Slashdot Mirror
Ubuntu Linux vs. Mac OS X
An anonymous reader writes "An article on InformationWeek pits an Apple user against an Ubuntu Linux user (although he talks about other distros as well) as to which OS makes a better desktop operating system. As might be expected, the conclusion seems to be "different strokes for different folks," but it's interesting to see Microsoft cut (mostly) out of the equation."
Screw CP/M - it never had the mindshare or marketshare that Windows, Linux or the Mac OS did.
The whole point of TFA is about switching AWAY from Vista.
Actually, the point of the article is never going to Vista in the first place:
The problem is that M$ has already forced radical change on their users. Had M$ allowed competition or freedom on their platform, there would be a choice of UIs and this would be a non issue. Instead, M$ has kept their old school, forklift upgrade treadmill running. M$ fanboys who don't mind throwing away all of their hardware and software as still faced with the fact that M$ has not provided a stable and modern OS as a reward. Information week seems to have picked up on the fact that less than 12% of home and business users want Vista and Vista is not selling.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Well that's an actual reason, besides "why not install Solaris, OpenBSD, FreeBSD, RHEL, Fedora, Ubuntu, SLED, Windows 98, Windows 2000, Windows XP, and CP/M, so that you can jerk off to the length of your boot menu."
"If you plant ice, you're gonna harvest wind."
Anyone that cares to can search Google about "hacking modelines" in MacOSX.
I found it a bit shocking actually. Rather caught me off guard.
The same chipsets that give people trouble in Linux also do the same in Windows and MacOSX.
I guess it didn't occur to "the usability people" to avoid hardware like that.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Close, but no cigar. I asked for a home built Mac, not a generic machine that will run OS X. There is a huge difference.
"But this one goes to 11!"
Sleep might "work" out of the box, but it's not turned on by default. (I tried this less than 9 months ago; it's possible it's fixed now, it certainly wasn't fixed 2 years ago.) That means the default settings go against the specs of the machine and could potentially damage it. I'm not saying your iBook WILL overheat and fail if you install Ubuntu on it, I'm saying that it's a distinct possibility unless you manually turn on sleep mode. I don't know about you, but:
1) I think this is important enough that people should know about it. After all, if Ubuntu destroys your $1200+ piece of hardware, they disclaim all responsibility and you're basically screwed.
2) I think it points out a HUGE flaw in all Linux distributions: Lack of a thorough QA process. There's no way a software product that could potentially harm hardware should ever be available for download by anybody. It's a huge mark against Ubuntu that they didn't even do this very basic piece of testing before release. I'm not asking for every tiny little bug to be ironed out, but before you say "hey! download and install this on your iBook!" you might want to do enough testing to ensure it won't actually go against the specs of the hardware first. Maybe I expect too much.
Comment of the year
What a uninformed statement, your co-worker is an idiot.
Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
Dell hardware != PC platform. Mac hardware = Mac platform.
Besides the motherboard form factor, you can swap out any parts on a Dell system with generic PC parts and it will still work. Have done it a million times myself.
"But this one goes to 11!"
Let me remind you that English is a living language, constantly evolving. Words mean what people think they mean. If most people think CPU means the computer's case, then that's what it means. To correct them is closed minded pedantry.
At least that's what they tell me when I inform people about begging the question.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Vista is selling via pre-loads and it'll keep selling this way until the public+dog are beat into submission and accept it.
You can't beat people down with something they don't have. It's not really selling and that's really hurting PC sales because people already own a system that runs XP. Vista has not been a big enough improvement, and many are calling it a downgrade due to bugs, outrageous hardware requirements and digital restrictions. Even M$'s bottom line is unchanged, despite Vista and Office releases. At this point, only gnu/linux and OSX have real improvements and they are both selling at an increasing rate. Vista is a long way from breaking even, say nothing of market dominance.
If you think that's bad for the Soft, just wait until the market is flooded with $200 gnu/linux laptops. Big changes that have been a long time coming are finally here.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Bullish Machine Tzar