librem 5 or Galaxy S8
>plug into monitor
>have a phone which is also a PC
True, buying a PC will be unnecessary soon. Home computers will be replaced with phones.

my laptop has a GTX 1060 and can game.

my phone is good for snap chat and fitting in my pocket.


Its all about what you need and mobility. they arent meant to compete with one another.

Also I cant CAD or Photoshop on phone like I can a computer.

Bait

This. Apples to oranges

that's about as real as the pomegranate phone

What's a computer?

Desktop operating systems are better.

That's not a computer.

kek

not open source enough

Good. Open sores developers do not know how to make a good UI/UX.

>microshit products
>apple

>is incredibly insecure and finds the smallest chance to show off shitty music taste and fucking runs with it

If I was insecure I would have hid my music collection.

This. Android is the best OS.

Nobody restricts you from using a proprietary GUI.

In that case I'm using the open source OS, Darwin with the proprietary MacOS desktop environment on top of it already. Why are you complaining nigger?

the only UI you need is a CLI
if you're uncomfortable on a CLI, you're a pussy and should just go be true to yourself and join camp smartphone-touting faglords

Where did I complain about anything? And no, you're not using an open source OS.

I literally am though.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system)

>Darwin forms the core set of components upon which macOS (previously OS X and Mac OS X), iOS, watchOS, and tvOS are based. It is mostly POSIX-compatible, but has never, by itself, been certified as compatible with any version of POSIX. Starting with Leopard, macOS has been certified as compatible with the Single UNIX Specification version 3 (SUSv3).[2][3][4]

Thread becomes shit tier nerd fight

>it's based on an open source project therefore it's open source
That's not how it works.

>Implying modern smartphones aren't computers as well
Just because the UI is simplified doesn't mean they aren't computers.

You read that wrong. It's the core utilities that form the underlying OS for MacOS. The linux analog of this would be GNU, as in GNU/Linux. The MacOS UI is completely optional to use. You can install X11 and run it like other *nix OSes without ever using the proprietary UI. MacOS is essentially just a DE.

...

GNU is the OS though, and isn't just a DE/UI. Linux is just a kernel. GNU/Linux is a complete OS so if GNU were proprietary (or just GNOME/KDE/Xfce) that would mean the OS is too, for example Ubuntu would be since it would ship with proprietary GNOME. Just because a part of an OS is open source, even if it's the kernel, doesn't mean the OS is open source too. See Android and SailfishOS, both are proprietary.
So, MacOS is closed source and the fact that you can run it without proprietary parts doesn't change this. You can run your open source variation of it, but the actual Apple's MacOS is and always will be, proprietary.

>Implying you can be off topic on a random board

My bad I thought I was in the/hoc/ thread

>if GNU were proprietary (or just GNOME/KDE/Xfce) that would mean the OS is too
The MacOS core utils are all open source. And they are exactly the same thing. They are the fundamental programs you'd use without any GUI in a terminal only environment. XNU is the kernel for Darwin, which is the basis of MacOS (as well as iOS). The GUI on MacOS is optional and is essentially a complicated DE. You can replace it with Gnome, KDE, XFCE, etc, even without installing a Linux distro.

>Just because a part of an OS is open source, even if it's the kernel, doesn't mean the OS is open source too. See Android and SailfishOS, both are proprietary.
They are open source with proprietary apps. You can run AOSP without ever needing the gapps. Sailfish is similar. The userland you'd use from a terminal is open source, as is the kernel (linux).

>So, MacOS is closed source and the fact that you can run it without proprietary parts doesn't change this. You can run your open source variation of it, but the actual Apple's MacOS is and always will be, proprietary.
Yes, because "MacOS" is basically a DE that runs on the actual operating system. You can run Darwin without MacOS, you can't run MacOS without Darwin.

You can build your PC yourself, you have a fucking keyboard and mouse instead of a shitty small screen and you can play quality games/use quality programs.

you cant play world of warcraft on a phone nigger

but soon you'll be able to play OSRS on mobile :DDDD