Windows, Mac or Linux?

Great Debates
21

In some sense we are all rooting for the success of Linux, I think, even if many of us mainly hope that the success of Linux pressures Apple or Microsoft into improving their wares to keep up with the competition. Meanwhile, neither Windows users nor us Mac folk as of yet have to deal with hordes of Linux afficionados saying our OS sucks, so we are not yet on the defensive. That, I suspect, will change.

OK…I have a copy of Red Hat Linux. It booted and looked around and decided that my monitor ought to display most nicely at 800 x 600. I would prefer 1024 x 768. I already have launched a thread (do a search for Silly Gnome Questions, I’m too lazy to go there and copy the URL) about how the bloody heck I switch Linux from 800 x 600 to 1024 x 768. The answers I received, if I comprehend them correctly, sound something like this:

Boot to a command prompt; do a find for an obscure file that might exist here or might exist there, we aren’t sure. Launch a different application that allows you to edit the settings contained in the first file. Meanwhile, start a different session and open the existing settings file so you can see the correct answers to 99% of the questions, all of which you will need to input from scratch, with no prompts, in order to change the 1% that will be different. Use a keystroke command to switch from session 1 to session 2, but don’t expect to see them both simultaneously. And no, you can’t clone the old copy and just edit it. And do make a backup of the thing before you edit it in case you fuck it up, which is entirely likely.

Ummmmmm…how to put this nicely? I think a user interface, if well designed, can really make or break an OS. I think a user interface is both necessary and a good idea, overall. I think Linux would benefit from acquiring one of them. It has a good start with Gnome but still has a long way to go. When my technologically unsophisticated aunt can switch monitor resolutions in seconds, not hours, and without it being the Task of the Weekend, that is a good thing. When I, an occasionally pompous semi-geek with many comp-config success stories across multiple platforms, manage to hose an entire installation of Linus repeatedly as a result of trying to set the goddamn monitor resolution, this is NOT a good thing.

Nevertheless, we know you kick our butts in lots of under-the-hood ways (well, we Mac folk hope OS X can stare Linux eyeball to eyeball on most of these but we don’t yet know the cost), and you are the new kid on the block with both awkwardness and promise, and we respect Linux for all that.

22

i post here only because of how silly i think these arguments are.

as not only an operator on all three platforms, but a tech/and network admin, i’ve found that if you know what you are talking about, you wouldn’t really be talking.

Mac: use’m all the time for design, graphic design layout, surfing the web, playing games (yes, they are great for games, like any other machine, properly equipped it will rock your world), some light programming.

PC: Windows: all the same as above, plus NT Admin stuff.
Linux: GNU baby! same as all above except for the design.

none of them give me problems. if there ever was a problem, i could fix it. it depends on my mood as to which i lay my hands on that day. i think all the new macs look like fisher price toys, i think pc’s are better for customizing yourself, i think windows is great for tooling around with and practicing new stuff, very easy to reinstall, i like Linux 'cause of it’s simplicity and ease of installation, and wish it was more popular than it is.

23

soulsling writes:

This is either very clever sarcasm or very telling truth. My PC that I’ve owned for about a year now has has the hard disk erased and the OS reloaded from scratch by my sys admins three times. All of my friends tell me that reloading the Windows OS is routine for them. I’ve been using the MacOS (in various incarnations) since 1985 and I’ve never reloaded my OS on any of my Macs, just upgraded. In the grand scheme of things, I think one mark of a good OS is stability enough not to have to be reinstalled every once in a while, just becuse it gets confused, cluttered, or generally screwed up.
Oh yeah, back to the Windows test questions. This one came up last night:

  1. I’m trying to multi-task between a text editor, an MP3 player, and Windows explorer. I’m moving from the MP3 player to the text editor. I click in the window and quickly start typing, but notice that nothing is happening. Then, out of the corner of my eye, I notice that I must have inadvertently clicked on a file in Windows Explorer (I have a laptop with a sensitive touch pad that always gets me into trouble). So instead of typing into my text editor I was altering the name of the file. I’m still in filename edit mode - how do I retrieve the original file name?

Note: On the Mac I simply try to set the name to blank and it reverts back to it’s original name.

24

Hit escape. Just make sure you don’t hit enter, because then the changes will have been saved.

25

it was very well both truth, and sarcasm. true, a well functioning OS would prevent the need for having to reinstall when things get rough, but that was one of the reasons i DID like windows, i like to tool around and play with it, push it as far as it will go before i need to reinstall and play again. macs don’t leave me much room for that, you can’t play with their guts as much. macs have a solid OS in that respect, but they have too many issues where extensions conflict with one another, and i find it a pain sometimes to have so many extensions settings in my Extensions Manager. All in all, all three systems are alike, all three have their quirks, all three have their wonderful advantages and disadvantages.

to avoid problems, pay attention.

don’t swing the bat if you’re gonna miss stupid!

26

Why does this not work for me? Is NT different? Escape doesn’t seem to have any effect. I still get the error message “You must type a filename”.

27

I agree with Akatsukami. Mac is for the computer illiterate, and it doesn’t have the same flexability that other OSes have. Windows is a good system, only because almost every game on the planet runs on Windows. Linux and unix have the most stability, and are used in high-end systems. Would you rather have Mac or Linux computing the sounds in the SOSUS sonar net? Linux is used to run servers on the net. Again, would you want Linux or Windows running the SDMB? Unix is altogether more stable, but because of complexity and a lack of games to run on X-Windows, it will be on the backburner for a while.

28

Speaking as someone designs and builds computers and computer applications, develops software on a number of different platforms, trains new engineers in these skills, and prefers to use a Mac at home - I think I’m offended by this assertion.

I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that what you meant to say was that the advantage of the Mac is that even computer illiterates can use them effectively.

I still haven’t heard anyone give examples of the second part of that claim, that the Mac “doesn’t have the same flexability that other OSes have”. In fact, the only OS feature that I’ve found in Windows that I envy and wish for on my Mac is the ability to do file system operations within the open and save file dialogs.

29

I would recommend using Xconfigurator. Sure, a lot of the menu options will be redundant, but you did specify easy. :slight_smile:
After it’s finished auto-detecting, chose the monitor resolution manually.

30

Of all the systems that I use, I like Windows NT the best. It is surprisingly stable, as well as robust with programs written for it. I just wonder why MS didn’t use the positive aspects of WinNT to Win98.

31

Simple. Windows98 was merely an upgrade/hack of Windows95. WindowsNT was nearly a complete rewrite. There’s no practical way to reuse the code and Microsoft didn’t want to waste any more time and money on the legacy Windows9x code. Windows2000 is supposed to be based on the WindowsNT framework.

32

Aw, come on… Is no one going to defend their claims that the MacOS is less flexible than Windows or linux? I was really looking forward to a good fight, here… I mean is this the “Great Debates” forum or the “For Weenies Only” forum?

I thought, at the very least, someone would mention the myth that the MacOS is less flexible because it doesn’t have a CLI… (It does. In fact, it has several)

You guys are no fun at all!

33

coworker told me this thread was still alive…only have a minute to post.

Joey, 2 words for you: Preemptive Multitasking.

34

sixseatport:

Very good! I’m going to give you the point, reluctantly, but not without a bit of preaching…

A preemptive multitasking OS is a very important for Windows because most PC applications are not written with multitasking in mind. Macintosh applications are normally written from the ground up to support cooperative multitasking. Programmers are given very clear guidelines and direction on how to support multitasking on the Mac. Many of the low-level and high level toolbox routines have always been asynchronous. In some sense, the MacOS could be said to be a hybrid multitasking OS.

That being said, did you know that MacOS 8 originally had true preemptive multitasking? Apple took it out after the initial beta release. I’m not sure if there was a problem or it was simply a case of too much risk for too little benefit. MacOS X, of course, supports preemptive multitasking since it’s unix based.

I’m not giving you the point because preemptive multitasking makes Windows or Linux more flexible operating systems. I’m giving you the point because, in some cases, preemptive multitasking can result in better performance than cooperative multitasking. I’ll wager you that more than 99% of the world’s computer users don’t know the difference between cooperative and preemptive multitasking - couldn’t tell the difference - and don’t care.

35

I’d always heard that the difference between Mac and Microsquish is that Macintosh merely sucks through incompetance, but that Microsoft sucks through deliberate malice.

MacOSX is Unix-based? Cool, I did not know that. I’ve also heard that it’ll run on Intel-type hardware, true?

36

Yep, just like the unix it’s developed from, FreeBSD.
I’m personally excited because hopefully somewhere along the line it may mean Apple may finally provide a QuickTime player for Linux - open or closed, doesn’t matter to me. Just make that !@#$ Sorenson CoDec available for Linux already!
I mean, it’s free for Windows and Mac cause they make their money off of Encoding. The only reason there is no *nix version is Apple doesn’t care.

BTW, I’ve been using YellowDog linux under MacOS for the second half of last semester’s Assembly class. I quite liked it (such a relief to have Gnome on that machine!). Been thinking of joining the porting project.

We’ve got dual boot with the pretty Yellow Dog point n click dual boot screen, but so far, nobody, even the Mac Fanatics, have switched it to MacOS. Perhaps it’s cause the machine is so slow only Linux is remotely usable on it.

Time to put YellowDog on one of the G4s…

37

I’m just thinking here, that if Apple actually manages to produce a UNIX-based OS, which can reliably emulate Microsoft and run on a variety of hardware, while still retaining the advantages of MacOS, this whole debate will become pretty much moot (other than the price issue). It seems to me, though, that that might be a bit too optimistic… I guess we’ll just have to wait and see.

38

This is a silly argument. It goes on endlessly in stupid newsgroups like comp.sys.<x>.advocacy and on various messageboards. One camp isn’t going to convince the other; you might as well convince people that their political leanings are “stupid”.

39

Oops! You must have accidentally landed here in Great Debates. I think you were probably looking for General Questions. By definition, Great Debates are arguments that will never ‘convert’ the ‘believers’. This is a forum for passion over logic. Some of these topics have been argued for centuries without resolution… I suspect the Great OS Wars will go on for longer than that…

40

I have used Windows, Mac, and Unix machines. I am sorta partial to Macs. Mainly because I do a great deal of map production and desktop publishing. Also the operating system has historically been more stable than Windows. I have a Centris and Quadra that are still used and working fine. In fact I had a Mac II that I had stored until recently. I took out and turned on and it still worked okay despite the obvious limitations in memory and speed.
I only had one bad experience with Macs and that was with a PowerMac. It seem to have problems from the day we got it.
Its only time I seriously considered throwing a computer out a window.

Even though I am partial to Macs, I beginning to like Windows more and more. At work, I have an NT machine and my colleagues have Win98 machines. The biggest complaint I have with Windows is its instability. Every so often I can count on a Windows machine crashing. I’m the de facto admin so I have to run “fix” the problem instead doing my real job. Also those DLLs are very particular. I had to reformat the hard drive of my NT machine three times in order to finally fix the problem which was a corrupted DLL file.

Like previous poster have said it depends on what kind of job doing that decides which computer is the best.