Slashdot Mirror
OS X Vs. Linux On The Desktop
saintlupus writes: "There's an interesting article about the recent web browsing stats of Linux by Charles Moore, a fairly well-known web journalist in the Mac community. He asks whether OS X is the deathblow to Linux in the desktop and scientific computing markets. He also touches on the perennial "I'll run it on my Athlon or not at all" mindset of current Lintel hardware owners. Definitely worth a read." The article that Charles uses as his jumping point is the recent stats on Linux on the desktop. That article cites .24%, but Charles article has some pieces on why that number could be wrong.
I'm going to go buy an OSX equipped G4 right this minute! Well, as soon as I sell some organs to pay for it...
python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
Anyway, Mac advocates have been saying that before even the Mac OS X release, yet customers are still not buying it. This article was just made out of frustration.
They were unable to develop a good OS on their own, so they took BSD's code.
OSX could never beat Windows. BeOS was easier to use and better than Windows in ever way.
Having a good product wont help if Windows is whats packed with every PC. OSX also lacks software, game support etc etc, its as bad as Linux in THAT area. Dont forget Microsoft has shares in OSX.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
We know OSX has a better interface than Linux. The question is, how much longer will that last?
At one time Linux was commandline, in fact that was only 3 years ago!
And hey, remember when Windows95 looked better than Linux?
Well, its only a matter of time, thats all i have to say, I dont think Apple has the money to keep ahead of Linux forever. I dont think Microsofts code is clean enough to greatly enhance the interface.
What this means is, just like Mozilla will eventually be superior to all browsers, Linux will eventually have the best interface.
Why? Because Linux is open source, coders will first copy what they know works, once thats done, they will improve beyond the levels of OSX and XP. Remember XP and OSX wont be improving for at least 2 years. So in 2 years I expect Linux to have surpassed them both and I expect Apple to release a new GUI or be completely left in the dust. Microsoft cannot support a new GUI on such a bad codebase, XP is slow as hell and looks like the same GUI with just a skin.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Anyway, I was really disapointed because it's inconsistent (changing windows between apps and within apps; config apps quit when the last window is closed, normal apps don't), awkard (contect menu) and very limiting (try to switch to a finder-window that is obscured by another finder-window. No chance without closing/(re)moving the obscuring window).
Why do people think the Mac is easy? Because user-friendlyness is the main point of Apple marketing.
Linux on the PPC is a bit tricky to install, but the x86-versions are damn easy and KDE beats theMacOS9-GUI single-handedly no matter on what platform.
And since Apple remains the only computer-seller in the world that sells one-button mice (while most other vendors already sell wheel mice) - yes that is important because the mouse is the most important (and de facto only) GUI-navigation tool - I don't believe in the MacOS X marketing anymore.
So to summarize:
No I don't think MacOS X will kill Linux because Linux users already know great GUIs like KDE.
But I do think that MacOS X may gain a lot of users because the marketing-machine behind it is priceless. - And that's a good thing for us Linux-users, too, because apps will be a lot more portable between MacOS X and Linux than Windows and Linux.
IQ of 169? When I was 14 i was informed my IQ was 174. That sounded really great until I found out that IQ means ABSOLUTELY FUCK ALL. You might as well tell us how high you can piss up a wall. YOU FUCKING TWAT. Actually, YOU'RE BOTH TWATS, and way OT twats at that.
That was classic intercourse!
I'd rather have standard hardware based on interchangable parts and only be saddled with a proprietary OS than be stuck with proprietary hardware and a proprietary OS.
Apple is dead, they're just not broke yet. The only people they have left to blow their trumpet are the religious freaks. I don't know of any knowledgable person who likes the mac, let alone would want to use one, Unix-like kernel or not.
Lee
Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
Lets see my res is higher than the rest on my Desktop with XSGA+ and theres UXGA which is like 1600x1200 i believe, totally smokes the monitor on the power book.
The Powerbook has a better battery life but thats about it.
I have the 4100 series, your 8100 if you actually have that, would literally blow the powerbook out of the water in all areas except maybe battery life.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Fine, I'll refrain from telling you that it's "would have".
"Oh and BTW since when is a CLI interface the only interface to spit out 'syntax errors'?? Gee, Windoze does this to me EVERYDAY. It's called a BSOD. Granted the CLI is not perfect, neither are the GUI interfaces that are in the most common OS's." A general protection fault is quite a different thing from a syntax error. Commandline applications have the disadvantage of having both problems. No wonder you're an "underpaid" sysadmin, if you can't discern two completely different error types.
"The problem with the French is that they don't have a word for 'entrepeneur'." -George W. Bush
I am extremely frightened for the future of the computing world as dominated by Microsoft. As I started debating 6 months ago what I could do to help unseat the operating system stranglehold they maintain, it came down to voting with my dollars.
I had a choice, I could buy into the OSX world (a nontrivial investment), or I could build an x86 base machine and install Linux. Where would I make the most difference? By buying an apple and OSX, I would support the only currently viable competitor to Microsoft in the consumer space. (If you want to argue that point, come back and talk to me when I can go to a national consumer electronics chain and buy a preconfigured linux machine off the shelf.)
Here's the thing that's liable to get me modded as flamebait. I considered Linux to be a much smaller vote against Microsoft than buying Apple. Not just because I would spend more money on the OSX vote, but because most of the money I would spend in the Linux choice goes to the hardware. I really wonder in the popular press how much they distinguish sale of Intel boxen from sale of Microsoft operating systems.
To really contribute to the vote against microsoft in the LInux space, you need to contribute to open software. I can code, but I want to do other things with my computer time than make my computer run. A weak analogy: not everyone feels the calling to be in the Peace Corps, but most of us can contribute some money to the people who do. Good things get done both ways.
Bottom line, by buying an intel box without an MS operating system, I'm taking a way a few dollars from their bottom line. By buying apple, I'm putting a much larger amount in the hands of a competitor.
An alternative, getting closer to a monetary apples vs apples instead of apples vs oranges (no pun intended), would be to buy the intel box and send a $1000 donation to the FSF. However, as in politics, a significant part of the process is evangelizing. As I talk with my friends and family, if I told them I made a non-trivial donation an open source foundation to balance my purchase of the hardware, they would rank me a crazy idealist. But if I show them the beautiful platform that they can get with an Apple, they might give it some thought.
So that's a big chunk of why OS X got my vote over Linux.