Macs vs PC vs Linux

[scardella]

Yeah,

which is better, and why?

[MagiDragon]

Unix. It's the most stable.
Mac. It's got the best graphics.
Windows. It's got the best games.
Linux. It's free and a heckuva lot faster than windows.

*grins wryly* i'm a CS major, so you should kindof expect that from me.

[scardella]

I've got a degree in CS, so I know what you mean...

I might have to edit the windows line to say
Windows keeps me employed!

[philothea]

Windows is only good for running things that only run under Windows. Unfortunately, that does include a lot of software. Given Windows' oppressive licensing, vulnerability to viruses, worms, trojans, spyware, adware, and Microsoft's ability to remotely modify your data, I don't think anyone should rely on Windows as their only OS or computer. Certainly not if you do any important work on it. Gaming machine... maybe. (And for that, you might as well get a gaming console and be done with it.)

I think Macintosh is the best computer for most users. I'm switching the law office I work for to Mac next month (it's been Linux for a few years). Since I've been using my iBook, everything I've tried has worked easily and flawlessly, often with nice little touches I never expected. I left it running for three months without ever even logging out, and there were no problems at all.

Linux has a lot of amazing advantages: it's free, both in money and in rights. No annoying licence agreements which continually pop up and treat you like a criminal. Everything you can imagine doing with a computer is included, or easily (and freely) available. No viruses, of course. Great security and control. Networking is native and natural. Free support from (mostly) friendly geeks all over the world. Customizable in every detail. Runs on anything.

In many ways Linux is no harder than Windows. I am aghast sometimes at the hoops people go through to get Microsoft stuff to work... and then they say Linux is too difficult? No, it's just not familiar.

But... getting some things to work under Linux can be unpredictable. You can almost always get anything to work but there's no telling how complicated it'll be. If you don't have any inclination to mess around with things, Linux will not do. (Neither will Windows, really.) Go with a Mac.

Also, I should point out that the Apple hardware is elegant, stylish, and delightful to use. And you can run Linux on Mac hardware.

[MagiDragon]

*grins* i think us bums with CS degrees just kindof killed off any hope for a fight! lol . . . although i *HAVE* heard that Bill Gates is the Anti-Christ.

[track2004]

MACS ROCKS. Period Amen.

[photosynthesis]

Linux is virus-free, and it is decent-looking. my linux computer doesn't freeze all the time, whereas my Windows XP desktop freezes a few times per night. And it's free!

Windows is ugly, virus-prone and unstable. Plus it's not very customizable. it's affordable.

Mac OS is beautiful, but expensive, as is all the software necessary for it.

[philothea]

[quote name='photosynthesis' date='Mar 9 2006, 03:04 PM']Mac OS is beautiful, but expensive, as is all the software necessary for it.
[right][snapback]907457[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Actually, a lot of free Linux software is becoming available for Macs, since it's pretty easy to recompile Linux programs for OSX. (OSX is based on BSD, which is very similar to Linux.) And you get a lot of stuff included when you buy a Mac, including the latest iLife.

The only software I have bought for my Mac was iWork ($70, includes Pages and Keynote) because I wanted the word processor, but honestly, I could have stuck with Open Office for free. It works fine.

Speaking of which, I should get the iBook out and get to work.

[scardella]

My critique of linux/BSD unix:
- often cryptic configuration files; sometimes leads to frustration and futility in trying to configure some hardware and software. This is compounded by manufacturers who don't always support linux, and so drivers need to be reverse-engineered.
- lack of unity; things need to be adapted to each variant.
- documentation sometimes is lacking
- lack of commercial app support (I have yet to find something that can out-spreadsheet Excel, and I'm still not 100% sold on Pages, though I haven't bought office for mac)
- I've run into multimedia issues in the past, though some of that may be sorted out now. I had a horrible time trying to play a commercial dvd, I remember.

Critique of windows:
- spyware, viriii, et al. It's the single biggest problem I deal with on a regular basis.
- Security is the reason for the above.
- lack of a good command-line (though I hear Vista will have a pretty good one)
- it seems like to get trustworthy software, you need to pay extra (and sometimes through the nose) for most of it.
- there are still kernel-mode (audio and video) drivers that can kill the whole system.
- It requires reboots where no other os seems to need it.

Critique of Macs
- doesn't have the same hardware support as windows or linux. It must be running on apple hardware (for the most part; though you do get quality hardware).
- lack of games
- comparitively expensive

[ironmonk]

[quote name='scardella' date='Mar 9 2006, 03:45 PM']Yeah,

which is better, and why?
[right][snapback]907381[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Windows XP 64bit.
-Windows is the most widely used and known
-Windows is easier to use for 90% of the people in the world
-Windows can use powerful relational databases
-Windows now has better graphics being 64 bit on Intel Dual Core processors
-Windows has the widest selection of software without needed a emulation window
-Windows XP 64bit is the fastest I have ever seen. Smokes Mac, Unix, & Linux for moving around in programs, start up, etc...
-Windows has all the software needed to do professional graphics.



I've been in the IT industry since 1999. I'm in my senior year of my CS degree. I can do everything from build to program to troubleshoot.

I've used Windows, Linux, and a little Mac.

WinXP64 is the most amazing thing I have ever seen. It can have upto a 128 GB of RAM.... for one processor.... If you want to play with a SAN... let's talk a Terabit of RAM. <- Insane Terminator Computer Power.


God Bless :
ironmonk

[ironmonk]

[quote name='photosynthesis' date='Mar 9 2006, 05:04 PM']Linux is virus-free, and it is decent-looking.  my linux computer doesn't freeze all the time, whereas my Windows XP desktop freezes a few times per night.  And it's free!

Windows is ugly, virus-prone and unstable.  Plus it's not very customizable.  it's affordable.

Mac OS is beautiful, but expensive, as is all the software necessary for it.
[right][snapback]907457[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Linux is not virus free... there are not to may viruses for it because not enough people use it. The more programs that are developed for a operating system, especially ones that have network capabilities, will always have holes.

The problem is not Windows, it's Windows users... most people do not keep their systems upto date. Most people load a bunch of software that they think is "free" when it loads all kinds of spyware on it. Another problem is when people do not get enough RAM in their XP system, XP needs at least 512 if someone plans on having more than a couple windows open at once.... then there are programs like Adobe that causes IE to hang at times.



I'll be happy to help you figure out what you XP problem is... if you want, download teamspeak from [url="http://www.goteamspeak.com"]http://www.goteamspeak.com[/url] and I'll send you my server info and then you can tell me what's wrong and we'll get it working right for you.



God Bless,
ironmonk

[Anastasia13]

Macs pwn all else, 'cept maybe PC's.

[toledo_jesus]

PC. All others are too confusing.

[scardella]

[quote name='ironmonk' date='Mar 9 2006, 11:40 PM']Windows XP 64bit.
-Windows is the most widely used and known
-Windows is easier to use for 90% of the people in the world
-Windows can use powerful relational databases
-Windows now has better graphics being 64 bit on Intel Dual Core processors
-Windows has the widest selection of software without needed a emulation window
-Windows XP 64bit is the fastest I have ever seen. Smokes Mac, Unix, & Linux for moving around in programs, start up, etc...
-Windows has all the software needed to do professional graphics.
WinXP64 is the most amazing thing I have ever seen. It can have upto a 128 GB of RAM.... for one processor.... If you want to play with a SAN... let's talk a Terabit of RAM. <- Insane Terminator Computer Power.
[/quote]

FWIW, I like to separate between desktop and server roles. I prefer Macs on the desktop and Unix/Linux on the server, though I wouldn't be opposed to an XServe on the server either.

In response to 1 and 2:
- Windows is not easier to use on a day-to-day basis. People just know it already, and are used to its quirks. It's easier to transition to Mac than to Windows.
- Just because something is popular, that doesn't mean it is good.
- Userfriendliness is not as important on the server side.

In response to 3:
- Windows, Mac and Linux can all use freakishly impressive databases.
- I'd trust Oracle + Solaris/AIX over Windows + IIS any day of the week.
- MySQL runs on just about anything, probably even toasters.
- If I were building an industrial strength website, I'd run it on Solaris or Linux clusters

In response to 5 + 8:
- A good CPU does not good graphics make. Not to mention that Apple is transitioning to intel...
- If you're talking about 3d graphics, macs use the same GPU's that intel people have access to.
- Graphics quality is primarily the work of artists, much more so than the hardware running it.
- If you're talking about the OS look and feel, I'd say Macs trounce Windows.
- I'd prefer to run Photoshop or 3d modeler on a good quad-PowerMac than on a Windows comp.

In response to 6:
- True, but mostly for industry specific apps.
- How many apps does the average user need? (Hint, they need Office-type stuff, a web browser, dvd/music/video player, plus the OS)
- GAMES You say? Consoles seem to fill the need more elegantly than a PC rig. Now that they've got broadband access and can support keyboards and mice (usb ports!)... Why would you need a PC for gaming?

In response to 7:
- First, I haven't noticed much slowness on the UI of my dual G4 at work or my G5 at home.
- Second, XP's GUI is an ancient design. It may be faster, but I don't have to worry about a window failing to redraw because I drag another window over it.
- Third, Vista will be as slow as OS X or slower on the same class hardware. It finally is incorporating features OS X has had for a number of years.

In response to 9:
- On the desktop, nobody really needs that much ram, so I figure you're talking about server/workstation roles.
- I'm fine with my 8 gig of RAM possible (actually 16, but not officially supported) on my dual G5 for workstation work, and you'd have a tough time finding a workstation running XP 64bit that actually supports that much. It's probably in the same or higher price range. So, this is really a server question.
- If you want, you can build a cluster with however much RAM you want, total. IBM mainframes can hold terabytes of data in RAM as well...
- SANs aren't Windows only....

[azaelia]

[quote name='ironmonk' date='Mar 10 2006, 12:40 AM']WinXP64 is the most amazing thing I have ever seen. It can have upto a 128 GB of RAM.... for one processor.... If you want to play with a SAN... let's talk a Terabit of RAM. <- Insane Terminator Computer Power.
[right][snapback]907884[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

<<mouth hanging open in computer-geeky awe.