Age old question whats better windows linux or mac [Archive]

Starbuck3733T

18th April 2005, 23:02

Any *nix is superior. Now what do I use? Windows. Why? Because I'm a windows network admin! and that's what all my games come on! and I don't want to learn GIMP when I've got near 13 years in Photoshop under my belt.

And... well... I'm a Visual Studio Whore.

fillip

18th April 2005, 23:05

If I need six hours experience with an OS before voting then I can't really. Windows and Unix are the only 2 i've had any real usage with, and Windows beats Unix hands down on the basis that it's far more user friendly and much more widely supported as well as having far greater compatibility with 3rd pty software - I know that stems from Windows market share but if it was as piss poor as Mac users and the majority of the open source community like to say it is it simply wouldnt be on 90% of the home computers around the world, no matter how good your marketting dept. is

Linux, although hugely impressive for an enthusiast product (and don't get me wrong I have huge respect for it) will never have the millions to poor into R&D and thus can never be as widely compatible and as 'user proof' as Windows is, and i'm yet to find an incarnation of Linux that is as easy to get to grips with either on the installation front or for general usage.

[EDIT] Whats more GIMP is the worst image manipulation prog' i've ever had the displeasure of using. lol. http://wizdforums.co.uk/images/smilies/laugh.gif

Arctirus

18th April 2005, 23:15

I vote Windows, still haven't got round to downloading Linux, I will eventually and will dual boot ^_^
Download knoppix, it's a bootable cd that runs linux from the cd without installing anything.

toby

18th April 2005, 23:26

windows is awesome!great product!linux is pretty good for a bit of fun, but no directx means i wouldnt use it as my main os, also installing stuff is just awful and very painfull, tried mac os a bit ages ago and thought it was poor, cant get used to one mouse button!i wouldnt mind one tho cause they look nice and wouldnt mind a play around.

dutchcedar

18th April 2005, 23:47

I've only used Windows. :wacko:

Plug and play.

Point and click.

Plug and pay.

Its all good. :lol:

zer0

18th April 2005, 23:56

im shure you can all guess what im going to say but i will put a few more words behind it...

linux because for an open source operating system it has surtpassed any of my expectations and is more powerful than i have found ways to use it... Toby mentioned direct x linux dosent have support for direct x besaus direct x is a microsoft program and is not open source. i do miss some of my windows apps (photoshop, dreamweaver so on) but i have found my move to linux is eased by some tools that are simaler to the ones i miss (gimp, *i know you hate it fillip* nvu, beep media player and so on)

as far as linux as a desk top operating system i do think that in the next 5 years it will surpass windows longhorn and anything microsoft can concive in that time... but at this time i still find that the lack of acceptance for linux by software developers makes using linux from day to day some what harder but wine and cedega seem to make up for that (even though it can be slow and buggy)

scopEDog

19th April 2005, 00:06

The real answer? The best OS is the one you make the most out of. Be right back...gotta reboot my CP/M box..

...although i do see an X future :)

toby

19th April 2005, 00:10

i would probably run linux all the time just because its more fun to use and you get to do new things if it werent for the games, i need games!

Vis

19th April 2005, 00:17

Amen to that Toby. The software available for windows (not just games) blows anything else out of the water.

Delirious

19th April 2005, 00:23

The only os i have experience with is windows, mainly cause i dont know how to use anything else. but im looking to change that. The next comp i build will have windows and this one will have linux.

zer0

19th April 2005, 00:46

also the reason i said 6 hours is because that is equivalent to about a day of working with them...

toby has a point but game companys are quicker at moving over to linux i can list at least 2 companys that offer linux versions of there software

id (doom 3) and epic (or digital extremes witch ever one developed ut2003/2004) oh and BioWare releced a linux client for nwn so a few big games are playable on linux.

Arctirus

19th April 2005, 00:49

I've only used Windows. :wacko:

Plug and play.

Point and click.

Plug and pay.

Its all good. :lol:
:eek: We agree! I think this is the second time I'm making this post! :eek:

Starbuck3733T

19th April 2005, 01:02

The real answer? The best OS is the one you make the most out of. Be right back...gotta reboot my CP/M box..

...although i do see an X future :)

Don't knock CP/M. I own a working PDP11 running CP/M. Fortran ownz on that thing (I'm not kidding).

Edit: If given a choice, I'd like to run a unix based server. I'm looking forward to seeing the open source .NET release an ASP.NET bit.

scopEDog

19th April 2005, 02:08

Not knocking it...cp/m was my introduction into computers. I had an ooooooold hp 120. Built like a tank and weighed as much as one. God i wonder what happened to that thing.

Starbuck3733T

19th April 2005, 05:14

DEC 350SL professional workstation.

jaguarking11

19th April 2005, 05:35

I use windows 99% of the time and I know my way around it. I never have problems with windows eversince I switched to a nt tech windows and not that 9x crap that discusted me.

I have used diferent distros of nix and I think they are gr8 but I seem to naturaly steer towards windows. Maybe one day I will get fed up with windows and get my hands diging through nix and finaly become a user of it. But it is very hard from going from a position of being a power user of an os to a todler in another os. I remember lerning to use ms os's and it wasent hard but what became hard was actualy using it more as a pro than a user thats full of questions.

zer0

19th April 2005, 07:09

Don't knock CP/M. I own a working PDP11 running CP/M. Fortran ownz on that thing (I'm not kidding).

Edit: If given a choice, I'd like to run a unix based server. I'm looking forward to seeing the open source .NET release an ASP.NET bit.
as far as your hope to see an open source .net well there is mono as far as i know its alsost the same but i prefer to stay away from .net and mono as .net was a resource hog in windows and i think mono is the same way.

Yellowsnow17

19th April 2005, 07:29

zer0

19th April 2005, 07:52

well i realy hope my use of linux isnt a phase (although your explination is close to mine...) although im thinking about duel booting again because cedega still sucks and i realy wana play my games with more ease...

honestly though i will always have a lil penguin in side of me (i think i swalowed a lil toy one i was messing with a few weeks ago...) and i realy do think linux is a very powerful operating system that isnt being addoped because microsoft is sort of forcing its hardware venders to only offer windows... (have you ever tryed to buy a desktop from ibm with linux preloaded on it even though they back linux soo much... or how about dell or gateway...)

but possobly my biggest issue is dfi was lazy when developing the bios for this mother board and wright the acpi code like windows and made it suck when using linux... (eather that or the 2.6 kernels still dont have full acpi support...)

(meaby it is time i switch back to windows... i mean my linux set up is constantly being messed up.... eather way ill leave half my hdd for linux...)

Fibbles

19th April 2005, 09:19

I went through a brief Linux phase a few years ago. I tried Redhat, SuSE, and even complied my own Gentoo distro. Linux was nice and all but it just didn't have the polished feel I was used to. With that said, I voted for Windows. Microsoft may have had stability and compatability problems with their OS in the past, but as of late they have done an outstanding job. Win XP is a masterpiece.

Lately, I've been getting familiar with the the Mac. A month ago I bought a 12" Powerbook and I'm still getting the feel for OS X. It's very powerful and was totally easy to pick up, but I'll still take my Windows any day. :)
Pretty much how I am. My main rig has WinXP, mostly for the games, more games are being developed for alternate OS's, but the majority are for Windows, so Windows is where I will stay. My secondary rig has Windows ME, for the 3dfx/Glide app's I still have and really want to play. I need the box because my 6800 screws some up and they're unplayable. I messed with Redhat on my third box a few years ago. Nothing ever came of it, it was just something to try.

I'm planning on buying a Powerbook/Mac Mini/Mac XXX to learn the OS with. I've gone so far as to get Qualified for a payment program, and I'll choose my parts based on a friends suggestions (she works for Apple). If all goes well, I'll only have my Windows based computers and every other in the house will be a Mac :h34r:

Risky

19th April 2005, 11:54

As said before I had to use Macs for a while in the mid-late 90's and they were really awful as office machines, crashprone, underpowered and overpriced.

Unix, I have only used occasionally so can't comment, though I have some unix work coming up at work now. That said I can't see the innate superiority of typing at a command line over a a good GUI.

Windows can be frustrating at times but does offer a lot both to novices and power users. Of course it could be better but I don't see the need to balame it for everything.

Da_Rude_Baboon

19th April 2005, 12:20

The problem with open source software is the support. We always have some linux geek academic at work complaining that we shouldnt be so reliant on MS and use linux as its free. Thats all well and good but if we have problems with any of our systems microsoft will be here within 4 hours to fix it. Linux can't offer that.

Darv

19th April 2005, 13:51

I think every O/S has its uses. None is better than the other overall, they all have their plus points as well as their negative.

The only thing keeping me using windows primarily at home is I have a Windows Smartphone. Although I don't connect it to install stuff much, I still do.

One day I will go to Linux as my default O/S but I will leave it til a weekend when I have nothign else to do.

zer0

19th April 2005, 21:19

Fibbles

19th April 2005, 21:32

i must say that linux isnt enierly comand line. many desktop envireomnts and window managers have been developed such as gnome, KDE, XFCE and so on.

my honest reasons for not using windows.

prescott processors are not very compatable with sp2 especialy scence when i moved to linux new bios fixing the problem had not been releced.

in windows i would get a few issues of random slow downs while playing a few games (later i found out that was because of the automatic windows update program)

i felt like i had learned all i could learn while using windows and desided it would be best to chalenge my self with a new operating system.
Why not just turn the automatc updater off? There's a few things I do after I setup Windows, like turning the updater off, setting my own virtual memory and turning off system restore.

You really don't need to list reason why you wanted to switch. Simply wanting to learn something else is fine in itself.

cools

19th April 2005, 21:35

Every 12 months I do a Linux install to test the waters, see if its ready for me yet.

So far no. It's been this way for 6 years.

My MAME cabinet runs Gentoo Linux, superbly, but as a straightforward desktop where everything works in the same fashion, I can't use Linux.

I don't actually use a lot of Windows apps, but those I do use are unequalled in OSS. Tag&Rename, iTunes, Newsbin, Nero, WinRAR, MadTracker. Yes, I could give WINE a bash, but that's not the point (and I know full well 3 of those don't work properly with it). Using Windows, they "just work", and its as solid as can be, and equally as speedy.

I like the idealism of switching, but then I'm also attracted to OS X. To be perfectly straight though, I don't see any reason to switch!

zer0

20th April 2005, 00:45

Why not just turn the automatc updater off? There's a few things I do after I setup Windows, like turning the updater off, setting my own virtual memory and turning off system restore.

You really don't need to list reason why you wanted to switch. Simply wanting to learn something else is fine in itself.
actualy i heard something about microsoft makeing the autop update thing mandatory....

and i did when i first set it up but it some how find its self turned on only a week later

Starbuck3733T

20th April 2005, 01:37

Turning off automatic updates is like asking for someone to break into your house. Just plain dumb - I wouldn't say this if I were joe user, but since I'm an admin, I force updates. I manage which updates are deployed and which are not. I've got ~1000 machines in my domain (still pretty small in the grand scheme) and none have had problems with the prescott/sp2 thing. I'm convinced its an incompatiblity with the chipset drivers.

Edit: yeah, .NET is a pig. It makes apps so damn easy to develop, and providing you've got the machine to push them, they do run very fast (they show benchies with ASP vs ASP.NET). Don't even start about running stuff in perl (which I also know) or php, (ditto) - they aren't as easy to program in because they lack the extremely powerful backend of the .NET framework.

So,no arguments from me... just a different spin.

zer0

20th April 2005, 02:42

well even though you siad not to im guna argue with ya...

i for one develop in php and have found it to be the easyest language i have learned... im relectant to learn asp as its a microsoft technology (i know about apache asp) and php is more accepted...

im also relectnat to learn .net as it again is a microsoft technology and although there is mono i still would rather users of my program or code to be able to run it with out any need for dependancys such as .net

imagine this senario your a 56k user you download a small program that does a simple task and attempt to use it only finding out that it requires .net well you dont have .net installed and you see .net as a big scary download... (happened to me to be exact back when i was using 56k)

you may argue that its easyer to develop with but when developing you must first think about the user and that only a very small persenage of us have the ability to download large depencys quickly.

Starbuck3733T

20th April 2005, 03:25

okay, lemme respond to that.

ASP and ASP.NET share almost nothing, other than the VB syntax. One is a real language, and the other is a piece of crap scripting engine. It's cool by me that you use what you use, and I use what I use, but the sheer power of the .NET framework is insane. for instance, there's no integrating caching mechanim in PHP, or multithreading, etc.

As far as the program size, .NET proggies are tiny since most of the functionality is in the framework. Yes, the framework is a 14MB download, but .NET programs for user end stuff aren't yet common because of this - so no arguement there - its a valid point. However, Longhorn includes the .NET framework and most OEM shipped machines (at least the ones I get) are already including it too.

I'm not a user-app developer by nature. I develop on the server side, so there's no program to deliver... only interface and content. And in that respect I use webstandards and best practices to my best advantage.

So for the user program, until .NET is ubiquitous, non-dot-net apps are probably still the best bet. If I were asked to code a user app for consumer use, that'd be the direction I take. If I'm asked to code an app (well, I have) for enterprise use... .NET is the way I go. Why? Because I have ironfisted control over the machines... and they all have the .NET framework.

Good discussion so far... tho its slightly left of the middle.

zer0

20th April 2005, 03:58

oh well i have been some what betten (12 to 1 isnt prety) and soon plan to go back to dule booting (i realy hate cedega) but i wont abandon linux...

also as far as user interfaces if you remember http://wizdforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=1384 you should watch gnome develope those features will be in gnome probly by the end of the year and i have heard some great news about more multimedia thing being built in to the kernel so thease next few years will realy be something interesting to watch as linux and longhorn battle it out for market share...

also a nice lil referance open source projects can over come large closed source projects as mozilla has showen with firefox.

now with this i ask you to look at this windows vs linux topic in another year or 2 and compare your views at that time with your views posted here in...

next thread: Browsers!

equilibrium

21st April 2005, 00:58

I vote for linux :)

best overall tbh. Maybe not so good for everyone but if it was would it be so good? :)

It's so versatile and fast. So many optimizations you can do and things you can play around with. I guess I just miss DOS and windows 3.11 lol :eek:

Don't see why people diss command line system :unsure:.