Slashdot Mirror
In Which OS Do You Feel More Productive?
HTMLChecker asks: "I found an article in which the author talks about how she is more productive using Mac OS X.
What about the people of Slashdot? Where do you feel more productive, in Linux? Windows? DOS? Mac OS X? Also, what is the best way to rate productivity in an OS?"
By the sheer number of FPS titles available native to the platform.
Inversely, of course.
M
trustedworlds.net - gaming, security, and the gunk that lives in between
To those of us that have either been on the platform for a while (or since the beginning), or have already switched from another platform to OS X, this article will not provide much that we do not already know. However, for those not familiar with OS X, it is a pretty good read. I have used many platforms in parallel for years from the early days of the PC revolution (Apple ][, Macintosh, TRS-80, Commodore, Amiga, Atari, Compaq, Windows) to the later workstations (Sun, SGI, NeXT) and have my likes and dislikes for all of them. Having said that however, my preference has fallen on OS X. It is sooo easy to use, is truly plug and play, is more stable, more secure, has most of the GUI and CLI integration a geek could want as well as a pretty good selection of software that makes things either 1) more enjoyable and/or 2) more productive.
For a long while, I had multiple systems on or under my desk, peaking at one time with an SGI Octane, PowerMac 9600, Windows NT, and a Linux box to perform my scientific work, serve a website, do graphics work and general productivity. All of that functionality now exists beautifully in one OS X machine freeing up considerable desktop space. Also, thank goodness for flat panel displays! I serve a couple of websites up on my workstation as well as use it for computational calculations, a front for distributed computing, writing papers, doing graphics for figures and illustrations, preparing presentations etc...etc...etc...
No other platform offers this degree of ease of use combined with flexibility and functionality.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
KAYPRO!
I feel most productive in DOS.
As a programmer, I am much more productive in Linux because I can tie almost everything I do in Gnome (or KDE) to a key command. I don't use the mouse very much (or at all) while programming in gvim or Eclipse, and it really slows me down when I need to, say, launch a terminal or a browser.
As a scientist, where I do most of my work in MS Office, I am much more productive in Windows. I basically have to use MS Office because I need to interoperate with my peers and coworkers. Furthermore, Excel (every scientists best friend), is still far and away the best spreadsheet application and to me is Window's so called "killer app". MS Office for the Mac is still wildly unstable, and although it's an option, it's not a very good one.
As a hobbiest or a general user, I'm more productive in Mac OS X, which sort of bridges both worlds. Because Macintosh enforces a pretty strict interface guideline, all the general purpose apps are easier to use on the first go. This is not really critical for stuff I use every day (as a programmer or a scientist) but is really useful when I'm trying out a new chess app or whatever.
If I had only one choice, I would use Mac OS X. At work I have both a Linux computer and a Windows computer on my desk (it's a pretty big desk). At home I use my iBook. I don't have to make that choice.
My productivity shoots up as soon as I see a Bash prompt.
This question is critical in all environments, end-user and enterprise. The answer is really another question. What role does the end-user or server need to do? If the end-user wants to simply read websites, check mail, and write a document or two, a Celeron with Windows XP is the ideal choice. If an end-user wants to play with multiple OSs in VMware, terminal service to their house from work, and play the latest games, a P4 with W2K is the ideal choice. If a server is going to perform SMTP/POP3/IMAP/webmail, I would recommend an HP DL 380 G4 with RHEL 3.0. If they want to upgrade their domain controllers, I'd go for HP DL 380 with W2K3.
that does not allow me to read slashdot all day.
I can open an average of 14 infected mails every minute, click on the atatchments and have them procreating in seconds, without having to save them, make them executable, then fiddle about trying to get them to run under Wine. Match that on any other OS.
In dealing with servers and enterprise applications, I feel more productive with Unix and LAMP.
However, when it comes to office applications or presentations, at this point I still feel more comfortable with Windows - though Open Office is coming along quite nicely.
"Your admirers in the street
Got to hoot and stamp their feet
in the heat from your physique" -King Crimson
Similarly for servers, Debian Stable has been the most productive since it stays suppored for longer than the commercial OS's and has the fewest upgrades.
(for the desktop I must say ubuntu seems competitive with debian unstable, though)
I'm actually more productive in Windows, since in Linux I tend to fiddle with things and have fun :)
3rd ask slashdot in a row
karma to burn
I barely even use the mouse in OS X. I get the feeling it's going to waste on me.
In windows and DOS, I play games too much. In Linux, I futz around compiling things over and over and getting my configuration files just right. In Mac OS X I just stare slack-jawed at the purty eye candy.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
a 386. Behold, a spectacle of sight and sound (ding!)
No, really, Slashdot doesn't have enough rabid platform advocacy and name-calling. By all means let's put this on the front page and drum up some more.
Serious research is one thing, trolling for a flamewar is another.
-- the_Librarian
I'm sure that everyone has heard the old saying, "Mac for Productivity, Unix for Development, and Windows for Solitaire". My experience has shown me that at least for my needs, the Mac is not only for productivity, but for development as well. Windows? Well, some things never change.
Hmm...I don't think I could possibly guess what the preferred OS of Slashdot is. (I would assume the preferred OS of most would be the one they are most productive with) It's not a particular OS has a majority presence here or anything.
PalmOS 5. On my Treo 650 smartphone. The total integration, mobility, and preconfig'd apps for specific tasks - along with the dearth of options when things go wrong, except trying again, make it the perfect tool. It's practically invisible, while I'm communicating with people around the world, who don't need to have any equipment more special than a regular phone, or maybe any kind of email or web browser.
--
make install -not war
Queue the amt of porn d/led jokes.
- For programming and software development work, I find Linux much more productive. - For traditional uses of a PC - word processing, office applications, even graphics - I find Windows more productive. - I've never used the Mac but I hear it's good for graphics.
Personally it is not so much the operating system as the window manager. I use fluxbox becase I like being able to scoll between virtual desktops with my mouse scroll wheel. The advantage of Linux is that you have tons of window managers to choose from, as opposed to Windoze of OSX where you are limited to the one provided.
Because it has Visual Studio, which is the best IDE out there (in my opinion, of course).
Linux is impossible to feel anything but productive on. Except maybe Linspire... Macs are productful, but only for creative things. It's the ultimate art computer.
Honestly, when I use Linux or BSD, I spend so god damned much time tinkering with my almost limitless options that I don't actually get anything done. In high school my computers spent more time taken apart or recompiling than they did running and working on papers or anything. The fact that I don't expect Windows to be able to do anything, coupled with the fact that I couldn't even if I want to, change much, I actually use it to do stuff. Of course, now i'm a junior in college and that is mostly papers, im, mp3s, and pr0n. But my computer spends more time in operation than in varying states of broken crap.
Sure, Slashdot puts up an OS9 icon, but not even one of the BSD icons.
When I boot to linux I spend too much time tweaking.
When I use my ibook I spend too much time exploring
When I use 2000 I am at work and just program
I have achieved more accomplishments on a Nintendo then anywhere else. Including real life.
Because anything that can keep me that angry for that long makes me produce more heat, noise, piles of hair upon my desk, and sheer nervous energy while wondering if it will work properly.
My little site.
All OS's and software have their limitations. You have to write macros to really achieve a new level of productivity. I would estimate Macro Express has increased my productivity by about 1000%, plus I can work while I'm eating lunch across the street! No I do not do data entry.
I'm most productive on Linux. All of the tools I need are either already installed or just an emerge away, I am able to work without things like spyware and viruses getting in my way, and I can run everything I need and more.
In addition, I can use a WM like ratpoison which allows me to work even more efficiently, as well as nest another window manager (usually wmaker) inside it if I need to work with certain applications like The GIMP.
I believe in using the right tool for the job, and Linux is definitely right for me.
Disconnect and self-destruct, one bullet at a time.
I use Windows at work, but I feel like my brain spends most of its time processing how to move around in the user interface, which things to press, what to click where and which button to use. When I'm using Mac OS X, my brain works in a more task oriented way. Instead of opening this program and right-clicking on that thing, I'm editing a video, or I'm working on a graphic. It's somehow less intrusive and allows me to focus on whatever I'm trying to do instead of focusing on how to do it.
... producitivty is enhanced in the backseats of CamarOS.
...
---
It's true -- I hate myself for writing that
I jsut got a MacMini awhile ago, great computer. Installed the bsd tools and developer crap, and half a billion other things. Right now linux is much more productive for my programming, but once I learn xcode on OSX im guessing that will change.
Wordperfect 5.1 meets all my needs and KDE is too slow on my 25 Mhz 486-SX.
I've been using it since DOS was around. Then 3.11, 95, 98, ME, 2000, XP, XP SP2. The point is, it works for me. I have every software that I need to be productive and the environment just works perfectly with that.*
* CandyColor theme disabled.
A blog like any other.
I hate to say it but Photoshop (for example) is Photoshop, be it on OSX or Windows XP (and yes I have and use both systems). The only time the platform comes into question is when a given app is missing from one or the other.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
Where do you feel more productive?
:)
Behind a firewall that blocks port 80
a purpose-built linux system, doing only that task.
.. for that, OSS/Linux/GNU is superlative.
..
if i need to do one thing, and one thing only, i will build my own system for that application
for general-purpose computing, however, OSX is king. the other day i couldn't believe i was playing a consumer game like UT2004 on what is essentially a portable Unix workstation, finally, after all these years
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
I'd long since gotten all Microsoft operating systems out of my house, but having hosed myself on email for several days by getting a little too playful (you mean *you* don't play with installing kernel drivers?) I got an iBook for my non-hacking day to day use.
Took a couple days to convert, but it's been pretty much painless since, plus I dn't have to deal with the people who say "what do you mean you don't have Word?"
I'd say for *programming*, give me Linux, or let me install gnu tools on your generic unix. For daily use, Mac's are just fine. My only complaint is that they use the old-fashioned BSD commands (eg sort -k, but not sort --key).
The funny thing about comparing operating systems is that frequent users of each OS are blind to the failings of their own, and are driven insane by the failings of others. For example, I find scrolling in even the latest OSX to be painful, but I love it on Windows. People get driven nuts by explorer pausing when it tries to find things that aren't there, but I don't notice it and instead go batty when Finder wastes time panning to the right in column view.
On Windows, I have a small set of utilities (notably strokeit, trip* and remote desktop) that I rely on heavily, and while other platforms have their equivalents, I just don't find them anywhere near as good (remote desktop, in particular).
Now don't get me too wrong - I would rather use default OSX over default Windows, but give me a customised Windows, and I'll take it over any other OS. It's the same reason I use an IE shell (iRider) over FireFox - one may be the technically 'better' solution, but the other just does exactly what I need it to, and lets me do it faster.
I guess my point is the obvious - people are most productive in whatever they're used to, and whatever suits them.
...especially since I need solid video editing (FCP 4) and I also need X, gcc (for embedded systems design work) and security. I bought my first OS X laptop about a year ago and since then I have gotten rid of everything Windows that I owned. My Mac, honestly, has been the most reliable and usable computer I've ever owned. I don't get involved in the whole DEFEND YOUR OS nonsense, my motto is USE WHAT WORKS FOR YOU, and for me, thats Mac OS X.
Abuse my rationalization of rhetoric as either metaphor or monotomy.
The OS in which you are most productive is whatever OS you are most accustomed used to using! Gee, spend all your time in MacOS, and you're going to be lost in another operating system, aren't you? Oh, and can we stop calling the user shell the operating system, please?
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
When I am fulfilling my webmaster/programming activities I feel best in Linux as it is most seamingly with the environment that displays my work (internet).
However when designing... must I really go on?
Scribus is nice and also some signs of DTP related activity takes place in Linux, but one has to admid that this is still Mac land stuff if one really wants to be productive, so OSX it is...
BTW they both work great together as well... I deployed several Linux/OSX office networks...
Linux!
-- Win2k: "It's not so much that it's only 65,000 bugs, it's just that they stopped at 65,535 to prevent an overflow."
A sense of accomplishment is *usually* tied in with accomplishment (especially among us engineers)... but it's possible that if an OS gives you "busy work" so to speak, that you will "feel more productive" using it than another that actually boasts higher productivity. I would *think* this would be more likely to affect the unices, but the abysmal bonus tasks I have to perform in Windows makes me personally feel most productive in Linux, followed by Solaris, followed by Windows. Only one of these OSes has made me dink around for hours because something deep inside broke utterly. I think we all know which one that is. The closest Linux has come is this mysterious thing where it wouldn't fsck the disk while complaining about it, but that was actually my bad. Solaris misbehaves at work routinely, but it's not their happy-joy-love install, so it's probably not representative of the "real" Solaris.
1. Why is this not a poll? I guess thats reserved for important stuff.. or has CowboyNeal not written an OS yet?
2. OSX switching from Windows a year or so ago. OSX is clean looks good and works fast, most applications are built to work with Aqua off the bat.. even Microsoft have given up in Windows Media Player of using their widgets, don't blame them. However it creates mismatched apps. Avalon should clean that up.. Didn't want to wait till 2006 to be more productive though.
3. ???
4. Probably not profit.
Thanks for reading.
How else can you measure productivity between differnt types of users...
--- If stupidity got us into this mess, why can it get us out?
Personally I got rid of all of my Old Shags (girlfriends) for a purpose. They made me uncomfortable. But perhaps I would have to say my first OS made me most comfortable. She's married now.
If I'm comparing like applications, e.g. Mozilla across various platforms, I'm more comfortable in MS-Windows but that translates to any environment with the same look and feel, e.g. ALT key brings down the menu bar, arrow keys navigate it, a single key brings up the start menu, etc. etc.
Of course, apps mean a lot more than GUIs, if the app you need or the one you are most comfortable with is only available on ABC operating system, then FOR THAT TASK, the ABC operating system is the most productive. I use at least 3 different OSes routinely.
For some tasks, such as doodling or brainstorming, I find a pencil and paper, or printable-whiteboard and marker, much more productive than a computer. If I need to share my raw ideas, I can scan and email them.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
OCO is Loco
More then just GUI wise. Although there were a number of significant improvements in Panther over Jaguar. Expose and network browsing to name a couple. But OS X is one of the few OSes I've used where I've felt where the command line was just as functional as the GUI. Windows often feels lacking in that respect, not to mention some of the clunkiness found in the DOS/Windows command line over *nix variants.
Although the biggest thing for me on a mac is still a one-button mouse. While most functionality is on the left button, if you plug in a two+ button mouse into a mac you'll find that the right mouse button behaves more or less like how you would expect it to, and not having it makes you feel like you're missing something, even though you can control-click still. Seeing how many mac users hook up PC mice to their Macs now I don't see why Apple can't just start shipping Macs with two-button mice.
First it would depend on what a person does. I'd imagine someone working in prepress would be rather unproductive in Linux, given the lack of tools, but the same would not be true of a PERL developer.
However, generally, people are the most productive in the environment they are the most comfortable in. They know it, understand it, and thus can use it effectively. So Linux people will be the most productive in Linux, Mac people in OS-X, and so on. I'm also willing to bet that any of those people, properly retrained and acclimated to a new OS, would be basically equally productive, provided the new OS provided the same quality of tools.
For most jobs, a computer is just a tool that gets things done. When you get down to it, the OS holy-wars don't matter since most of what is talked about doesn't affect normal user productivity in a noticable way.
It's different than saying what OS is the best technical solution for a given problem. For example UNIX/Linux have a better text-mode remote access soltuion. An SSH terminal is nearly as good as being at the console. Not so with Windows, you need a graphical remote desktop session, there's a lot you can't do command line. Thus if text mode access is technicly better for a soltuion (perhaps bandwidth is extremely limited), then clearly a UNIX base is a better idea, for that factor at least.
But trying to ask which OS is generally more productive is just flamebait. All the zealots are going to say their OS is the fastest/easiest/most powerful and will probably have irrelivant personal anecdotes about how they can't deal with other OSes. In reality they are all different ways of doing thigns, with good points and bad points, and it's mostly just learning one and becomming proficient with it.
Riding a bike isn't a natural activity. You don't just sit down and do it. None the less, once learned and practised, it's literally second nature. Likewise no OS is so intuitive that all people can use it isntantly as though they'd been doing it their whole life, in part because what is intuitive vaires by person. However once you are used to the methods, you can get quite productive with all the majors.
Since I am a programmer for that platform... It would be hard to program for windows using OS X or Linux.
Os X is good for when I want to view my photos, edit a home movie, or browse the internet safely. I have several computers and I generally use the MAC for entertainment tasks (except games of course).
GoatPigSheep, the 3 most important food groups
Seriously. I got more done in five uninterrupted hours of staring at white letters on a black screen (especially now with vi's color syntax highlighting and dangling } identifiers; where was this stuff when I was hacking code on VT220s?) than I ever possibly could in *any* GUI. With a GUI you've got Outlook's siren call (when forced to use Windows) or the Mac Mail.app icon and it's little red "you've got XX pieces of new mail!" appendage, the effortless ability to click over to a web browser "just for a few seconds," etc. ARGH.
;)
Grab three O'Reilly books, fire up the console, and get codin'! I did cheat a little bit, keeping a virtual console open that I used for:
- `man strncasecmp`
- telnet localhost 1390 (was working on, and debugging, a network app)
- ssh @ for the occasional pine session
- lynx http://www.google.com/ (for digging for sample code when I got stuck)
Just finished a "estimated time: 1 week" piece of a project this morning. Five hours. Console mode.
*That's* productive.
geek. lawyer.
A major detriment to my productivity is keeping software up-to-date. It is a drag & upgrading a lot of Windows apps & keeping abreast of all the security announcements & what not really drove me to using the Linux & *BSD distros where upgrades were less painful. Ports, apt, and portage keep me more productive.
Besides the obvious tools, I think that the major differences come from the user interfaces. Extra eye candy and even functionality can become a big distraction to work.
As soon as I'm trapped in a command line, with nothing that I can input except the next line in a shell or file, I seem to become more productive and learn faster without the distractions.
Systemd: the PulseAudio of init systems
Ninnle Linux or NinnleBSD would be my choices.
If you're talking about Apple's computer and/or operating system, it's Mac. "MAC" means "Media Access Control."
Keep your eyes to the sky.
But I find myself most productive in Windows. But the reasoning for that is because the software I need to be productive is on Windows. If all the software I needed had a Linux or Mac version they I could do just as much work on those.
In the end the only thing that really determines if I'm productive or not is the software I need. After all the operating system doesn't really do much in the way of making you more or less able to do your job, it mainly just runs the software you need to do you job.
You still get the discussion with the poll, but you also get the raw data, which might add something of interest to the collection of posted anecdotes, each explaining where one individual feels more productive.
Can anyone tell me how to set my sig on Slashdot?
This is the most rediculously stupid article I've seen on here in a while. And that's saying something.
Productivity is determined more by the app than by the OS. The OS will naturally determine what apps are available, but it still depends on what your task is. If you're doing something that is command line shell intensive, *nix will serve you better whereas if you're looking for "off the shelf" type apps, Windoze or Mac would be the obvious choices. I am an outspoken critic of MS, but I definitely get more gaming done on Windoze than any other OS, and the longer I'm stuck running it at work, the more I tweak my 'doze box to provide unix-like functionality.
DISCLAIMER: This post was not checked for speling and grammar- if you complain- you're a whiner
I would define productivity as the ability to get your work done quickly with the least effort. For any given individual, this will be whatever system they are already familiar with. If that's Windows, Mac, or Linux for you, then that's what it is.
In absolute terms, I think the best productivity would be whatever OS or environment where the tools are forgotten about and your attention is solely focused on the task you are trying to accomplish. I think this might also be tempered by how long it takes to become an expert on the system (and how much effort is required to maintain that status).
Probably command line Unix type environments used by experts who really know the system are the have the highest level of productivity (most useful results for the least efforts). However, it takes a long time and lots of effort to become extremely proficient on the Unix command line.
Plus, comparing them like that is only valuable if you have no experience with computers or else want to maximize your efficiency in the long term at the cost of learning a new system.
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
No gui distractions standing in the way of getting the work done (when the said work doesn't involve Photoshop or Autocad or Freehand or Illustrator or Quirk Xpress)...
1)No www etc to eat away time.
2)I quite often need to write and test out code in a test-bed like environment for later inclusion into some other, typically embedded, software. The most productive way I've found to do this is Borland C with MSDOS. I can edit/compile/test small code bodies faster using MSDOS and Borland C than a cute GUI interface with mouse clicking etc. Bummer though when a bad bointer crashes the whole box. Still, a reboot only takes approx 20 sec. I can do almost the same thing under *nix, but it isn't quite as snappy. *nix does same me from nasty ptrs and give better core dumps etc though.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
That was the best! I was sorry to see them go. Another MS fatality.
Who cares what OS you use?
It seems to me that most users choose their applications first and then find an OS that supports them, not the other way around.
Defecation occurs.
I started on 360s and have run the gammut since then. I've worked extensively on LINUX, Solaris, DOS, Windows (all), MacOS since 1985, and many, many more. I can say without hesitation that MacOS X has been the most productive non-programming environment for me.
Development environments vary and, of course, it is impractical to do Windows development on anything other than Windows. But, for development where you really do have a choice, like with Java, you can see a strong gravitation towards MacOS X. In fact, a couple of JavaONEs ago there was such an observation in the daily rag put out by the conference: WHERE DID ALL THESE POWERBOOKS COME FROM?!
Apple did what many said could not be done: making a UNIX that could be used by mere mortals. They put a GUI on UNIX that even covers all the nasty sys admin stuff. And, it isn't just functional, it is beautiful. When you spend 12 hours a day on something, having it be beautiful goes from optional to manditory. JMHO.
-- Scott
I don't have to point and click. I don't need icons to complicate the situation. I type exactly what I need to do and it does it for me. If I need a GUI I have X. Otherwise I have xterm. That's really all I need.
Combine it with a good shell with tab completion, vi, screen, and a few other programs, and I am very productive.
...access the internet.
Maybe it's a lack of self-discipline, but I find myself being drawn back to surfing every 15-20 minutes or so. Okay, so it's a nice break and it fits in well with extreme programming methods, but I just find I do more with no net connection.
a computer that doesn't let me read slashdot.
It doesn't really matter what OS you are using productivity wise. *nix while clean and transparent can take longer to set up due to a lack of a standard base. (no hatemail we've all had trouble setting up new hardware or getting a new software package to compile) Along the same lines most windows applications are bloaty, waste time with useless wizards and are subject to the crashy whim of the OS itself. Point is, after you've had some time to properly set up your OS and work around the initial problems, your work is only as productive as the worker doing it
It largely depends on what you're trying to acomplish. While you can do virtually the same things in Linux as you can Windows or Mac OS X, each OS has their finepoints. For programming, I feel I am most productive in Linux. Rather than having everything done for you (and often not correctly), you have to do it your way in Linux, which makes for a higher quality production. For media effects and creation, that's where Windows and OS X come in, along with several other areas. Overall, though, I feel a lot more free in Linux.
The Computations of AdamR
http://www.adamreyher.com
Personally written by Bill Gates.
Unquestionably, the most productive OS I have ever used is TRSDOS 6.0...
Ron Gage - Westland, MI
I mean, she makes the argument that OSX is a more productive environment because it has better icons.
Karma: Non-existant. Due mostly to the fact that you smell funny and nobody likes you.
If it wasn't for the fact that I've completely tuned my work environment...
I have two desktop machines, one machine running Linux, with 3 monitors, real multi-desktop, not Xinerama. I live by Virtual Desktops. One monitor is for Browsing and many-tabbed Konsoles, one is for Evolution and Kopete (and Konsoles), the third is for a Term-Serv (Rdesktop) session to the other desktop machine, a windows 2k3 server running fullscreen and other rdesktop sessions on other virtual desktops.
This is by far the most efficient setup, even though the monitors are only 17's and the fact that I'm running a "slim" desktop (P4 3.2HT, but only 2 PCI slots plus onboard).
I feel that at any other company, I'd end up using the Company Standard, and not getting any of my work done.
I like music
Once you are up and running (this post isn't about setting up machines) a user is going to be most productive in the enviorment that they know the best. Once a user has a grasp of the task at hand, the less things they have to think about doing, the more focus they can be at the problem at hand.
The real question that should be asked is where do you feel the most at home? For many it will be linux, for many it will be Windows, for others it will be Mac. The question is flawed in that it doesn't prove anything about the OS other than what OS the respondants feel the most confortible with, this will be the OS that they have the most experience with.
In other words, the answer to this question, will in general, be the same as the question: Which OS do you use?
Your mammas flamebait.
XP. Probably the only person here who feels the that way so I feel like I should vote. It does what I want it to do more often then anything else. I do use several flavors on Linux on several other machines at home. I gave on Apple many years ago when they just got to small to matter (to me).
http://www.busyweather.com/
I'm a developer as well, and I find that Linux is the best for efficiency. Part of this is simply that over time I have built scripts to simplify repetitive tasks, etc, that would be much more trouble to do in windows.
The other part of this is simply that I'm really familiar with all the tools on Linux and so I know how to get done what I need to do with what's there. For example, I use cervisia to deal with more complex CVS tasks (browsing the revisions of a given file, etc). There's probably a similarly capable tool under Windows, but I don't know what it is. Even then, for the most part I use some shortcut scripts for dealing with CVS (a command "updatecvs" that does a cvs update and greps out only the stuff I care to see).
Finally a more subtle benefit of Linux is that everything is loosely coupled. It's easy for me to use a bunch of different tools for what they are best suited to. So, I use a combination of an IDE, a dedicated tool like Cervisia, and the command line to handle my CVS tasks.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
Amazingly, that works out to be AppleWorks 3 with Beagle Bros Timeout extensions on an Apple //e.
The sad part is I can't tell if I'm making a joke or telling you the God's honest truth...
I'm like most /. users, i've used linux flavours, etc etc..
Right now my primary desktop machine is WindowsXP, and my laptop is an iBookG4. Definitely more productive on OSX, without a doubt. Task switching is faster (Expose), and everything is fast, efficient, and a drag away. There's no question about it. I've used windows all my life and OSX less than 6 months, and I'm more productive in it. Impressive to say the least.
I can't believe you actually recommend XP for web and mail - what a way to increase the number of zombies and spam-bots on TEH INTARWEB than to set people up with an insecure operating system, an insecure web browser, and an insecure mail client. Smooth move, ex-lax.
For web access, e-mail, and writing documents, a linux live CD is the way to go, with documents and preferences are stored on a USB flash drive. It's hard for a rootkit to 0wn a system when all executables are stored on read-only media.
My kids' computer runs windows (for the games), and that's why their computer is blocked by MAC address at the router.
-paul
Pistol caliber is like religion: everyone has their favourite, and theirs is the only right choice.
I still have my 1977 Kim-1 [picture on my fotolog] in a plastic storage bin in my apartment, and as soon as I rig up a new power supply I will key in the hex code to Peter Jenning's microchess, which he was so kind to send me a couple of years ago and get to work on the article I promised to write about his wonderful hack--chess in 1.2KB at 900Khz. I was never very productive on that machine...
Now I have an ibook running Panther and it is the best most productive machine I have ever owned. I have a complete dupe of my webserver with a gigabyte MySQL database and xcode--a real hacker's machine--as well as the beautiful and functional Aqua interface.
[Why did it take until 2005 for someone to figure out something useful for f9, f10 and f11???]
I think that Mac and Windows are both good enough now that the most important thing is which one you are used to. I use Mac at home and Windows at work. I am much faster at Office for Windows, because I use it all day and am used to the keyboard shortcuts in Windows. I can surf the internet faster [I almsot typed "more efficiently", but didn't think that made sense] at home because I am familiar with the Safari shortcuts and have a mouse with extra buttons that I configured for forward, backward and open in new window.
:) ]
Neither machine crashes very often. Neither has required maintenance voodoo. Each has certain OS features that I prefere over the other. [I hate window-in-window style of Windows applications. I prefer Windows Taskbar to the Dock.] The work machine has some weird remote access settings that IT occassionally tweaks when they modify our network.
I don't use Linux. [I know, what am I doing on Slashdot?
I "gave up" on Apple many years agon when they just got too small to matter (to me).
http://www.busyweather.com/
Sounds like the kinda question a manager asks... "oh I heard switching to this coffee brand will make people more productive".
Heres a hint, if you want to be more productive force yourself to be. If you want others to then bribe them.
I like muppets.
The key to my vast productivity, (or unproductivity) is the workspace switcher. I'll typically have six or eight workspaces, in one I'll have my email client, another will have a shell/terminal open, another will be scrolling irc, another will have a browser. In Windows the task bar seems to get to cluttered.
OS X is great, especially if you know all the key combinations and shortcuts. If you add LaunchBar or a similar utility like Quicksilver or Butler and minimize Dock usage and Finder navigation, OS X is even better. You can also affix shortcuts to applications in the top of the finder window itself, which is useful for apps you commonly drag things into, like text editors, Photoshop, email clients, and media players, for instance.
(%i1) factor(777353);
(%o1) 777353
So far I've only worked with DOS, Windows 3.1 and up, Mac OS X (I won't include the play time on earlier macs.) and a flavour or two of Linux. What allows me to be move productive is the ability to move around the OS with just the keyboard. I code and having to move a hand from the keyboard to the mouse breaks the momentum. I find windows the most complete with regards to keyboard navigation. There are only a few things that is won't do well. Mac OSX is a little clunky in this respect; like getting to the menu and navigating to a menu item. Linux (Gnome, KDE) has some of the basics but I find I can't do some cirital thinks without using the mouse. Computer config also helps though so my opinion is a bit unfair. My windows box is dual headed. Which is great to have for graphics and development work. My mac is just a laptop with limited resolution plus a frustrating keyboard. My inexperience with Mac also a cause of annoyance for me being a major PC user. PC's have shift, control and alt as their modifier keys. Macs have shift, control, option and splat keys; include 'fn' key for laptops as well as you need it to get to the pgdn, pgup, home and end buttons. I'm always getting the common keyboard combos wrong as I'm used to using control mainly instead splat and splat is where alt is on the pc. Plus behaviour differences don't help... Hrm... This is turning into a gripe. :P
I think most will end up saying the OS they used the most as they know it the best. Having to move to a new system will require a brain washing to unlearn all the habits.
I work with computers not on them...linux can hands down automate just about anything so linux it is...
Got Code?
Even though I enjoy working on Linux (CLI) more, I find I'm more productive on Mac OS X since I spend less of my time coding 5 minute useless programs (more effort to create XCode projects than makefiles) or playing Nethack...
-:sigma.SB
WARN
THERE IS ANOTHER SYSTEM
I'll be productive when the Hurd comes out.
As a Macintosh developer I strive to produce consistency in my applications for Mac OS X as do most other small/medium sized developers. This consistency, from Transmit to OmniGraffle to NewsFire, allows me to learn an app quickly and interact with it at the speed of thought without having to work around the GUI nonsense that plagued me back on Windows.
As for Linux, I think the only thing holding it back is that consistency. Many apps have different widgets, there is no QA to work out how to make tasks flow into each other and no one spends the time to say "hey, you should do it this way as that's the way $insertWindowManager says it should be done". I think egos do get in the road when it comes to ease of use whereas in a corporation there is a focus to make it simple and easy for the user, well Apple based corporation. Linux should copy Apple not Micorosoft. OpenOffice should not be a hodgepodge like Word, it should be simple and effective like Pages.
Don't get me started on Microsoft...
You're not stuck with one desktop if you're using Windows XP. Go
here to download the Virtual Desktop for Windows XP which allows your to manage four desktops.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/downloads/po
OSX is what I am most proficient with. When I want to do something where the GUI is not powerful enough like downloading a file and move it from one place to another on a regular basis as well as other things you can have cron do for you on a regular basis, you have BASH, Applescript and anything Linux can run. When I want to edit a video for my family, I use iLife '05 or Final Cut Pro. When I need to type a document, I can do it with Word. It has all the best things of UNIX wrapped with a purty GUI. What more can I ask for?
Gorkman
I tend to agree that saying that one OS is somehow universally makes people working in it more productive is quite a big nonsense. Even tho I personally like OS X, I know people that navigate through windows and do things in it faster than most people operate a mac or bash console. Noone stops you from being a total maniac operating Windows Explorer, and you'll have grounds to say that Windows boosts your productivity. But its never universal; I find it hard to believe that people still argue about this.
Emacs. It's also two letters more productive then a Mac. ;)
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
So now you decide which is more productive based on whether or not you think meetings are productive.
Basically: for pure development work which involves work in a text editor I like Linux. For anything else, especially if it requires a GUI or officey type stuff I'd use Windows.
And for personal use I like my Mac at home that gives me the best of both worlds.
Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
Mac is not a option, and I really really tried with Linux, but after 6 months I realised my development had dropped to practically nothing - I was spending all my time fighting half assed IDE's or debugging cryptic conf scripts etc.
Switched back to windows, reinstalled VC 6.0 and Delphi, was back in action.
which ever one they go to Slashdot in and reply to articles.
Less spyware, adware, viruses = faster processes, and an easier and smoother work environment.
As a programmer/DBA/Sys-admin, I prefer Linux (We're a small company).
As an amateur photographer, I prefer scanning & printing on Mac OS X; there are drivers for my slide scanner, and it's colour balanced. I prefer editing pictures on Linux; Cinepaint and PerlMagick make a powerful & flexible duo.
Fortunately, I have little spreadsheet requirements that can't be handled by gnumeric, so I have no use for windows.
1)No popups from background windows poping up in the front, like in firefox or safari. If there is a popup in a different tab's page, it will not popup in front if im not focused on that page.
2) Faster bootup time.
3) when I shut down my computer, I can just click shut down and go away. In windows sometimes there would be a popup waiting for me to click. So I can't leave unless I the blue windows screen.
4) Expose..enough said
5) I have been using this for more than a month now and my Mini only got stuck once. Once! take that windows!
6) No need to install anti-virus software (yet)
7) No worries about the registry hell!
8) I donno why but all the programs (not just apples) works the way they are suppose to work! This is a very strange feeling. In windows world, I never expected programs to run the way they are suppose to.
9) this is just a small thing I noticed, but in real player ( sorry I have to use it), suppose I'm watching a video and shut it down in the middle. The next time i start that video I will see a mark where I left off the last time. This is a small thing but, if you are regular video watch like I, this is very very helpful.
I can keep going and going and going, but seriously, I can't imagine why I did not switched sooner . I'm planning on getting imac pretty soon (and give my mac mini to my dad or something)
"There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people."--Howard Zinn
Best comment ever.
"Also, what is the best way to rate productivity in an OS?"
Wouldn't the answer to that simply be, "Whichever gets you the most work done?"
I don't like windows, but I can do my job the best with it because of the tools provided for windows. I rather use Linux or OSX for what I do, but I can't do my job as well with those even though I could probably do OS level things better. *shrugs*
Fromt the article:
" Colored Folder Labels
Initially I thought this was silly...until I started to use them. Just another way that I can get to my files faster on a Mac. If such a thing exists on Windows, I've never been able to find it. I use it to make folders that are not accessed enough to book mark directly, but that I occasionally need to get to more visible. Cuts down on the time it takes to do relevancy determination. "
This is exactly like Linux with the bash shell and colored folder, really usefull. See, this is the kinda thing that could make me switch.
This is a stolen sig.
Windows XP with...
- Cygwin, with the bin directory in the windows path, so I can use the tools in my...
- Command prompt, which I open with the CmdHere PowerTool
- Tortoise CVS, CuteFTP, EditPlus, and Putty.
- OpenOffice, FireFox and Thunderbird
- Adobe and Macromedia Suites
remove the applications and look at just the OS and what do you have?
Perhaps teh real question is not "What OS?" but rather "what total system are you more productive with?"
And a step beyond that is to ask "what whould you need to be more productive - in OS and Apps?"
I am more productive in Mac OS X because I don't have to give a single thought to viruses, trojans, spyware eradication, pop-up ads, or whether or not my firewall is working, or whether or not my anti-virus definitions are up to date, and especially I don't have to worry about whether or not my Web surfing, Usenet or email-attachment-opening habits are compromising the security of my machine.
I've used both Windows and Mac OS in a variety of flavors. Due to a lot of different factors, I've used Windows quite a bit more.
LSS: I think I'm more productive in Windows. And O don't want to suggest that OS X is bad by any means. I'm just used to the 'logic' (or as some Mac fans may say -- the lack thereof) of the way Windows is put together. When I'm on a Mac, I have to think harder about where things are. "Thinking different" in this case slows me down.
I spent a few weeks setting the dang thing up... getting windows under my control, hacking the registry and such (it won't boot in safe mode!!).
In the end though, firefox, thunderbird, MS Office, and adobe acrobat/photoshop are by far the fastest and most stable on a clean copy of XP (as long as you have a decent firewall!). I always had problems with crashing OS X MS Office, which cost me many hours of productivity...
would like to commemorate Black History Month
Black History Month was last month, and if dogs were extinct, the cat population would rise. Why are you trying to annihilate domestic animals? Do you jerks in these "trolling groups" and "anti-slash" live to create trouble? Are you so afraid of hate mail that you have to post anonymously? Were you molested by your parents at a young age or something?
Geez, asking a question like this was bound to draw out the Mac zealots. When reading this story's comments, keep in mind that out of all platforms, Mac users are by far the most zealous. Every comment they make sounds like something out of Apple's PR department. So far there are a lot of comments supporting OS X, but it's not like OS X is "the shit" nor is it the pinnacle of useability. Mac fans are just more likely to voice their opinions, while the rest of the world continues to work.
Pssssst.... they matter now. :)
-- There is no sig line, only Zuul.
The statement about bash is quite true. I have gotten used to it and prefer it over ksh, csh, etc. But I would say that regardless of what platform, as long as I have bash, it makes things a lot easier. I never liked Windows's version of history or its scripting language. So whether if I'm using OS X, or Windows (where I install cygwin) I use bash and it makes me more productive.
Irregardless of underlying platform.
To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
Why is Johnny Cash running around in the desert, and who's this bastard with a gun chasing him?
"The more corrupt the state, the more it legislates." - Tacitus
my SPEEDOS!
Oh, what?
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
I'm assuming you mean "CP/M" as Kaypro is a brand of computer not an OS.
Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
I feel most productive when not dealing with any form of computer aided system. DO IT YOURSELF PEOPLE!
...saying "its a mac!" than anything else
:-(", but never "my mac cost twice as much as your GNU/Linux box".
note: "its a mac" can be freely interchanged with "I love my mac", "my mac is better", "my mac has never crashed", "mac is based on BSD which is better than Linux", ocassionally "my mac is my best friend
j/k
I'd say that which is more productive for you is highly dependant on what you do. Computers are just tools. There is no one hardware/software that is the end all. When starting a task, one must spend a little (not too much) time deciding which tool is best for that task.
First off, the main problem she cites with GNU/Linux is her constant urge to upgrade, and how upgrading in the particular distribution she chose breaks things. By the time we reach the OS X-fawning section of the article, her urge to constantly upgrade seems to have completely vanished. If she's ok with sitting still on a single version of her desktop manager, the problems she mentioned with KDE simply vanish.
Second, the majority of the issues she complains about with Windows are settings. That means, if you don't like the way it's set up, you can just change it. Since many people obviously don't share her (somewhat bizarre) preferences, this can only be a good thing.
Lastly, I think I'll simply mention the fact that she refers to GUI design choices (which happen to align with her own ideas) as "logical." What a joke.
It so happens that the very features she's so gleeful about annoy me to no end. I wouldn't give up GNU/Linux running XFCE 4 for anything, but I certainly wouldn't spew a load of crap onto the internet about how "logical" the design choices in XFCE are, because that is, in itself, illogical.
Feelings, nothing more than feelings,
Trying to forget my feelings of love.
Teardrops rolling down on my face,
Trying to forget my feelings of love.
Feelings, for all my life I'll feel it.
I wish I've never met you, [OS of my dreams];
You'll never come again.
Feelings, wo-o-o feelings,
wo-o-o, feel you again in my arms.
----
Seriously, though. Have you heard of the Scientific Method, whereby one establishes an hypothesis and tests it? Feelings don't enter into it!
Feelings happen after the results are in and we argue about whether they're valid and how to interpret them. -- You've just jumped the gun here. First the testing, then the flamewars.
--- Corporations Are A Fad.
It is the best of both worlds, Windows does not come with a Bash shell but nothing stops me from ssh'ing from $2500 Windows gaming machine to a $45 Linux jump box.
Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
Really. I daily swap in and out between Solaris, WinXP, Linux and OS/2.
By far, OS/2 stays out of the way the most so I can focus on how to do the job within a particular application or task.
OS/2 is equally comfortable and useable either by pure command-line or pure GUI. Currently all the *NIX really suck if you wanted to go pure GUI.
(Go ahead, try one week without ever opening up a command-line prompt in *NIX and see how far you get).
WinXP, on the other hand, is a bitch when I go command-line, for whatever reason. Mostly because most of the tools, and Billy, don't expect the user to go there. Or something.
If I had to jump ship, I'd go OS X.
The author of the article states that Windows XP
has this feature as well. Can someone
tell me how to activate it as I've never been
able to and would love that functionality.
On the PC i've have to say BeOS, easily.
Co-worker re-boots;
Meanwhile all my work is done.
I go out and play!
Windows XP. As a CS student, you can't beat Office and Visual Studio.
Hikery.net - The best hiking site ever. Made by yours truly.
This topic is obviously an invitation to blatant OS advocacy, so here goes. I'm most productive in Linux, which for me mostly means xterms and fluxbox. When I use Windows, I feel like it's fighting me. Whatever task I'm focused on, I have to grit my teeth and charge through the hurricane of nonsense and distractions that Windows throws at me.
I seem to spend a lot of time painfully guiding Windows Explorer to the directory I want and visually scanning lists of things - usually files - for the element I want. In Linux I never have to scan. Grep and '/' are my friends.
In Windows XP, network mounted paths are not visible from the shell. What on earth is wrong with these people? Isn't it obvious that network filesystems are a sufficiently low-level concept that they should look like local filesystems from an application's viewpoint?
When I am coding in vi, roughly none of my attention goes to the editor - I can focus completely on the code and concepts. When I code in Visual Studio, I am much slower and more cautious, because it's so easy to screw up. If text is highlighted and I type a character, that text is erased. This means I always have to look for a highlight before typing. If I highlight text, realize it's off by a few chars, and redo it, Visual Studio thinks I'm trying to "drag" the text. The whole setup seems designed to erode speed and confidence.
Moving around in Visual Studio is so painful that I will often omit fixing cosmetic issues, while in vi I can navigate with less stress and effort, and only half an eye on the terminal.
And the VS "Project Settings" dialog is a perfect example of why GUIs don't work in reasonably complex domains. To pick just one highlight: under Project Settings/Link the "Object/library modules" text box contains libraries you're linking against. It's wide enough for about 6 file names, so horizontal scrolling is a must. There is no obvious way to search in this box. There are no obvious power tools, like vi-keys or emacs-keys to navigate this box. In a large project this can become a substantial text buffer which you must view and edit with the most primitive tools.
To think that someone must have considered this an improvement over a normal Makefile!
Sorry, but it's true. For most single-user tasks performed serially, cooperative multitasking is good enough. Mac OS X is still slow and ungainly in comparison (this is especially true for the Finder). Of course, for web and application development, OS X definitely blows everything else away.
Worst features? Do they still have the feature where you have to drag the disk icon to the trash can to eject it?
Sure, ask this question on Slashdot. It won't create a holy war/flame war/hurt feelings/lots of MS bashing.
(Personally? Palm OS and Windows XP)
If you are in a predominately *nix environment that it is usually much more productive to stay in that environment. Say i'm a server admin for a few linux box's well running xapp from a server is quite handy some times. Yes xwin32 or excied work in windows. Also simple things like ssh with key auth are easer to setup. yes i know putty does this too. But it one more addon app. Even gentoo at stage1 has ssh available. On the other side. In a window environment, It is easer and more productive to use windows, in may situations. sure linux works well, but not always. Gaming is the same way. I like my games in linux but not all of the games i play work there. Sure i feel more productive gaming on linux. Less os take down crashes like XP but not every game works. So back to the windows environment for productive in that game. Put it simple you need them all, for now, to be productive in a certain task.
Having spent time working in a mixed office and working with other mixed offices with a broad variety of tools. I've found that the Linux/Apple/MS zealots swear by their os and will spend great quantities of time espousing the benefits of the respective environments. Some of these (not all, and some workers not in this group) will also spend considerable time "tweaking" their workstation/applications.
If these would shut up and work they might approach the productivity levels of the people who don't care and just do their job.
Outside of the above group productivity appears to be unrelated to platform. Our biggest related time sink is getting applications to play nice with each other's formats. If we could standardize on a platform that would help, but it isn't an option for us.
As for myself, I was once a "tweaker" (on any of the big three platforms at one time or another) but eventually I just got bored and am now really *very* happy with my plain Jane WindowsXP box. The extent of my tweakery extends to my wallpaper and keeping my start menu somewhat under control.
As Guy Kawasaki once said (paraphrased) "I would love to argue platform advocacy with you, but I've got a check to cash."
But these days with virtually no free time and a 17 month old son I have lost all desire whatsoever to futz around with Linux.
I installed Debian briefly on a new PC, realised I'd have to spend several evenings dicking around with it to get everything configured properly and promptly rebooted Windows and erased the partitions.
Besides which, most of the OS tools (Apache, GIMP) and languages (Python) I care about have Windows ports these days anyway...
Linux
I think when a computer is connected to the internet, productivity nose dives.
------
insert sig here,here, and here
I generally prefer the sheer speed of AmigaOS 3 or 4 and for some reason I tend to be more productive when using an Amiga. That mostly means writing and drawing in my case.
For music I tend to use my powerbook since it has the almighty GarageBand and it ties my various devices together nicely (phone, pda). Since it also publishes my calendar on my homepage I have access to that from my Amiga too.
The beautiful thing is that they complement each other nicely. If I get tired of OS X's speed (or that of any other "modern" operating system) I simply go and work on the Amiga for a bit. If I need to see a specific website that the Amiga browsers can't handle for one reason or another I go use the powerbook. Often I find myself VNCing between the two though.
I guess when all is said and done, I spend more time producing stuff on the AmigaOne, so that gets my vote.
They make a beautiful pair.
I try to use only cross-platform tools for development, so I can stay equally productive in any OS. For me this means Firefox, jEdit, and any terminal app will do (I use SecureCRT on Windows). It's pretty easy to switch between either OS when needed.
I am far more productive under MacOS X than Windows XP. I also run Linux on my X86 box, but am not quite as productive since I spend a lot more time doing sysadmin and such than I do on the Mac.
:-)
One of the most telling factors is that I find myself trying to use my Exposé gestures on my X86 platform...
Personally I prefer linux, but I have been as productive on a win2k machine after a couple of days setting it up (what else do you do in a new job before you have any work assigned?).
It all comes down to the application - if you need an application that only runs on a single OS, that's what you use - and you can then run your other stuff over the network with X. If you are using the thing as a glass typewriter you don't need MS word - there are thousands of substitutes going back decades, and most word procesing programs written in the last fifteen years have most of their menu entries in around the same place.
Where I work everyone, even the secretary, needs X - so any new desktop machine has linux on it and sometimes win4lin with MSOffice. The stumbling point was powerpoint, but OpenOffice.org seems to have better support for that now. I haven't looked at cygwins version of X for more than a year, but since I haven't had to buy any more copies of Exceed for MS Windows that probably doesn't matter.
I mean, she makes the argument that OSX is a more productive environment because it has better icons
Icons under OS X are 128x128-pixel, infinitely scaleable images.
I know you're thinking "oooh...pretty colors...shiny..." so I'll spell it out for you:
- Bigger icons are easier to see and click
- Higher resolution icons are easier to differentiate
- Scaling icons allows you to take advantage of the above benefits while conserving screen real estate.
Any questions?
I for one am very happy with my inverted Swahili hand-gesturing system. Sure, it takes 27 hand gestures to start an email, but after two weeks now I am able to open beers with just my pinkies.
And the important thing is that Bill Gates and Microsoft had nothing to do with it. Those evil bastards.
I can use Finder, Gnome, or KDE, or often time a combination of them at the same time, on my PowerBook.
Fink and DarwinPorts allow KDE and Gnome to be installed on OSX, and you then use X11 to run them.
Writing music. Specifically, doing MIDI sequencing.
For that it was superb. The crisp mono monitor, the fact the OS was single tasking so I didn't get distracted by anything else...excellent. Yes, single-tasking is being proffered as an advantage here.
For general use it has to be OS X, for server use it's Debian, but in this one area alone I'm going to hold out for the old school.
Cheers,
Ian
OS X. Without question. I'm a recent switcher (thanks to the Mini, from KDE, which I thought was really nice, and still think is the next best thing) and OS X just blows everything else out of the water. Until you actually experience it, it's all too easy to underestimate the advantages of consistency and simplicity. But under OS X, everything just works the way I expect it to, and does so with a minimum of fuss.
Now getting used to things actually working the way you expect... That is a challenge.
(Okay, except for cursor navigation keys. Those have taken some getting used to, but that took less than a week.)
If you doubt the utility of OS X for programming, you've never used SubEthaEdit.
... but, for my part, I am most productive in a spartan environment with no eye candy and no distractions - for me this means the linux console or some minimalist, boring wm like fluxbox or fvwm.
When in KDE, or Gnome I find I'm fiddling with doo-dads and thingy bobs more than getting anything done.
Windows is simply out of the question; there are too many barriers to usage and too much "can't get there from here" bullshit going on.
I never thought about productivity in terms of the opperating system, rather than the programs opperating in the system. Certainly an interesting point tho, yet very hard to come up with some kind of metric to measure this by. Most of it's probably pyschological - if you dressed Win XP/*nix as MAC OS X then i'm sure a similar effect would be achieved.
what is the best way to rate productivity in an OS?
Here's how not to: post to Ask Slashdot and see which OS garners the most fanboy posts.
How can anyone rate "productivity" anyway?
A person may completely believe he's being as productive as he possibly can each and everyday - yet, his boss can fire him at any time for "not being productive"; the two individuals views on productivity are completely different. Therefore, who is it that determines just which one is being more productive? Perhaps, they both are being exteremely productive, just in several different areas... blah blah blah, anyway, what i'm getting at is this is a pretty stupid topic.
i like to talk to my computer, not prod it like cattle.
- good command line interface - Particularly I use tcsh, but anything equally powerful would do. I do all file operations through command line. I can't stand watching people on Linux go through the file browsers when just typing the commands would be so much faster. Also, if I need to quickly extract data from one file and rearrange it, I usually do this with a long piped command line (my obsessive nature makes script writing a long task).
- practical windows management - I keep too many windows open to not have good WM. Basically, I need to be able to get to any one of my 20+ windows with the flick of my wrist. I use multiple desktops in KDE so I never have to minimize a window. I also have active borders turned on to hop between desktops with only mouse movement (Uh oh, I hear footsteps, back to my work desktop instead of
/.). I suppose something like OSX's expose' would work as well, but I haven't tested it out.
I must admit that I'm inticed by OSX's eye candy features. But all I have are x86 machines, and I'm not about to go buy a mac because I want to toy around with it. So I must wait till some X replacement starts stealing Mac's cool features.The ultimate goal of science is to unify all forces of nature to a single law that can be silk-screened onto a T-shirt.
Productivity would depend on the task at hand (and a lot of other factors).
If you were pampered by the features of decent shells with the usual Unix toolkit, you might find yourself less productive trying to do commandline intensive tasks and some kinds of automation in Windows.
The new improved shell features are nowhere near that of Bash or Tcsh and the problem is worse in company environments where you need to go to the IT department to get each piece of software running.
But, on the other hand, in the case of certain types of software that are only available on Windows, trying to make a half-working or equivalent work on Linux would be a big hit on productivity.
What matters is the toolset that you need for increased prdouctivity is available.
Another way to increase productivity is practice, but you lose productivity on the way to becoming an expert in a particular system.
Essentially, it 'depends'.
Blah blah blah windows unstable spyware gates eats christian babies blah blah macs are the best because I argue about it and lose all my friends in the process blah blah linux (insert bash prompt/beowulf joke here) I fear mice because my mom was eaten by one blah blah
Seriously, this 'article' is like Hitler walking into a synagogue asking, "Who wants to kick me in the nuts!?!?" I mean, was there any doubt what the outcome was going to be?
The OS that I am most productive in is also the only OS I have; and that is Linux... Fedora Core 3 and Mandrakelinux 10.1 PowerPack to be exact.
How do I rate productivity in an OS?
Being able to do everything I need to do while being as secure as possible with the fewest problems.
Office work, internet work, communications, graphics design, software design, multimedia. Linux has it all and it was totally free of charge. Linux is perfect, IMHO.
Out of all OSes, I feel the most productive in FreeBSD. FreeBSD has just about everything that I need in order to be productive. I use Window Maker as my window manager and applications such as the GIMP, Firefox, AbiWord, and Gnumeric every day. FreeBSD is also a superb development platform. It comes with all of the development tools that I need.
FreeBSD also comes with a very good package/port/dependency resolution system. Say I want to install the latest version of Firefox. All I have to do is cd into /usr/ports/www/firefox, type make install clean, and boom! Firefox is compiled and installed, dependencies included. Don't feel like compiling? Just type pkg_add -r firefox and it (as well as dependencies) will be fetched and installed as well). Just about everything (except for Java) is easy to install using ports and pacakges in FreeBSD.
Finally, FreeBSD has just about the best documentation there is. Anytime I am stuck with anything, I have the FreeBSD Handbook and other handbooks and articles on my computer. FreeBSD even comes with historical BSD documentation back from the days of 4.3BSD and 4.4BSD, which is also occasionally helpful. They are very thorough and in depth. The man pages are also very well written and one can actually learn from them.
I've used many OSes over the years: MS-DOS, Windows 95/98, Windows NT/2000/XP, Classic Mac OS, Mac OS X, Slackware Linux, Red Hat Linux, and FreeBSD 5.x. I know how to use every one of them and I feel/felt productive in all of them (even DOS to an extent), but the one that I feel the most productive in is FreeBSD, even though I like Linux and I am very fond of Mac OS X (I wonder how Unix-like is OS X; I don't own a OS X-capable Mac). I'll probably be very productive in NetBSD or OpenBSD as well. As a aspiring computer science student, I find that learning FreeBSD has been a great experience, and it taught me a lot of things about computing in general that I would have never learned by sticking with Windows.
Having multiple desktops that switch fast with easy shortcut keys make me work tons faster. Also having a large screen resolution to have as many apps open at once is a large increase as well. I don't use OSX (would like to), but for Unix Server Managment using a Unix Like OS is far easier than using a Winodws OS.
Yes...especially if your target audience is kids with iPods.
No reason to lie.
after at least six or seven years of tinkering and playing on a computer, I one day found out that what I had just done was totally different from everything I had previously done; I had actually done something useful on my computer (written a CV). Since then I haveseldomfelt the same sensation, but it doesn't matter, I'm running Linux, everything I now do will be useful once we replace all those legacy systems (windows & mac).
A computer is a tool, but I am not. I use Linux
What do you mean vi is not an OS?!?
Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
I have tweaked Gnome to look like OSX, and I installed wine to make it act a little like Windows.
The only conclusion I can draw from this is that all operating systems suck... Linux just sucks less.
I recently switched from WinXP to Gentoo linux. Although I really love Gentoo, and I'd like to say that I'm more "productive" with linux, I must admit that I was more productive on WinXP.
:)
I think that it is because in order to be productive on linux, you *must* know all the command line stuff by heart. I am not 100% comfortable with these commands yet, but I'm pretty confident that once I'm used to them, I'll be more productive under linux.
I must also say that I was pretty hardcore in my choice of WM (I use ratpoison, and I love it) for a linux beginner. It might slow my productivity gain under linux.
About "Productivity": I think it's meaningless. I mean, when I code, the OS I code under doesn't really hinder or enhance my productivity. The IDE is more likely to do so.
Beside, I gladly give some of my productivity (temporary) for the uber-coolness of the gentoo portage system
perception is reality
Historically speaking, I'd say I've been most productive using OS/2. I don't use it much these days however, and spend most of my time now using either Linux or Windows.
Between Linux and Windows, I'd say I find Linux more productive, if for no other reason that the fact that it has a proper shell (for the sake of argument, I'm assuming "pure" os'es not Windows + Cygwin, etc.).
That said, I do miss Textpad and a few other Win only programs when I'm working on a Linux box.
// TODO: Insert Cool Sig
For example, I find RegExBuddy to be the best regular expression tool out there. While I'm an avid fan / user of OS X, and loathe Windows, the fact that the tool works so well makes me forget I'm using Windows and instead focus on the task at hand. At home, I use Virtual PC to run the app.
I think at some point, useful GUI features like Expose and such take a second seat to the time actually spent in the application. Do I think a feature like Expose is amazing in manipulating a *lot* of Windows? Sure. Can I make do without when an application is good enough. Sure.
I find that I am most productive with a pencil and paper...
No viruses save my cold, no e-mails, no messaenger as I turn off the phone, no 'out of memory' as when it happens I shparpen the pencil.
Granted each OS has its good and bads, I love Linux for surfing the net etc, Windows for doing my 3D Max stuff and Mac for looking good on my desk.
I consider the OS as the wood around the lead of the pencil. It can be a cheep yellow pencil or a $1000 MontBlanc, either way it is only a tool and if YOU don't have the wherewithall to create, the ease of use or value of the tool will not help you. Case in point, how many crappy drivers own expensive cars?
I LIKE MACS, DO YOU LIKE MACS TOO?
/. here, isn't it?....
Unusual article for
Im a huge fan of Linux and an even bigger fan of Gentoo Linux. I run fluxbox and I am incredibly fast with the prompt. The reason I say Gentoo and not just Linux is I like how I can really customize it and portage is amazing. Ive used many other distros but Gentoo is the best. Windows always crashes on(XP 2k what ever) and always has some kind of problem, and Mac OS X is more gui oriented while im more prompt. There isnt one single app on OS X that I would use instead of the apps I use on Linux.
How much work can you do on said platform in a given amount of time, period. If you are a writter, how many projects can produce on your computer in one day (3 pages of an essay, 5 of a fiction, one publicity, 10...). Do this on all platform, now you just measured productivity on each platform, all of them being unequal some type of work will make one platform seems more productive than the other.
.wav and then compress it (do not compress right away if you need to make change you have to start the whole process again). A huge job, huge, it would have taken me hours to complete. I tried doing this professionnally, like I do in studio with real audio software and processors, means, make regions, move end and start point at will without risking a deselect, and export region as whatever format you wish... couldn't, all audio software on the PC do regions (regions is a standard in audio, several file format supports it...)but none actually is programmed to handle them intelligently, none, and I know a lot of audio wares. Entirely fed up with my experience I went back on my old G3 500MHz iBook Mac, a feeble beast compared to my 3.4GHz P4, 1GB ram, raptor hard drive PC, well, one hour later it was over... It might not be a speedy beast but the os let me do lots of stuff much more intelligently and fluently than Windows, so I opened the file in Peak, created regions and exported the regions as .mp3 in a folder (one menu selection and a save dialog), burned the file contained in said folder, one hour, I was at my third one on the PC...
My case is simple, MacOsX (I'm writting this off a PC, my PC, I don't do computer religion sry) is the most productive environment for me, all fields confounded. MacOsX is thought as an os you work with, not something that tries to please everyone, and it doesnt please everyone, and thats why its a productive environment, it cather to a crowd and do it very well. In terms of market share, as far as the consummer is concerned, less is more. Why do I own a PC then? Games... not really about productivity...
Example: even though there are countless amount of me too audio wares on the PC none of them is decent to my liking. After 3 hours in Wavelab (one of the only pro audio editors on the PC, Sony Sound Forge not being what it once was... yep its not Sonic Foundry anymore...)trying to separate a long audio file into several tracks I gave up, I had to select the exact part I wanted, copy it and paste it in a new document (nevermind that to do an good selection you have to be zoomed in your waveform and can't see the start and the end at the same time, so you start and select a huge chunk, then zoom in, scroll to the begin or end, move the start/end point to the right place wishing real hard that you don't inadvertently click elsewhere and deselect...), then I had to save it as a
When it needs to be up and *stay up* there is no substitute for FreeBSD 4.x
I am very easy to get along with, but I don't have time to waste being nice to people who are being stupid. -Theo
I have a windows XP box, a Mac mini, and a cheapo generic linux box. I use them all for my software projects, and I find that they all have their merits. However, if you force me to rate them on productivity:
;P
I can write the most lines per day on the windows box. I estimate that I code about twice as fast in visual studio (windows) than in vi (cygwin, mac, linux). Granted, this is largely due visual studio's productivity features. I might be just as productive if I knew the right tools for mac or linux. And by right tools I mean smooth function name and class member completion, integrated documentation/man pages, integrated debugger, etc. Using vi + man/info + find/grep + gdb works, but it's quite a bit slower than visual studio.
For reference: With visual studio I typically churn out around 1000-2000 lines/day on new development. On rare occasion I've been known to do over 10,000 lines in a weekend. There's no way on earth I could put out 5000 lines in a single day with vi -- well besides yank/paste.
There's no single perfect answer to this question...
If I'm playing videogames, I get more out of using Windows.
If I'm messing around with coding or harware design (geda, icarus, Eagle PCB) I'm happier in Linux or Solaris. (I use Solaris for hardware stuff at work, Linux at home) I've got a MythTV box running on Linux, I had previously tried various similar software packages running under Windows 98SE, then 2000, and they proved too unstable to be suitable to the task, though I got into Linux before trying XP on that setup.
If I'm reading email, I prefer to use a platform we're not allowed to talk about on Slashdot lest a raging pile of "It's dead! It's dead!" monkeys go berzerk. I'm also involved with developing software for this un-named OS, and tend to boot into it for this specific development rather than cross-compile from a Linux host. This particular code is rather small and doesn't get any real benefit from being compiled on my Linux machines with faster CPUs.
Arachne is a pretty good, and there's lynx (I think "Bobcat" was a version of lynx for DOS.) You're make the rest of us look bad by being more productive. Cut it out!
An OS without an access to Slashdot must be *extremely* productive.
perception is reality
My desktop is windows, but most of my work is through ssh connected to various linux boxes.
This is just such a ridiculously written article. The few legitimate examples provided in the article are found in the section discussing OSX. Some points of contention:
Personally, I find the Start Menu to be completely useless. And for the record, I didn't like the Apple Menu, so beloved to OS 9 users either.
What the fuck does that mean? I love the Start Menu. Especially the part where it has my most frequently used programs - that thing is a godsave. It seems like the author just isn't used to windows and so is bashing everything on sight.
The tree view causes more useless motion and mouse clicks than anything else in the whole interface.
Actually, the tree view is something that is intuitive, since our filesystem is organized in a hierarchical form. What the hell else do you want? If you don't want the tree view and prefer double-clicking your way through every single folder in your path, you can do that too.
Seeing Desktop and My Documents at the top of the hierarchy, above My Computer, still sends my brain into tailspins. My Documents and My Computer at the same level...huh????
Actually, no it doesn't send my brain into a tailspin you retard. Having My Documents there is easy for non-computer folks so that they can have easy access. And for the record, the actual My Documents is found on C:/Documents and Settings/UserName/My Documents so it's not a random magical folder at the top of the chain - it makes complete sense to have a quick-access shortcut.
Why do I need this moronic , multi screen wizard just to find a file????? Why does it ask me what type of document I'm searching for? More unnecessary decisions to make.
What the fuck does that mean? I want it to ask for what type of document in case I want to search only for movies or something. It is absolutely useful - if you want a general search, you can do that too!
On the Mac, the icons are so crisp and clear and realistic, that most actually convey meaning to me. The ones that don't immediately convey meaning are easy for me to remember due to their shear impressiveness.
Wow what a scientific analysis you made. Crisp, clear, and realistic. Well I for one have no problem confusing the Recycle Bin with My Computer or My Documents. Only a retarded idiot who is trying desperately to say windows sucks no matter what would point this out. Remembering Windows icons is very easy, and I am completely accustomed to it. I wonder if the author of this article has ever used windows for prolonged periods of time.
ONTO THE BONUSES OF OS X. But before I begin showing more examples of why the author is a moron, let me tell you that I do absolutely admire the OS X interface, and think it is very slick and intuitive. I am not a MAC HATER or anything like that. I am only trying to reduce the blind hate of Windows that seems to be abundant in this article.
It is powered by pure drag and drop. When I drag stuff off of the Finder Sidebar, it goes away. On Windows, a useless link is left I my desktop that I've got to get rid of.
Some people see the dragging off to create a new shortcut as a feature in windows. I would find it annoying on OS X if that deleted it, simply because I am not used to it. This doesn't mean either OS is bad, each has its own way of doing it - just because one is different doesn't make it bad.
I just enter my search string and away it goes..no questions, no wizards, no dialogs, no thinking. And back it comes with everything that qualifies, regardless of document type. I can't wait to see what Spotlight adds to what is already powerful and simple.
Again, you can do blind searches in windows too, without regards to file type.
The absence of a Windows-style tree view bothers me not a bit. I don't even think about using it on my Mac. I know my directory structure and I've bookmarked all of the important places in the Finder sidebar. No need to ever waste time navigating up and down the tr
I tend to get the most work done in Linux, and specifically using KDE. If it weren't for the couple of commercial Linux-only apps that I use, I suppose I could use any *nix that can run X and KDE.
The features I miss when I use a Mac or Win Box: virtual desktops; auto copying and middle-click pasting; the control key working as expected; built-in graphical CVS front end; ability to CTRL-ALT-BKSP my way out of a stuck GUI; HTTP, HTTPS, FTP, SFTP, NFS, and SMB all from the same file management windows; simple key commands like CTRL-D that give me a duplicate file manager window (I really love that one).
While I realize everyone develops their own workflow on their platform of choice, I really do feel alienated and weighed-down when I'm not on a Linux box.
being able to open up an xterm and apt-get make linux my system of choice.
the only thing that is missing for me : i wish e-onsoftware would release a linux port of their vue software...
living the dream
I hate my mac. I set the thing up, power it on and it just works. I don't need to install all kinds of software, upgrade drivers and put on millions of security updates? I mean, without those, what's the point?
Here is just one example. I use wireless to connect to the internet. Usually, I have "connection sharing" enabled so that the ethernet serves DHCP to a slave computer. Now and then I don't have access to wireless, so I have to reconfigure the ethernet *and* the wireless.
How? With XP (classic mode):
Start
settings
network-and-dialup-connections
wireless connection
properties
advanced
unclick "allow other network users to connect through this computer's internet connection"
OK
Close
(wait a long time)
local area network
internet protocol (TCP/IP)
properties
obtain IP address automatically
obtain DNS server addresses
OK
OK
(wait a long time) I've done that a hundred times. If only I could type it into a script.
But I can't. Although somebody probably post some arcane way to do it in this particular instance, that won't enable me to write scripts to walk through the myriad of other gui mazes that Windows throws at me.
Linux, Unix, OS/X any day. Windows with Cygwin, if I must.
I am an avid fan of linux and work on several boxes all with linux on them. Personally, I am more productive on linux than anything else but I am constantly bothered by my co-workers who use windows machines. I spend little time with the mac users vs. the 8 hours a week solving problems with people unable to print, wireless not working, installing software, virus checking, etc on windows (even XP). This would not be a big deal if I were the system admin and not a grad student but that is another complaint.
My basic observation is the majority of people know less about hardware and operating systems than they think. Macs are easier to get basic work done and encounter fewer problems. They have their downsides that have kept me from switching as well as the problems with supported software and they tend to cost more but if I were being paid by the hour this would be a big expense on our research group.
I have secretly hidden some mispelled words in this post. Can you find them?
The unfortunate reality is that I need both. I do the majority of my technical work from Linux and the business bits from WinXP. If I could get a mac at work, I'd just use that, but...you know how that goes.
Ciao,
-C
"This above all, to thine own self be true"
I rate how productive I feel on an OS based on how much effort it takes to do simple tasks and to jack around with the filesystem - everything else is more a question of applications. (Yeah yeah, I know that the culture provides different experiences with the apps, too, but I have enough of a problem with keyboard dysentery withou having to talk about that, too.)
I regularly work with OS X, Windows, KDE, and WindowMaker, and here is what I think of the first three. (For the sake of disclosure, I was definite Mac hater three years ago, I have had vague feelings of annoyance with Windows going back at least 7 years, and I have never been a fan of Gnome or KDE - I use WindowMaker on my home PC.)
On Windows, it takes a lot of effort to do simple things. Even bringing up an extra Explorer window seems to take a lot of time, because I can't seem to find a good keyboard command or menu item for it. (If there are, Windows fails at making them easy to find.) Navigating the filesystem takes time, because there doesn't seem to be a way to make the places I go most accessible from anywhere. "My Computer" seems to be in a different place (sometimes the Start menu, sometimes the desktop) on every @#$@% computer in the office. Functionality is hidden in random places, and menu items seem to never be hidden under the most appropriate menu. I can't drag and drop things I think I should logically be able to drag and drop, and the alt-tab twitcher completely fails to allow me to switch between applications quickly and seamlessly. Worst of all, it pops up dialogs for things that I don't think should require dialog pop-ups - I hate it when I eject my USB key (which takes too many clicks) and go back to some task (which takes too many clicks) and am just starting to re-orient my attention when Windows throws it all away by throwing up a dialog that tells me my USB key has been unmounted and requires a click to close. The overall effect makes me feel like Windows is hell-bent on wasting my time a second or two at a time and slowly destroying my ability to concentrate.
KDE and GNOME aren't much better. In fact, they're worse - they feel a lot like Windows, only even more disorganized, less consistent, and less logically arranged. The file managers are all half-implemented, and drag-and-drop is barely given a nod. It doesn't help that I find myself constantly dropping to the command line to do simple things that should have an easy GUI equivalent - kill and ps, for example.
OS X isn't perfect, but it's shangri-la compared to the rest. I love that document-oriented apps give you an icon in the window's title bar that acts as a proxy for the file that is open in that window, meaning I can send a document I'm working on to someone else via e-mail without having to waste my time hunting for it in the filesystem. There are keyboard commands for EVERYTHING, and it is easy to find them, I love that. The shelf is a thing of beauty - I think that it is a bit half-implemented, but it's far and away better than anything that any other popular GUI can provide. Expose took some getting used to, but now I can say that it rocks my butt off, and I miss it when I am using other OSes. (I used to use Codetek VirtualDesktop. I still run it, but I rarely use it unless I decide that I need to grab a clean sandbox real quick.) The Dock isn't without its problems either (its handling of placing files in the Dock is just completely broken), but it crams a lot of useful information into a small space, and takes a lot less staring and thinking to figure out what you want to know from it than a taskbar. It doesn't tell you about individual windows, and I have grown to like that - when I work, my mental state tree goes application first, window second, and OS X follows this mental flow. Besides, the window I want is usually on the top of the display after I click on an app's icon, because it is usually the window in that app that I was using the most recently. By contrast, the Windows Taskbar feels like it is jumping the gun. And when I want a window instead of an app, I use Expose, and it's easier and faster than having to deal with the taskbar, which gets real cluttered real fast.
I'm most productive using Windows because I know it the best.
No matter how good Linux/OSX are, it would take my a very long time to become more productive with them.
What could be simpler, you want to initialize (format) a disk, hit "i", you want to copy a file, hit "c" Sure you're limited to only 26 functions, but who cares, it always worked!
What can I say? I've been using UNIX since before there was a Windows and I've always been a DOS command line user too. Microsoft's insistence that everything now be done through the GUI usually ends up pissing me off. I still end up doing most stuff through the command prompt in Linux, too.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
The Mac is much more productive. But I wont use it until I better kde support. Until then I won't spend the time to fix the Home/End keys and other anoyances.
-- I was raised on the command line, bitch
Ok, fine, geeks. Yes, MS is bad and we should ALL hate Windows. Whatever. The fact is OS X BLOWS in terms of productivity. Main reason? Simple window management. Take for example the common file menu. Given 2 monitors (which I require to be more productive) the file menu for any single application remains in the same top portion of the primary monitor despite the current monitor of the currently focused application. Do you realize how much more movement my mouse has to endure to use that menu? Your basic Linux/Windows configs keep file menus with the application window. And speaking of the application window... OS X basically has none. Instead, what you get is floating panels. Open a few apps and you have a crap-load of floating panels all of which seem to float together in one big mess. It's confusing, annoying and hinders drag & drop functionality. And on that same principle, OS X has no maximize option. It has a resize option, but it does not maximize. In fact, I can't say I honestly know what it does in working with macs since OS 7.1 other than it can give me access to my resize corner if it's out of reach. What? Out of reach? That's right. OS X provides only the lower right corner for resizing windows. At times, this can be unreachable at which point the resize option is necessary to get it back. Once it's again visible, it can be used to resize the window as needed. But of course, then, you need to move your window to its desired location. Given Linux/Windows, I can resize a window from any edge. What can be as little as one drag to increase the height of a window (such as a video editor timeline) you instead require two. Once to move the window up and the other to resize its lower edge back down. More mouse movement, thank you OS X. Luckily, given all that crap, Apple had some smarts enough to introduce EXPOSE which can be as annoying to use as it is helpful. There is a lot more but I'm sure everyone already knows despite their blind ability to accept them simply because Mac is now *nix and therefore great. Give me my Windows box over a Mac any day.
It really depends on where you are working and I think it has been said already anyway so I'm redundant because I don't have time to keep hitting refresh until a new article comes up so I can be the first to post.
That said, I have users of WindowsXP and MacOS9 and MacOSX. They both do two different types of work otherwise they'd all be on Windows. The graphics and layout people (on Mac) are basically the most stupid users I have ever supported but they are also pretty good at what they do. And the point of MacOS has always been to let people do what they want to do, not learn about computers.
That said, the PC users generally do just fine as well with their apps. As GUI as we try to make Windows, it's still very text-centric somehow and as a result is very effective and word processing, spreadsheets and the like.
And an interesting asside: WindowsXP runs DOS apps better than MacOSX runs MacOS9 apps. In both worlds I have to support some really old software on the newer platforms. I look forward to dumping Windows in our network, but giving the devil its due, WindowsXP does a pretty nice job of making old and new stuff alike run pretty well.
Thats where I am most productive. Bind ^Meta1-space to wmterm, ^Meta1-m to firefox, ^Meta1-o to OpenOffice.org, and all my other commonly used apps to other things. ^Meta1-{1-0} bind themselves to the current window, allowing me to switch back to said window quickly. Simple interface (only need a close button and iconify), monitors, multiple desktops, etc. Root menus and appicons are far better for me than the stupid taskbar and start menu. Window Maker has always just felt right to me.
-- 4 8 15 16 23 42
How do you do that without root. I have yet to see any out there.
I've used Windows and Linux for years, and am intimately familiar with both. As for which is more productive, it depends on what I'm doing. For GUI intensive tasks, Windows is slicker, more responsive, has better keyboard shortcuts and is more consistant (arguably you could say I'm more familiar with the Windows GUI than the ever changing KDE/Gnome environments, plus I'm forced to use Windows at work). For working at the command line level, obviously Linux is way more powerfull. I get by on the windows command line with Cygwin, which is a life saver. For developement, it's sort of a toss up, there are strengths to each OS, but I feel more comfortable in Linux. I've been really curious to try a Mac, I think it should have the best of both worlds, you have a great GUI and the UNIX shell. Definately sounds cool.
Why isn't this just a poll?
GNU/Windows. WinXP with Cygwin.
My desktop machine is running windows XP, which runs all the office and game applications I need. A lot of specialty apps in my field run only on windows or solaris, so I picked the one that can also run half-life 2 after the kids are asleep.
I connect to a server running Linux because that serves as a platform for different applications. I know exactly what it's going to do, and the rich set of utilities fits well with my work. I can filter and manipilate data very quickly and interact with network gear without a lot of poorly-integrated third-party apps.
I've played a little with OSX, and I was impressed with it visually and the level "seamless" behavior. But it doesn't support the business applications I need and few of the games I like to play.
That said, the low price of the "mac mini" is tempting indeed. I'd like a desktop system that can run a browser, a basic spreadsheet and word processor, without the heat and noise of a typical intel box. When I'm feeling rich I might just get one to see if the bug bites me.
At the risk of being called a troll, I'd like to say that trying to do all my work on a 128MB linux laptop really sucks. I love firefox, vim, xemacs, I program in perl too. Since I'm installing the latest openoffice too this might be useful but I would just like to say that unless you have one of the latest machines don't even think of linux and productivity in the same breath if you are talking about interoperability with your colleagues who are on windows. My machines crashes so many times it isn't funny, and this was trying to make Powerpoint slides, or export to Word doesn't work right, anyway these were using OpenOffice 1.6.92 which is now obsolete. Anyway 128MB is not enough to even run KDE without constantly waiting, so I use windowmaker now. I would love to get a new fast machine but I have to say that when I sat down yesterday in front of a Windows 98 machine with 128MB and Office on it I shuddered to realize that I was exhaling a breath of thanks. This from a Mac and Linux lover and hater of Microsoft! Office may suck but it works and is the only reason to use Windows. If this latest OpenOffice cuts it (and I can close the bug reports I've submitted) then I will be a much happier camper. But most new things for linux seem to imagine that you have a machine that a few years ago would have broken the bank.
I sysadmin Linux and w2k servers for a living. Plus babysit an awful hodgepodge of Windows desktops. I have at my desk w2k and ubuntu with KVM switch and my laptop is an iBook running OSX. Granted OSX handles wireless the best, but I certainly don't feel the most productive using it. In fact it is the most irritating to me. Otherwise it is a toss up between w2k and ubuntu, but if I had to have just one, it would certainly be Linux.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
What I find to have the biggest impact are all the little things. For example, in OS X if you double click a word you select the whole word. If you double-click and drag you select entire words at a time. In windows, if you double click and drag you auto-select the whole first word but then go right back to letter-by-letter selection. The OS X saves so many little mousestrokes and careful movements that it really does add up.
The moral of the story is that small decisions in the UI add up to crucial differences. Apple knows this, M$ doesn't. I would argue (though I'm far from an expert) that linux has the potential to make these decisions correctly but is currently hobbled by a good amount of unix/X11 backward-compatibility issues, which is understandable.
Note that all this hinges on your very first OS X action being to throw away the one-button mouse. Stupidest thing ever (but it's ok because regular mice are fully supported, if they weren't I would never touch the mac). Even Raskin (RIP) regretted the one-button decision.
Of course if the application only runs on one OS, and that OS has other problems that make it less than reliable or that demand time over and above the absolute minimum to get the system functional in the first place and back up application data ongoing, then that's another thing altogether.
My favourite application over the past 20+ years is one called filePro (16+) which started off as Profile on Radio Shack micros, notably the Model II (8" floppies and a Z80 with 64K RAM)
Over the intervening years I and my customers have migrated applications written with this system as well as data entered into them from TRS-dos to Xenix on RS model 16, to Xenix on Altos to Unix on Altos to Unix on x86 PC, to Linux on i686 and not had to re-enter anything or (with the exception of a couple of records in one customer's database that got missed in a record expansion) lost any records (or even worse, had to re-input them). One customer has records dating back to 1983 and still has access to them from his multi-location business now served by a Linux box - same data, same screen layouts, same back-end processing.
The point is that the application is fast, useful, keyboard oriented, easy to use and modify, works on everything from old hardware to the latest (including DEC Vax) and even runs on Windows of various flavors if you are truly perverse ;)
But the really great thing about it is that IT DOESN'T USE A GUI - it is text based.
I recall another (accounting) application many of my customers have used for years - that shortly after Windows 3.1 came out added a GUI version - and has pretty much dropped all pretext of being backwards compatible with the older text "shortcuts". It used to be that you could sit with a pile of receipts and bang them into the program without even looking at the screen - never taking your hands off the keyboard.
Now you have to take a hand away from the keyboard, grab the mouse and navigate to a button to store each and every transaction - getting only 10% or less productivity.
Now that DOS compatibility is pretty much gone from Window they can't even run the old code (not supported though it is); except - - hey - - is dosemu still around on Linux????
Been there, done that, paid for the T-shirt
and didn't get it
Linux. All I do is play games when I'm booted into Windows.
...On the other hand, I could always argue that games are productive, as they increase my hand-eye coordination...
...Had this been an actual emergency, we would have fled in terror, and you would not have been informed.
Well, it would be if they would only just finally deliver my stupid Mac Mini!
dominionrd.blogspot.com - Restaurants on
winXP = more productive.
http://www.theunrivaled.com
the best way to rate productivity in an OS is by how easy the OS is to anthropomorphize. ("It wants me to use it!")
Productivity for me means how quickly I can do a job and just focus on work-related stuff.
.rc file to make something look like the computers on star trek ;)
For me it's OS X.
I've played with Windows long enough and I suffered from needing to customize it just right and always ending up with a machine that just wasn't stable or fun to use.
I migrated to Linux when I found most of what I needed on it. Linux was a blackhole for time, because it was always neat if you could get it to do stuff that Windows could do (e.g. play DVDs print connect to windows share, etc).
Finally I got a Powerbook a few years back. I have all the fun stuff linux provided me, Gimp, a terminal, etc plus a good selection of apps, and things like Office which let me work with other people who use office. I like it and I've always been able to work between apps pretty easily as a programmer and web developer.
A lot of this is due to a nice clean CONSISTANT interface, and a lot is also due to it not crashing or me wanting to spend hours because I can edit an
-d
http://davedash.com/
Obviously Access just doesn't run on the Mac, and VPC 7 with XP is so slow that I don't bother.
My Mac is always my principal machine. But... I do a LOT of data crunching at work on XP in Excel that I wouldn't want to do on the Mac. I used the Alt shortcut keys by reflex, and they just don't exist on the Mac version.
--Jim (me)
If you want to benefit from it without learning it, you can use a number of GUIs. Scientific Workplace on win32 (commercial, but good to push on those using Word) or LyX (F/OSS) for nearly any platform or many others. Even abiword can write LaTeX!
It isn't difficult to learn & becomes much more powerful when you eventually ditch the GUI & either use a quality TeX-focused editor like KILE (KDE), TeXnicCenter (win32), TeXShop (OS X) (all F/OSS) or your favorite multi-purpose editor. I prefer vim with LaTeX-Suite.
The best way to learn is to look at other code. Either get some from peers, from the net, or make some in either the GUIs or the friendlier editors. Then just write.
If you need a reference, you can usually learn to google for how to do something (or post to comp.text.tex). I maintain a list of www links. You might find something useful, but I can't suggest the best starting point from that list. The best introductory book I've used is Guide to LaTeX. The other books in LaTeX Companions are also excellent for reference, particularly The LaTeX Companion.
About 10 years ago I worked in a carefuly homogenous environment (both home and office Windows machines had the same versions of the same software and all the same Ctrl-Alt keyboard shortcuts defined in ProgMan or the Start Menu), which I'm sure was more productive most of the time. But when I sat down in front of a Quadra or a Vax terminal, it was like I was moving in slow motion... like running in emulation.
Lately, if I spend a lot of time using just one of system, I do find myself speeding up to take advantage of it. Maybe I'm doing some incremental compilation of often-used routines?
Anyway, I guess you could say that I've ported myself from running in Win-only machine code, to running in cross-platform Perl. Whether that's an improvement or not is left up to the reader... but I'm happy this way.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
Emacs
XTerm
ROX-Filer, but only if I'm feeling lazy. (Incidentally, ROX does the spring-loaded folders mentioned in TFA).
That's all I need for work.
Firefox and Evolution for Internet jollies.
It doesn't get any better.
C-x C-s C-x k
One thing that will make any OS easier to use for a geek is an alternate file manager.
I can tolerate Windows, but I wouldn't wish Windows Explorer on my worst enemy. Instead, I use Total Commander. It acts exactly the way I ask it to and lets me do everything with the keyboard.
I'm far more productive in linux than in anything else I've tried. Linux (unices in general, but to a lesser extent) is the only one that's customizable enough. What other windowed system can you configure to be useful without titlebars and with a minimum of mousing (repetitive stress injuries from high-mousing guis)? For example, I run fvwm2 with no titlebars; I use ctl-alt-arrows to change desktops (contexts); I have a panel to monitor status of mail, xmms, phone, ram, load and the like; and I have a few buttons to set up common contexts.
Most of my work is in terminal windows, editing code.
I haven't had the chance to seriously use MacOSX, but I'm sure its great knowing its roots in NeXTstep and UNIX. I have to agree with the PalmOS statement, its been my most productive personal operating system. My most productive routers have run Cisco IOS. That thing "just works" and needs little maintenance.
f 208347hf028734hf028364hf02834hf028374hf028364hf028 34hf028364hf082365hf972345hf7254hf98724 ad nauseum) extremely frustrating to use. I don't know how they can put up with that crap.
Including Microsoft Windows is unfair, since you need to stretch your definition of "operating". If constantly having to scan for viruses & trojans, putting up with unexplicable complete system meldowns several times an hour, and corrupting data quite a lot is "operating" then I guess its in. Somewhere down the bottom just above Microsoft Windows CE (aka "Wince"). I'd rather an Atari ST.
On a server its UNIX. The two go hand-in-hand so much that basically, if it doesn't run UNIX or a UNIX-like OS, it's not a server. My current desktop also runs a UNIX-like OS and I'm most comfortable in that environment, to the point I find other people's desktops (like cow-orkers with M$ WinXPsp2hf2934hf3945hf93047hf9385hf902375hf90385h
How to measure productivity? I think productivity has nothing to do with the solution used so much as the person using it. You don't measure how much of something is done, you talk to the person doing it and see what they're having problems with. There is no benchmark or performance criteria for programming, for example. There's just good management and bad management, happy coders and frustrated coders. Frustrated coders, under bad management, I would expect to be extremely unproductive.
Matt
Anything that supports 80 column punchcards, baby!
People keep touting OSX as being some sort of saviour of the computing industry. Stable, easy to use, yes. For most people anyway, I'm sure there's many out there who would prefer other environments.
However, they all neglect to mention one rather important fact about OSX, which would seem obvious but has hidden implications. OSX only runs on Apple's machines. Well, obviously, you might say. Apple's in the hardware business, after all.
But if Apple is in the hardware business, why is their service toward customers buying their hardware so...well, lousy? Case in point; at Future Shop in Canada, I bought a laptop for $1899. For $399 extra, I extended the warranty and product service plan (which Future Shop offers) to three years. What does that mean? Basically, they cover practically everything that can possibly happen to that laptop. Space bar falls off after you drop it? They'll fix the keyboard, free of charge. Screen dies? They'll replace it, free of charge (which is particularly significant when you realize that a 15" LCD screen can run above $1500 in and of itself). They even cover -performance- issues; two years from now, if I'm not getting satisfactory load times, crashes, any sorts of problems software or hardware related, they'll fix them free of charge. If this happens more than three times, they'll assume it was a "lemon" and give me a new one. For an extra $50, they'll give you the exact same plan in "overseas" form, meaning that you get the same service, at a fairly fast rate (5-10 business days), even if you're not in the country.
Contrast this with Apple...I could have bought a Powerbook and an extended warranty for around the same price. What does that cover? Well...not a lot, really. Apple is very insistant that their hardware should be sent in under warranty for work, which can take weeks at a time depending on where you're mailing your laptop from. Sending it to them isn't a gurantee that they'll actually fix it, either. The only way Apple will replace a laptop for you, free of charge, is if it's dead on arrival (in other words, if you try to turn it on and it can't even get that far). Anything else is considered warranty work, and obviously it's up to them what constitutes warranty work. You get phone support extended as well, but as I've never used it, I can't comment on that particular aspect.
OSX may be reliable, but all hardware has problems eventually, no matter who you buy it from. If Apple's service plan is so flaky that buying their hardware actually becomes a significant financial risk (I can personally vouch for friends who have bought defective laptops from them in the past), then how much of an advantage does it really provide?
Does HoneyNut CheeriOS count?
What about BeOS? It's just so...umm...well...ok, it's crap.
- Just because we CAN do a thing, does not mean we SHOULD do that thing.
I hate X with a passion... never liked it, probably never will. I run a huge number of linux servers, all headless and w/o X. I am always ssh'd into them and use them at work and home for most of my "server" tasks.
At work that would be fileserver, snmp, webserver, tftp server and for nmap, tethereal. At home it would be mp3 server, x10 home automation, Asterisk, etc. It's the best at chugging away for years and being able to be remotely administered.
For my "workstation", I prefer Windows. I've tried running Linux with X and endless numbers of windows managers since 1994, as well as Solaris on an Ultra, and Irix on an Indigo and o2, didn't like any of 'em. I've got a G3 running OS X for my daughter... she likes it, other than the lack of games and applications. I use XP and honestly I've been happy with it. I wouldn't imagine running any "server" applications on it, but it's hassle free for Office, Visio, Photoshop, and other applications that I need to use every day.
Her piece looks an awful lot like astroturf...
The biggest productivity gain comes from more RAM and faster processing power, especially in 3D/2D imaging. Windows 2000/XP and OSX are so similar on the application side (Photoshop/Illustrator/InDesign/Maya are identical on both platforms) that it really comes down to hardware speed. Hard disk speed also matters - a person slinging files around in Windows with a 15K rpm Seagate SCSI drive is going to be faster at that task than someone on OSX with a standard hard drive setup from Apple - and the GUI is irrelevant for something like that.
This thread seems a little pointless. Every OS has its merits and drawbacks. The continuous praise of OSX over Windows is simply religious in nature. I know so many long time Mac users who can't stand OSX. I'm not sure how Slashdot users can be 100% positive in favor of OSX when many of the Mac users I've met see OSX as a huge problem in terms of fast workflow. The hardware requirements (and cost) to run OSX applications at fast speeds is mindboggling.
I believe the game is all about the apps, not the OS.
Beyond the "mac.com" address giveaway for this article being just another Mac-lovefest....
"Shortly after I got my first job, they put Windows 3.x machines on everyone's desk at work. Those horrid GUIs made my head spin."
Any Mac proponent who brings up Windows 3.x in 2005 should be dismissed out of hand. Slow news day guys?
Linux:
if i'm writing a paper of a thesis, then it's the kde environment (+ kile + kdvi + kpdf)
if i'm writing code, then it's fluxbox (runs lightening fast and doesnt clutter up desktop space) - with multiple xterms (or multiple tabs on konsole, which starts up bit slower if you're not running kde in the background.)
Windows
if i'm drawing diagrams, then it's windows2000 (visio 2002) - exports
my blog
I'm not "Docu-centric", I'm Project-centric. I do my folders per project. So I have C:\dev\proj... Why? What's the diff between "My Documents\Dev" and "C:\Dev"? Easy! sometimes I use the command line or some old school piece like WS_FTP. If I save a doc to My Docs\dev and go to FTP it up, where is it? C:\Documents and Settings\MyUserName\My Documents\dev. Oh yeah.. I can type THAT! Do I LOOK like a UNIX usr?
In MacOS, you can choose three general places where you save files, set in the Control Panel, General... App Folder, Last folder used, Docs folder...
In Windows... I DON'T KNOW! I've seen files try to be saved into the temp directory of the Temporary Internet Files with a hash of numbers because I just download something and that's the "current folder". That's useful... If I want to save it in C:\x\y\... i have to navigate my way up the tree. I could just do the dropdown to desktop, but sometimes that takes seconds to fill in. The Mac knows the path to where it is and immediatley loads up the dropdown for easy navigation in the tree.
This is a 2.6Ghz with 512MB of RAM. Why am I waiting? You know those right arrowheads on teh menus that pop open a submenu? Why do they take 3 seconds to load? It takes 6 seconds to get to a sub of a sub. Macs are super fast for that. THAT is why they feel "organic". I have a shortcut to a folder on my Quick Launch... it takes 4 seconds to open the folder after staring at a blank window frame. Why!?
Picture this. You open a folder with an image, x.jpg, open it, then save as x2.jpg. Now you want to drag drop it to FTP. Where is it? It's in the folder, which is sorted by date descending, It should be at the top. It's not, is it? It's at the bottom, so you have to F5, or double-flip the Date Modified tab to get the sort order correct. Does Microsoft actually USE this stuff? Macs pop the file where it belongs. THAT is "humane".
A productive OS for me is one where I can use all the tools I want to use for my work, and have access to everything I need. Since my work consists of delivering support for multiple platforms and such, my main desktop is a PowerBook running MacOS X 10.3.8. I can run all the basic tools I need, run Virtual PC for a lot of the Windows/Linux stuff, and I can connect remotely via RDP, ARD, VNC, or SSH to machines running other OS combos I have in my lab.
So I'm a MacOS X person by choice and preference. But, with a little tweaking I can feel comfortable and productive on whatever OS I need to sit down with. For me, I think a more valid statement is "I use MacOS X because it lets me use less of my brain on the computer, and more on the task at hand". But if I'd been using Windows as my primary OS for my whole career, I'd probably feel the opposite way about Macs.
-- Josh Turiel
"2. Do not eat iPod Shuffle."
I definitely feel the most productive in Linux, sometimes this is bad, sometimes good. I mean, sometimes being productive is having to do tons of little things to get one thing to work. However, overall I just feel like I'm getting more accomplished in Linux, especially when using command line.
As things stand it's nearly impossible to have two instances of XCode running in parallel. You simply get lost in a dozen windows, because OS X doesn't offer anything to logically group them. No tabs, no MDI, no nothing. You can't even hide one set of project windows all at once. You have to either hide ALL XCode windows, or go through them and hide every god damn window manually.
This is fucked up, IMO. I'm literally 10 times more productive in VS.NET, and that's what I do - I write code. There's no competition to VS.NET right now as far as coding productivity is concerned.
I have used Windows, Solaris/CDE, Linux (many distros and UIs), and OSX. As a coder/sys admin I feel most comfortable with linux, Gentoo and KDE in particular. The reason for this is the ease of system administration and setup for the software I need while maintaining the ability to tweak it entirely to my likely. No Gentoo was not productive for the first few days. As an added bonus, there is a ton of free software available that just doesn't work as well on OSX or Windows, which can also raise my productivity (Umbrello, Kate, KDevelop, Gimp). It runs best (if it all) in Linux, and getting something equivelant (and native) on Windows or OSX is likely to cost a fair amount.
I recently got a new PowerBook through work, and while I love it, there are limitations when compared to linux. Previous users stated that setting up OSX as a server is a breeze. Sure, this is true if you're only using a basic server, but if you need an advanced configuration, OSX can be a true nightmare. The tools are available under the hood, but it is NOT designed to be tinkered with. My reasoning for choosing OSX for work was the gaurantee for driver compatibility and full support (it was either put linux on a Dell laptop or get the PowerBook). I figured I would take a slight productivity dip, and I did. Everyone has a different routine, and to maximize productivity an interface must be highly configurable. Of course, the average user is not savy enough to deal with such a high level of configuration. OSX is a compromise. It is the best all around, but Linux has greater potential when configured for specific tasks.
I guess Windows is great if you measure productivity in Frames Per Second.
To sum up my perspective:
Linux productivity sucks in most "out of the box" configurations, but has the highest potential.
Windows is just "OK." It gets you by and lets you play games. It is also good for office apps as OpenOffice.org really isn't that great IMO (sorry - I have to question it's design), which makes MS Office the best office software by default. KOffice and the Gnome based apps have a chance at changing this in the long run.
OSX is highly productive out of the box, but has little capacity for getting that maximum tweaking. It is also VERY different than Windows. Most Windows users will feel more productive in a generic linux install than OSX. It is also a big advantage to be able to run MS Office on OSX (at least until it crashes).
As some users before, I've used a Commodore C128, then CP/M, DOS 3.xx after it became available, Geos, Windows 3.1 onwards, Mac OS 7, Linux since 0.99 using various window managers, such as twm, fvwm, KDE since 1.x up until 3.0 and lately OS X 10.1 until 10.3. And this mainly for programming, web development, scientific writing (LaTeX), web surfing, recently much of Office documents (unfortunately), and for entertainment.
As a desktop platform I must admit that OS X beats the rest hands down. And the reasons are stability and integration.
- Not having to fiddle with XF86Config when plugging in a new external monitor helps.
- Not having to recompile the kernel from source once you get an obscure USB or Firewire drive helps.
- Not having to mess with the network configuration scripts as soon as you visit another lab helps.
- Having a unified user interface helps (you save lots of time using the keyboard if you know that Command-Q quits every program, that Command-S saves files, that Command-N opens a new document, etc.).
- Having Emacs bindings in forms like the one for posting on Slashdot helps.
- Being able to watch a DVD without much fuss helps.
- Being albe to sort my music and my photos easily helps.
- Being able to run the system without crashes (BSD underbelly) helps.
- Being able to use the shell and all UNIX tools helps.
- Being able to open my laptop and to continue working within 2s helps. Especially if you spend lots of time in airports.
I'm not saying that none of this could be done under Linux. For almost every one of those items there's a tool that would allow me to do this. But this means that I have to go and configure it. It means that I have to spend my time on fixing it. For sure, Linux could do it. But it would mean that someone would have to produce a system that really works. Not just 90%, not just for most of the cases, not just something that nerds and geeks like me can use.Switching from Linux (after 10 years of use) to OS X was a matter of 2 days of inconvenience. When my Mac broke and I had to switch back to my old system temporarily, it took me almost a week getting used to all the disincongruous interface tweaks again. And it's the first OS I'm not swearing at.
In particular, if you want a Unix capable laptop, you'd probably spend over 3 weeks tinkering with Linux until the system works properly (and it might not for recent hardware unless you hack it yourself - software modems, suspend to disk, wireless access, switching to external display, good power management). In a commercial environment that isn't worth it. Think your salary for three weeks vs. the price of the computer. And that's why in computer science you now see so many mac laptops when you go to conferences ...
I use OS X all the time and feel very productive. But then again I'm often working on an SSH session to a Linux box, so I guess I'm feeling pretty productive there. But then again, I do a lot of graphics work in OS X. Well, now I'm typing this on my OS X laptop at home, but I'm working on my Slackware box at my office via VNC doing some file admin stuff and wasting time on /.
;)
So, I guess you could say I feel pretty productive in everything but Windows, because I don't use it.
Right now its probably right the best marriage of the two worlds and it helps that Apples iLife suite make using my music, digital photos and movies enjoyable to use (although an elegant its missing a Tivo PVR solution). The other factor I enjoy about Mac OS X is its ease of software installations, simple security updates and very little maintenance. I don't have to struggle to find drivers for my hardware and I can plug and play without wrestle the operating system to cajole it to work. Apple's elegant aesthetics and well thought out operating system (but not perfect) pretty much was the deal closer for me.
P.S.
Little things like the pervasive spell checker where I don't have to use another application to check spelling of my Slashdot posts are some of the niceties that help me be more productive. Also not having to dual boot Windows/Linux also helps when both applications from different worlds can coexist on one operating system.
For Mac OS X fans out there. I stumbled across this gem of a plug in the other day. GMAP plug in for Addressbook.app to invoke Google Maps and automatically get directions from your home. The script can be modified to work with Firefox (which it originally did). Very Cool!
That's funny, because I personally have 0 productivity on OSX, since I work in business, which is almost uniformly Windows. (Which I like pretty well, by the way.)
That's where the money is. If Jobs had gotten over his anal-cranial inversion in the 80's and decided to be a real player in the other 95% of the computer market, maybe I could use a Mac and make money.
As it is, he didn't, I can't. And yet you Apple fanboys blame Gates for some reason.
>Also, what is the best way to rate productivity in an OS?
By giving your personal opinion, and taking pains to not gather any statistical data or do anything else that might come close to following the scientific method.
We use Windows as a networking environment where I work and due to the Microsoft infestation of software being the most widely supported and used on the desktop, I'm much more productive than I am in Windows than in Linux. However, on servers I run on my own and develop software on in my spare time, I'm much more productive in linux.
Chewbacon
The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
I find that aqua (at least my version) slows
/etc/private/foo.conf ????
me down. The Terminal.app is a joke compared to
rxvt, and the Finder is no where near as useful
as midnight commander.
However, using OSX with an X server, where rxvt
and multiple desktops are available can be very productive. Not quite as good as linux, but close.
It would probably be better if pwm worked with
a laptop keyboard.
Still, mac + FVWM is really quite nice.
I find that linux, running the pwm window manager
is quite productive, because of it's tabbed
feature and minimal approach to things. I almost
never have to use a mouse, there aren't a lot
of keybindings that you have to remember, it's a lot like the 'screen' utility, but for X11.
If you were to compare a window manager that
required the mouse, didn't have virtual desktops,
etc... against aqua, I'd say mac + fvwm would be more productive.
Window managers being equal, I'd say linux is just slightly more productive, just because it has more
tools available to it and the paths aren't all
messed up.
A very good friend of mine is now a dual-platform user, running both Mac OS X and Windows XP. He says he has most of the bugs worked out of the XP setup, and he also says he uses about 10% of the power of Mac OS X.
:)
He finds that he is most productive with a pencil and paper.
Using the holy grail of OSes...
OpenOffice does most of what Excel does but it really grinds to a halt doing graphs.
My students seem to be able to implement a lot of things faster in Excel than they do in Matlab. I'm not sure why. It certainly forces you to think about things differently. Actually, I prefer it for teaching convolution and correlation. It is more concrete for students just starting to think about that kind of thing.
It handles complex numbers and can do a pretty good FFT. It never ceases to amaze me. (Or annoy me 'cause I have a serious hate on for Windows. I'm truly torn.)
its what i feel comfortable with, and kde's kioslaves make life great if your doing webdev over ftp or whatever.
I use it for my online media business, http://www.WhiteRoseSociety.org/
I record shows, process audio, edit HTML, and even serve files from this eMac here and two older iMacs.
I not only have all of the Mac software available, but almost all Linux/BSD/Gnu programs can be compiled and run under MacOS X, and I do a lot of that. Plus some C development.
Dog is my co-pilot.
If by "productive" you mean killing stuff with a rocket launcher then Sony PlayStation 2 is the OS for me.
Is Quake 3 an operating system??? :)
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
It's awful. I use a Visual Studio knockoff and I never ever stop lamenting MDI. Stupid panes eating up my entire window. How do you look at two source files at once? Get two monitors?
Kill me.
I'm most focused in the emacs environment. The most productive people I know (lines of code per year) are emacs or vi users. (Not the GUI kind, like vim or xemacs; the shell kind.)
So, I hate to just dead-on disagree with anybody, but...
There is a VERY limited set of tasks for which the CLI is dramatically more productive than a GUI. Personally, I wouldn't even include programming (since the GUIs I use do predictive compilation, and a visual debugger is worth a thousand command line pieces of garbage).
But let's go on and take a look at other things. Editing a formatted text document: CLI or GUI? I'm sorry, but while you're playing around with LaTeX I can whip something perfectly good up in TextEdit, for God's sake, and still have time for an hour of sex.
Surfing the web? Making an mpeg clip of the latest company meeting and editing out the guy with the serious droning voice? Maybe adding a soundtrack? Organizing the photos from your last vacation?
Even, say, monitoring server load on your remote server. (I click the app in the corner of my screen and it zooms in and shows me load, processor utilization, hits per second, or any of the other stats, all at a click of the mouse). Hell, something as simple as diffing two source files and then merging them is much easier when you can drag stuff around, copy it and paste it, and so forth.
Now, if what you mean is 'having a GUI with a window open with a tcsh prompt is better than having a GUI without one' you might have a point. I wouldn't know, because I haven't been without one in quite some time. But there are very few tasks that are done on a computer these days that are more efficiently done on a CLI WITHOUT a GUI.
-fred
Sign #11 of Slashdot overdose: You see the phrase 'moderate Republican' and you wonder if that would be a +1 or a -1.
I know I'm going to get killed for saying this, but the choice is easy- Windows XP.
While other operating systems may be prettier or more fun to use, Windows has 2 (major) things going for it- it does the job, and 90% of all the software out there is written for it.
When someone asks me something about computers or they want help with something, I can be almost certain they're using Windows. It's nearly universal. They have 95+% of the market
Let me put it to you this way: you can own a car that everybody has, parts are cheap and found at every corner garage, and everyone knows how to fix it, or you can own a car they a tiny niche group says is better, but hardly anyone has parts, they're expensive and next to nobody knows how to fix it.
The convenience of standardization.
When I used to use DOS and program Clipper. No internet, boring co-workers... The only distraction was when the coffy got ready.
Comparing OSX to Linux is like comparing a bicycle to a jet aircraft. True a bicycle is easy to use and easier to learn how to use, but it's extremely limiting. But it sure has a pretty basket, bell, handlebar tassles and other eye-candy, I admit. Oh, but in this case, the bicycle costs much more than the jet. In fact, my fully-loaded Debian jet cost nothing but a learning curve and a few bumps on the tarmac before I figured out how to fly her.
Comparing Windoze to Linux is like comparing a shitty, rusty old ten-speed that someone found in an abandoned corner of their garage and then tried to sell on Craigslist for $150 against a Ferrari that your rich Uncle just handed you the keys too.
Either way you look at it...it's go go Linux, and no no OSX / Windoze.
Go peddle that proprietary crack in the schools and the offices and leave the power users to their own devices. We prefer it that way.
Simply put it isn't the best UNIX, the best Windows or even the best MacOS but it is ALL of them at anytime and all the time.
I can do anything from run an Windows AD to run nessus in Gtk. It is as close to perfect as it gets. And my wife and 5 year old son can use it and never notice all the "tweak" stuff it can do.
And, look I know this isn't a popular sentiment but it's really pretty.
This
Productivity depends on whether you're comfortable with the OS or not, and what you're doing. It's a matter of choice.
Virtual Dimension is free and open source. It doesn't have a limitation on number of desktops etc. You can read about it here:
http://virt-dimension.sourceforge.net/
This sig kills fascists.
Or graphic artists, or musicians (Hello, low latency audio bus), or video editors, or web developers, or college supercluster admins.
The image is a dream, the beauty is real. Can you see the difference?
I'm not an OS specific guy. I use whatever works for me. Tell you, I've tried OSX, Linux, and Windows. I use windows for Macromedia MX software (web design), Linux (slackware and derivative) for server programming, I've tried OSX (from my point of view, it's Gnomeish!) sometime in the past for imaging software. Using those things, I'm most comfortable in Linux and windows... Windows because they have the software I need for my work/job description (Macromedia works in wine, but it's a bit slow for my taste), and Linux for server purposes - I like cli. OSX distracts me - don't get me wrong... it looks nice, but the eye candy really does get to me.
If I'm doing audio recording or editing, I'm much more comfortable in Windows. This despite persistent assertions that Macs are superior for A/V production, or that Linux audio has arrived.
If I'm editing text in a text editor, I'm far more productive in a 100x37 linux framebuffer console running Vim and Screen, than any other environment. I realize I can have 100x37 xterms, or even RXVT's on windows, but it's not the same.
But if I'm working with Eclipse, I prefer it to be running on my X desktop, but I'll settle for Windows.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Also, I really can't use any window manager other than Ion. Most of the time I only use one big window taking all the screen space and use the tabs (well, the keyboard, really) to switch to other windows. This allows the current window to take (almost) all the available screen space and allows me to focus on what I'm doing.
Finally, my life would be very different without GNU Screen. If your work involves using a console (for whatever reason), I strongly advise you to take some time to learn how to use it.
I'll throw in Mutt and Bash as a bonus. Can't live without them.
Oh, in case you're wondering, the platform would be any Unix where those run (usually Debian but I like other distributions and BSDs as well).
I think it is easy to say my productivity is worst in windows. Simply factoring in maintaince time, viruses, spyware, crashing, rebooting, formatting and reinstalling, etc. Now I'm sure some of you have no problems with windows and it works great blah blah blah, good for you, to each their own. Overall my best workspace is something with virtual desktops. I've used such a setup across more linux distros than I care to count and on my OpenBSD workstation that I presently type from as well as my FreeBSD laptop and work system. I use enlightment and that is simply because it was the first wm I used that was configurable such that I had 0 complaints with it. Now I can't say anything about OS X as I own no macs (something I hope to correct with a mini.) *bsd seems to give me the least amount of hassle and post-setup I can just use the computer instead of maintaining it. On the server side of the world it depends. Debian is by far the best to maintain due to apt-get and takes the least amount of time. For peace of mind on the shell server I run it is OpenBSD (stack overflow protection, heap corruption protection, etc. READ: even if an exploit exists worst case it should only be able to crash a program not let anyone gain access.)
:(){
I am able to get things done because I know why they won't get done if they don't work. With anything else I am just stuck according to someone else's whim. I'm more in control and can control what I'm doing more. Everything's the way I want it, and I know why everything works. Back on Windows I didn't understand the importance of this, and I even thought I really DID know what caused what, just because I memorized a lot of eccentricities. Being productive working AROUND something is not the same as being productive working WITH something.
I had a good chuckle at the programmers who were more productive using Linux 'cause it had such good keyboard shortcuts.
Then there was the poor scientist who professed to using Excel... predictably shot down by passing gnumericists.
So here's a little programmer productivity challenge: how many lines of code would it take to integrate either of these fine spreadsheet applications into your GUI application?
You're allowed to use as many keyboard shortcuts as you want.
Ciao!
I've used so many different platforms over the last 30 years that it's hard to remember them all. DEC, CDC, Honeywell, IBM, Amdahl, Apple, Radio Shack, Sun, and about a dozen PC manufacturers (32-bit and 64-bit). Each one going through many OS.
:-)
Of all of them, two stand out as being incredibly productive for me. IBM's VM (Virtual Machine) operating system (from Version 6 BSEPP through VM/ESA), and Linux (about a dozen distributions, finally landing on Fedora Core).
I find it particularly interesting that these two co-exist now in the mainframe world, and that Xen virtualization is now making its way into the next Fedora Core release.
Folks, start your engines.
Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.
It all depends on the task being performed.
When I'm doing C# coding, Windows is by far the most productive thanks to Visual Studio.
When I'm editing video, MacOSX (iMovie) or Windows (Premiere) are the most productive. Mainly because there's nothing nearly as easy to use available for Linux.
For browsing the web, sending e-mails, using GAIM... I do all of that stuff on my Linux laptop. Oh yeah, and taking notes in meetings (Tomboy rocks).
Technically, I do all of my C# coding on the laptop too, but I use VMware to run Visual Studio in Windows.
-Zak
Unfortunately Excel is widely used in Aerospace, mostly because of how much Matlab and Mathematica cost. But I wish people would use Octave and Python more...
:( You have to be some sort of premium customer to get any useful response from them.
Excel is so damn buggy, and microsoft makes you pay for the privilege of telling them that they round seconds to minutes incorrectly or any other serious bug. Why corner yourself into relying on a tool by a company that won't even fix simple bugs?
(as an exercise to the reader just try and figure out how to file a bug against Excel!)
Not that mathworks is much better in dealing with bugs
There are 10 types of people in this world, those who can count in binary and those who can't.
Why? Because I use software that only runs under Windows and there are no acceptable free alternatives for other OSes. This isn't a personal preference, but simply because I need this software to do my job. End of story.
I find the apps on my Symbian device add a lot to my productivity. Tasks, Calendar, Contacts.
but I would rather be doing script editing work in UltraEdit on Windows than XCode, BBEdit, or whatever in OS X. I see what you're saying.
Although, I'm always on the lookout for good replacements.
As a programmer, I am much more productive in Linux because I can tie almost everything I do in Gnome (or KDE) to a key command. I don't use the mouse very much (or at all) while programming in gvim or Eclipse, and it really slows me down when I need to, say, launch a terminal or a browser.
Try Quicksilver
It will let you lots of cool things with hot keys...
To quote the Quicksilver site: "In the end, Quicksilver has one very important effect. , The effort associated with frequent tasks fades into the background and you are able to act without thinking. After an adaptation period, Quicksilver becomes an extension of yourself; the process fades away leaving only the results"
There are 10 types of people in this world, those who can count in binary and those who can't.
I feel more productive in Windows XP (specifically I get paid for writing code with Microsoft Visual C++ 2003), but that's a boring answer. So here are my annoyances with the operating systems that I use.
:)
== MacOS X ==
* The maximize button isn't (even though it's marked with a little + symbol). It's really a "make the window a different size" button. When I'm trying to look at a collection of files in Finder, I want a "MAKE THIS WINDOW AS BIG AS POSSIBLE SO THAT I CAN SEE THE MOST CONTENT ON SCREEN" button. You know, so that I can actually view the contents. Did you know: The "+" button can actually make the window SMALLER if it feels like it (this is true).
* The keyboard commands are completely non-standard and a mess. At the whim of the application designer (and if it's running in a terminal window), copy might be CTRL+C, APPLE+C, OPTION+C? As someone elsewhere here pointed out, this can be remapped, I'll try it when I'm home. But I still wonder why the defaults aren't sane in the first place.
* The god-damn dock. It was pretty at first, but now I want it to be a nice, svelte topmost bar like Windows taskbar - and when I maximize windows (which I can't), I want them to fit in the desktop space neatly between the menus and the taskbar. Without an edge of the window disapearing underneath the dock. The freeware program "ObjectDock" provides a Dock for Windows, so where can I get a taskbar for the Mac?
== Windows ==
* Too many applications do things behind your back, developers are trying too hard to make a buck by using "helpers" and "background updaters". I seem to spend a couple of minutes every week cleaning these out. Oddly enough, Apple is a particular offender - with their Quicktime and iPod helpers. And Adobe - shame on you for placing advertising in Acrobat reader!
* I miss Expose from OS X. I know there are programs that emulate the functionality, but they're never as nicely implemented as Apple's. The enhanced XP task switcher (that is a downloadble XP Powertoy) is a poor substitute.
* Poor UI customisability. Windows XP's default color scheme includes shades of urine yellow in application menus that can't easily be changed. I only solved it by downloading the Windows XP Media Center edition skin.
== Linux ==
* There are seven hundred versions of Linux and none of them work properly - or work with each other.
* Linux supports exactly four 3D graphics cards. Two are not made anymore, one is never in stock at any retailers - and the other costs a thousand dollars and is designed for CAD work. Well, maybe that's not completely true, but you get the picture.
* Even within the same version of Linux, you'll have to be running different versions of libraries in order to run the programs that you want to use. Compile from source? Sure. Um.. which versions of which libraries will I need? Do I have to edit a configuration file? What window manager will I need. Running Linux on a home desktop is needlessly, pointlessly complicated - and not worth it.
* Trolltech and their viral pseudo-free QT library underpinning KDE. It's actually one of the most overpriced software libraries ever made.
== FreeBSD ==
* Is perfect. I don't expect anything from it - except for it to be a sane, consistent and reliable server - so I love it.
Funny, I find Excel very useless for moderate amounts of data (say, 80000 points). Excel is more fitted for making status reports than doing any real work.
There is no objective way of reaching a conclussion because, guess what, it is a matter of personal preference and taste.
The article writer is in love with the latest ncarnation oc MacOS (or whatever it is called).
I can't stomach it. But I am used to the Linux and Solaris way of doing things.
She mentions services and I was thinking "geee, UNIX pipes in menus" and she just realizes the same, without reaching the obvious conclussion: such a contraption is far more powerful and productive in a script written in a command line using vi.
Horses for courses as the Brits say. The only idea of raising the question of what is more productive is idiotic in extreme since different people feel more comfortable with different things.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
I didn't see her discuss productivity. I did see a whole article telling me what gewgaws she thought were nicest to look at.
What I expected was something concrete about how much more work she can accomplish in a given timeframe and why Mac features make that possible.
Kewl icons are not productivity.
Three Squirrels
* qwerty- wonders why Home and End aren't yet implemented
pretty useful keys, for me at least
The Home key works for me; everytime I press it, I look around and I'm at home.
I haven't had the guts to try the End key yet.
I don't get it.
are Prohammer --;
\|/ ~~o==@
Ridiculing a really bad OS: windows
For everything else: linux
Seriously, I don't know if it's just me, but when I sit down at a windows computer and get the itch to do something I have a hard time figuring out all them pointy-clicky steps and I can feel my brain vibrating trying to figure it out.
With linux which is where I've spent *MOST* of my time on the computer in the past 10 years, I instinctively seek out an xterm and type in the command to start said app. I like a lean mean WM and *STILL* use the original FVWM even now with KDE and Gnome out there as good as they are. The left mouse button brings up a floater menu a-la-start button in windows and I could easily strip it down to about 10 or 15 commonly used apps. The rest I type in manually as I see fit.
For example since I've been using tcsh for so long, it's second nature and if I want to play a quick round of freecell, I find a spare xterm and just type in "freecell". With auto-completion, it's pretty damn fast. In windows you need to make the conscious decision that if it hasn't been played recently enough, it won't show up on 'recently run' apps and you have to go hunt for it in the games menu or somewhere else. I've configure linux in such a way that I always launch an app the same way and after a while it becomes automatic. I could be just as happy daydreaming about all them pretty girls and somewhere, somehow my brain has automagically opened up freecell for me and I have to make the decision to actually play the game or exit and continue to daydream. I'm not used to that with windows and it makes my brain hurt just thinking about the steps needed to do anything.
Take away some people's IDE and they're pretty much useless. Me I have an xterm to compile and run the app I'm developing via some shell scripts, and I use emacs for editing. No fancy IDE to show me the inter-relationships between classes, etc. I need to find something, I make sure my TAGS file is up to date and then I do a tags-search.
If you do something enough, sooner or later you'll reach a productive plateau and any more or less beyond that will be at the whim of the environment you work in. It's hard to remain productive on say win98 when months go by after the OS install and apps get installed/deleted and suddenly you get a spool32 error and can't print which forces you to deal with that issue.
Given that windows has a tendency to defacate on itself, sooner or later something just 'simply stops working' or 'grinds to a crawl'. I can't remember a single instance where linux has hosed itself for no good reason or any reason at all other than my messing with it. As such, my productivity is dependent on my motivation, not the motivation of the OS.
Asking someone to define what makes them more productive is so subjective it's about as useful as asking what their favorite colour is. At best it can be classified as trivia.
/etc/hosts is only used very early in the boot process on Mac OS X. So you can't actually use it to block addresses. You have to use netinfo instead
You didn't think to click the blue apple in the upper-left and go to System Preferences? You didn't think to type "cd /dev"? I mean, what exactly are you talking about when you say you didn't know "how to get out of /home/user in terminal to check /dev"?
LaTeX, VIM, IceWM, gnuplot, xfig, Octave, Firefox. Done.
zcat trace.gz | grep miss | awk '{print $3}' | sort -n | uniq -c
Try doing that in Windows without cygwin
i feel like ive done something worthwhile just getting windows to boot.
I never get anything done in linux because I am constantly finding things to fiddle with, tweak, set up, improve and generally make better. I spend all my time doing things designed to improve my productivity at some later date that I seem to think I will actually be working at.
But not to me, I did make that caveat. They do have some nice niches where they fit in nicely. But, they are too small (for me) to matter.
http://www.busyweather.com/
I have found a great way to emulate this in X is to create N virtual screens, fire up any terminal (xterm, gnometerminal) maximized to fill the screen, pick a big font, and go. This gives you the console look with X cut and paste, which for better or for worse I rely on.
How do you rate productivity on a particular platform ?
Simple: does the platform support BBEdit ?
BBEdit still doesn't suck. I write code on both the Mac and XP. I often mount a Windows share on my Mac so that I can edit the Windows code in BBEdit.
-S
Windows-E opens up explorer. Links to other useful Windows Key Shortcuts.
mentioned Pick?
...and I say that music is the only reason to ever use a computer and business and profit motive are reasons to NEVER touch one.
I would have to say it's a toss up between Mac OS and my Atari ST. When I was a hardcore Mac OS (pre OS X) and Atari ST user, I actually made a lot of original music. I'd spend about 6-8 hours a day working on original stuff and usually came up with about two to three songs per day, four or five on a good day. But then college ended and I couldn't afford a Mac of my own and I wanted more than my ST provided me with. Namely the audio capabilities of the Mac. So I wound up knuckling under and got a PC with Windows 3.1, WAVE audio editor, Cakewalk 5, and S.A.W. (Software Audio Workshop). I found that it took me a lot longer to actually make music because there were all these settings to mess with either out of necessity of just "what does this do"-ness. Then I moved to Win95 and Cakewalk Pro Audio + Syntrillium Cool Edit. That made things a little easier, but I still had a lot of tweaking that was necessary to do per song arrangement just to squeeze performance out of the box. It wasn't until I hit Windows 98 (first edition) + Cool Edit Pro + Steinberg Wavelab + Steinberg VST 24 that I finally found something on the Windows platform that was almost as good as what I had in college on a Mac Performa running OS 7 and Opcode's MIDI interface/patchbay. But it was still lacking. Fortunately, Linux's audio/MIDI stuff is finally catching up and I have to say that Rosegarden is starting to make me feel like my old self again. But I can't say that I was ever more productive than when I used a Mac or an Atari ST.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
Other than music or graphic art, what good is a computer? Certainly not a business tool. I think this is why the Windows platform sucks. They make business folks think they know how to use computers when they really don't. What good are spreadsheets and memos and documents that no one really cares to read? All this stuff is bullshit and should be relegated to the dumpster. The only real productive things done on computers are makeing music, making great visual art and coding new tools to make music and great visual art. Everything else is just more tools to spew business diarhhea all over the world.
Probably because I know FreeBSD better than any other OS. If I need to do something and a program isn't installed, cd /usr/ports/some/prog && make install clean && rehash && prog
../easy! I never have to leave my shell
I like mine big and indestructable.
Share single mouse and keyboard with a windows and linux machine.
Run samba to move files around.
Best of both worlds.
... the most productive OS is the Alphasmart Neo OS. Not much to distract from getting a lot of writing done.
I'm a Java/.Net programmer and Windows/Unix admin. I find myself most productive on an Ubuntu or Debian desktop running Gnome, using VMWare to run Windows. You get all these cool tools which are indespensible for network administration, and can still run the tools you need in VMWare. On top of that, you can take snapshops of your running WIndows, and if you ever have a problem, revert the entire thing.
Best environment ever. The Gnome desktop really makes general use a cheer.
Let's see if they sneak up on you and get big while you're ignoring them.
:)
:)
I too thought that Apple was just niche market, nothing but. Graphics, publishing, edu. That was it. And really, before OS X, I pretty much considered they sucked.
Of course, now they make a product that fits my niche, that of a network guy with an open source leaning.
It's really the best of both worlds. It's the shiny interface that I'd buy for someone like my father or brother and it's got that raw powerful system behind it that I can open up into even in their version of Terminal.
This is half rhetorical and half serious, but please don't take it as a personal criticism, but "How many niches will they have to fit in before they become big enough?"
BTW, might want to get rid of that immediate link to the DVD copy crack on your site, http://brainglass.com/downloads.htm Them there RIAA, MPAA and SPA folks are monitoring this site, ya know.
-- There is no sig line, only Zuul.
I feel more productive in Linux. It's a psychological thing-- in my mind, Linux is establihed as the "firm, stable" system and Windows as the "shaky, wobbly" system. When using Windows, I feel like a heap of things are going on the background (and they usually are). With Linux, though, it feels like the whole system is standing still unless I move it.
I vote too... for XP
I use suse on another partition, started with slackware in 1996. I've managed redhat, freebsd and openbsd servers for years. XP at times becomes boring, and I switch back to suse, and fool around with cross-compiling toolchains for embedded arm projects.
I play games like Giants, monkey island, and counterstrike. Two of those cant be run reasonably on linux even with winex. I'm also a sucker for predictable UI... like windows has since win95, despite their poor performance/price/feature/flexibility/security records. I can tab between windows faster, copy/paste faster, use alt-tab alt-space, alt-f4, F5, etc heavily and I have yet to find a good responsive WM that does all that, I dont care about KDE/GNOME. By default theyre too heavy, and I'm lazy to remap keys and the likes. Yes I do use nvidia drivers for my geforce4ti 4400, still not QUITE as responsive as XP in the GUI, sorry to say. Also visit flash websites, read PDF and msword and excel files, listen to real and quicktime. I try out/install apps frequently, and making manual links, and command line configuration slows things down for trivial stuff that you'd just want up and running. I also share files between other machines via CIFS, manual mounts are a pain.
I used to be all for slackware, until configuring a responsive and predictable GUI overwhelmed me, nothing works well in default (not talking about slackware, but the packages in general, installed manually). So I'm busy looking at Xandros, Lycoris, Linspire etc, while OSX has impressed me. I've come to the conclusion that X in itself, while being extremely flexible, is inefficient and suffers from being entirely in the userspace and treated as such. Also come to the conclusion that the window manager scene is still not settled.. the war between kde and gnome is simply a pissing contest and going the way of mozilla.. and not yet firefox, where people have realized the public's needs, and made a product for usability.
I'm not a linux basher. At work I've been trying hard to pile reasons to move everyone and everything to linux, thats 70+ machines. The biggest reason why we cant is binary compatibility of critical apps, a much smaller reason is the GUI should act exactly like win95-XP, retraining everyone is much more painful for us than deploying mini macs and osx even.
I'm not complaining. I'm explaining why XP still manages to keep people productive until the BSOD, yeah every 6 months to a year you have to reinstall windows, much more frequently if you have spyware. But the reinstall takes less time than configuring x and the wm, mapping keys, setting screen sizes, linking all apps to the wm, and retraining the user. Quite unfortunately, in real life, samba fvwm95 and openoffice's success are absolutely critical for Linux's eventual success on the desktop.
And ported games help too
"Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
Seriously, I have Diabetes - Type I, that is very insensitive of you clod.
Respect the Constitution
i have to teach on OSX from time to time so am forced to use it, though would rather not.
somehow the would-be productivity boost of OSX totally escapes me, this 'finder' logic (ironically) has me lost within seconds - as though everything is lost in the first place. the aptly named 'expose' seems needlessly flambouyant for the simple task of finding a window - something easily done in any *box window manager for the Linux platform (even KDE-3.3+ feels more intuitive). when working i need fast, min system-hit window management: can anyone suggest an install-and-go Open/Flux/Blackbox like manager for Apple machines?
secondly, i develop 3D applications and do alot of modelling/animation (previously in Maya, now in Blender). neither OSX or windows satisfy these needs well, OSX hogging the card for things *I* would like to use it for (turning polygons) - albeit for fast 2D blitting. Winblows, being DirectEggs and VC6 biased (where game development is concerned) fails here too..
for day to day use i need an easy to maintain, fast, clean system with a good office suite, excellent image editing and video codec support. hence any Debian based distribution suits me well.
Have used it for 7 years now. Still feel very comfortable using it.
/me looks at his tabbed iTerm.
Me too!
installing flash player manually, etc, configuring samba for the desktop, etc, setting up x11 at 65hz for my tft, etc, compiling drivers, etc, decss for mplayer.
... by then general tasks should be about the level of windows 98: manageable ... rather than requiring a godlike ability at the command line (that those of use coming over from windows don't have...)
been using linux off and off for 5 years and reckon it'll take me another 5 to be anywhere near productive on it
This UID is 7651 digits too high to subjectively infer IQ from.
I've never been more productive than I have since I switched from Linux to OS X. I never have to mess with any configuration for the OS and included apps. Keyboard shortcuts, menu options, buttons, and the terminal give me the option to do things the fastest way I feel like at any given moment. Add in the huge amount of free/open-source software available saving me from actually having to go out and buy software and there just isn't any better OS option.
You'd need a level of AI not yet developed. Also, part of it is simply being told how you need to do things. Like using the left mouse button to select something, doesn't have to be that way, but you have to be told how it is to start using something.
I suspect interfaces will begin to learn their users in the future, but there's only so much you can do. Also, in some cases what a user may want to do isn't as efficient as if they spend a little time learning a better way. So a designer may want to put something in that seems a little less intuitive, but after you've done it for the 50,000th time, you appreciate that it's faster/easier/whatever.
MACS!
http://www.rayn.net . Funny. Stuff.
It's not the OS that matters - more so the desktop environment. It just so happens that MS Windows and Apple MacOSX have only one DM to choose from, so typically it becomes synonymous with "the OS".
;- )
;- )
I personally am most productive on KDE and will present the following reasons for it (from least to most important, and contrasted with the other environment I use):
1) Time which you can set for any timezone - a real hassle-saver on laptops.
2) KNotes - Notes that can actually STAY ON TOP while you work
The closest thing on Windows XP is Outlook's horrendous notes which don't - and that's if you HAVE Outlook.
3) Calendar that ALSO STAYS ON TOP while you work, which is great if you're reviewing financial transactions on your bank's website (for example).
The best Windows XP (explorer) does is tell you that you "don't have permission to set the time"
4) Flexible panel - you can have whatever you want wherever you want on your desktop (i.e. Kasbar up top for running programs gives you lot's of room to put tons of applets on the panel below).
Explorer: Slightly flexible, but I'll have to give it a point because you can "lock the panel" like in the Gnome environment.
5) Session management - How did I even work before this? Just logout...log back in and *poof* all the work you were doing is open in front of you again.
This rivals the XP approach of just not logging off - preventing anyone else from using it as XP's fast-user switching doesn't work in a network environment! (Of course there's also praying that a patch requiring a reboot isn't rolled out...)
6) Multiple desktops! There is nothing better thought out than this concept because it reflects how people work, naturally. When you start a new task (such as "Making travel plans for Trip X") you pick a desktop to do it on while another task (such as "researching Item X and emailing a document on it") goes on another desktop. Voila - your work is LOGICALLY separated and (if setup correctly) the taskbar cleanly shows only what's running on the current desktop.
Contrast this with XP's taskbar "cluttering" which rolls all of any particular application into a single menu:
- It takes 2 (slow) clicks to get the program you want (every time)
- Taskbar still gets cluttered, but this time with unresponsive and confusing menus
- Work is separated by apps, not logic. In the real world tasks are not tied to particular apps - I might need IE+Word+Excel to plan a trip, but might need IE+Outlook+Word to research, type up, and send a document. (Does XP assumes you need IE+IE+IE for one task and Word+Word+Word for another?)
Now if only I could get familiar with GNUStep or Enlightenment
Win-E will pop open a new instance of Windows Explorer.
"What about the people of Slashdot? Where do you feel more productive, in Linux? Windows? DOS? Mac OS X? "
None of the above.
My past experience is that the inherit problems with Windows makes it a less productive environment eventually.
.. it all depends how persistant you are.
.. Kwrite allows for 80+ different language or script markups, with colour-highlight and silent error checking. ..
...
Security problems, Corrupted irrecoverable files, viruses, trojans, worms, and a system that decays with time - becoming slower and slower. Pure paranoia.
In Linux, sure there will be a learning curve often a long one.
1 year (?)
But after that - you just can't possibly go back to using just Windows.
Now if you work with Windows files (Corel Draw, Excel Macros) or even program for Windows like i do (Visual Studio, C#)
you can set an environment to make the best of both worlds.
I use CrossOver/ Wine (for the common MS apps), Win4Lin (for a cute embedded Win98) and Vmware (Windows XP).
This way I have what it's not granted to Windows users : much choice, security and flexibility.
Most of the time I am on Linux (95%) - as I have some bad memories of Windows, also find it very boring and featureless.
Take for example your Internet/File Browser.
Does it come with Newsfeed? A W3C Validator? And complete FTP capabilitities?
I can FTP to a site, open up a document, edit it and when I save it - it uploads the changes for me.
How convenient is that?
I can exchange documents between many FTP sites with much ease.
What about if I right click on a file I can navigate through a series of pop-up windows displaying directories so that eventually I can click "Copy Here" or "Move Here".
In Windows you have to either CTRL+C then fiddle your way through various folders and then CTRL+V
Or perhaps open two Windows and drag and drop between them? Kinda Clumsy.
So its like that - much power and a lot of flexibility.
Our version of "Notepad" is so powerful, it recognizes the syntax and highlights your code be it HTML, CSS or even C#.
If you are on KDE
Not to mention the cascading indentation trees
Then you need Outlook to have Sticky notes.
Ours work independantly, and accepts Rich Text Formatting.
The convenience of Virtual Desktop can only lend to better productivity.
Sure you probably can (given the time and resources) download all these gimmicks and add-ons from freeware and shareware sites.
But God knows what you've installed with it as well.
Linux makes even Windows users more productive and they can use it for their advantage.
See it as a tool and powerful infrastructure enviroment, rather than abandoning Windows for good and joining a restrictive cult.
The possibilities are endless and I could go on and on
Linux is very stable, much faster, more secure
So don't just have Windows - have two operating systems (or more) in one.
If you truly care about productivity - of course.
(and security, and stability, and speed, and peace)
As a .Net developer, I have to use Windows XP at work - and to tell you the truth, that is when I am most productive. It doesn't have anything to do with the OS and in fact, fighting XP is a real pain the ass.
But the question is Productivity, and Windows XP lets me be most productive.
Of course, at home, I am writing this on the sofa using a Mac laptop. I wouldn't call it "productivity", but for managing digital photos, home movies (iMovie and iDVD rock!), iTunes, and web/email, I sure do get a whole lot of gettin-nothin-done done. Again, it isn't "productivity", but I prefer it hands down to Windows XP.
I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
I'm most productive on windows, becuase I give up after having the system slow to a crawl due to spyware, and instead get out an abacus and a penci land paper. I could also say I'm most productive in Linux because I give up after a minute or so realizing nothing I want to use is supported. And I could also say OS X becuase really... how many games are there on os X? Do they even have Tuxracer? I like a Personal analog assistant. A good piece of paper and a pen.
Which OS am I more prductive with?
It depends on my product .
If my product is generating charts and information for upper management the answer is Windows - except for the Autocad I use for drawings and the occasional .rtf I generate while on the road.
If the product is code development - - the answer is Linux .
Most folks, not in the know, think the reason for my choosing Linux is the "low cost of entry".
I enjoy explaining that the main reason for my Linux_centric development has more to do with all the support I find at a moment's notice in the community.
Then there is the sheer joy of grokking something and then sharing that mojo with co-workers.
Thanks y'all - thanks to you (us) I am (we are) a sage. >;-)
Could it be that linux / *nix and windows are changing places?
About 5 years ago I worked with *nix servers at work and windows at home and I thought geez, why can't these command line thingies be more user-friendly.
Some time passes and I learn the wonders of vi. Then we get this new linux box with kde 2.0 to play with and I'm like holy SHIT! This is kool.
And then I changed jobs and I now live the reverse life... Linux (mepis) at home and windows at work. Only difference in my perspective is I don't long for windows at home - but I am glad I still work with some *nix servers at work.
I freely admit to occasionally spending a few hours frickin' around with gv4l or some obscure app to do PVR stuff - but stacked up against the hours I'd spend on windows trying to keep up with the continuous stream of patches / bugs
If however, you compare a very well administered winXP system against out-of-the-box linux or Mac OS X; I would say winXP will likely be more productive for most cases.
But I imagine most people use Mac OS X or linux mainly so they don't have to don the SA hat every time they want to surf the web or check email.
I also think windows got where they are because
- they were cheaper (remember when Netscape cost $40)
- they were mostly good enough
Guess what? That's pretty much how I'd rate linux on the desktop....In a wall-mart world that has got to scare the sheeAttt out of microsoft.
Rob Enderle's excellent new book: Everything I needed to know about Computer Science I learned in Marketing School
Some of the features I miss while at work are:
-Search as you type in the finder.
-Exposé
-Launch speed of apps and responsiveness of the UI under heavy load.
-universal spelling checkers (really handy in Safari).
The list goes on. I find that I have been churning out icons, wallpapers, boot screens, boot panels and other them elements on the mac whereas I was just a consumer on windows before.
The iApps like iMovie and iDVD are also brilliant.
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
I've used both 026 and 029 keypunches (along with all the standard tty keyboards, ASR33, vt100, decwriters, IBM PC, Mac, SunOS, SGI, etc.) and the 029 was by far the most efficient device for entering source code, notwithstanding the fact that if you made a mistake, you had to eject the card and start over from scratch. The 029 was also OS agnostic (sort of). Can't say anything about OS X ... never used it.
I'd say by how little the OS gets in your way.
I'm more productive in Solaris you insensitive clod!
I'd have to say that this topic and pretty much all the replies, as is typical of slashdot, is just one big flaimbait trollfest.
I don't have a computer, you insensitive clod!
It's not a real complaint. It's like the one-button-mouse thing. It's an excuse.
-
Create the file ~/Library/KeyBindings/DefaultKeyBinding.dict
- Paste the following in:
Note that this only works for Cocoa applications. You will have to close and reopen any applications that are open before the effects will take effectI've got Linux installed on all my boxes. One desktop and my laptop also have a small windows partition. The laptop hasn't booted to windows in 48 days and the desktop hasn't booted to linux in 9 days. With the exception of the laptop (x86_64) i'm running x86 systems. No mac but many windows and linux variants. I do most of my work on the laptop in Linux with the desktop in windows right next to me. Hate windows but sometimes it's just faster.
-Tim Louden
I'm more comfortable using Windows than Linux or OS X, even though I use all three. Dos is definately not it.
-Palal
"Thanks /. editors for launching a pointless religious war instead of putting something new and interesting on the front page."
:)
Baptists are better than Catholics.
1. Games hard to come by. Most stores don't carry the games I would want to play. I tossed my PC thre months ago for osX and haven't bought a game since. Not distracted.
2. Quicksilver. My hands never leave the keyboard.
3. UNIX/Customizability. Its so tailored to my needs now its like it knows me.
4. Sweet UI. I don't get sick of being on it.
5. Stability/Security. Not a single virus, trojan or hack attempt. Thank you NSA lockdown guide at NSA.gov
6. Relative dearth of freeware. Very little to screw around with unless you want to pay.
www.hiredinsight.com
...is remembering some configuration item, being able to conjure up an image of it in my head, but totally forgetting how to get to that screen again. This happened quite frequently, when I was using the OS every day on my laptop -- it wasn't just becoming unfamiliar with it, it just requires a lot of memorization. Then the next version of windows comes out and it's completely different. Macs are easy enough to find your way around that everything is where you expect it. The various unixoid OS's are generally pretty slow to change (I mean this in a good way, it's like german cars...) -- so if you learned it once, you know where it is.
I'm pretty comfortable in any unix-ish OS (except solaris, i just don't know anything about it), though I spend a lot more time "tweaking" linux and freebsd over my OSX machines.
Productivity is very subjective.
I can do the same job, measured by two different managers and get rated excellent by one and failing by the other at the same company.
Personally, I _felt_ more productive between the two managers when I was in touch with the people I needed to be to get my job done, but somewhat insulated from unnecessary distractions.
However from a computer perspective, I was most efficient when I had a mobile "workstation" -- it was running Linux -- which is what I needed for development, and it ran Windows under VMLinux. It would have been better if the office functions were integrated, but using VMware was satisfactory -- at least it didn't require a reboot. I could also run test kernels, also under VMware to test unstable patches. The ability to throw away a "session" and reset it was very valuable.
When I was plugged in at home or work, I could off-load compilations to higher-powered workstations, but the ability to have a reliable computer I could take with me everywhere allowed me to do work on my schedule. It was all transparent with NFS (or SMBFS) and make -- sometimes my compiles ran on remote CPU's with my laptop acting as a disk server -- and thanks to linux's dynamic buffer usage, it could easily handle disk serving for my 2-cpu workstation at home or 3+ Xeon CPU's. So scaleability was important for the work I was doing. Windows has problems with interoperability and would have required expensive licensing for "servers", I haven't used a MAC, but have tended to shy away from that corner due to due to lack of interoperability in the workplace. The only thing that would have been better than a laptop would have been a multi-processor laptop -- both at work and at home, docking stations were a must -- plugged them in for large screen and ergo usage.
But I think what computer or OS is going to depend on what job you are doing and how you, as an individual, works best. I need to change tasks and focus, often, to work well. Others prefer to stay on one task at a time. As I get older, I find myself needing to focus on fewer tasks at a time so that may change.
I find the need to use a mouse disruptive to programming. No one has a good programming environment that uses a mouse to type in "if/then/else...etc" and moving my hands back and forth off the keyboard to mouse slows me down.
Another consideration -- what your "thinking system" is geared towards -- i.e. - visual, audio or tactile. Do you recognize shapes faster or words
faster?
I think it would be hard to have one platform that would be the "best" for everyone. If we did, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion...
I think management style is a more important factor, for me, at least, than what computer I'm on -- if I have a flexible work schedule and multiple tasks to work on at the same time with agreed upon completion dates, I fare much better than with a micro-midget manager who only wants to hand out 1 task, and expects "you complete the 1 task you are assigned, and when you are done with that task you come back and ask for another task. You don't choose the order of tasks or take on other tasks without permission." I find it difficult to be productive under such circumstances.
-l
As an IS professional and consultant, the answer for me is linux - currently suse 9.2 professional. I can get by in microsoft windoze (w95/98/me/2k/expee) for limited periods, using it essentially as a dumb terminal to get to my internet resources, but to have to use microsoft windoze regularly would quickly become annoying as hell.
I suspect I could also be fairly happy and productive with OSX, and I like what I've seen of it so far, but I haven't spend enough time with it to say for sure.
I'm dependant on the hardware and software, not the OS. Windows doesn't help or hinder my productivity. Linux makes me spend time installing drivers, and not just running software. Mac hinders me in it's interface. Of course, that implies I want to be productive. If I wanted to be productive I would just boot straight to a 5 option menu: Word, 3d Studio Max, Photoshop, Internet, Final Draft. Ohhh and it would have to be able to play Mp3s and have a fancy way of interfacing with school computers.
Nothing beats single-command installs of either a an app compiled from source or a pre-compiled binary package for efficiency in installing apps.
Windows has nothing on this - no central directory of the hundreds of thousands of various apps you can use: MS Office, Nero, Photoshop, all the games, your text/code editor, etc. etc. - from which you click a button and it installs...
In that way, the transaction cost of having to deal w/ paying somebody for software (and thus having to go to the store, or dl it off somebody's site after filling out registration, CC#, etc.) is a cost borne by users of proprietary, for-profit software, whereas free-beer software doesn't have this problem.
That's just app installation though. In day-to-day use, I find myself fighting fewer bugs in FreeBSD or Gentoo than I do on WinXP. Feature-wise, however, it depends on the use. If I want to do gaming, I'm far more productive on WinXP (b/c WINE just doesn't run most of the games I play, and the few it runs at all, it runs painfully). But for coding, for *basic* office work, for email, for websurfing, for file-transfers, for securely handling my documents, for serving anything at all, for scripting craploads of tasks I want done -- nothing beats a Linux/BSD box for me.
Then again, I don't own an OSX box. Maybe it's the best of all worlds? Maybe - but being locked in to proprietary hardware like Apple has doesn't make me any happier than being locked in to the proprietary software of Microsoft. Each company pursues both a proprietary and a relatively-open attitude, but from opposite directions...
If only Apple would bring OSX to a limited number of "Apple-approved" x86 machines (on AMD64, preferably). I'd be all over those boxes and laptops like white on rice; like sweet on honey; like cum on a pr0n star...
Is Capitalism Good for the Poor?
Hmm. I admit upfront I'm no Mac user (x86, WinXPee&Linux) but I respect what they are good/better at and try to stay up.
.. Googled a bit and didn't find anything specific to Macs about this. Just curious, thx in advance.
So, someone please explain the low latency audio bus (Hello, me)
encoding divx of my own personal library for backup purposes? Windows, hands down. Because I know exactly what I'm doing. I'd have to re-learn how to do it in Linux, and I'm not sure I'd have to time.
Word processing, it'd be a close tie. There are some things I like about Word that I can't get with StarOffice, or OpenOffice, but I can do just about as much.
Server admin. Linux I love and I feel I'm way more productive. I might have to take a little extra time to get things going, but once it's done, it's done. I never have to touch it again, unless I need to change something. Windows on the other hand, it's finicky, flakey, and 99 flavors of wrong.
Gaming, windows. I hate to say it, but Linux just isn't there for me. I can play on Windows with half the horsepower that I can on Linux. (Bearing in mind that I'd have to use Cedega to play most of the games I play in order to use them in Linux, and I'd require almost twice the processing power and memory bandwidth). That being said, if it's written for NATIVE linux, I can do the same thing as I can do on a window box with less horsepower. (linux is just that much more effecient IMHO.)
compiling software. I think Linux has windows beat, hands down. Nothing says love like a self-configuring makefile.
Multi-tasking. Linux, by far. I love being able to switch from the gui and go into the console and run commandline apps apart from the gui and that are independant of the gui. SO even in the rare event the gui DOES crash, (albeit less often than windows), I can kill the gui without disrupting my other things.
It really depends. I have 2 linux machhines, and 1 dedicated windows box. However I look forward to the day when I'm completely free of the microsoft monkey.
Who cares about the ozone layer?...thanks to CFC's I can write my name......IN CHEESE!!!
isn't it the apps. and not the os that most people find useful?
most users are writing documents, checking Email, surfing the web, or what ever and most of the things they do are application sensitive and not OS specific?
I have many PC based machines and most of them (all except for my 3 year old sons) run some distro of linux. I also have 2 laptops 1 iBook, and 1 vaio OSX and linux in that order. I run the Linux tools I like on the iBook and Linux w/ the tools I like and use on the viao. and 2 old SUN boxes w/ solaris 8. I can if I wanted to get most of my business done on a windows box if I needed to w/o using many MS tools other than the OS it self.
Any way I just find the question a bit silly for average computer users.
I'd Tell you all my secrets but I lie about my past
Until very recently. I always uncompressed tarbals from the command line, but I do this in KDE now too (then I hit F4 to open a terminal there, for compiling, etc.) - I click to enter the tarball as a folder, then I hit the gear to duplicate the window, then hit the UP-Folder icon and "copy" the files over. I also love being able to right-click and zip up files to send to windows friends/clients...fish:// is also EXTREMELY handy at times...
I have a little LAN with multiple Linux machines - I really like ssh and love being able to run commands off of other machines; GUI apps act just as if they were run locally, they even dock into the system tray if they are dockable apps. This is much better than vnc (or rdesktop), IMO, most of the time - extremely productive.
I also really depend on multiple Desktops. I always keep most apps full-screen, especially the web-browser. I hate resizing windows all the time...
Also just recently, I figured out how to do something snazy like this (I should have figured this out years ago *sheesh* - I would sometimes do this by hand using NetCat):
This is GREAT. This lets me write files remotely to the machine (fred) I use as a CD-burner...my last solution was to load the command-line version of Midnight Commander on the remote machine (it's an OLD Pentium 166 with only 48 megs of ram) within an ssh remote login shell - I set it up (via the menu config files, etc) to load simple scripts I wrote to write bin/cue files, mpg files, folders, and it has access to shared drives. I was using this setup to write files on my network from the remote machine.
Now I plan to incorporate this into the KDE right-click menu, and I will be able to simply and easily, from the file manager, write cd's to the remote machine (I wish network block devices (or whatever it's called) would hurry up and make this entirely transparent with cd/dvd drives!).
I'm extremely productive - as long as I avoid the temptation to click on KNewsTicker and read Slashdot stories such as this one ;)
dahlek (will you squirm when you are pecked
Not much else to say except that I agree. The same is true with programming languages. The real skill and ultimate measure of productivity often proportionate to one's problem solving skills. A person can code Basic/Fortran programs in any language and on any platform. Some of the largest but error free programs have been written in assembler while some of the most difficult to maintain software has been written in a number of high-level languages such as C++, Python and Perl.
Yeah, so I have this little theory that Apple computers and other crap that they make are for stupid people. An in my experience, Linux is cool but I'm just not used to it and I like the applications that I am used to. So therefore, Windows is most productive for me, although if I were stupid my answer would be macosx.
Just in case you didn't know, you can download remote desktop for your OSX machine as well.x ?pid=do wnload&location=/mac/download/misc/rdc_update_103. xml&secid=80&ssid=10&flgnosysreq=True
http://www.microsoft.com/mac/downloads.asp
That saved me from having to buy a windows machine so I could remote desktop to my various machines at work.
I could have summed this up in 1 sentance.
"Women like MacOS because its pretty".
I've always found my Mac to be faster than my PC - faster meaning more work is done. Expose really speeds things up mightily as I often work in multiple apps. There's something to be said for Apple's consistent interface design. I carry my PowerBook around and to the office - it's my "work machine," while my PC sits at home for playing games and as a backup if I need a larger screen. Both machines have Macromedia Studio MX, luxology modo, and CS Suite on them, but I find I just work faster on the Mac. Not just design work, but also development work (databases).
Wrists killing you? Not in 2 weeks. Learn Dvorak.
...I feel impelled to chip in and mention that your choice of the term "shoots up" is a singularly - albeit probably subconsciously - appropriate description of BASH. (-:
:-), but it's close enough to represent a fairly strong incentive to use Ruby for all of your scripting.
It doesn't look quite as much like the result of a dodgy serial connector as, say, TECO (think "vi with the Shift key stuck down"
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Or perhaps he should try Ruby on Rails? Hard to get more integrated or developmental than that.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Long ago, far away I was given the task to find out if the Mac or Windows was more productive for the company I was working for. Since the Microsoft Office Suite was available for both platforms at the time, and the workers in the company were comfortable with it, I devised a series of tasks to serve as a performance test. Simple text editing, producing a flier, setting up a spreadsheet and so on.
We then got three people from each side, so to speak. Three expert users of MS office on Windows and three people from the marketing department who were familiar with MS Office on the mac.
We set them all down on Windows machines and had them do the tasks. As expected the windows people got the tasks done 10% faster than the Mac people.
We then set them all down on Macs and ran them through a similar set of tasks.
As expected, the Mac people got the job done 30% faster than the Windows people. However the big surprize is that the Windows people got the job done 10% faster than they were able to do it using Windows!
We called this the "Butt In Chair" index as the only thing we were measureing was how long a person had to sit in front of the screen to get the job done.
We did not go into detail about WHY these results came out the way they did, but there's obviously something about the Mac interface that makes people more effective, but as far as I can tell the productivity of the Mac platform continues to outperform the Windows platform.
I'm forced to use Win XP at work and it's a relief to come home to MacOS X. If you have any questions about the Mac/Windows/Linux usability question, please do your own BIC tests. If you have any questions about how to do it, email me.
Why do you like MDI?
I'm a long time windows user, and I've become accustomed to using the standard MDI framework. It's *very* nice to be able to hit Ctrl-Tab to switch between documents in an MDI frame, or Alt-Tab to switch to a totally different application like email or the program you're writing/debugging. It's a fantastic productivity enhancement for coders.
Basically I view MDI an "one better" than tabbed browsing. Hopefully Firefox and/or IE will switch to MDI in their next releases. (Browser developers, are you listening?)
Uses Konqueror to manage her website via SSH, does everything else in Konqueror, Kontact, Kate and OpenOffice. Very rarely administers anything, but if the KDE config menus aren't quite enough, Mandrake's Control Center will do it.
She has a few scripts behind icons to do stuff with one click which would be impossible with a bare copy of MS Windows. Most if not all of it would be achieveble with REXX on OS/2.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Philosophically, I like "unix" like os's. Hell, I use "vi" on Windows machines, and Cygwin on Windows too. I also get paid to write Commercial Qt C++ software for Linux. (But I can whip out a killer GUI in C# with .NET over the weekend, when needed).
The bottom line? The most productive OS? The one that has a paying gig, at the momement.
What do I want to do in 10 years? Nothing with computers, other than be a user - so I will probably go to an Apple product when I retire.
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
And I prefer 5-button mice, thank you. (-:
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
For me, Linux! I love the virtual desktops. I can code in one, look at my results in another, check
my email in the third and look at my email logs in the last! While I am doing this I can be compiling some new Open Source program I discovered along the way. Plus having a terminal at my fingertips at all times is nifty!
I'm a lawyer. Most of the work I do on a computer is in word processing. Win XP is perfect for me, as long as I'm behind a decent firewall with good virus protection (we use Symantec Antivirus Corporate Edition). I use Outlook for my email - and I'm not stupid enough to open attachments. I am experimenting with Firefox for browsing now - I like tabs, very much, and I am using Thunderbird at home. It's pretty decent, and I'll probably use it at the office too.
But (and perhaps this is a little off-topic as I'm talking about apps here) what I really use most of the time is good old WordPerfect 6.1 for Windows. It's simple to use, and because it's 10 years old, it runs like lightning on any modern computer. It's perfect. WP 7-9 were more or less too buggy to use. WP 10+ (it's up to v12 today) work well, but some of the older computers we use at my office (Celeron 600's) won't run anything that's bloated with any efficiency whatsoever. They run WP6.1 just fine. The only thing that WP6.1 doesn't support that would be nice to have is long filenames, but since it's the devil we know, nobody complains about it - and the speed at which WP6.1 runs makes the loss of long filenames an acceptable cost. Also, since we've been using the same word processor for 10 years now, every document we prepared over the last ten years opens looking exactly the same as it did when it was drafted.
As long as the OS doesn't crash, and for me XP doesn't crash, it's the apps that count. If you have a stable OS, and the old apps work, stick with them. You won't have to learn new tricks. Ever. True productivity means learning something that does the job, and never, ever, having to "upgrade" to a new app with new "features" that you won't use at the cost of you and your less computer-literate coworkers having to take time away from actual work to learn to use from scratch.
144l. ph34r my 133t l3g4l 5k1lz!
I'm a Web designer, and am fairly comfortable with the Mac and PC versions of the tools I use often (Linux is out for me--Dreamweaver and Photoshop are a must). I have to say that the one thing that keeps bringing me back to Windows is the tendancy towards MDIs vs. SDIs (Multiple vs. Single Document Interfaces) in Windows applications. Particularly in Dreamweaver MX, the single window with docked tools and tabs for easy switching between documents makes a world of difference. In OSX I find myself fishing for different open documents all the time. In Windows, I rarely have to do more than click a button or tab on the screen. I also find it much less distracting to have a solid-colored background than to have all my other open applications/documents visible behind the application I'm currently working with.
--
Why the hell not? Here's some SEO: Home Inspector
I havnt used windows for over a year now... infact it'll be around 1.5 years. Actualy i have used it, but not as my main OS and i havnt owned a window machine for nearly 1 year now. I have never owned a win 2000 or XP machine. When i had a job i used win 2000 a lot, its basicly just like 98 (the interface anyway).
:)
But having not used window for so long, when i have to use it, weather it be something not working on linux or my friends having virus problems, i find my self continusouly frustrated. Its like i'm back at work again, to be honest. Things arnt fast, they're dead slow and nothing is intuitive. But intuitivness in the computer world is learnt i feel because each system has its quirks.
I feel more home with at linux for sure. Fuck windows pisses me off. When i was first trying linux it was interesting/annoying, but now its just cool and smooth
Giving IE users a taste of their own medicine since 2005 - http://pods.-is-a-geek.net/
Anonymous Coward wrote: Hopefully Firefox and/or IE will switch to MDI in their next releases. (Browser developers, are you listening?)
Ack! MDI is just so...primitive. Why hash up perfectly well-behaved programs with something so unpleasant?
brwski
brwski
"Because without beer, things do not seem to go as well''
The most productive computer environment lacks an internet connection and any video games... but where's the fun in that?
... and in the DRM, bind them.
Maybe it's just a comfort issue, but I find that programs like Office, Dreamweaver, Matlab, Firefox, etc, all run much smoother on the PC. While some things run nicely on the Mac, the layout of things, such as the toolbars in Office for Mac seem to be scattered and clutter the screen. I prefer the same layout as that on the PC and I end up spending more time formatting my word files while on the Mac than I do on the PC. Dreamweaver for Mac has been nothing but trouble. Toolsbars randomly dissapear until I hit a key, or when I close dreamweaver and reopen it all the toolbars are no longer open and I have to manually open them. Trying to go to the begining or end of a line on the Mac is not exactly an easy task. Whereas I would hit "home" or "end" on the PC the Mac is very scattered and depends upon the program you're using. Holding function and left or right in Adium (AIM for Mac) will prefer the same function as home/end on the PC. But in firefox, for example, control and left/right performs this. In other programs you can't do this functionality at all.
People may argue that they hate the start menu but I'm personally a fan (sort of). I hate the new XP version of the start menu and always revert to the old classic start menu. My "applications" folder on the Mac has been completly reorganized to somewhat mimic the start menu. I hated having an entire listing of a million programs in the applications folder. I had to scroll for 10 minutes just to find my programs. Instead I organized my applications folder into certain groups just as I would on the PC (aka my "Applications" folder has become my "start menu"). Not having the right click can be a pain. yes pressing cntrl + click serves as the right click and yes I can get 2-button mouse but on a laptop this uses extra power and is cumbersome.
With all that said I do love my Mac. I think some of the software is great. I wish there was a version of Adium for the PC (I tried Trillian once but I wasn't all that impressed). iPhoto sucks (Picasa for PC all the way) but iCalc is awesome, QuickSilver is awesome, and Delicious Library is awesome.
Anyways, that's just my thoughts.
I like tabbed browsing actually, and I like tabs in VS.Net. If tabs were easily detachable, I would like this even more. Mac windowing is a horrible mess. They pay too much attention to transparency and shiny buttons, which in itself isn't a bad thing, IF the basics are nailed down. Whic, unfortunately, they aren't.
The Mac was more efficient -- the same work was done in about 20% less time, as I recall.
I'm sure the data are no longer valid, but it's the only statistics I've ever seen on the subject. It's also the best definition of productivity I know of -- what platform lets you do your work in the least amount of time.
For me it's OS X. I have used PCs at work since mid 1983 and Macs at home since January 1985. The biggest difference between the platforms was the consistency between applications, not anything in the OS itself (although expose is quite cool).
But now the biggest difference is the differentiating apps: itunes, iphoto, Garageband (which I am prepared to call the greatest program ever -- even better than the old Mondrian DA from the Finder 1.0 days). All the rest of the apps are either the same or so generic (i.e. mail apps) that for most users there is no difference.
For years smart people have said that the way you choose your OS is by the apps you want to use, since you spend the vast majority of your time there. And the Windows market share is proof that this sensible advice was by and large unheeded. But in the past few years it does seem as though Apple's apps are beginning to have some effect in promoting the platform as a whole.
It's nice to see people at least asking the right questions.
"BTW, might want to get rid of that immediate link to the DVD copy crack on your site, http://brainglass.com/downloads.htm Them there RIAA, MPAA and SPA folks are monitoring this site, ya know. :)"
No we're not!
Tell a chick that you spend all day sitting in front of a computer and she'll want to Lewinsky you right there.
Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
They didn't get too small until the Mini came out a couple months ago.
I've never felt quite as productive in any OS as I did in AmigaOS. Couldn't tell you why. Perhaps it's that the system was so responsive. Perhaps it's because the multitasking worked so seamlessly. Whatever it was, I've never found anything its equal.
would be my brother, and he uses linux (and occasionally windows (when he wants to play games)) and DONT say i dont get out much, thats beside the point...
Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job. - HHGTTG
Computers are like Hawkeye's criteria for a good nurse (rent the movie, not the tv episodes). At the end of the day, did you log out and turn it off? Or are you still fussing with updates, cables, reboots, manuals, nubbin tweaking? There's power users, and users with power. Uda prisoner uv Zenda?
``Tension, apprehension & dissension have begun!'' - Duffy Wyg&, in Alfred Bester's _The Demolished Man_
Need I say more? Quarterdeck had the productivity thing solved a looong time ago.
I don't care about OS for development. I use 100% the same tools on both Windows and Linux:
- gvim for editing
- gcc for compiling (mingw on windows)
- bash as shell (msys on windows)
- make/jam
- gdb for debugging
- firefox for browsing
- thunderbird for email
- blender for 3D modeling
- gimp for drawing
The *only* exception is valgrind on linux which unfortunatelly is not ported to windows yet.
Greetings,
Project Manager of Crystal Space (http://www.crystalspace3d.org). Support CS at http://tinyurl.com/cb3x4
How the holy fuck can this be offtopic? OK, who's the genius that gave the fucktards modpoints?
For those that did not RTFA:
For female readers of Slashdot:
- Emacs
... and I'll be all set.
- ifort (Intel Fortran)
- gcc
- python
- grace
- LaTeX
- Firefox and Thunderbird
So I guess that's Linux all the way for me (and so it's been since 1997)
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Assuming you have a functional firewall and AV system, then why are you screwing with drivers or the registry on a production machine? I've been running one particular machine with W2k for the past 4 years now. No rebuilds, crashes or anything else. It's the machine that earns me money, WTF would I mess with it? If I could freeze it permanently I would. Sure, I can buy a (slightly) faster machine today, and I could slot some more RAM in, but neither is a particular limitation.
Since it is a corporate machine unfortunately I do have to accept some of the security upgrades. When I am told to reboot I phone my 'helpdesk', and remind them that I am doing this at their behest, and that their lives will be a misery if it falls over. Suddenly the number of compulsory upgrades drops.
So far so good. It is odd to think that I have had more hardware problems (two - buggered RAM and a dodgy Video card) on this PC than software ones (none).
On the single button issue - my question to you is, what other laptops have done three (or even two) buttons well with X-Windows? I greatly (and by greatly mean will expound at length) prefer the single button with chording that OS X uses on laptops. it just makes more sense to me, feels pretty natural, and eliminates a lot of chances for keyboard designers to put buttons in the wrong spot. I cannot think of a better mechanism for a UNIX laptop to incorperate multiple-button mice than to allow for chording.
q /os/os_x/opt/" this page, which I think you may like - one intersting aspect is a command to turn on focus-follows-mouse for Terminal windows only:
On resizing, X is nice - but you can have that method back if you really need it. I'm actually not quite sure what you need to resize a window for often that is not generally taken care of by the zoom button... but if you really need to be able to hit a key and resize a window you can use a program like Keyboard Maestro. Myself I used X-Windows for a long tme before and don't really miss that aspect of X-Windows as I generally settle windows and then they live at a size they are at pretty much the whole time.
On both Windows and OS X you can achieve focus-follows-mouse, which I used to use all the time on X-Windows myself. The problem is that there are some aspects of the windowing system that do not play well with focus-follows-mouse, at least on Windows - I figured out how to turn that on but quickly decided it just did not behave in a friendly way, and reluctantly had to abandon it.
Interestingly when doing a little research for focus-follows-mouse on OS X I found a href="http://acs.pha.jhu.edu/general/computing/fa
defaults write com.apple.Terminal FocusFollowsMouse -string YES
Basically what I would say is that you need to spend more time researching utilities that help you gain shortcuts and quick workflow you feel you have lost - just about everything is there. Personally I do not use a lot of them because for many things I do the Mac workflow as it is does it for me, even though I used to be a very heavy consumer of all sorts of interesting customized window managers.
You can of course always resort back to X11 for terminal (or other windows), but keep digging and I think you'll find a lot of cool tricks with what is there already.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I'm going to have to go with Mac OS X on this one all the way for a couple of reasons.
First, and probably most importantly, it's what I've mainly used for a long time now and over that period of time (About 12 years I'd guess) things have been pretty consistant, even though I've lived through everything from 7.5 to now.
Back during the days of Classic, I still prefered Apples over PCs, but I think back then it was more a matter of personal taste. Both platforms worked ok, crashed way to much, and had inconsistant software. I still liked the Mac better, but I don't think I really would have been any worse for ware on a PC. However, all the various little nuances of the Mac have stayed pretty consistant over time and now most live on in OS X, so I've been able to transition very well from version to version over time and have simply built upon the core skills I had before with each new upgrade.
Along with consistancy in the OS, applications on OS X seem to me to be much more consistant in design and function than on other OSes. I've had experience in plenty of other OSes and have never found anything that has worked as well (or looked as pretty, but that's not what we're talking about) as OS X and had the level of consistancy. Granted, I've never used any other non-Mac OS to the extent I've used OS X, but I'm very comfortable in any version of Windows (to comfortable really, but more on that later), can work fine in most flavors of Linux, am not scared of any sort of command line and have even dabbled in the olden days of OS/2 and whatever the first Commadores with an OS ran (Amiga?).
Even thrid party applications all seem to follow the same basics of design and function. The menus are all where you expect them to be. Key commands are basically standardized. They even usually have similar looks which lends itself to a sense of unity throughout the OS. My favorite example of consistancy has to be that on Macs, all the CD burning applications have always more or less worked the same way, compared to a Windows machine, where I have yet to come across 2 diffent apps that behave the same. Hell, I've yet to cross 2 people with the same app. to burn CDs, and I've only found a small handful who even knew how to make a CD using their app. I learned Toast a long time ago to burn CDs (my first burner was a 4x2, no re-writeability), and while the process has advanced to a real no brainer level, iTunes more or less works the same to make music CDs and OS X to make data CDs as Toast did probably 6 or 7 years ago. It's this and a million other examples that add up for me and make it so that I dont have to spend huge amounts of time learning how to use every new little app that crops up.
And then there's the usual OS X advantages. It really is rock solid (I've had 2 crashes ever using it, and those we're back in the early days of the OS), even most applications never have issues and the OS is disturbingly efficent. I have a friend who is a die hard Windows fan. One day, he saw me use Apple's Expose feature to rapidly sort through and work in about 10 windows in no time and actually said, "Wow. Your operating system is disgustingly efficent." It kind of made me all warm and tingley inside.
But, thinking as I go, probably the biggest proof for me that OS X is the most productive OS for me comes not from me personally, but from other users. Being the most technology savvy person I know, I get to play mobile IT support guy to every one I know. I can think of, give or take, about 7 other Mac users I know and talk to about their computers and about 20 PC (All Windows) users. Funnily enough, as an aside, only a couple of the Mac users are even remotely aware of Linux and none of the Windows folk have even really heard of it besides my occasional threat to make them learn it.
Anyway, out of all the Mac users, I've only ever had to show 3 of them how to do ANYTHING on their computer and 2 had legitmate problems and the other 1 is mentally retarded and should be banned from compu
Request: ECM unit, 1000 km fullerene cable, 1 tactical nuclear weapon. Reason: Birthday party for foreign dignitary.
The mere mention of Lucas indicates exactly what kind of coke the parent poster meant....
I finally had the chance to work with MacOS, so I know from personal usage: :)) to XP
:o)
1. Linux (now 95% of usage time)
2. Windows from 2.11 (really
3. MacOS X 10.3.2
and while I'm a Linux junkie I must confess: setting up the Mac was done in a glimps, using the UI and all programs that come with it was "without thinking", and productivity on the first day on this host was about 40% I think. On Linux, I would still be installing applications.
After all I think MacOS X is the best, because you have a lot of time to work and don't have to tweek the OS a lot, Linux comes second because you HAVE to tweek it a lot, but after that it finally works, and Windows comes at the third place because it's - like the good old Doom Operating System aka MS-DOS - mostly installed to play Doom 3 with proper surround sound. Nothing to work with, though, especially after seeing Mac OS X in action.
Yep, call me an Apple Enthusiast. I have learned programming on an Apple ][e...
When I want to mess around with my operating system hours upon hours trying to configure everything correctly, that's when I feel most productive using lunix.
I'm a worms, trojans and virusses developer. Guess on which os i'm the most productive :)
GNUstep GNUstep
I've been around the block a few times. In my experience, anyone who says "windows is better" and then qualifies it with "for me" either a) attempted to install Linux and failed miserably, or b) never seriously used another operating system (or even used another one for more than 5 minutes). Most windows users couldn't handle Linux if their life depended on it, and have never set their hands on a modern Mac. They do this all the while attempting to trivialize the differences between a UNIX workstation (OS X included) and Windows by saying idiotic things like "they're converging" or "the reason there are no virii for Mac/Linux is because no one uses them".
Give it up people. Let go of your petty prejudices and actually give another OS a real try. Try it to it's fullest potential (like the author of TFA did) and then start talking about which OS is better than another OS.
Just a couple of points:
/usr/local (if you don't mind wiping it on occasion) or in /tmp. If you're not up to that, choose a distro with better dep resolution (if you still want bare bones, go to gentoo or Debian, otherwise try Mandrake or Suse) and use the Contrib.
1) Windows hasn't always had a predictable UI (and IMHO still hasn't). Case in point: drag n drop a file between 2 folders on the same disk: it moves the file, do the same between 2 disks: it copys the file, do the same to the desktop: it links the file. This is unpredictable in the extreem.
2) X bashing is so last century, and today is not much short of trolling. X has never been slow, and when you use the proper video driver, and a (reasonably) modern machine (Athlon XP 1600 here) Gnome and KDE aren't eather. Personnally I've always found KDE more responsive than XP on the same config (Gnome has some lag, it's true)
3) You're 'nothing works' shows me that you probably haven't used slack since the version inflation, and in anycase it isn't the distro for you. I'm currently running Slack 10.1 and DLG 2.8.2 on my machine, and Mandrake 10.1 on my gfs, and, surprise: everything works!
4) Try real, quicktime, wmv, shockwave, flash: all work (yes, on my Slack!, without tweeking!)
5) Trying out apps (from source) is done either in
6) smb shares work out the box with modern DEs (XFce 4.2 found my Windows network at work all by itself, no problems , nothing)
7) Free software is about scratching your own itch, for some people it's KDE, for some Gnome, XFce or Screen, there is no war, each borrows from the other, tries to get an improved user experiance, and both improve. XFree in itself should show you why this is a good thing.
Oh, and 8) Win95 doesn't act exactly like XP, you're moving the goalposts there, and 9) A WinXP BSOD is either bad drivers or massive spyware infestation, that one doesn't work anymore either.
HTH
David
Ask 8 slackers a question, get 10 awnsers (a citation, but I can't remember from who)
there's nothing like the smell of flamebait in the air to start the day off right...
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
emacs, teTeX, perl, firefox, R, gnumeric, gqmpeg, ...
- Hubert
OSX on my powerbook takes care of anything I ever had to use windows for and my server is a debian box. They've become symbiotic.
It's not one or the other... OSX gives the programmer a laptop that can be used as a wonderful "slam the lid shut and run" terminal to manage all their workstations...
I think of my osxbook as my "deck" (in honor of the Gibson neuromancer term...) it serves to connect me to my larger machine via some sort of ephemeral networking whether it be ssh or vnc, and that is where all the real work goes on... but everything from photshop to quicktime to gpg is "dmg and go" with my "deck". Not to mention the skyping and im'ing. (All without the trashy web advertisement looking interface of XP.)
OSX and Debian are a match made in heaven.
Each OS/GUI has its own productive use.
I use WinXP for home education and LAN multiplayer games, and at work it is used for document viewing and X-host to unix systems.
My Linux machines are used for various purposes: Some as distributed cluster for analysis, some as family member workstations for practically anything except multiplayer games, and one as file/db/multimedia/apps server.
I used MacOS for almost 9 years before jumping to 10 years of Linux (I missed MSDOS - Windows 3.1 revolution), so my natural next move is MacOS X workstation that may replace one WinXP station.
But I will probably keep WinXP, since we need Red Alert 2/Yuri's Revenge for family entertainment (multiplayer LAN group battle with wife/kids or with guests) which doesn't exist in Mac. BTW, wife is not a geek, and statistically, many mature females enjoy computer games.
I hope there are more multiplayer LAN games suitable for family entertainment (not some bloody FSP geared for young males nor repetitive mindless games like those in game consoles), preferably multiplatform that can run in Linux, Mac, and PC. Beats playing scrabble or monopoly when not playing outside. Shouldn't that be a feasible market? I even heard of someone doing business providing LAN game setup for office parties. Anyway, off-topic.
Let's all try to come up with a formula for productivity!
... say .. factor 0.9
I'm taking 5 working days of 8 hours as a basis. So if you work 4,5 days on work, and 4hours on other things, you spent 90% of your time on work. If you do
do overtime, it's possible to be more than 100% effective. However, everything over the 40h base takes a hit (Po) of
Wgj = The % time you spend on getting the work that needs to be done, done.
100% means you can dedicate all of your time to your goal
Wos = the % time you need to dedicate to basic OS tasks. Booting, Rebooting, opening Apps, renaming files, waiting on mem swaps. We assume that the system is fully prepped, but minor tweaks should go in here
Wup = the % of time you spend on doing things you shouldn't really do, but make your life easier, or less annoying: updates, virus scans, spam and malware removal
Wgo = the % of time you spend goofing off: solitaire, coffee machine, slashdot
So we would get to something like:
Productivity = (Wgj - Wos - Wup - Wgo) + (Wgj - Wos - Wup - Wgo)*Po
Exercise caution when modding this message up: the author acts like a jerk when his karma is excellent.
Which O/S has the smuggest users ?
My personal experience is from the perspective of my day to day role as a systems administrator for unix systems and windows systems. I use linux on my desktop primarily because 99% of my work involves unix based systems. The role varies from FreeBSD, Solaris, Linux, Tru64 depending on the systems im working on at the time. With ssh and all the tools used to communicate with those systems out of the box its much easier to use. and the benefit is that I dont have to pirate anything or waste company money on licenses for software that I will never use. The other plus is that every time a new release comes out i purchase the cds to ensure the future of my OS :).
Got a question about UNIX ask it here : Unix/xBSD Forum
They dont' hype it anymore (was in place with 10.0) but it's "Core Audio". Apparently it's super fast / low latency / etc stuff. I'm not audio person nor have I used the API so I can't say more. I hope this will help your googling.
Unless what you are doing all day is plagurising someone else's material, then speed of copy-and-paste (or dragging text) really isn't much of a metric for how productive you can be.
/mnt/windowsbox //windowsbox/share /mnt/windowsbox
*if* you're the kind of person who edits everything in vi because they believe that that's the only 'real' editor, and *everything* you do is editing text, I can see the argument. But I use my Mac for reading mail, browsing the web, organisiing my photo connection, connecting to remote systems.
mkdir
mount -t smbfs
No thanks, Command+K from finder and smb://windowsbox/share.
Copy and paste a URL from a document into a web browser?
Highlight and Command+Shit+U.
Install a new mouse, with as many buttons as you believe are going to make you productive by editing a variety of configuration files (in vi, of course)?
Nope. Just plug it in.
The poster makes some reasonable observations; yes, you can only resize windows in the lower right corner; yes, Macs come with one button mouse by default (and everything just works with that); yes, there's no X-windows accidental cut'n'paste or text dragging. What he fails to do is convince anyone that these actually slow anyone down; and completely ignores featurs like Expose which are nowhere close in X land, and the fact that hardware works without any configuration at all.
Linux wins, hands down.
The things which make me most productive are multiple workspaces, tabbed browsing with tabs aligned vertically, and the unix command line.
The native Windows way of organising multiple windows on your desktop - individually minimising or maximising them using the toolbar - is horrible. I haven't used OS X much, but as I recall it continues the Mac OS tradition of showing / hiding applications, which is slightly better than the Windows way, but not much.
On Linux I can use the Galeon web browser, which allows me (admittedly with a little more difficulty than before, since the development team's feature-removing rampage) to put the tabs on the left or right. This means that when I have twenty or thirty tabs open (as I usually do), I can still see all the names. (The first person to tell me that I'm using the browser wrong, and that you're only supposed to have ten tabs open in each window, or that you're supposed to open a new window for each new website, is going to get a poke in the eye.)
And then there's the unix command line, its enormous selection of utilities, and the shell. I use it to navigate and manipulate the filesystem (I've tried to like graphical file managers, but I don't), do various useful things to text files (with sed, awk, head, tail...), write bash scripts to automate tasks... It's probably the tool most useful to me on a daily basis, and the thing I miss most when I have to use a Windows computer. You get a command line in OS X, but (at least in the client version) the majority of the unix utilities is missing.
I know that there are third party utilities which emulate multiple workspaces on Windows (although I hear they're buggy), and that you can install Cygwin - but you have to make a special effort to get them, and when you're temporarily working on *someone else's* vanilla installation, you seldom have the option of adding arbitrary extra software.
Linux gives me two of these three things natively - I'm guaranteed of finding them in any standard installation.
To be fair, I do have to go to a little extra effort to get Galeon, since it is rather obscure and isn't included by default in the major distributions. But as far as I know, there is no browser available for any other OS that lets you align tabs vertically. Firefox can do it if you install Tabbrowser Extensions (Bloatzilla!). There is currently no other extension that I know of which enables this.
These three things are not the only reasons that I use Linux, but they're the things whose lack annoys me the most when I'm working in another OS.
And yeah, I know linux does that, but linux isnt ready for the desktop, no matter what /.'s crackpipe dreams state.
...or any decent modern Unix, for that matter (Linux, Solaris, the other *BSDs, MacOS X).
Most of what I do involves using multiple machines, and being able to synchronize files using cvs, ssh, scp etc. is crucial.
When I get files from the net, I can always trivially extract them (gzip, bzip, tar, unzip, unrar are all, if not included by default, trivial to find and install). On MSWin...hunting down the stuff from some download sites, half of the stuff isn't even free, everything works pretty inconsistently...no wonder MSWin-users need fancy installers for software.
For web browsing, I'm comfortable with Konqueror, Firefox or Safari. For dealing with MSOffice documents, OpenOffice.org is just fine for me.
Seriously, I don't see what MSWin could possibly offer, except a less comfortable windowing environment (when you're used to X11 desktop apps, they're far more comfortable than MSWin equivalents). Games, perhaps, but I stick to using a console for gaming.
Oh, and I don't need to use any pirated software to get everything I need to do done.
BTW: I do have a WinXP installation (it came with my laptop) but I never really feel I need it for anything, and when I occasionally boot into it (mostly to keep it up-to-date), it keeps complaining that I don't have anti-virus software installed. A short-time subscription to Norton AntiVirus was included with the machine, and I did have it installed, but I'm certainly not going to pay for something that grabs up resources, bugs me every now and then, and merely serves to work around flaws in other parts of the system.
With Unix systems, at least it's easy enough to lock them down so that they're not vulnerable to anything.
I'm so sorry for being a Windows user but what's with this pretentious attitude that unix CLIs can do things that DOS can't? Have you played around with the command line on XP? It's not a toy. Any of you blabbermouths care to step up to the plate and elaborate on what unix has over Windows/DOS? No? Didn't think so.
linux (fedora) for most things, unfortunately there isn't a product like ableton live for the penguin yet. wish i was skilled enough a coder to contribute to something along those lines... until then redmond will still rule one of my boxes.
Most of the stuff the article mentions about is very superficial or related to visual design in the language of UI design. Things make us really productive if they are aligned to our goals and tasks and all the existing OS score very badly in this area.
Then it works. you can also set up a shortcut key for it, I use Cmd-alt-T to speak and stop text.
> I'm also a sucker for predictable UI...
I find that using a homogenous GTK+ desktop (gnome minus nautilus desktop (to boost speed) and plus goffice (faster than OO.o, plus uses native widgets)) the UI is far more predictiable that Windows. What do WMP, MS antiSpyware, MS Office, Windows Explorer, and Notepad have in common? Not the same widget set for sure. They all use different widgets.
I use Solaris at work, and Windows XP at home (for games, and stupid bullshit)....
So which do I fell more productive in? XP, of course.
How about:
c) They're not arrogant enough to assume that their choice should be embraced by everyone else.
Also:
I'm confused - are you using this as proof that Linux is better than Windows, or worse? Common sense suggests the latter, but your tone suggests the former.
In my experience, it comes down to one thing: what you're used to.
That gives you about 90% of your productivity, if you're talking about the OS (as opposed to whether you keep getting distracted or read slashdot all the time, etc).
I've heard people tell me many times that Windows or Mac OS or Linux is much better at doing job XYZ, but on investigation it's just slightly different, and basically 'what they're used to'.
Case in point for me: I've used Windows on and off for long enough that I use Alt-Tab habitually. I can't live without fast keyboard based task switching, that lets me flick through all the main windows with a simple keypress. Everytime I use a system that doesn't have it, I feel restricted and constrained. The OS X dock annoys me with its Alt-Tab analog, because it almost copies Windows, but gets important things wrong (like the order of windows is based on the order in the dock, not the Z-order, etc).
However, ask most Windows users what Alt-Tab does, and they won't be able to tell you. When I use it on a non-developers' machine, the user is like "Woah! What was that? What did you do?" So it's clearly not a widely used feature. However, it really bugs me when it's not there.
Most other things are like this - I hated the Mac OS network chooser, because I was used to a different model, but Mac users were fine with it.
It's the way it goes - it's what you're used to. I don't personally believe that the Mac or Windows or Linux desktops have much to separate them.
By the way, this goes double for casual users. I upgraded my Dad's PC from Windows 98 to Windows 2000, and for many tasks, he was lost, because the buttons/menus had moved/changed. Imagine how he would cope if I changed it to OS X or a Linux desktop. It has nothing to do with the superiority or otherwise of Windows - it has to do with what he's used to.
Or an email client. Those eat my time.
EOF
My Background: I use all three major Workstation OSes (Linux, OS X and Windows) on a regular, professional basis.
Of course Windows 2K/XP has massive suckage potential, but no one can deny that it still is a de-facto monopoly which unfortunately is an advantage in itself. Available Software, everybody knows it, etc... Yet it's universal desktop usability is far behind anything a generation 2005 Unix derivate setup has to offer (Aqua/KDE/Gnome/E/whatever).
KDE has improved massively in the last releases. It's usable out of the box, has siezed 100% of Font and Clipboard management without fuckups and it only takes a little configuration to rid it of the windows crappiness it still thinks it needs to ape. The usability of a well configured KDE is just about at the heels of a well configured and tweaked Mac OS X. Bad hardware vendor support of OSS is currently the biggest no-go for professionals at the desktop. Everything else is way ahead of Windows. It's what Steve Ballmers nightmares are made of.
Finally OS X. I have to mostly agree with the linked article. Apple pays people good salaries to 'just sit around' and think of ways to improve user experience. Apple is an appliance. Apple has literally zero hardware fuss they have to cope with. Even the first iMacs came in a package that had a first in not needing Monitor adjustment. That allready greatly enhances end user experience. I've seen countless desktops with expensive CRTs flickering at 60Hz because the users didn't know how to set up a CRT screen. How do you install a printer on a Mac? Plug it in. It's start's right there and end's with things like MacMini, 'Expose all programms' and Tiger's upcoming Automator. It's what Michael Dell's nightmares are made of.
That's the reason Apple is leading the way in usability and productivity, OSS is closely following and MS is sweating bullets over the trouble at the horizon.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Hands down
...there are always things to break through aimless blundering with the terminal and plist editor. Then there's opening packages and substituting renamed files of incorrect types. Or you could delete kernal extensions at random and see what happens.
You just need to be a little more creative about what needs "fixing".
Well, I appreciate you comment although I personally disagree, but... having X in userspace is the whole point of it, really. It means less "critical" code to mantain, and it usually leads to less security flaws. More, I don't think that having X integrated with the OS would necessarily mean a faster X. Also keep in mind that X11 was born for truly different reasons than M$Win. Can you have more than a person using a Windows computer at the same time with a GUI available?
As for keeping in topic, I must say that I'm a lot quick developing in GNU/Linux than in Windows or MacOSX. Probably everything is about habit, when you get right down to it; but speaking as an ex 13yrs-long Windows user, I can say that I got fed up with it for its counter-intuitive (yes, you heard me right) interfaces. I find a console damn simpler (maybe because I started with MSDOS so I ain't afraid of typing), and it doesn't force me to do what M$ wants because I don't understand what I'm doing, I'm forced _to learn_. And someone that has learned _why_ a thing works that way, can use it faster and better the second time. Maybe this is why a lot of Unix users don't like Windows (more than for ethical / political issues): they find themselves limited, like passing from swimming in the sea to swim in a seven ft. depth pool.
Also, on my old PIII 500Mhz 128Mb RAM, a Gnome 2.4 DE was twice as fast than Win98!! I even tried XP once, you know, but it lasted three days or so, even on my new 2.4Ghz 256Mb RAM. Just opening "My computer" made me cringe, and gave me the time to rewatch a Kurosawa's movie from the beginning to the end.
Another thing I found really simplier in GNU/Linux, is installing new software. It gets where you would like it to get (I really like the Unix approach: divide the files by function, not by productor), and a good package manager (I use emerge) does everything you want: download the needed files for you, solves dependencies, and install it automagically.
In Windows, you had to go to the site, download the program, accept fourteen licenses, install it, wait for it to add 5000 keys to the register (and thus making it slow in a couple of days...), and so on.
Unix systems are known to apply the KISS philosophy. But in Windows I had to keep: Media Player for wma, DivX player for DivX, WinAMP to play OGG, Adobe Acrobat to see PDFs... in Linux I just type "mplayer filename" or "xpdf othername" and I'm set up.
Last time I tried to set up a network in Windows, I got those six or seven errors that are cryptic and inexplicable, such as "the host could be disconnected" (when I could ping it?) and "unknown error" (winxp, if you're wondering). To get two computer connected via crossover cable, I had to configure one, disable network for it (it takes >2 minutes, don't ask me why), disable network for the other one, enable it for the first, enable it for the second, disable it for the first, re-enable for the first (dhcp related problem). Okay, there's a good explanation and it's not the Right Way(tm) to do it, I can admit it. But what's up with an "ifconfig eth0 192.168.0.1" on the first computer (with the dhcp server) and "dhcpcd eth0" on the other(s)? And it didn't took >2 min per operation, I assure you.
A thing I couldn't really do without, is the Unix "API". "CreateProcess" & friends give me the willies, when you just need a "fork()" and an "exec??()". I found Unix libraries syntax much more clean, less bloated and well built than its M$ counterpart. Do you need a pipe? "man pipe". Do you need a socket? "man socket". As simple as that. Threading? "apropos thread", "man pthread_create".
At the end, Unix was wrote in academics by academics for academics, while M$ products were wrote in corporation by corporates for corporations. The first one is a more "elegant" approach, which is often explained with elegant math formulas, stratified development and clean design. On the other side, it all seem to me a huge hack (except for NT 3.0, wrote by a VMS engineer
42.
Personally, I have multiple computers with multiple OS's that I multitask between. That's when I'm most productive. Each OS has it's own strengths and weaknesses. Use them for what they are each good at.
Half the items in the list don't even have a reasonable excuse for being greyed. For instance, "make new sticky note" should just launch the app if it hasn't been, and "search with google" should bring up the google home page if no text is selected. Any others that require text should put up a dialog to let me type or paste the text they need, or should just use the clipboard text -- anything to let the user know that the options actually can be made to do something.
Oh, well. Good to know now, at least.
I play Nerd-Folk!
I won't use an OS unless at least 15% of the rest of the computer using population is using it.
Tell me where I should go today...
I drank what? -- Socrates
What you just said, it is idiotic.
As a programmer, I am much more productive in Linux because I can tie almost everything I do in Gnome (or KDE) to a key command. I don't use the mouse very much (or at all) while programming in gvim or Eclipse, and it really slows me down when I need to, say, launch a terminal or a browser.
I also hate to use the mouse, and like to use function keys for everything. But I could never figure out how to program the function keys the way I want in Gnome or KDE. I actually use an ancient window manager (fvwm2 with AnotherLevel macros from RedHat 5) because I was able to make it do what I want.
E.g. if I have a bunch of mozilla windows open, I've got the window manager configured so that every time I hit the F9 key, it moves to the next mozilla window, bringing it into the foreground and giving it keyboard focus. I can cycle through my mozilla windows by repeatedly hitting F9.
I've got a ton of such keys programmed, e.g. ctrl-shift-F7 goes to the next xdvi window, F10 goes to my emacs window, and so on.
Can Gnome/KDE be made to do this? As opposed to programming them to run a particular command when I hit various function keys?
Real bonus points would be to have the above behavior, but be clever enough that if I hit say F9 and there aren't any mozilla windows open, to then run a new mozilla process to open one.
Explanation: http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/audio/
1. Doesn't Crash
2. No pop up ads
3. Handles all data formats, graphics, texts, spreadsheets, and mail.
3. Compatible with all forms of music (as long as you know how to write and read musical notes).
4. Low cost data storage.
5. No battery to recharge.
6. Write/Erase ease of use.
Pencil and Paper is the best OS ever!
I recommend rdesktop instead. I find that it's more stable and more configurable than MS RDC. It is an X11 app so you'll need that installed. that is all.
Let's give our laboratory productivity test monkeys a couple of tasks...
Task One
* GUI - 1 minute thinking, 29 minutes flapping around with a mouse
* COMMAND LINE - 29 minutes thinking, 1 minute typing
Task Two
(very similar but not identical to Task One)
* GUI - 1/2 minute thinking, 29 minutes flapping around with a mouse
* COMMAND LINE - 1/2 minute thinking, 1 minute typing
I only realised the significance of this when I developed serious RSI about 4 years ago. Brains don't get RSI.
The first pool that is not really an poll. and cowboynealOS option is missing.
Its the applications not the os duh
As far as top productivity OS, I use Linux, and DR-DOS (see below for info on why DR-DOS is better than MS-DOS). Which is more productive, I can't say for sure. Linux gives me the ability to start X & Gnome, when I want to do things best accomplished in a GUI, but I am usually (90+ % of the time) at the text console. SVGAlib, AAlib, SVGATextMode, links and mplayer make full multimedia work very nicely, and when I am being productive, a straight-up text editor (JOE) is more helpful than all the IDEs in the world.
DR-DOS, of course, is just about equally productive for programming, thanks to multitasking. I don't have web browser and media players for it though.
DR-DOS (http://www.drdos.net/) is at least
equal to MS-DOS in every way I know except possibly running Windows under it. (Deliberate effort of MS to stop Win 3.1 from running under the competition, not sure if it still causes problems or not)
It's main advantage, however, is multi-tasking. This functionality brings it almost to the level of UNIX.
On 386 and later machines, a system similar to Linux virtual consoles is used, so a hotkey brings up a menu to background the current process and switch to another console.
On 286 and earlier machines, the hotkey menu supports task swapping (essentially suspend a task and open a new virtual console, or switch to another virtual console with an already-suspended program; one program at a time running, many suspended)
Switching to firefox has helped increase my productivity, simply by not rendering slashdot properly...
~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?
The environment from which I do all this is Win2K, because I prefer it where user interaction is concerned.
Please retrofit your insightful observation to fit this datapoint.
Well my personal most productive O/S was GEM on my old Atari 1040STFM.
It used to boot C-Labs Creator (music sequencer) from a floppy which then was the single app running on the machine. I then used to create hours upon hours of tunes (MIDI sequences) with absolutely no distraction from the O/S because "It just worked" (tm) and there wasn;t enough memory to run anything else. Sheer productivity heaven.
In comparison with the other O/Ses I've used.
Windows: Too flaky. By the time I've kept all my antivirus & anti spyware apps up to date I've forgotten why I switched the damned computer on. Not to mention that the ealier Windows used to BSOD ALL the time and that the drivers for my Audiowerk-8 now don't work properly under Win2k.
Linux: Too configurable. By the time I've tried out a small portion of the gazillion apps for the task in mind I've ended up getting distracted and realise I've just spent all my time trying out some new config settings/services etc.
Mac: Too expensive.
So whilst this is somewhat tongue in cheeck the Atari really did win hands down for productivity. And at the time it was also far better than any of the hardware sequencers available. So hats off to Atari !
Sky subscribers are morons. They pay to be advertised at !
But at home I have OSX and Windows, and feel more productive in Windows. There is a big "But" there, though - there is so much sypware, adware, popups etc in Windows that I've given up trying to defeat it and use OSX almost exclusively just for that reason. Although I love being able to alt-tab through the individual windows of an open app under XP (requires F10 on the Mac, still drives me nuts), one too many times I was doing some critical piece of work and my full screen was suddenly taken over by some commercial or movie preview. No more.
Eclipse feels just as fast on my Mac Mini than on my fancy new AMD machine and everything is just nicer.
So the AMD machine is gathering dust while the Mac Mini is doing the grunt work.
Go Mac,
T.
My other sig is Funny.
Sure, coders and developers need different things out of their OS, but once the app is done, the critical aspects of the OS become the user's main needs. And yes, I'm assuming your app calls the OS in an organized fashion.
Then you get into the societal aspects- what is the user used to, what is the learning curve, etc... That said, from what I've observed with my family members and their experiences with Apple ][, DOS, Win 3, Win 9x, WinXP, Mac OS 6-X, and leeetle bit of *x.... Well, I get less calls on the Macs than I do anything else. So I vote OSX.
Tell a chick that you spend all day sitting in front of a computer and she'll want to Lewinsky you right there.
And if your socks match, she'll even let you zergrush right in your face.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
It's a bit of a rant, but it is beautiful, and after coming across this...
...I found a warming affinity with the writer. Microsoft Word is one of the biggest offenders - the tabbed dialogue box is so difficult to use because of this. Utterly, utterly appalling design.
:D
Some of the most utterly evil things about the Windows UI are those diabolical multi tabbed preference windows, where each time you click on a tab that is not in the front row, the whole set of tabs shifts, leaving them all in a different position.
I'm sure there'll be many who will try to defend Windows or, God forbid, some such Linux GUI on here (although GNOME is pretty damn good in some ways), but I doubt they've used Macs for any length of time, simply content to dismiss them out of hand. I laugh at you for the fools you are! Hah!
It's very rare these days that I have to endure a Windows machine, but it is always a painful experience when I do. Don't defend Windows until you've properly used the alternative - those of us who have decent knowledge of both will invariably choose Apple.
iqu
put a MAC OSX, a Windows xp/2000 and a linux O.S. with the same guy with the same software installed and loosely the same hardware and productivity will be base on how good this person is with the Software. Given time, everybody can be productive on any type of platform, it's just knowing the tools and commands and making the most of it. Every O.S have flaws ,but some of these flaws will seem bigger depending on what you use the machine for.
Get a Mac graphic artist on a windows after he's been using a G5 MAC,,,damn he'll cry is hearth out saying it's the slowest thing in the world and that it's easier with Mac and graphics are better etc..etc..
Cant compare apples with tomatoes.
There's no accounting for taste.
I hate MDI, I much prefer organizing my work by virtual desktop, so I'll have one desktop per task and the all the windows associated with that task go in that desktop. MDI makes this impossible.
If your workflow is arranged around applications I can see MDI having a benefit, but that just feels unnatural to me.
Case in point: drag n drop a file between 2 folders on the same disk: it moves the file, do the same between 2 disks: it copys the file, do the same to the desktop: it links the file. This is unpredictable in the extreem.
If you've only got one hard drive plus removable drives then that does kinda make sense, but I agree it's odd.
Solution - always drag with the right mouse button and you'll get a pop-up menu to select move or copy.
Recompiling the kernel with the latest patches is something that happens at lunch time. Daily.
After a few years this gets real old.
Yes, you can do this in windows and I use it all the time (I'm not the original poster btw!), but it definately isn't as good as in linux; as lots of programmers must not realise it's possible a great deal of programs raise on focus which is really annoying (Eclipse IDE for one!)
to 1)
...
Mac OS X does exactly the same, and you don't have drag & drop right mouse button here, you have to use Option/Command to override this.
But I never understand why there is move/copy. Normaly I always move things and rarely copy
"Freiheit ist immer auch die Freiheit des Andersdenkenden" - Rosa Luxemburg, 1871 - 1919
I didnt read all the responses.
If the question is "which OS do I feel most productive in", one must also ask "what task am I performing?"
If I am developing a web app for myself, I feel most productive in linux. If I am developing a web based app that integrates with our corporate network, I feel best in Win32. If I am developing documents or spreadsheets, it is again win32. Gaming is also win32.
I do have an aged mac running osx, and I like the system very much, I just dont have a lot of use for it atm. It's a little too old to replace the linux box.
Four-digit slashdot ID. Recognize.
Really, I feel any OS can do the things I'm looking out for it to do in its scope. C'mon, you can't expect Windows to do this -- "zcat file.gz | grep miss | awk '{print $3}' | sort -n | uniq -c" like some guy pointed out earlier. Of course, you won't approach Windows that way to do it. And how many times have you really required to do that command on a Windows desktop ? Same way, you'll not approach linux to play fancy new games. I use many OSes ( MacOSX, Linux, Windows, BeOS, PalmOS, QNX, Solaris, IRIX ) and they're all good in their own respects. Of course, Windows is at the bottom but its still useful for certain productivity tasks. It like the cars. you won't take a beat up chevy station wagon to the Indy 500. You go get what's best for the job. Depending on what you want to do. Also, for the author -- a lot of her Windows quirks can be solved if she paid more attention to her setup or by visiting Windows Annoyances.
I find some of the arugments the article presents to be plain old ridiculous. Icons are too small and too hard to work with? You know there is an invention called glasses. Perhaps it is time for you to see your eye doctor?
I have tried all 3 platforms. Namely: Windows (95 through 2003), Linux (SuSE, RedHat, Mandrake, Knoppix, MEPIS, etc..), and last AND least in my opinion: OS X.
OSX proved to be nothing more than a MAJOR annoyance. Every time I force myself to sit down and try to figure it out I end up cursing left and right, and can't wait to get a hold of a Windows machine to do some real work On. Granted, Windows has many MANY uncountable flaws, but hey: AT least It doesn't drive me nutss trying to figure out which application(s) is/are running and I don't have to manually quit them by going to File->Exit or File-> Quit. Furthermore, I want my right clicks dang it! I can't live without them. SOrry OSX, but holding down the control key (or whatever the heck its called) while clicking just defies the purpose of a right click to begin with!
Linux has its fare share of problems. It drove me nutss to have to mount something to accomplish something as similar as "map nework drive" especially when i have to create a file/folder first and set permissions. It seems easier toimply map a network drive (THIS IS ONLY AN EXAMPLE).
Back to the point though, I think this lady who wrote this article about how OSX helps her be more productive is missing the point altogether. Its not THAT OSX helps you feelmore productive. Its simple that it jut "clicks" with you. As someone said above, you can be super productive on a type writer if that is what "clicks" for you. Personally, I feel most productive on Windows 2000 (yes 2000, not eggs pee).
Oh, why post that AC? I may not agree that this is the truth, but I sure as hell want to!
WinXP BSOD is either bad drivers or massive spyware infestation
Or hardware failure. Sorry, but not everything is MS' fault.
Usability is relative. Each OS is a tool and the best tool for the job will depend on the task itself. Choose accordingly.
The only issue is when you upgrade KDE in FreeBSD via ports, it never works again (at least for me). I have to use Gnome on there, and Nautilus won't work, so I have to use Konqueror and not have a desktop.
In any OS with no support for tcp/ip.
That would surely increase my productivity !
I spend a lot of time from Windows surfing slashdot, and almost no time from Linux. So obviously I'm being more productive when I use Linux.
Nothing to see here. Move along.
Do you have any other examples? Seems like most of the things you talked about so far are just the result of you expecting a different way of doing things than what you're used to.
I think he's mostly talking about that 17 Meg file...
1.) how is behaviour that you can describe perfectly unpredictable? If you don't like it use modifier keys or the 2nd button... /random/pucky/goes/here/ and build the binaries to /random/pucky/runs/there/ that I should be able to... You have the source, change the make file or specify the parameters to put it where you want it.
2.) bashing any OS or UI is mostly useless. Live a little, broaden your skills, become OS-agnostic! If you don't like it and have a choice, don't use it. If they've standardized on it at work, either make a business case for change or shut the @$!% up and deal with it...
3.) see above, but substitute distribution for "OS or UI"
4.) yippee! Try Oracle.
5.) hmmmm, seems to me that if I want to put the source in
6.) it has gotten better, but not all user experiences are the same.
7.) amen, see #2 and #3
8.) basic functions are similar, but there are definitely huge divergencies
9.) but alas, bad drivers are pervasive. Creative? 3Com? Intel? ATI? Broadcomm?
Having used Windows, Linux and OS X (in that order chronologically), I have found that:
drag n drop a file between 2 folders on the same disk: it moves the file, do the same between 2 disks: it copys the file, do the same to the desktop: it links the file. This is unpredictable in the extreem.
?!?!? DO the above three times, same results? How is that an example of unpredictability?
because I can't seem to find a good keyboard command or menu item for it. (If there are, Windows fails at making them easy to find.)
I know it's a novel idea, but did you ever try searching the help for "Keyboard Shortcuts"? If you use Office, try it in the Office apps, too.
For a new user this is doing the same action 3 times (ie draging and droping a file/folder), and getting 3 results: there's your unpredictability. Note I didn't say instability
Ask 8 slackers a question, get 10 awnsers (a citation, but I can't remember from who)
True, that said since most drivers are written by third parties, bad drivers aren't often MSs fault either. Now if only they could be more ethicle....
Ask 8 slackers a question, get 10 awnsers (a citation, but I can't remember from who)
"Scroll Wheel" any OS or platform that does not support this is wasting time! Hence less productive.
I also prefer the Javadocs to MSDN documentation. Javadoc puts all the information for a class on one page which I thought made understanding a class very easy and limited how much you have to navigate to find the things you're looking for.
I got several people in my office using it and even those that were totally dependent on a GUI editor admitted that it was a better IDE. The auto-completion was just as helpful and *a lot* less intrusive than VS.
Lastly, IntelliJ can be extended to implement features that people want. A favorite in my office was VI emulation in the editor.
Anyway, I'm not in anyway associated with IntelliJ, but I'd recommend checking it out. It was pricey but not as expensive as Borlands stuff, and they give a free month to evaluate it. I found it worthwhile. Runs on linux and macs too.
WWJD? JWRTFM.
1) as stated underneith: for a user that is 3 results for the same action, note I said unpredictable and not unstable. 2)3)7) You should really point this out to the GGGParent, I was just counter acting and didn't bash anything outside of his post. 4)Must do, shouldn't pose too many problems (that said if I were to deploy a slack, I'd use postgres) 5)I was pointing out good system keeping practices 6)But then again they never have been: try talking about the XPeriance to a Mac user 9) Too true too true
Ask 8 slackers a question, get 10 awnsers (a citation, but I can't remember from who)
In which OS do you get a greater feeling of freedom?
If you don't have freedom then what is the purpose of productivity?
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
yes you can replace the buttons: search for sidetrack. i paid 15$ and very happy. yes, there is an opensource scroll driver (two-fingers) out there, but side track lets you map corners to keyevents or mouse clicks. including your 3,4,5, and sixth buttons, if you want to go there.
Not to shill for 'em, but you might be interested.
or with Equivalent FPSs existing for them :p
4) Try real, quicktime, wmv, shockwave, flash: all work (yes, on my Slack!, without tweeking!)
Are you completely sure that Shockwave runs on Slack without tweaking? Or does "running via WINE" not count as tweaking?
There is no sig line - only XUL
Question Authority before IT questions You
As I measure productivity by the following ratio:
What I want to do : How much of it I can do easily
The But is that sometimes I want to do in-game and out-game maintenance on my game server. I can't play the game(yet...) in Linux, so I do this mainly in Windows, even though a large portion of it would be easier in Linux.
As a result I have gotten, not Linux versions of windows-like programs, but Windows ports of Linux/Unix-native programs (MySQL Navigator, for example) and I puTTY in when I need a shell(server is on Linux.)
ftp://81.86.159.146/latest.png - need I say more?
Cthulhu Saves -- in case He's hungry later.
BTW, might want to get rid of that immediate link to the DVD copy crack on your site, http://brainglass.com/downloads.htm Them there RIAA, MPAA and SPA folks are monitoring this site, ya know. :)
Q: How low can a Mac user go?
A: Low enough.
This seems minor, but when I tried to find a solution to this online, I stumbled across this guy who sold his PowerBook after a month, because it was driving him so crazy!
Supposedly this can be switched off by using a Kensington mouse (and the Kensington drivers), but that doesn't help much with a build-in touchpad. Any experts dare to comment...?
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
I spent too much time trying to trouble shoot things in Windows. Right now I have found out that the DNS settings to update W2000 with the active directory DNS server are not the same settings one needs for XP. So I am spending days trying to figure out how to use GPO's to fix the registry. Since these are adapter specific, and each adapter has a GUID, then I can't do a simple .REG file.
Linux has too much of a learning curve for me. That would be my issue, not a Linux issue.
OS/400 - when I work on it, I am actually getting business work done. Not jacking with settings.
The AS/400 is the most productive platform I have ever worked on. I have been in the field since the C=64 days.
Neither. I personally, due to experience, believe Linux is far superior. I'm using my earlier statement as evidence that Windows users are lazy, incompetent and afraid of the other-os-boogie-man. I've taken 3 computer know-nothings in the past year and put them on Linux (Debian no less). They do their work every day, quite happily and virus/spyware free. All it takes is a little bit of effort.
How about:
d) think that claiming option c covers up the fact that they are actually option b people.
The way you manage your windows is far, far, far slower than someone using a descent multi-desktop linux environment.
Even moving and resizing windows is painfully more slow and annoying in Windows - you can't really debate that one.
Windows' window management just sucks, in a very concrete, objective sense.
I actually wasn't referring to its usability. I was referring to the fact that Windows users by and large are unwilling to try. They claim Linux isn't ready for the desktop because "it doesn't do X like Windows does". Well of course not, that's because it's not Windows. They're afraid to try something different for the simple fact that it's different and they feel intimidated by that.
I've been using OS X for a year, Linux for 5 years, and I used various incarnations of Windows for 6 years before that. On a large screen I'm most productive on either Linux or OS X. On a small screen I absolutely need Exposé. And Windows, well XP is not bad as long as I only install putty and use it as a way to open many shells on a real OS. Even then it's difficult to get any real work done when I'm forced to use Windows. I agree with the author in that I spend more time fighting with Windows to get it to do what I need it to do.
Source for Xul?
:)
Source for Zuul: Ghostbusters script.
(yes, never believe hollywood! Even if the writers actually read up on that stuff - cause, well, Dan Akroyd is a real freak (positive connotation intended) about the occult, religion, et al.
Seriously, thanks for the correction, but what's the source. so I can correct others as well.
-- There is no sig line, only Zuul.
And people say Linux users are ready for the desktop!
Without a doubt, MacOS X.
Even though I am getting close to my MCSE and do a lot of work on Windows I more productive on the Mac. The Mac makes me feel like the computer is working for me. With Windows I feel like I am working for the computer.
With Windows virus updates come in on a daily basis, if you surf the net then you have to run ad-aware. I have saved a lot of grief and work by not even using Windows for email. I do all of my email on the Mac. I prefer the Mac version of Microsoft Office over the PC version and I can do over 90 percent of everything I need to do on the Mac.
I even find it easier to test bed stuff in Virtual PC than using my real PC. The best thing I ever did with my PC was to dump Windows XP Pro and install Windows 2000 Pro.
I recently bought a Powerbook G4, and have been a mac convert ever since. Don't get me wrong, the cheapness of PCs along with their wide variety of software is alluring, but, when the going gets tough, my Powerbook just gets tougher. I have never had a single crash, have never seen a BSOD, and have always been able to find some piece of software that will get the job done. And anytime I turn on the computer, I never have to struggle with the BIOS or figure out why my computer is demanding I boot into "Safe mode..." it just gives me the happy faced mac, and assures that everything will be ok! Also, I dig the placement of the Command key on Apple's keyboards. It makes key commands much faster and easier when in the midst of note taking/paper writing/on-location audio editing and the like. To me, there is no question: OSX is the king.
In other words, how often does the OS crash and thus prevents you from working? By this standard, at least, Windows has to come in last.
Well well well. I wonder how much she got paid for that. Interesting article; I even learned a few things about Aqua. It's a pity that the article was all about GUI's though. I'm sure you can make an Aqua-clone for Windows or Linux. But I feel more productive with Linux or OS-X because they are so much more flexible than the Windows OS. And I'm not even a programmer, just a nerd who likes computers. With Linux or OS-X you can get the OS to do what YOU want, not what some pointy-hair in Redmond thinks is good for you.
-- Cheers!
Well, unlike 99% of y'all, I've worked on mainframes, and PCs, and workstations - that means IBM, and Unisys, and DOS, Windows, Win9x, NT, Linux, and various Unices.
I'll take any version of Unix (incl. Linux) over anything else. As I've said for nearly a dozen years, I've created reports in *nix that took me maybe 15 min. of thinking, and one very long command line, that in any other O/S, would have taken me anywhere from two days to two weeks.
mark, software developer, configuration/release manager, sysadmin, and looking for work
Did switching work for you? Why (not)?
(Whichever direction, mac to linux, linux to pc, amiga to atari, whatever...)
I think, therefore I am...I think.
Sigh.
:-)
Stupid religious war.
Look, people are different. Most people are primarily verbal or primarily visual.
They will be more productive in an operating system that caters to that. A verbal person will prefer a command line, a visual person a well done GUI.
Mac OS X is visual/kinesthetic.
Linux tends to be pure verbal.
Windows is a bastard verbal GUI. (more on that later)
So if you're an artist, you'll find Mac OS X to be easier to use and you'll produce better work then you would on another operating system because the OS will synchronize with your cognitive mode.
If you're a lawyer, you might well be happier on Linux. If you ask a lawyer, they'll tell you they were happiest on Word Perfect 5.4 under MS-DOS.
No one can be productive on Windows, because Windows manages to be a verbal focused GUI. Under Windows, its all all about choosing verbs and nouns using a GUI, vs. Mac OS X which is more about the visual manipulation of objects. So there is no cognitive mode were Windows is really usable... Even worse for a visual person, the color scheme is like being screamed at all day. For most artists, using Windows is the death of a thousand stings. More subtly, art done under Windows is usually inferior to art done on Mac OS X, because Mac OS X is easiest to use in a visual cognitive mode. Windows, by forcing a shift to the verbal mode, hobbles the artist.
As an experiment, ask yourself this:
If you are drawing, do you use more or less keyboard commands?
If you are writing, do you use more or less keyboard commands?
If you are programming, do you use more or less keyboard commands?
If you are designing programs, do you use more or less keyboard commands?
What you'll find is that depending on the primary cognitive mode of the task you're currently doing, you use the computer in different ways.
This is why all OS religious wars are stupid. Different people have different preferences depending on their particular cognitive preference.
Except for trashing Windows, because it sucks because it requires mutually exclusive cognitive modes. That's ok.
For a new user this is doing the same action 3 times (ie draging and droping a file/folder)
I see. Unpredictable because someone else would not predict it, not unpredictable by behaving differently between repetitions. OK, in that you actually have a good example... my mistake.
probably a dumb terminal connected to some sort of server with emacs... everything else is just fuel for distraction...
but they _can_ use Windows
I disagree. I would postulate that most Windows users cannot use windows. Oh, sure, they may be able to click on the blue 'e' on their desktop to get to yahoo.com, but is that really using windows?
I've never seen Windows make a shortcut on your desktop with an ordinary data file. In the old days, the default action for moving an _executable_ file was to create a shortcut. And moving/copying files in that manner has been standard on the Amiga platform for 20 years and is consistent with file system logic. (Consider what Unix variants do with 'mv' - it's simply performing a relinking that's like a rename on the same filesystem, and a copy-and-delete (move) across different filesystems). Granted this might be a bit confusing to a novice/very casual computer user, but it shouldn't be too hard if one reads the fine manual.
Even if a user finds this confusing after RTFM, just have them drag with the right mousebutton. The context menu erases all doubt.
(For the record, I've not really used Windows before Windows 95, I found the 3.x series to be hideous and I was completely non-PC before 1990. I suspect Win3.x had a lot of GUI infelicities. None of my comments apply to pre-95 series Windows)
Oh, off on a tangent, one thing that has always annoyed me about post-Amiga OSes is that they do NOT seem to support what I call 'Type Behind'. Since most of these OSes either foreground a window when you click on it, or worse yet, when you hover your mouse over it, you must shuffle the windows on the screen if you want to type in one window while reading from another. Or click back and forth a lot. Or copy the information into the other window (often not possible with images/diagrams). AmigaOS doesn't automatically bring the selected window forward (unless you configure it to; see the ClickToFront commodity, I use that with the ALT key modifier to bring a window forwards), which lets you use touch typing on an input box / text editing area while viewing a document/etc over it.
PS. Running Debian Testing on this machine (2500XP/ATI 9600) is a sluggish and unresponsive GUI experience, compared to XP. Further, the driver for the nForce RealTek 8100 network adapter is rather crappy. Mind you, I find XP to be sort of sluggish and unresponsive too, just to a lesser extent. I like Linux-console-on-AthlonXP/P4 or AmigaOS on 060-with-video-accellerator type of responsiveness, myself.
Are we still in the 80s? I realize this is not an IDE, but I was talking about IDEs.
As a text editor it looks promising, though. Trouble is, text editor built into Mac OS X is perfectly adequate for my _text_ needs.
9) A WinXP BSOD is either bad drivers or massive spyware infestation, that one doesn't work anymore either.
:-(
Actually, I work for the tech department for a large university campus and I can say without hesitation that bad drivers may cause a BSOD, but spyware won't ever do it.
What will cause the BSOD on a regular basis is Windows nuking the HKLM registry key. Which causes the computer to bomb out on boot (and you can't get to safe mode either).
What OS corrupts its centralized database on its own and is still used by a majority of the world?
Your Windows PC is my other computer.
Oh, where did the good old days of Win9x go?
Live in the past - you never get any unexpected errors.
1. Most feel their OS is better then the rest
2. Most reading /. are power users
3. The only Posts that should be here if you have used and are proficent with at least 2 of the OS's mentioned
4. If you cant live with the Mouse you don't belong posting here because your not Productive 5. I hate to say this but if your reading /. all the time your not Productive either
I am proficent with Mac and Windows have used both for many years but prefer Mac
Just my 2 cents
Most windows users couldn't handle Linux if their life depended on it
Good Windows users could.
Those that remember their DOS heritage and just make a mental note that "/" replaces "\" in path specifications.
Conversely, I've been able to do things in a DOS shell that are "intuitive", like
"Provided by the management for your protection."
For you first point, I haven't got a windows to test, but I'm pretty sure that was the way it does things (I'll check at work tommorow) at least I remember it driving me mad on 98.
And I agree that type behind sounds useful to an exent.
BTW: What are you running on your debian? not rolling just curious.
BTBTW: nForce drivers are rubbish, but if you look through the doc, you'll find pointers to their open equivalents, much better all round.
Ask 8 slackers a question, get 10 awnsers (a citation, but I can't remember from who)
If we knew anything about productivity would we be spending our time reading /.? ;-)
do the opposite of whatever we're doing...
I don't have to go and install popup blockers for IE, I can use Safari instead of installing Firefox, I don't have to install Virus and Spyware programs. And when something does go wrong I'm not at the manufacturers website looking through a thousand different models trying to find the one I own for help.
Personally, I'd love to get by without most of my distractions - that would be email (mostly from the sales team, the rest normal business overhead) and the phone ringing constantly. Not to mention that as a programmer in a small business I also have a server admin hat, a DBA hat, and a technician hat. Whole days can go by where I don't get a single line of code written and yet barely have time to eat my lunch. My OS doesn't have a chance to make me unproductive! :)
> KDE and GNOME aren't much better.
> It doesn't help that I find myself constantly dropping to the command line to do simple things
> that should have an easy GUI equivalent - kill and ps, for example.
In KDE:
kill:
1) press CTRL+ALT+ESC, pointer turns into skull, click on a window to kill its process
2) press CTRL+ESC, a graphical ps appears. click on processes to select them and click the kill button to kill them.
ps:
1) CTRL-ESC
--
-JC
In a way, yes it is. One of the goals of the operating system is to manage applications, and if the user doesn't have to fiddle with the operating system, then the OS is doing a good job "staying out of the way." An OS should require very little user maintenance.
They work, just not very well. The Quicktime Crossover plugin is extremely slow (though it works), and the various open source plugins I've seen have been of poor quality. Flash works, but there's a difference between "working" and "working well." Flash does not "work well." It is slow and uses far more CPU power under Linux than it does on other operating systems. Wmv also doesn't "work well," mostly due to the plugin issues. I wish the mplayer plugin or xine plugins were reliable and well-designed, but anything that is just a shell around an external program instead of being designed as a plugin is going to have problems.
Free software is about scratching your own itch, for some people it's KDE, for some Gnome, XFce or Screen, there is no war, each borrows from the other, tries to get an improved user experiance, and both improve.
This also makes it difficult to develop for. It is a chaotic and moving target. I used to be a big advocate for diversity of desktop environments and libraries, but over the years I've found the downsides are matching the upsides.
wow narc'ing that guy out because he doesnt like macs.. to the riaa no less.
and now you see why everyone hates mac enthusists. they are dicks.
btw I have an ipod, but im not gay so no i would never buy an unupgradeable mac because its more "trendy"
I'll just use my special getting high powers one more time...
I work with small to midsize businesses and consumers. I have two consumer customers and a few small business customers who use Linux on the desktop (a little over 5% of my customer base).
The love it.
The learn more about the software, feel more confident, and find that Linux is easier to learn.
IMO, more people who use Windows are afraid of it than when they really start with Linux.
There are some rough spots, but these are really minor at the moment compared to the rough spots of Windows (such as spyware and adware issues).
Linux suffers in the consumer market more out of reputation than anything else.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
Newton OS 2 on a MessagePad 2100.
best, most useful UI out there, even a decade since its design.
- Entertaining Bits from the Ancient Kernel Tree
Supplying all these keyboard commands for me is helpful, and I will definitely use them. Thanks.
But they really aren't an answer to the issue, since it takes actively hunting for them. A good desktop GUI should be more not-there than there.
you know....some people actually like windows over linux though. I have a friend who prefers doing all his school work on a windows machine because on a linux machine will get distracted with fiddleing with it. And with a mac they just havent given it too much of a try....they are kind of expensive. I on the other hand would prefer doing all my work on a mac.....less distractions.
If it wasn't for C, we would be stuck using BASI, PASAL and OBOL.
you must be new to slashdot.....MS is blamed for all the evil in the world.
If it wasn't for C, we would be stuck using BASI, PASAL and OBOL.
Never willingly going to use another OS that doesn't have "apt" configured and running by default or something pretty close to it.
Today, editting web pages by hand (apparently I last updated the "last updated" tag in 2000), whoops no "tidy", "apt-get install tidy", whoops no "dos2unix", "apt-get install sysutils"
Not to mention the time I waste patching computers that don't just get all the updates overnight when apt-cron runs, be they from Redmund (no I mean properly patched, not just a handful of system updates with a random reboot, but every app and every security patch and scarcely a reboot in sight), or Redhat (like RH9 isn't that old).
Now all I need to do is resist the urge to check out what the upgrade to all my favourite time wasting games has done, and I'd be more productive.
MACs I plead I've never got along with, although MacOSX looks okay, I've not had the patience to persevere. Does it have "apt"?
Which can be roughly restated as "only by using this boring piece of crap Windows box am I able to stay disciplined long enough to get my homework done."
Its the /. advocacy flame war.
/., I don't need to tell you that windoze 98/95 is at the bottom of the list as the most hated systems I have to work with.
I use pretty much every kind of system in my day to day tasks. Since I move around from client site to client site, I never have much of a choice which system I'll be using to get my job done.
I work with so many different kinds of equipment, routers, telco gear, speciality kit, funky electronic gadgets, servers, firewalls, data bases, CRM sytems, you name it, I've probably touched it in the last few years. Everything has a different access method, whether a telnet session, a console port, remote desktop, special proprietary apps. Some is local, some is thousands of kilometers distant.
Depending on what is available at the client site, I now have a nice hierarchy of preferred and hated systems. As this is
At the top, its the latest Mac OS X. I never have to tweak an OS X system. I sit down and I'm working at full speed in 10 to 15 minutes, multiple windows open, email, M$ word documents, xterms, *nix CLI commands, google, network printers and file shares, all there. Compare that to a minimum one hour with any linux system, one to three hours with a *BSD system, and a full day or more lost if I have to get a windoze system cleaned up enough to support my work needs.
I'm a pretty experienced computer user. But I spend hours tearing my hair out with 'doze boxes, even those fresh from the OOBE. I had to set up a system this evening for a friend, the DSL modem took a few minutes, the WiFi took a few minutes, and the XP SP2 system took several hours to get it to behave like a real computer on the internet. The only saving grace is that I had a Mac Powerbook with me to verify where the problems lay, and to help google up some pretty obscure answers to the plague of problems a fresh clean XP machine can have. [\rant]
the AC
In second place, I'd have Cisco IOS, just for consistency across releases and through the years. Not exactly a General Purpose OS, but consistant
Hemos is like...sci-fi fans;he thinks technology is cool, but he hasn't bothered to understand the science it's based on
Well, I can't help with the focus follows mouse problem but there are a few good applications that I can recommend that might prove useful for you. Witch (http://www.petermaurer.de/nasi.php?thema=witch&sp rache=english) will allow you to maximise from the dock and to switch between open windows. Making use of a good launcher like Butler (http://www.petermaurer.de/nasi.php?thema=butler&s prache=english&kopf=labor), LaunchBar (http://www.obdev.at/products/launchbar/) or Quicksilver (http://quicksilver.blacktree.com/) to quickly open applications or documents. Another interesting application is GeekTool (http://projects.tynsoe.org/en/geektool/) which lets you display text files (i.e. logs), terminal output, or images on your desktop. Finally I recommend that you try out TinkerTool (http://www.bresink.de/osx/TinkerTool.html) for changing some of OS X's less apparent settings.
> 1) Windows hasn't always had a predictable UI (and IMHO still hasn't). Case in point: drag n drop a file between 2 folders on the same disk: it moves the file, do the same between 2 disks: it copys the file, do the same to the desktop: it links the file. This is unpredictable in the extreem.
/.ers in this thread (not just Welsh Dwarf) are posting what amounts to little more than "Windows is crap because I don't know how to use it."
[pedantic mode=1] Actually, WD, since you've just described exactly what Windows does, you have shown only that Windows is very predictable, not that it is unpredictable.[/pedantic]
You just need to know how to interpret the feedback the computer gives you. If you see a little [+] during a drag/drop, then that's a copy, if you don't then that's a move. If you see a [+] and press Shift, it changes the operation to a move. If you see no [+] and press Ctrl, it changes it to a copy. If you can't be bothered to read the screen and you want a move, press Shift because it doesn't have any effect if that's what it would have done anyway (similarly for copy/Ctrl).
"Which is which?" I hear you cry. Shift causes the computer to shift the file from one place to another; that's how I remember it.
Generally, if you rely on defaults, ignore the computer's feedback (i.e. you don't RTFS, or perhaps UTFS) and do not know how to change the default behaviour to what you want, then yes, you could argue that the computer is "unpredictable." But I guess that's probably true for Linux and OSX as well, and probably every other computer sytem out there, and that this is more a case of PEBCAK than Windows crappiness.
I find it interesting that lots of
> Oh, off on a tangent, one thing that has always annoyed me about post-Amiga OSes is that they do NOT seem to support what I call 'Type Behind'. Since most of these OSes either foreground a window when you click on it, or worse yet, when you hover your mouse over it, you must shuffle the windows on the screen if you want to type in one window while reading from another.
There are two possible solutions to this (possibly more). (1) Use Focus Follows Mouse; (2) in Windows, look for the Nail utility, which gives you the ability to specify the Always On Top flag for any window. As I'm typing this I have Firefox full screen with Explorer nailed above it so I could give you a list of files in my root directory without any window switching, if I desired, which I don't.
True, this isn't generally supported by applications, but this is a bit of an advanced task anyway, and could create more confusion than it solves for a beginner.
Pretty difficult question... but overall, I'm going to have to say.... well. Damn. I don't know. Speaking in terms of productivity, it really depends on what I'm doing. But to make a long story short, I can say that my network, consisting of three computers running various operating systems does everything that I need to do and makes me very productive. I have an eMac running Mac OS X, a desktop running Windows XP Pro/Slackware 10 and a laptop also dual booting with Windows XP Home and LLGP Linux (back and forth with SuSE 9.2). This takes care of everything.
"Instant gratification takes too long." - Carrie Fisher
but then I haven't felt productive in decades...
Lost in space at an early age. Survived the vacuum. Now rebuilding castle in air.
I think that productivity is something that really depends on how knowledgeable you are with the environment you work in. Unfortunately, for myself, I am more productive in windows based OS's because I have been working with windows since i was 5(well dos, but still Microsoft). It may be error filled and frustrating at times when the OS crashes constantly, but I can get more done in windows and quicker than i could in Linux simply because i know windows and every screen and check box by memory. I roll with the explore errors and unresponsive programs with ease and recover the OS from the brink of hardware freezes constantly. However, I get so much more done with more windows than I can shake a stick at (...23 windows right now), something Mac can't exactly do. I am just at "home" in windows. Ultimately though, when I get to the point in Linux where I am now with windows, I can almost guarantee that the one with the least amount of crashes will be the most productive. So assuming I know everything about every OS I would say Linux and OS X would be the most productive environments with the least amount of crashes and recoveries needed to get the work done. In addition, with less games in Linux and Mac, there are less distractions like a "15 minute break" for some old fashion UT or doom 2 :D.
I fart around at work on my Du^hell, then get the real work done at home on my G5.
I have ran eclipse on debian unstable since v2.0 (thats how long, 1.5 years? 2?) with no crashes whatsoever. My coworkers use it on win2k/winXP with no complaints about stability at all.
What platforms have you tested it on? which java JDK?
Oh, and about speed issue, yes, it can be quite laggy sometimes, but I haven't seen an IDE of this caliber running much faster.
Besides, Eclipse has refactoring, autocorrection of simple errors, cross references, very good search and lots of other goodies.
--Coder
"5) I have been using this for more than a month now and my Mini only got stuck once. Once! take that windows!"
What version of windows are you running, 98? I haven't had my computer crash since I installed XP 3 years ago.
In Linux because I am familiar with it, has the tools I need, does not require antivirus and spyware protections and does not require unplanned reboots except when the nvidia driver goes south (rare, but it does). And I can choose a minimal window manager that both looks good and does not eat much memory for itself.
But for most people Windows is the familiar platform, even if you have to install extra ram to compensate for the mandatory av and spyware protections.
Windows users by and large are unaware that there are any other PC operating systems.
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
The point is that a new user would get confused by what is very unintuative behaviour.
/Rant off
And I'm not saying that Linux is better in this regard, KDE suffers largley from the same problem (in this and other areas). OS X OTOH always moves IIRC.
Not all users are geeks, if they were the web would be a better place. Thay aren't, theres nothing we can do about it, and bitching that "Windows is great in all respects, its just that 95% of the world is too stupid to use it properly" won't help.
Finally, if you look to my original post, you'll see that I'm not bashing anyone system more than another, and if you can't accept that your system has flaws then you're no better than the people you critisize.
Ask 8 slackers a question, get 10 awnsers (a citation, but I can't remember from who)
Have you ever felt the day passed by and you find yourself thinking "oh. i wanted to read that article, and there was that link, to another interesting article, and... i don't remember what happened after that". To be productive, i'd better have no available connection, except for intranet, and offline or papers copy of the usually needed resources...
And I'm not saying that Linux is better in this regard, KDE suffers largley from the same problem (in this and other areas). OS X OTOH always moves IIRC.
OS X moves if you're dragging to a location that's on the same partition. If you're dragging to a location that's not on the same partition it adds a gigantic green "+" to the mouse pointer to let you know that it's copying and you can press fruit to make it a move. (I'm sure a Ctrl will make it turn a move into a copy but I never have occasion to use that one.)
The idea here is that it's what you're going to want to do. If you've just inserted a disk of some sort you're probably going to want to copy the files off it, you're not going to want to move things. Same with network shares and the like.
Windows' ".exe files are SPECIAL and should be linked when you drag them" bugs the living daylights out of me, however. But that's due to OS X's wonderful concept of "here is an application file. It's really a directory with a bunch of files in it but you don't know that. It's just... a file."
I think it was further expanding on your joke.
http://www.xulplanet.com/
I've actually seen some other sources with the spelling of XUL since I saw the purported joke expansion.
:)
:)
If there are an babalonian gods reading slashdot (No, that's sumerian, right, thanks for that) please feel free to correct.
Isn't it wonderful how slash gets so OT so quickly
-- There is no sig line, only Zuul.
well, i've tried running an OSX mac for a little while. i personally liked the interface (easy to use, while looking subtly cool), but, i have a few knocks.
1. unupgradable. i like to be able to change parts in my computer, not chuck the entire thing every 2-3 years.
2. many of my favororite games don't have a mac version, and don't like virtual PC.
3. 1-buttoned mine annoy me, though if i needed to i could probibly get used to them.
if OSX, or OSXI, is ported to x86 and works with my hardware, i'll be glad to install it as a third OS on my computer, but keep windows xp and linux around for what i use each for.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
If you have (or get) Mac OS 10.3 or newer, it will come with Apple's X11.app, which, when you launch it, provides a fully functional installation of X. I just tried the select-to-copy and second-button-to-paste method in it, and it works perfectly, even when my "second button" is actually option+click my trackpad's button. Within a window, and between windows.
You can also install any X program that's been ported to PPC Darwin (and some that haven't!) easily from source, including all the most popular window managers, if you prefer them to the Finder. I'd recommend looking up Fink, a Debian-style package manager for OS X. I've had nothing but excellent luck with it.
Dan Aris
Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
Take the amount of minutes in a day that you're actually getting crap done, and divide by the number of minutes you spend troubleshooting the machine. My iMac G4 with OS X runs between 95 and 99; my Windows machine, less than 50.
I use three OS (Windows 2000, Mac OS X and RHL Linix) every day. Each a their advantages and disadvantages. IMHO I personally am more productive using Mac OS X because I can use connect and use both Windows and Linux resources without too much trouble. I have VirtualPC from Connectix(Microsoft now) and I can use some exculsive Windows programs.
The only time I cannot use Mac is if there are hardware limitations if the manufacture made the application and hardware only for Wintel equipment.
> What OS corrupts its centralized database on its > own and is still used by a majority of the world? I've NEVER seen a Windows OS do what you describe, and I've been using Windows since Windows 286 (remember all those diskettes?). I have, however, had Linux (mostly RedHat, but a Slackware distro also) go tits-up on me, and I've not been able to recover.
I feel most productive, as well as a lot of other things, in Linux.
For me, It's not the OS (kernel) but the feel of my workspace. it's more fair to compare GNOME or KDE with Mac/Windows than Linux, since my Linux is very bare and decidedly not KDE.
Of course, my requirements are simple: A good text editor, a command line for recompiling or executing utility commands and gathering tidbits of information (man 3 whatever) and that's it. Having few flashy distractions helps.
I could be just as produtive in Windows (cygwin + windows port of emacs) or OS X or Solaris or *BSD. My most productive environment is emacs, a couple xterms and a web browser (for when man lets me down). Hell, I could even just use 6 VTs if I can have more than 80x25.
On Windows I find there are too many hard-to-disable distractions (plus, on XP even if you disable stuff there are a ton of things slowing the system down). Disabling eye candy on OS X was not a design goal, so I find it hard to concentrate (plus, that damn command key keeps oopsing me). Any other kind of *nix (with bash, please) is perfectly all right by me, since you can disable 99% of everything if you want to.
Of course, what some users need to be productive is different. Some people need Photoshop or a word processor with good layout capabilities. Or maybe fancy wizards and I-see-you're-bored-would-you-like-to-play-a-game? dectection. Windows and the Macintosh are better for those at the moment, but probably not for long. Eventually Linux will be as good a desktop for those types as it already is for me, and then everyone will automatically think "Linux" and we wont need polls like this.
I want my Cowboyneal
I've used everything from older "big iron" running HP-UX to modern systems running Mac/Linux/BSD/Win32. Really, it's irrelevant.
What matters is your personal environment. At home I have a FrankenMac (heavily modded and upgraded G4 tower). At a previous job I used Windows 2000 as my primary system. At my current job my primary system is KDE on SuSE Linux but I also regularly use Windows XP and Mac OS X on an old G4 tower.
What really matters is my personal environment. I'm a coder so what matters to me is a good editor (currently gvim 6.2 on *all* platforms) and a consistent set of commands/scripts/etc. to work with. Really, there's only minor differences between the different platforms I use (when I'm working).
Beyond that, there's "productivity apps" like browsers/email/etc. I use different apps at home and work but that's not a problem.
Probably the most important way to handle multiple platforms is to use cross platform software. I'm not saying there won't be native software that you might prefer (I use Firefox on Windows and Linux but Safari or Camino on Mac OS X).
I'm late to this discussion, but it dawned on me that to be productive your machine needs to be available and working properly. If you are constantly dealing with security issues, downloading patches, running spyware removers and scanning for viruses, you are not being very productive. I have seen people literally replace a horked Windows box rather than go though the troubleshoot, cleanup, and reinstall process, only to have their new machine ownd for the same reason a few days later. Maybe I am being laissez-faire, but I don't even have an AV package on my Macs at home. It just never been an issue.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from Macintosh...
What I hate most about Windows apps, and linux programmers like to use it too in their apps, is the fact that all dialogs end with confusing 'yes' 'no' questions. e.g. on a Windows box, closing an unsaved document in Office asks:
Do you want to save changes to Document1?
[Yes] [No] [Cancel]
But other programs have different and sometimes elaborate questions:
"Closing this window will cause you to loose changes. Are you sure you want to loose your changes?
[Yes] [No] [Cancel]
Now I have to read the WHOLE dialog to be sure nothing bad happens, because if I click [Yes] here, I WILL loose my changes.
On the Mac there are also 3 buttons. The default button, the one pressed by entering return is always the savest choice, sits always on the right side of the dialog and is marked differently from the rest. e.g.:
"Do you want to save changes to this document before closing?"
[Don't Save] . . . . . . . . . [Cancel] [Save]
You may call this eye candy, but IMHO and that of real GUI designers this is a huge timesaver and prevents anger, hi-blood pressures and other comfort issues.
The close button, one of my other 'favorites'. Sometimes the outermost close button closes the inner window, but sometimes it closes the whole application. This is not so bad for quick-starting apps, like Office. But slow as hell if you have to go through login screens. e.g. HP Openview.
So, imho, I am more productive with clear & concise dialogs.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
wow, she sure sounds like a clucking hen.
XP definitely doesn't make shortcuts to the desktop. I'm pretty darned certain 98 didn't either; it just made shortcuts of executable files. _That_ was definitely annoying, but I'm perfectly fine with the filesystem logic.
I'm definitely running Debian Testing (Sarge, estimated release number 3.1), using the drivers in the kernel tree for 2.6. I use a KDE desktop too. This dual boots with XP using the nice little _text menu_ mode of LILO, as I have a strong dislike for graphical boot menus on a PC. The AGP GART stuff seems to work fine, but the nForce ethernet controller (really some sort of realtek 8100; realtek has a horrible reputation for NICs. Their leadership position is only due to the cheapness of their products) drivers that come with kernel 2.4 and 2.6 seem rather flakey.
Thank you, I'm definitely going to get this Nail utility. I've missed that feature for a long time now.
But as a system admin I already see the future benefits of Linux. I can get all the workstations running with quality apps (real DTP for everyone!) and not kill our annual budget in licesning. (and use LTSP to reduce management!) Interopibility with the 'other world' (Windows) would be better (also with OSX), and also cheaper/wider range of hardware/peripherals are available.
So OSX/Classic first, and hit the books and trainings and then Linux down the road.
"Enjoy what you're doing! If it becomes drudgery, you're doing it wrong!" - Jim Butterfield
If I ever meet you in person or anyone like you, I'll punch your mouth off your face. It's pieces of shit like you that make life suck for everyone. Women are the most important part of our race. They bring new life into the world and they do the brunt of the work.
So what was it you stupid tard? Did your mommy not pay enough attention to you? Was she dead drunk on the floor while you were crying for some formula? Or did your mommy beat you repeatedly teaching you that hate=love? And now you want to express your frustration by blaming women for your pitiful existence? Maybe you're just a fat, ugly, bloated, balding piece of turd that no one would ever touch. Maybe you got molested by your mom, but when a real molester came along, he took one look at you and ran screaming because of your stinking ugliness. Whatever. Slashdot is not the place to come and get your emotional strokes.
Just for the record... I'm a heterosexual male who really doesn't get along with most men. I'm married. I have a kid. I'm happy with all that. All of my closest friends are female because, frankly, women are far more interesting than men. I hate sports. I don't drink. I don't use drugs. I'm not a car nut. I don't have this testosterone driven penchant for violence that most guys seem to. I love to read. I love british comedy (they are better at it than Americans). I love to cook. I split the housekeeping duties 50/50 with my wife because that's as it should be. I believe in enforcing fairness. I'm a liberal. I have a daughter and I'm extremely proud of that. I wished from a young age that I would have a daughter because I relate to women better than men. (Which is also why I'm not gay. I can't even relate to gay men.) And above all, the most important things in life, in order from most important to least:
1. Sex
2. Air
3. Music (Electronica only everything else sucks)
4. Computers
5. Destoying capitalism
6. Beating people like the parent poster to a pulp
In case you are thinking this is a troll, it's not. It's really and truly how I feel. I am proud of being this way because I know it means that I am the model of the man of the future. The kind of man that can make the world as seen in Star Trek the Next Generation a reality. There are more of us and we are growing in population. Trust me, if any of what I said above irks you, that means you are probably obsolete. Sayonara fuckers.
bahahahaha.....oh so true.
If it wasn't for C, we would be stuck using BASI, PASAL and OBOL.
Yes. The Jetway Magic Twin (review at AnandTech) is a small form factor box running XP that allows you to have two users at once. (It's designed for businesses with users who aren't using nearly as much CPU power as they have, so it can be shared. I think it's some kind of hack on Terminal Service that makes the second monitor a terminal or something.)
Tired of free iPod sigs? Subscribe to my blacklist
I didn't know about it, thanks. Obviously it's a totally different approach than the X11 one, and it's limited to 2 people, but still, interesting.
42.
I hope and pray you are being sarcastic.
Le français vous intéresse?
some software to allow you to view _all_ windows, even Dock-minimized ones:
Witch, by Peter Maurer
I found it on this site macskill.com
definately rules!
Question is whether Windows wouldn't go downhill if MacOS X was available for x86, too.