SwiftDeath Posted June 2, 2004 Report Share Posted June 2, 2004 Well, I was thinking the other day how linux compared to macintosh. I already knew who the winner was with microsoft. ;) So what is better in terms of user ease, reliability, stability, speed, and who had more software? And also, does linux include freebsd? and if not whats better, using the same qualifications as above? Moved by Ixthusdan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william Posted June 2, 2004 Report Share Posted June 2, 2004 (edited) I had a imac G3 333 some years ago running MAC OS 9.1 (if I'm not wrong), at that time the offer of new softwares for MAC was not so wide and as consequence softwares were quite expensive. In terms of interface, MacOs is very easy and friendly, more than most of Linux distribution. Stability!! both, Mac and Linux are stable for what I need (intenet, audio, some office apps). Anyway, my vote goes to Linux, it's more exciting, every boot and software installation is a new experience, it requires all the time your ability of thinking. That's it. BTW. I've never tried other unix OS than linux. Edited June 2, 2004 by william Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwiftDeath Posted June 3, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 Hmmm... so you don't think it'd be worth it to go out and buy it? I wonder whats faster... I'm imagining linux but you can never be sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cannonfodder Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 When the Mac OS becomes available for all types of machines, then it will be a winner.. also doesn't mac os now allow linux apps to run? Not sure.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zero0w Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 OS X and Linux are both POSIX compliant system, so they have great similarity already. You will be comparing prices and application available on both platform to make your argument. Of course Linux is moving very fast. Don't forget Mplayer-OSX has its root in Mplayer for Linux. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugolino Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 Well, speaking as a non-computer hack who has used DOS, Apple II, MS-DOS, DR-DOS, Windows 3.1, Macintosh 6-7, Windows 95, VAX Decstations, Unix terminals, MacOS 7.5.5-10.2, Windows 98, Windows ME, Windows XP, Mandrake Linux, FreeDOS ... My vote would be MacOS X, which (as a desktop computer, not as a server) I found to be much more stable, broader (in software) and useable than Mandrake Linux on my present AMD Athlon computer. The only reason I'm running Mandrake Linux, and not Mac OS X, is price. If the price were cheaper, I'd be happily running MacOS X. However, its not really fair to compare Linux to MacOS X precisely because Linux doesn't control the hardware combos you throw at it... while Apple is able to control what hardware combos get thrown at MacOS X. Thus MacOS X runs better (in my experience) in large part because its a bit sheltered and pampered from the untamed wilds of market diversity. I did try to buy the best possible hardware for Linux, and indeed built this computer from scratch specifically to run Linux. But despite all my efforts, Linux has been one of the least consistently reliable operating systems I've ever run actually (excepting Windows I suppose). Now, I have been toying with FreeDOS and am pretty impressed with what theycan do with very little memory and speed. Very very impressive. :) I use it on a little 1 gigabyte partition on my hard drive and it makes a great backup for my unsteady Linux. B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugolino Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 > also doesn't mac os now allow linux apps to run? Not sure.. My eldest brother is a computer tech and has gradually (in the past two years or so) been won over to MacOS X (for desktops only that is, not for servers). His previous experience was all on the PC side (DOS, Windows, Novel, OS2, BeOS, Redhat Linux, Mandrake Linux, Suse Linux, etc.), and only in the past few years has he had any exposure to MacOS. He still can't stand anything pre-MacOS X but he's grudgingly sold on MacOS X. Because he already has three PCs at home, his only MacOS X computer is a laptop, and I think he sees the value of MacOS X especially with laptops because they can interface with any one (whereas Windows won't). Anyway, on his PowerPC laptop he is able to run KDE and Linux programs inside MacOS X. At one time he boasted of running a handful of operating systems within MacOS X as well (not as a dual-boot and not quite as an emulator either.... I can't explain it as he did), such as Windows XP and various flavors of Linux. Needless to say, I was quite impressed... although I'm nowhere near as knowledgeable as he is and wouldn't be able to do as he does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iphitus Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 (edited) Old macs suck New apples rule IMHO, until E17 comes out (and i have word it is going to produce something by the end of the year) OSX wins on iCandy. OSX is very nice. iphitus EDIT: I'd love a powerbook too, the apple hardware looks so kickass, doesnt need any case mods :D Edited June 3, 2004 by iphitus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gowator Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 OS X and Linux are both POSIX compliant system, so they have great similarity already. You will be comparing prices and application available on both platform to make your argument. Of course Linux is moving very fast. Don't forget Mplayer-OSX has its root in Mplayer for Linux. This all goes down to how dumb you want your OS to be. Apple has better processors and hardware than X86, it makes much prettier and quieter machines the OS is easier to use for people who dont wanna learn The upgrade works all the time everytime. (like UNLIKE the laughable installer that is mandrake) its a microkernel so technically superior to linux as an OS.... its just not opensource! its not open hardware ... its NOT OPEN oh and the cost... did I mention the cost! Therein lies the only advantage(s) of linux. when people complain about the usability of linux I tell em to get a Mac.... Why... they are technically BETTER at everything except what you want to do yourself. the processors are WAY faster in real terms Indeed as I mentioned on another thread they are the luxury runarounds.... using OS-X as a desktop is a bit like using a SUV to pick up the kids from school. You dont have to but you can if you can afford it... Only this isnt just ANY SUV its the porche cayanne of SUV's in styling and looks! If your really enthusiatic you CAN tinker with it yourself etc. but if you like tinkering then linux is for YOU. If you just want something to work get a mac .... Mac's are something you give to a technologically challenged relative! Mac Powerbooks are way superiro to their Windows comrades.... If I bought another laptop it would be a Mac! p.s. i dont have a mac, im just being realistic here! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qchem Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 The advantage of a Mac running OSX is that whilst they can be as simple as possible (that classic Mac experience), it has the underlying power of unix and is basically freebsd with a fantastic looking DE/WM (not getting into kernel specifics here). This means you can open up a terminal and use the regular commands (note. freebsd commands have some differences to those found in Linux - but this is common between different *NIX). The fink project allows a decent amount of "standard" Linux software to be run and I believe there is a version of XFree available. The actual Darwin core of OSX is open source (with a x86 port), but is nowhere near as attractive without the aqua GUI. Of course, the main problem is you currently have to have Apple hardware to run OSX - and whilst the build quality is good and the hardware attractive, it is reasonably expensive. This may be remedied as IBM have opened up the POWER architecture and cheaper cloans may become available - however I'd still buy an apple over a apple clone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gowator Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 The advantage of a Mac running OSX is that whilst they can be as simple as possible (that classic Mac experience), it has the underlying power of unix and is basically freebsd with a fantastic looking DE/WM (not getting into kernel specifics here). This means you can open up a terminal and use the regular commands (note. freebsd commands have some differences to those found in Linux - but this is common between different *NIX). The fink project allows a decent amount of "standard" Linux software to be run and I believe there is a version of XFree available. The actual Darwin core of OSX is open source (with a x86 port), but is nowhere near as attractive without the aqua GUI. Of course, the main problem is you currently have to have Apple hardware to run OSX - and whilst the build quality is good and the hardware attractive, it is reasonably expensive. This may be remedied as IBM have opened up the POWER architecture and cheaper cloans may become available - however I'd still buy an apple over a apple clone. This may be remedied as IBM have opened up the POWER architecture and cheaper cloans may become available - however I'd still buy an apple over a apple clone. hehe imagine IBM making there own... it would look like ./... compared to .... well take a look ... IBM's are UGLY from the servers to desktops... UGGGH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qchem Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 I believe IBM already use the same chips as the G5 (powerpc 970) in one of their blade servers. IBM do make ugly stuff, fortunately it tends to be quite good (at least the POWER workstations and their laptops). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gowator Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 I know its like a powerhouse in a boring grey box! I think its an image thing.... LOL we have some clusters here and they are just SO FUNCTIONAL .... ahhhh SGI have some pretty boxes tho.... like the tezro :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkelve Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 Duh! That's easy! It's BEOS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkelve Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 Duh! That's easy who is the winner! It's BEOS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.