100%!

One of the operation types that benefitted from much of that money and software development time is cryptography, where entire chunks of silicon are dedicated to quickly performing the (for better or worse) pipelined calculations that allow us to conduct secure transmissions along to their destinations.

There’s a lot of technical differences I just wanted to go a step above saying “arm is just a lil guy and x86 is a muscly dude who can’t function without his protein”, which seems appropriate to me.

In the version before sequoia you can choose to uncheck “draw window contents while dragging”, that will make it only draw an outline until you release the drag. In my experience that setting stops a lot of slowdown and hanging when moving between monitors.

I can’t say for sure, because idk which 2017 you have or what monitor you have, but it may also be related to the monitor not supporting the same dpi or colorspace as the built in does. In those circumstances a hang when moving windows between screens comes from the video card swapping resources in and out furiously to show everything.

I don’t know what you mean when you say “switch screens.” Like in Mission Control or switching workspaces?

The last two that you’re talking about can be alleviated by hotkeys. Option command d toggles the dock, option q quits and option command esc force quits. Make sure you have the correct program up front before you do this.

If you absolutely cannot live without clicking the red button and knowing the program closed, there’s a bunch of little programs out there that change the behavior to what you want. I don’t recommend this though, because you’ll feel lost when working with a computer that isn’t your specific customized device.

What’s kinda funny switching between windows, macs and different Linux systems is that the windows and Linux gui elements act mostly the same but the hotkeys are all different and the mac and windows hotkeys are mostly the same but the gui elements act real different.

My apologies for not having definitive links and answers like above, I’m not in front of a million computers at the moment and you can’t trust what you just read online.

What kinds of window management changes would you like to make? Iirc you can make some decently radical adjustments using brew but I’m not extremely knowledgeable about them because I like to keep it normal.

There’s already some really good replies, but think critically for a second about what you’re asking for:

You want a summary of content made by “reject convenience” about the data broker and removal request industry, shouted into the void on social media, specifically on the insanely easy to infiltrate and subvert fediverse.

Real black comedy posting hours who’s up?

I don’t have an accord, I can’t save at bonfires.

No, they can’t be adjusted.

I know you said you don’t need a tutorial right after that, but the context of you saying that was another user explaining that it can be changed but they didn’t have time to provide you tech support.

I happened to be in a position where I could quickly get the information they weren’t able to, so I did.

If you wanna know anything else just lmk.

Why is my chainsaw better than my accord?

It’s not a good question.

https://support.apple.com/guide/mac-help/choose-an-app-to-open-a-file-on-mac-mh35597/mac

Number 1 search result, contains instructions for multiple versions, I checked that it’s accurate with the last four major releases.

You’re getting bad advice.

If you don’t expect to actually be shuffling packets back and forth or doing any kind of quality of service or vpn or really anything then the pi will be the better choice just barely because of its super low power consumption at idle. In that situation you would be at idle enough to actually justify using the pi. It would suck in the same way that using a pi for stuff usually sucks but you could justify it maybe.

If you plan to have a bunch of hosted stuff, a seedbox, qos, manage vpn connections and especially upgrade your lan to 1gb + later on down the line, the mini pc will actually be more efficient per cycle. In that circumstance you’d be at idle less, and the mini pcs more powerful processor, wider bus and expandability would make it less of a bottleneck presently and down the road.

Risc CPUs like the arm in the raspberry pi are really good at not doing anything, or doing a really small subset of things (it’s in the name!), but x86 is great at doing some stuff and being able to do a wide variety of stuff with its big instruction set. If you raise an eyebrow at my claim, consider that before gpus were the main way to do math in a data center it was x86. If the people who literally count every fraction of a watt of power consumption as billable time think it’s most efficient it probably is!

With ~08+ CPUs ability to turn cores and functions off at the clock tree and communicate back and forth with the os to orchestrate and coordinate it, there’s not as much daylight between the power usage of a pi and a mini pcs as some of these comments might make you think.

The long and the short of it is that you’ll most likely have a better time using the mini pc than the pi and claims that it’ll bankrupt you with power bills are greatly exaggerated.

In terms of privacy, I’d go for the mini pc. All your packages are most likely going to be open source, but the x86 stuff gets more scrutiny and isn’t as “magic blobby” as the arm world is.

Source: I have used over twenty different pi variants including knockoffs, wrote for microcontrollers before they were called sbcs, host a bunch of services on x86 which are monitored for their power usage using a power distribution controller by my lovely wife who keeps an eagle eye on the bills and I literally registered an account because people were telling you the wrong thing on the internet.

If you wanna verify that for yourself, get a cheap plug em in power meter and try both units running the package you choose under some artificial load like managing qos between a device streaming 4k and one torrenting 50 different Linux isos.