MacOS X vs Linux

[A.I.Ghost]

Oh, i agree not to spark flamewar here.

It just pains me to see someone trashing linux (any other OS, actually), without acquiring at least same level of competence with it, as with their primary. And using ripped from context examples to support their point.

This forum is for people to acquire knowledge, not opinions.

 

 

For the topic.

 

I have not said that LO/OOO is better than MSO. Topicstarter was talking about the looks, design and requirement to retrain. LO/OOO is not something entirely different, and I have added, that MSO on a Mac is far from being "classic windows MSO".

 

As for market share, links you provided deal with revenue from server share, and enterprise penetration.

Moreover, it is logical, that windows with less servers installed will be comparable in "total money in ecosystem", as MS charges for the OS license, device and user access licenses and support, whilst even enterprise oriented distros like RHEL and SLES only charge support.

Such review will not cover servers running sites like InsanelyMac for example, nor will they cover expenses required to train proper professional (calculate how much "Windows Enterprise Admin" total cost of mere certification costs). I was talking sheer numbers of installed and used in production servers. There two are quite different numbers.

Additionally the zdnet-one supports my words as to the choice for stability in mission critical workloads. Yet then again, those are just words of someone else

 

Here is information about top500 supercomputers and systems they are running, with development over time. Choose operating system in the drop down.

 

And here is somewhat unbiassed desktop statistics taken from browser useragent and other data, from visitors to many popular sites. 

There you will find some interesting data, such as:

37% of people are still using windows XP

windows 8 has less users, than total OSX, despite being "all about gui", which means that OSX adoption rate went exponential over last few years.

Yes, there is a learning curve, but in Windows is much smoother than in Mac or Linux because everything is done in GUI with wizards. Windows 7 is best for newbies.

 

Do in windows gui with wizard:

flush dns cache (very often problem on notebooks moving from one internal corporate/school network to other school/corporate network, or to outside network)

renew dhcp lease (same example as above, additional example: you come to school/office, you connect to network, you receive dhcp from pool for guests. Admin creates you an account and adds your mac address to the list, now you have to get new address from pool for allowed computers)

[Sotirios Papakonstantinou]

Let's first comment on last post...

 

Quote:

 

 

Do in windows gui with wizard:

flush dns cache (very often problem on notebooks moving from one internal corporate/school network to other school/corporate network, or to outside network)

renew dhcp lease (same example as above, additional example: you come to school/office, you connect to network, you receive dhcp from pool for guests. Admin creates you an account and adds your mac address to the list, now you have to get new address from pool for allowed computers)

 

To refresh your IP address in Windows you right-click the network icon right bottom (near the clock) and select "Diagnose and repair". A more advanced user can also access Control Panel, Network and Sharing Center, then click Manage Network Connections to see the adapters list. Then disable the adapter and reenable it. It's even easier for the WiFi, you simply disable it and reenable it using the switch or key combination. Where is CLI needed?

 

As for OpenOffice, for simple text is OK, but if you have added images and graphs in a Word document (in MS Office) and then edit it (in Open Office) most of the times it's out of place and you have to correct it before printing. Also any text or background colors are never the same, they have changed hue, depending on application.

 

My point is that for Desktop use (not servers etc) most users have Windows, so they are familiar with them and don't like changes. Many users, including me, want to use some specific applications and not bother with alternatives that are often incompatible or different to a point you have to learn stuff from start. Even the same application eg MS Office, is different in PC and MacOS and I don't like it when features are missing (right-click to see different options in Windows and Mac) or done differently.

 

Anyway, I'm Windows biased, you are MacOS or Linux biased, so it is difficult to judge objectively. I vote Windows. You vote Linux. Surely too many paying for Windows are not stupid. They do it for a good reason.

[A.I.Ghost]

I have chosen those examples specifically, because nor network restart, neither even system restart will help. Settings are persistent for their respective TTL. And it works like this by design, not because it is faulty implementation.

If it is 10 minutes, you probably can live with it, if it is one hour or longer however (dhcp leases can be up to days long)...

From network diagnostics tool point of view there will not be any problem, as it has no way to know, that you wish to drop properly (from network standpoint) working connection and re-request new data.

So, do those things via GUI wizard as you have said it is all possible and easy for newbie.

 

My point whole time:

Educate your self on all three systems first to the same level, and only then compare what is to be compared.

 

Most people only use computer with windows, because they are given one, not because they choose to. If you choose it because you do not wish to learn about alternatives, it is your decision and no one is trying to persuade you otherwise. But, don't tell others that something is "bad" or "worse" then.

 

 

Even i do not use all the features OS provides me with (whichever it may be), but in the eyes or simple desktop user, i am a computer freak 

As i have stated in my first post, i choose OSX, not linux, despite giving it preference and also explained why.

[3.14r2]

Most people only use computer with windows, because they are given one, not because they choose to.

Same goes with applications. An application/OS is "better" only cos' it's the application a person know/learned/is used to. Learning something new/adapting to changes, may some be difficult or even painful process (esp. then you getting older), hence most people prefer the things to be "the same/normal" all the time. It's, for the most part a question of the what was the first device/application/OS a person was given/forced or had to use to make the job done. "The first ever" most likely be "the best ever" forever.

 

The first computer I've used, was a ZX spectrum clone connected to B/W vacuum tubes based old TV set (hardcore hacking ). I don't thing it's the best computer for everybody (no GUI at all!).

 

Then it was OS/2 Warp based IBM PC (at school), fallowed by Windows 98 Pentium PC (at college) and so on... Eventually the first personal computer I've bought myself, was a Suse Linux 9.3 (as the only non virtualised OS) based dual Xeon PC (here the Hackintosh era began for me). Later on it was dual booted with Windows XP x64, then triple booted with OS X (Leopard) and finally dual booted with Windows 7 and SL. A combination of W8 and Lion/ML could fallow, but the PC it's dead now...

 

All the experience gained from all the computers/OSs used, has led me to these concussions:

• no OS is perfect
• getting used to a commercial software is very bad habit - it MAY lock you down to a specific OS and hardware it (OS and/or application) requires
• CLI is VERY POWERFUL thing and you can do amazing things with it, but only if you know how to use it (I use the appropriate tools Windows/OS X/Linux provides) but it was Linux that made me like CLI
• PC/OS/Application is only a tool to get the job done, you are the main factor that determines how effectively the tool is used and how good the tool is for the job

There are few Windows-only apps I use, this is why I use Windows (not that I hate it, I like Windows 7, it's Windows version I like most). I also use OS X, it's comfortable (IMO), has terminal and some other things I like. There are few Linux disks I use every once and while (to fix computer using awesome Linux tools). There is something useful in each OS. Nor OS is perfect or better. There is a task and a tool to make it. Everything has it's own purpose.

[necrophagous]

^

Completely agreed with it

these os/ apps bashing are completely pointless. Linux is not an OS in my opinion, it's just a standard kernel being an offshoot of its UNIX counterparts.

as of apps and os(es) consider this too , some proprietary based companies heavily supports the open source community ( like apple funded BSDs , or AMD supports their radeon open source driver hell even John Carmack did ) the more the merrier. I still hope apple will acknowledge and allegedly support us the osx86 community too i mean hey would it not be cool?

 

the community should not predate other members of the community or being a major PITA to it ( guys like tomatomac stealing any osx86 good guys work)

as for the cli : 

hell even most system administrators out there ( at least in my country) don't know how to use simple bash script or even open a terminal emulator 

 

sorry for my crippled english , cheers 

[Sotirios Papakonstantinou]

As already said, you can do the same thing in all OSes, but not the same easy straightforward way. In my opinion, Windows has much more software to choose from, so why limit oneself with a few software for MacOS or Linux?  Moreover, most MacOS or Linux applications have a PC port, so just use the Windows version if you want something specific. Any piece of hardware has a driver for at least Windows XP, but in MacOS or Linux you may have to rely on third-party drivers, or not work at all. If it does work it may not have all the features you paid for, only basic functionality and certaintly I don't like that, even if I hardly use all the features, I grade compatibility too much to compromise, this reason alone hinders me making MacOS or Linux my primary OS. I may dual boot for the experience, but my main everyday OS is always Windows, unless something else proves competitive to my eyes. That's why Apple should allow Mac clones (Hackintoses) as IBM allowed PC clones in the past. All major companies would provide official 100% all-feature working drivers for their devices and MacOS port of their application. Then MacOS X could be very competitive with Windows and gain a comparable market share. Yes, the price of MacOS would rise a lot, but it would still be cheaper to buy it and use a PC instead of a real Mac. For Linux to do the same thing, the developers must concentrate on providing good all-feature drivers for most well known hardware. If there would be a way to recompile/emulate Windows drivers would be a great benefit. Is that hard to dissasemple the code of the drivers and create a MacOS or Linux compatibile code? Yes, I know copyrights make that difficult... But if the Linux had a greater user-base, the OEMs would provide their own official drivers. Now they simply don't bother. Yes, having a greater user base would attract malware programmers, but you cannot have it all. That's why Antivirus software is used for. It would also be a chance to see if MacOS or Linux are really as secure as they claim to be. In real terrms, not in theory. I believe that there is no 100% foolproof secure OS. In any OS, having an up-to-date antivirus AND be careful what you click, you shouldn't have any problem. In MacOS and Linux, the user simply enters the password every time it is asked, and that's it. The malware can do whatever is programmed to do. And it certainly doesn't need any more rights to do damage.

 

Until MacOS and Linux have the compatibility of Windows, sorry I vote for and recommend Windows to everyone. I don't trash other OSes, I would install them to a friend that wants to experiment, but not as a primary OS, and of course he would have some good knowledge of PCs. I wouldn't recommend it to a newbie, since when he would have any problems, I would have to help him and unfortunatelly this would happen annoyingly frequently (sorry if the last expression is not correct, but you get the point). An advanced user makes fewer questions which can be solved by phone. A newbie would require to go his place or connect with TeamViewer, and of course, I wouldn't charge a friend... Doing too many "favors" and wasting too much time for free is not what I want, I don't know about you...  Of course this excludes helping others through a forum. But you do it in your own time because you like it, not forced.

 

And a last thing, I am a Windows expert, so I can easily help my newbie friend in Windows. In MacOS or Linux I would have to search for the solution in Google wasting too much time. Some other poster said to be at the same level in all three OSes before judging. Yet another reason for me to vote for Windows. To get in MacOS at the same level as Windows (well, as an advanced user, not as a technician that would require much more time) would take roughly the same time if not a little more. This is because I'm familiar with Windows and I try things the Windows way. If they are done differently, I have to spend some time to figure out how to do it. In Linux this is much worse since they are not as easy and straightforward as MacOS. (I found many similarites between newest Ubuntu and MacOS Mountain Lion by the way). This means Windows has a learning curve A, MacOS has a learning curve A+B and Linux is even steeper with A+B+C (in terms of time). (That's what I meant by "user friendly" in previous posts. Learning curve is also important). I prefer it the easy way, so I choose Windows hands down when it comes to learn using a computer. By using I don't mean only connecting to Facebook and reading your e-mail, sometimes typing a document. I mean knowing how to configure stuff as well and add/remove programs. Being an adnanced user and progress, not staying a novice forever!

 

One more and the most important reason for a gamer: Games. Yes, Steam is on Ubuntu now, but most others are not. Playing a Windows game using Wine doesn't count. I speak of native games.

 

For all the above reasons, I vote Windows. Other OSes are for experimentation, unless you are an graphics artist or similar using a Mac. But here I refer to the average user, not some specific professionals. For the average user, it is Windows, I insist. Artist could use the Windows version of their applications, so there is no excuse.

[Alessandro17]

 In my opinion, Windows has much more software to choose from, so why limit oneself with a few software for MacOS or Linux? 

 

 

You are joking, right? Debian has 68 CDs only for the amd64 arch or the i386 one: http://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/7.1.0/amd64/jigdo-cd/

http://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/7.1.0/i386/jigdo-cd/

 

To the official ISOs you can add plenty of more repos.

[PookyMacMan]

As already said, you can do the same thing in all OSes, but not the same easy straightforward way. In my opinion, Windows has much more software to choose from, so why limit oneself with a few software for MacOS or Linux?  Moreover, most MacOS or Linux applications have a PC port, so just use the Windows version if you want something specific. Any piece of hardware has a driver for at least Windows XP, but in MacOS or Linux you may have to rely on third-party drivers, or not work at all. If it does work it may not have all the features you paid for, only basic functionality and certaintly I don't like that, even if I hardly use all the features, I grade compatibility too much to compromise, this reason alone hinders me making MacOS or Linux my primary OS. That's why Apple should allow Mac clones (Hackintoses) as IBM allowed PC clones in the past...I believe that there is no 100% foolproof secure OS. In any OS, having an up-to-date antivirus AND be careful what you click, you shouldn't have any problem. In MacOS and Linux, the user simply enters the password every time it is asked, and that's it. The malware can do whatever is programmed to do. And it certainly doesn't need any more rights to do damage.

 

And a last thing, I am a Windows expert, so I can easily help my newbie friend in Windows. In MacOS or Linux I would have to search for the solution in Google wasting too much time. Some other poster said to be at the same level in all three OSes before judging. Yet another reason for me to vote for Windows. To get in MacOS at the same level as Windows (well, as an advanced user, not as a technician that would require much more time) would take roughly the same time if not a little more. This is because I'm familiar with Windows and I try things the Windows way. If they are done differently, I have to spend some time to figure out how to do it. In Linux this is much worse since they are not as easy and straightforward as MacOS. (I found many similarites between newest Ubuntu and MacOS Mountain Lion by the way). This means Windows has a learning curve A, MacOS has a learning curve A+B and Linux is even steeper with A+B+C (in terms of time). (That's what I meant by "user friendly" in previous posts. Learning curve is also important). I prefer it the easy way, so I choose Windows hands down when it comes to learn using a computer. By using I don't mean only connecting to Facebook and reading your e-mail, sometimes typing a document. I mean knowing how to configure stuff as well and add/remove programs. Being an adnanced user and progress, not staying a novice forever!

 

One more and the most important reason for a gamer: Games. Yes, Steam is on Ubuntu now, but most others are not. Playing a Windows game using Wine doesn't count. I speak of native games.

 

For all the above reasons, I vote Windows. Other OSes are for experimentation, unless you are an graphics artist or similar using a Mac. But here I refer to the average user, not some specific professionals. For the average user, it is Windows, I insist. Artist could use the Windows version of their applications, so there is no excuse.

Well, I have an opinion.

 

Windows does not have "more software to choose from" in the sense of useful programs than other OS'es. Since I'm not a Linux power user I won't speak for Linux (I'll leave that to Alessandro and A.I. Ghost), but Mac OS has some incredible free and paid software that is quite useful; in fact trying to find a useful Mac OS program is easier, frankly, because you don't have deal with nearly as much crapware. Either someone has a program or doesn't, you won't find a million spam links in Google. As far as drivers go, even Windows drivers are third-party; Microsoft does not write all (or on a grander scale, most) of the drivers for Windows, they are written by the manufacturers, just like all devices that support Mac OS natively. So in reality it is up to manufacturers.

 

But I will say it again: Mac OS will lose its security advantages if it is used on as wide a scale as Windows as more malware will be written for it. And probably some quality, as more crapware will rise and manufacturers will not properly write drivers for Mac OS (I've worked with prebuilt Windows machines like this...). Apple is not making a mistake IMO in not licensing Mac OS for PC manufacturers, but what I do think should change is the restrictions: Apple should remove the restrictions in Mac OS from installing on a PC (i.e .we wouldn't need FakeSMC or Chameleon), and instead offer it to all users at their own risk. In other words, Apple wouldn't promote their OS on PCs or license Mac OS to PC manufacturers, but they would not "lock out" the system from PC users who want to use the system. Not that the "lock outs" have prevented us...

 

Also, I could use your argument for Windows for Mac OS as well, and that is because your argument is based on familiarity with the operating system. I started using a Mac when I was around 3 or 4 years old, and did not actually use Windows until I was 14 (I used it a few remote times when I was younger on other computers, but not enough to be even novice familiar). So to put it in perspective, I have used Mac OS for 12-13 years and Windows for 2 years. Guess which OS I would recommend to other people? To use your learning curve argument, Mac OS has learning curve A and Windows A+B for me personally. It all depends which system you start out on. As for getting expert knowledge: with no arrogance intended I would say I know more about Mac OS than many Mac technicians (not Apple techs, others who repair Macs who don't work for Apple) and many Genius bar reps (I say this because I have spoken with Genius reps and Mac techs). But I have known the basics of Mac OS for over a decade, and I started learning geeky/technical functions of Mac OS when I was about 11 or 12 so I've been doing Mac tech work for about 4-5 years and can fix about any problem. Now in Windows, I've done a lot of tinkering and after quite a large learning curve (for example, in Mac OS to uninstall an application you just drag the application to the trash, and sometimes remove a preference file. I can't think of a more straightforward way to uninstall a program. In Windows it took me a while to figure out that you had to actually go into the Control Panel and navigate a wizard to remove a program instead of dragging the folder to the Recycle Bin ) I can do many technical tasks in Windows as well (I've fixed a couple Windows machines for friends), but I am not near the technical knowledge of a professional (like my older brother who does IT for a living). All that to say: if you are talking to a complete computer newbie who has never used any OS extensively, you can recommend any OS to them and it would have the same learning curve; the only time the curve is steeper is if you have prior experience with another system (like for you Mac OS and Linux are tougher because you are coming from a Windows background, for me it was vice versa).

 

As far as games go, watch out for Mac OS; more and more major titles are coming. But I do agree that there are more mainstream titles available for Windows that other systems.

 

For the average user, it is whatever system he/she is familiar with, I insist. I would personally recommend Mac OS to computer newbies. You would recommend Windows. Alessandro might recommend Linux (he can confirm). No matter what, the user wins, as long as work is being accomplished. 3.14r2's post is right on the money.

 

(BTW, something I'd like to commend you on is not trashing the other systems. It takes a certain level of maturity to do that, which I find many do not possess.)

 

Every non-blind developer will tell you this is not true. OSX has it's stability issues and bugs, and their drivers are quite far from being extremely reliable. I managed to KP my every apple mac not doing anything out of ordinary.

I never mentioned system stability was perfect. I mentioned that drivers were mostly reliable, and I was particularly referring to Apple's. Are you sure those KPs are due to drivers? Many times KPs are due to a memory fault not related to any driver.

[necrophagous]

As already said, you can do the same thing in all OSes, but not the same easy straightforward way. In my opinion, Windows has much more software to choose from, so why limit oneself with a few software for MacOS or Linux?  Moreover, most MacOS or Linux applications have a PC port, so just use the Windows version if you want something specific. Any piece of hardware has a driver for at least Windows XP, but in MacOS or Linux you may have to rely on third-party drivers, or not work at all. If it does work it may not have all the features you paid for, only basic functionality and certaintly I don't like that, even if I hardly use all the features, I grade compatibility too much to compromise, this reason alone hinders me making MacOS or Linux my primary OS. I may dual boot for the experience, but my main everyday OS is always Windows, unless something else proves competitive to my eyes. That's why Apple should allow Mac clones (Hackintoses) as IBM allowed PC clones in the past. All major companies would provide official 100% all-feature working drivers for their devices and MacOS port of their application. Then MacOS X could be very competitive with Windows and gain a comparable market share. Yes, the price of MacOS would rise a lot, but it would still be cheaper to buy it and use a PC instead of a real Mac. For Linux to do the same thing, the developers must concentrate on providing good all-feature drivers for most well known hardware. If there would be a way to recompile/emulate Windows drivers would be a great benefit. Is that hard to dissasemple the code of the drivers and create a MacOS or Linux compatibile code? Yes, I know copyrights make that difficult... But if the Linux had a greater user-base, the OEMs would provide their own official drivers. Now they simply don't bother. Yes, having a greater user base would attract malware programmers, but you cannot have it all. That's why Antivirus software is used for. It would also be a chance to see if MacOS or Linux are really as secure as they claim to be. In real terrms, not in theory. I believe that there is no 100% foolproof secure OS. In any OS, having an up-to-date antivirus AND be careful what you click, you shouldn't have any problem. In MacOS and Linux, the user simply enters the password every time it is asked, and that's it. The malware can do whatever is programmed to do. And it certainly doesn't need any more rights to do damage.

 

Until MacOS and Linux have the compatibility of Windows, sorry I vote for and recommend Windows to everyone. I don't trash other OSes, I would install them to a friend that wants to experiment, but not as a primary OS, and of course he would have some good knowledge of PCs. I wouldn't recommend it to a newbie, since when he would have any problems, I would have to help him and unfortunatelly this would happen annoyingly frequently (sorry if the last expression is not correct, but you get the point). An advanced user makes fewer questions which can be solved by phone. A newbie would require to go his place or connect with TeamViewer, and of course, I wouldn't charge a friend... Doing too many "favors" and wasting too much time for free is not what I want, I don't know about you...  Of course this excludes helping others through a forum. But you do it in your own time because you like it, not forced.

 

And a last thing, I am a Windows expert, so I can easily help my newbie friend in Windows. In MacOS or Linux I would have to search for the solution in Google wasting too much time. Some other poster said to be at the same level in all three OSes before judging. Yet another reason for me to vote for Windows. To get in MacOS at the same level as Windows (well, as an advanced user, not as a technician that would require much more time) would take roughly the same time if not a little more. This is because I'm familiar with Windows and I try things the Windows way. If they are done differently, I have to spend some time to figure out how to do it. In Linux this is much worse since they are not as easy and straightforward as MacOS. (I found many similarites between newest Ubuntu and MacOS Mountain Lion by the way). This means Windows has a learning curve A, MacOS has a learning curve A+B and Linux is even steeper with A+B+C (in terms of time). (That's what I meant by "user friendly" in previous posts. Learning curve is also important). I prefer it the easy way, so I choose Windows hands down when it comes to learn using a computer. By using I don't mean only connecting to Facebook and reading your e-mail, sometimes typing a document. I mean knowing how to configure stuff as well and add/remove programs. Being an adnanced user and progress, not staying a novice forever!

 

One more and the most important reason for a gamer: Games. Yes, Steam is on Ubuntu now, but most others are not. Playing a Windows game using Wine doesn't count. I speak of native games.

 

For all the above reasons, I vote Windows. Other OSes are for experimentation, unless you are an graphics artist or similar using a Mac. But here I refer to the average user, not some specific professionals. For the average user, it is Windows, I insist. Artist could use the Windows version of their applications, so there is no excuse.

 

what you are saying is as if Linux is still in its early development stage like Hurd or Haiku which currently have no support for a major list of hardware components , well ... i guess you are wrong dude. 

it ( Linux kernel) doesn't include several 'proprietary' drivers well yes but it wasn't because of copyrights and all that {censored} ( sorry for the offensive language) it is mainly because of its philosophy as an open source project. 

However, some Linux Distributions do include all proprietary drivers ( and firmwares) within its userland.

 

It wasn't all that easy to port a driver , there is no absolute conformity between one OS and the other you should've known that. by the way for the purpose of japery , i found that your answer slightly reminds me of what a contestant would say in Miss Universe contest 

 

For your statement of other OSes are for experimentation purpose only , well it is purely subjective

OSes (or in Linux case Distributions) are intended for a single or multiple purposes 

 

For instance , you need a minimal system for embedded device , you will not use Windows because it is not intended for that. Or you need a really reliable system for the sake of calculating Messner Prime for example , you will not use Windows as well 

 

Just because some Linux distributions or Macs were created mainly as a Desktop oriented OS , you don't necessarily compare them to Windows , a lot of gamers need solitaire and chess more than they need Call of Duty or Crysis.

Windows is your weapon of choice? Good! maybe it is intended for you.   

[Alessandro17]

 

 

Windows does not have "more software to choose from" in the sense of useful programs than other OS'es. Since I'm not a Linux power user I won't speak for Linux (I'll leave that to Alessandro and A.I. Ghost), but Mac OS has some incredible free and paid software that is quite useful; in fact trying to find a useful Mac OS program is easier, frankly, because you don't have deal with nearly as much crapware. Either someone has a program or doesn't, you won't find a million spam links in Google.

 

Bingo! I couldn't agree more. It is getting worse and worse. Every free program you try to install comes with at least half a dozen of crapware/malware.

Even if you know what you are doing and you are very careful, you'll end up with a few installed anyway. Linux and OS X have nothing like that, yet.

[A.I.Ghost]

 _    _.--.____.--._( )=.-":;:;:;;':;:;:;"-._ \\\:;:;:;:;:;;:;::;:;:;:\  \\\:;:;:;:;:;;:;:;:;:;:;\   \\\:;::;:;WHITE;::;:;:;:\    \\\:;:;:;:;:;;:;::;:;:;:\     \\\:;::;:;:;:;:;::;:;:;:\      \\\;;:;:_:--:_:_:--:_;:;\       \\\_.-"             "-._\        \\         \\          \\           \\            \\             \\

P.S. I hope it does not get messed up in your browsers. 

[Alessandro17]

 

I never mentioned system stability was perfect. I mentioned that drivers were mostly reliable, and I was particularly referring to Apple's. Are you sure those KPs are due to drivers? Many times KPs are due to a memory fault not related to any driver.

 

I get system freezes on a real Mac, for that matter.

[Rampage Dev]

No, it's not. Linux and OS X use quite different approach to hardware management. Linux/Unix drivers (the source code) are useful to understand how the device work and should be handled. With this info a skilled programmer(s) can create OS X driver. AFAIK creating a properly working driver from scratch, is the upper level of programming skills.

 

Many drivers can be ported. Just takes time and in most cases is not needed. 

[dan542]

I've switched from Linux to OS X. It has all Linux has to offer, if you install MacPorts, you get a Linux-like package manager, and yet is has nice UI and lots of closed source apps. Also development for OS X is great and it's the only platform on which you can develop iOS apps. I love Xcode!

 

Even one of the founders of Gnome, Miguel de Icaza, has switched to Mac…

 

Ubuntu is already doing lots of things that die-hard Linux/free software fans don't like and that's great. Now I think they should guarantee some libraries (perhaps Qt alone would be fine? It has almost everything… It could be Linux's Cocoa) and adopt OS X-style application bundles. All apps would only use system Qt and would carry everything else in their application bundles. They should also create a stable ABI for drivers. If they had that, more manufacturers would create drivers for Linux. The problem, however is legal, Linux is GPL and that kind of infects the drivers and therefore they cannot be close source… They should add some exception, because I think a driver is more like an app, it's not an integral part of the kernel. Or switch to BSD's kernel or even XNU.

[fantomas]

hi all  

 

sorry if this is OFF-TOPIC (don't worry, it will be easy to remove it  )

 

but I have a question...

 

...Apple would have been out of ideas when they met to give a name to their last OS X?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[ameris_cyning]

hi all  

 

sorry if this is OFF-TOPIC (don't worry, it will be easy to remove it  )

 

but I have a question...

 

...Apple would have been out of ideas when they met to give a name to their last OS X?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ubuntu names are stupid as {censored}

[level70steve]

My input is simply how I was educated growing up.  No computer was running any Linux distro or other Unix operating system when I was still attending middle school and high school.  It was a fierce competition between Windows 95/98 and Mac OS 7/9/X.  The main thing though was that I was not afraid to learn from both.  I did run Kubuntu one time but it seemed a little complicated to me since I never knew where to go to get drivers.

[jhoni98]

each OS has its strengths and weaknesses! apple is great but also linux is good too,

 

http://iwillfolo.blogspot.com/2013/10/is-linux-better-than-mac-os-x.html

 

this article helped me see the pros and cons for each OS perhaps it will help you too.

[chadfran]

Linux and it's not even close. It runs nearly everything we use. It just works. Watch this video.

[Alessandro17]

Well, nobody can disagree with that, but: when most people think of operating systems, they have desktop operating systems in mind, and nobody can deny that Linux has less than 2% market share. That could of course change if a large company (and no, Canonical is not a large company) created a good distribution, easy to use, with very few bugs and which could support important applications, especially games (could it be Valve?).

On a side note, there are people who are convinced that Android is not Linux (yes, even in this forum).

[chadfran]

Well, nobody can disagree with that, but: when most people think of operating systems, they have desktop operating systems in mind, and nobody can deny that Linux has less than 2% market share. That could of course change if a large company (and no, Canonical is not a large company) created a good distribution, easy to use, with very few bugs and which could support important applications, especially games (could it be Valve?).

On a side note, there are people who are convinced that Android is not Linux (yes, even in this forum).

I agree. This is something that bothers Linus the most as he says in this video and a few others if you watch on youtube. However i feel that in the last year they have made great leaps imo. The last linux mint release is as good as anything ive ever ran. Out of the box on my desktop it is amazing. Like he might say in this video is that the biggest part of linux not being on the desktop as an end user product is because only a very small portion of the population (like us) is willing to go online get an iso file and install their own os. They buy it with the os that is on there and run it. For linux to be competitive they would have to start going in as preinstalls. Such as chromeOS in the chromebooks(which is the best $250 ive spent for a school book). 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFKxlYNfT_o

[vbetts]

I would say it depends on what you're doing.

 

For gaming, out of the two I would say Mac giving the reasons that there is Steam(Yes there is Steam for Linux, but support is still not as big as Mac's support) and major developers are supporting Mac some more.

 

Emulation gaming, is a different story, I would easily go the Linux route. Dolphin on Linux for example shows better promise compared to the Mac version.

 

Server work, Linux.

 

Media development, Mac.

 

General everyday computer tasks such as web browsing, for some type of actual official support I would say Linux based on cost alone. You could build a supported Ubuntu desktop for way less compared what you can buy for a Mac.(Not talking hackintosh either!)

 

That being said, my current HTPC has XBMC on it and runs great.

[Mikethebike]

I'm very happy with Ubuntu 14.04. Very easy to use and lots of games. I only boot OSX and Win8 to recompile my apps. I use Photoshop,

Dreamweaver, Rage, Wolfenstein etc. with Wine 1.6. No problems at all and I use Photoshop 7 almost every day.

[JahStories]

i think that on powerpc macs OsX is better than linux.

But not on x86.

[Mikethebike]

PPC is way outdated. Even if software would still support it, it would be slow as a turtle.

 

Same for OpenGL. On Mavericks I'm stuck with OpenGL 2.1, but on Linux I use OpenGL 4.* for years!

 

Honestly, if I wouldn't need to recompile stuff, I wouldn't even bother to install OSX. For me proprietary

OS are obsolete.