|
I know I'm opening up a can of worms, but oh well.
I was reading cgrinker's latest blog and couldn't help but notice how many people said "XP SP2/3 is the best OS."
Whenever someone says "XP/Vista/OSX/Linux is the best OS" I always have to ask: "Have you ever used any other operating system, and if so, how long?" Sometimes they'll answer "yeah, I have a lot of experience in both OS X and Windows and I feel [insert OS here] is better" but more often the reply is "No, I've never used the other operating systems because they're crap."
So, I pose this question to TL: How many of you use either Mac OS X or Linux on a regular basis?
For those of you who haven't tried either OS X or Linux, I definitely encourage you to do so. What do you have to lose? Desktop Linux distributions can be downloaded freely, so all it will cost you is a blank CD, time, and some hard drive space.
So, share your experiences with other operating systems, either OS X or Linux. If you want to pitch in something about a Windows OS, feel free, but please don't flame other posters or turn this into a debate about which OS is better.
TL:DR - Linux: It's so easy a Mac user can do it.
 
|
I've used quite a bit of Linux and a bit of OSX and i definately prefer Vista. I'm into hardware, not software, and it took me literally a week to figure out how to install Arch when i had no bash experience at all because of the incredibly technical installation guide which is full of unnecessary commands and unclear explanation. I installed linux to get away from resource hogs, and the only Linux that an educated layperson could possibly use without studying for weeks would be ubuntu, which has nearly the same resource usage as vista.
|
Canada9720 Posts
ubuntu has made a lot of advancements in their UI. you don't really need to use the terminal at all to set anything up, and on the latest ubuntu installation (9.04), everything that isn't automatically configured, will pop up and automatically ask you if you it to search for the proper software -- from drivers, to the non-free packages not included in the installation
of course, once you taste ubuntu, and lose your shell cherry, you can move to more tasty linux selections like debian. and then on one depraved, mad day, you might even go so far as to try compiling the kernel and running gentoo
regarding the resource usage of ubuntu: i run ubuntu 9.04 and vista on this machine (for bw), and linux handles my computer much, much, much nicer than vista does. it's not even close, on a 2ghz dual core machine with 1gb of memory
edit: and i've got all the compiz-fusion candy enabled
|
in my experience, OSX looks nice, but it's so damn hard to do anything efficiently, especially with limited customization and counter-productive mouse acceleration
pretty animations really cap the speed you can work at, and it doesn't help that things seem to load so slowly (even on the MBP)
|
congratulations, you have just waved a red flag in front of the ubuntu-using, slashdot-reading, php coding idiots.
enjoy your misinformation and recycled outdated irrelevant facts
|
On August 24 2009 06:14 vAltyR wrote:
For those of you who haven't tried either OS X or Linux, I definitely encourage you to do so. What do you have to lose? Desktop Linux distributions can be downloaded freely, so all it will cost you is a blank CD, time, and some hard drive space.
TL:DR - Linux: It's so easy a Mac user can do it.
Seriously whats the point? I'm so lazy and I don't do anything technical that would require Linux. Why is it worth the pain in the ass when windows has been working fine for ages? I remember running redhat when I was 13 and wanted to be a 1337 hacker but, what's the fucking point when I just use the computer to browse the internet and stream movies to my playstation.
|
Canada9720 Posts
On August 24 2009 06:29 uberMatt wrote:
congratulations, you have just waved a red flag in front of the ubuntu-using, slashdot-reading, php coding idiots.
enjoy your misinformation and recycled outdated irrelevant facts
what's the point of this post? to vaguely come off as knowing more than the OP without really posting anything? there's nothing wrong with ubuntu, slashdot is fine if you like low-level dev, and php runs the site you're being a douchebag on.
|
I use XP, Vista, and Ubuntu on a regular basis. I've spent considerable amount of time on a Mac as well.
Ubuntu is convenient if you don't rely on a lot of application. This is true when I do development work, and all I need is the terminal (putty is crap). While it has made a lot of advancements on UI and drivers in recent months, it's still lacking on the application front, which probably north of 90% of computer users still heavily rely on these days (please don't compare open office with MS office...)
Mac OSX is very nice, and I would actually use it if it wasn't so ridiculously overpriced. They should also tone down their intuitiveness push as well ("Enter" to change the file name does not make any sense).
Windows simply works. It's been around for so long, it actually defines what's intuitive and what's not. On the contrary, I don't understand why so many linux users (and Mac users too) bash (haha!) windows. Yea, putty is crap, random keys don't work, copy and paste are dumb; yea, some programs crash on windows (a lot of programs are extremely quirky on Linux too); but guess what, to 90% of computer users, these things are irrelevant or insignificant. Windows works.
|
Also, the thread is titled: "why you should try it" but you gave absolutely no reason for trying it. You just said it was easy. Doing nothing is easier.
|
On August 24 2009 06:31 MiniRoman wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2009 06:14 vAltyR wrote:
For those of you who haven't tried either OS X or Linux, I definitely encourage you to do so. What do you have to lose? Desktop Linux distributions can be downloaded freely, so all it will cost you is a blank CD, time, and some hard drive space.
TL:DR - Linux: It's so easy a Mac user can do it. Seriously whats the point? I'm so lazy and I don't do anything technical that would require Linux. Why is it worth the pain in the ass when windows has been working fine for ages? I remember running redhat when I was 13 and wanted to be a 1337 hacker but, what's the fucking point when I just use the computer to browse the internet and stream movies to my playstation.
Exactly. Linux does not offer anything more (in fact, probably considerably less) than windows if you are a casual user (a very loosely defined term).
|
On August 24 2009 06:17 ghermination wrote:
I've used quite a bit of Linux and a bit of OSX and i definately prefer Vista. I'm into hardware, not software, and it took me literally a week to figure out how to install Arch when i had no bash experience at all because of the incredibly technical installation guide which is full of unnecessary commands and unclear explanation. I installed linux to get away from resource hogs, and the only Linux that an educated layperson could possibly use without studying for weeks would be ubuntu, which has nearly the same resource usage as vista.
Which desktop environment were you using? Ubuntu uses GNOME as their standard desktop environment; I would try something running the Xfce desktop environment. It's supposed to be much more lightweight than either GNOME or KDE. I don't know exact usage statistics, but it could be worth looking into. Xubuntu is a version of Ubuntu that uses it, and I know Fedora also has live CDs with Xfce available.
Also, Arch Linux is not one I would recommend for people just starting Linux. I should probably caveat that installing Linux is simple if you use the right distribution! Installing Fedora or Ubuntu is simple; Gentoo or Arch, not so much.
|
United States3824 Posts
|
The problem with Linux is that some games don't work on it. And that's not something you can overcome for some(me).
|
the problems with linux and me is that my wireless card does not work and without it i cant do anything. but yeah i want to work soon on some php/mysql projects so linux could come handy.
|
I feel like this blog is aimed at me since I started the SP2 derail in that blog so this is fair.
Regardless, I have nothing against Linux - it does exactly what it sets out to do which is the give the user full access. Still as far as applications go and stability with hardware and applications there still isn't much it has on top of SP2. I can't go from an IDE to gaming for a break on a linux kernal without some grease work.
On a side note Ubuntu is nice consumer friendly kernal and I'd put it on the top of list with other OS's but if thats the case, I think that should be the kernal being discussed. A lot of the name brand linux based OS has differing qualities and shouldn't be lumped as one. Unless of course we're just going to argue about UNIX and non-UNIX which is something totally different.
|
Germany2762 Posts
i own a pc and a macbook so i use both, windows and osx daily.
*edit: this post was made under OS X ^^
|
Sweden2683 Posts
|
On August 24 2009 06:48 Shikyo wrote:
The problem with Linux is that some games don't work on it. And that's not something you can overcome for some(me).
QFT. The sole reason I still have windows is because of games.
On August 24 2009 06:56 jhNz wrote:
i own a pc and a macbook so i use both, windows and osx daily.
*edit: this post was made under OS X ^^
Currently running Fedora 12 alpha. :D
|
I have been using OS X for some time now (From January to June, and from now), and I can say with certainty that OS X has some very odd gimmicks about it that just don't make sense. I'm running it on one of the newer MBPs with the new sleek metal look, and though it doesn't often crash, almost everyday when I'm running SC/WC3 in the background with Firefox and a few other apps in front, it starts to lag down and do the little rainbow circle thing. It also decided to crash once or twice in the period ;|
|
Of course If people actually explored OS's they'd find one they liked better. Whatever you like, theres a Unix based OS that can do it better than any other OS. Id have to say Windows 2000 had the most intelligent design out of any other OS I've seen. Very simple to use but not hard to fix. Sure Mac's dont break often, but when they do its a pain to fix.
To ghermination : If you really care about hardware, you wouldn't use Vista. It is just as easy to do in OSX and OSX uses WAY less resources. Plus using Linux is very simple once you do it for a few months.
Idea: Linux needs to expand and make a few specific OS's that can interact with each other. Like a Game OS, movie OS,music OS, and buisness OS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
