I've used, and this is not an exaggeration, practically every single open-source and commercially-licensed GIS application ever released on Linux, Windows, and macOS. Certainly every single one listed on Wikipedia.

ArcGIS is the best general purpose solution.

If doing mission planning including flight guidance for aerial operations, FalconView is the least worst.

Telling an experienced GIS user to drop ArcGIS is like telling a somehow-still-living B.B. King to stop using Gibson guitars.

And by "better supported" he probably meant "isn't a huge pain in the ass that breaks every other kernel upgrade due to dkms or the package manager shitting the bed" when it comes to Nvidia drivers. Doesn't matter if it's a 1080ti or a 5090.

I was generally flabbergasted by that "My Workstation" section existence in the article at all...

Is it in any way relevant?

"flabbergasted" ? That's quite a strong reaction. It's somewhat normal for nerdy mc-nerdfaces, which the writer definitely is (in all the good ways), to tell people about their hardware. Or at least it used to be? Seemed pretty geek-norm to me even if it was jarring.

> Or at least it used to be?

I chose not to write it earlier but my candid thoughts were that he seemed too old to still be doing this. Its just younger enthusiasts and professional gamers that do this, and the younger enthusiasts eventually get enough money for a mac and choose that.

The PSU is completely overkill, as if he was going to get GPU's. But then he has this completely outdated and old, power inefficient GPU in it instead, which is nothing to brag about and doubly warrants an explanation if the rig is to be explained at all. All while newer GPU's from the same company solve all of his driver and OS problems.

Flabbergasted is the right emotion.

I imagine it is there to stop people asking about it. But who knows.