OS Comparisons From the BBC

igb writes "As part of their coverage of the launch of Vista, the BBC last week asked people to submit descriptions of the benefits and drawbacks of their chosen system, and today they've posted responses from two Vista users, a Linux user, and an OS X user. There's nothing earth-shattering here, but it's interesting to see the operating systems compared on a level playing field, and good that the BBC has given equal time to the major alternatives."

Comments

Not level

[suso]

I'm sorry but this is not a level playing field. What this is is acknowledging the competition so as to appear fair and silence advocates, but then show off the latest features of Vista's interface, but not show the same in Linux and OSX. They have been playing this game for long enough that they know that eye candy sells. For goodness sake a Linux user that I work with said he was going to buy Vista just because he thought the box looks cool.

Unique feature?

[Anubis350]

FTA: "The most unique new feature is called Readyboost. When you're having performance issues due to insufficient memory, you can use a USB flash drive as an additional cache of memory to boost performance."

Unique? That's Virtual Memory. Sure, the fact that it's easy (may be) a good thing (though how many people are going to keep an empty flash drive around for this? Easier to get the kid down the street to install more ram for you and be done with it if you cant do it yourself. However, unique? I can put a swap file on flash drive and itd do the same thing...

This is a good start

[JoshJ]

The linux advocate pointed out the free software license, contrasting it with "piracy". Hopefully this is the start of free software making a real impact in the mainstream media.

It's Filler

[Bullfish]

This is just filler for BBC's tech page. There is no real detail given on any of the operating systems other than, "it's cool, I like it". Before anyone says they should've said this and should've said that, this is aimed at people who know squat about computers, less about OS's and will likely read this article on page 5 of their newspaper. It was probably tossed on the desk of some rookie rerporter at five minutes to quitting time.

Possibly false assertion from the Linux guy??

[Anonymous Coward]

Also, unlike Vista and OS X, Linux provides comprehensive support for languages such as Gaelic and Welsh.

I believe this to be false, and I am assuming it is coming from someone who has never used OS X. I just looked in System Preferences, and they are indeed there under International (you need to look under its native name, e.g. "Cymraeg" for Welsh -- it's hidden under the "Edit" button). OS X was built with Unicode in mind. OS X even comes with built-in support for the Inuktitut (Eskimo) language for chrissakes!! (Try visiting http://www.gov.nu.ca/inuktitut/ in Safari --- that is rendered in the default font!!)

I use both Linux and OS X heavily, but stuff like this doesn't lend the Linux camp any credibilty IMHO.

Re:Mac user

[aristotle-dude]

"I find it hard to find things to be excited about, given that new rehashes of iWork and iLife are produced each year and it is hard to justify buying each new version, even modestly priced as they are."

There, now the opinion is more realistic. Not really, that is just your opinion. I've got no problem with you having a differing opinion. What I do have a problem with is you being a prick about it and not being willing to accept a differing viewpoint at face value.

Re:Mac user

[mr_matticus]

The problem is an issue of values. You assume that people value the ability to tinker over the value of what is essentially an appliance, which is not true--some people would prefer the Apple "just work" mentality. As computers grow more specialized (media servers, desktop workstations, mobile information devices, etc.), the desire for a self-contained, reliable, attractive solution will only grow.

Some people don't see open source as a virtue, and it's not simply because of Microsoft FUD. Most people I know honestly don't care because they don't want to have to dig around in the depths of the OS. They don't want to compile applications, and they don't care that the same source tree works on four different platforms thanks to elegantly designed tools. As long as there are Windows developers making applications that allow them to do what they want, it's an immaterial advantage. Some don't care that Linux costs nothing, because they never buy Windows either. It comes with their computer, so from their perspective, Windows doesn't cost anything either. If computer makers sold their machines at one price and offered to preinstall Windows for a separate fee, that act alone would be Linux's greatest boon in a decade.

Trying to "educate" users about how "wrong" they are is the fastest way to look like a pretentious computer geek and lose credibility. It's not about "seeing the light," it's about what values people have and which OS most closely matches. People here hate and mock attempts at religious conversions and many seem to resent government deciding what to do with tax dollars, but they have no such problem with pushing their Linux agenda on the masses.

Linux will always be relatively small because its virtues appeal only to a small portion of the population. It can't compete on ease of use with OS X, or the universality of Windows, or on cost with Windows (as long as Windows is bundled with PCs), or on the cohesiveness of OS X, or on many other fronts. Linux is great for tinkerers and those with an allergy to closed source; the rest of the population isn't broken because they don't care about those things.

Re:The virus argument

[Slashcrunch]

Sorry SirSlud, but market share does not mean automatically being targeted by malware writers. If it did, the Apache server would be quite the delicious target. Targeting Windows machines is commercially viable because it is a widespread *and* a soft target. If it wasn't soft, it wouldn't be exploited as widely as it is.

What matters

[Reality Master 101]

Here's the only comparison of operating systems that matters to the vast majority of people:

Software Selection:

Windows: The most and best selection
OS/X: Far less than Windows, but still serviceable
Linux: The least selection and most crude.

People use applications, not operating systems.

Re:What matters

[dangitman]

Not only does linux have thousands of applications, I would venture to say that you have never used Amarok, Gimp or a dozen other programs that outstip any comercial equivelent.

Well, you must be clinically insane. GIMP outstrips any commercial equivalent?? It doesn't even come close to Photoshop. It's not even in the same category. I think you might be the troll here. The fact is that while there are plenty of applications for Linux, most of them are far less functional than the best commercial software. It would be nice if this wasn't true, but it is. For example, show me where you can get a Linux video editing application that even comes close to commercial counterparts like Final Cut Pro or Avid.

Re:Mac user

[mr_matticus]

I wouldn't call it a pessimistic view. Linux works fine, and it's a valid desktop operating system. But there's nothing that makes in intrinsically superior for Windows customers. Your example points to the problem most OSes will face: people spend most of their time in web browsers these days. Being able to locate a familiar icon and use a familiar application isn't an indicator that someone can use Linux. Any idiot can use a mouse and understand the now-basic desktop metaphor.

What happens when they need to install a driver? There is no step-by-step process to follow. Hell, even updating video drivers requires you to know to type ./ before the (ridiculously long) filename just to get it to run. Both nVidia and ATi do a crappy job of modifying the X config files. It's easy to use if you don't do anything with it other than use the software it comes with. Where Linux fails is in the tasks that aren't as common, but are essential in order to keep customers (driver installation, software updates, installation, maintenance, plug-ins, basic troubleshooting, human-readable help files).

I'm not sure what your last paragraph means. If Dell or Gateway wanted to cut costs and install Linux, what's stopping them? Deals with Microsoft giving them licenses for $25 or less. The costs involved in supporting Linux are far greater than that, and Linux would generate many more support calls because of its inferior driver system and its utter lack of a device manager (IMO, Windows' device manager is better than either OS X or Linux, but in OS X's defense, Software Update works extremely well for new drivers/firmware).

Don't take this as a serious rebuttal, as the only serious point is that your example doesn't prove anything other than people recognize the Firefox icon (a victory in and of itself!).

Sterotypical

[SuperKendall]

I felt that the criticism for Vista and OSX was kinda weak. May be it's not even about a shill, but rather about not knowing any better. The main issue with the non-free systems is that you cannot tinker with them, but most users do not even realize what they are missing.

Yet another person lost in the stereotyped view of OS X users as clueless Noobs, who know not what an OS is.

Sorry, but the number of people who use OS X and are equally at home configuring any other UNIX system are legion. We are just people who got tired of having to configure things, and wanted to tinker with applications or other development instead of the OS that run them or even the window manager we interact with daily. I know a fair amount of about the kernel, about launchd, even about the filesystem and lots of other internal aspects of OS X I can use to configure the system just as well as any Linux system - but I am also happy with good defaults out of the gate that mean my tinkering is for fun, and not a matter of Getting the Damn System Functional.

I really don't understand how people so seemingly apt in their ability to configure all aspects of Linux systems can rain such heavy critisims down on OSX users, where really the only constraint I face in tinkering with the system is the equivilent of a somewhat locked down window manager in Linux. After having used TWM, CTWM, GWM, KDE, and Gnome (among others) I don't mind a window manager that is pleasing an performs well without much tweaking.

Good money after bad

[element-o.p.]

It can't compete...on cost with Windows (as long as Windows is bundled with PCs)...

I disagree.

At face value, you are right. You buy a computer, it comes with Windows pre-installed, IE, Outlook, maybe even Office. You and I know that you paid for the software in the purchase price, you just didn't see that cost since you were going to pay it even if you wanted Linux or x86 Solaris or FreeBSD or... So, it looks like Linux can't compete on cost with Windows.

Then you get infected with a worm or trojan because the anti-virus software installed on your computer didn't come with free updates for then next N months. Now you have to buy a subscription to McAfee, or Norton, or Kaspersky (or if you're really smart Nod32, but I digress), and that is a re-occurring cost every year. Because you've done some homework, you also buy firewall software from McAfee or Symantec or (shudder) Black Ice. Yes, XP comes with a firewall, but you want the reporting features and ability to block by program that a commercial product offers. Oh, but you're getting a lot of crap in your e-mail, so you also buy mail filtering software. Then your thirteen year old, who knows way more about computers than you ever will (okay, this is /. so that's probably not true for this subset of computer users, but assume you aren't a geek for a minute) is taking programming classes at school, so you buy Visual Basic and Visual C++, and so on.

Now how much cheaper is that Windows computer than Linux? There are free (as in speech and as in beer) alternatives for each of these problems available for Linux.

So, yeah, the initial purchase price may be equivalent, but after that, you are just throwing good money after bad. But that's just my opinion. YMMV :)