Posts: 63
Threads: 11
Joined: February 13, 2013
Reputation:
0
RE: OS Battle: which is the best? (OS X, Windows, Linux ...)
February 18, 2013 at 9:10 pm
Sorry I realized that windows 8 wasn't on the list couple of hourse after I made the thread which was too late. Apparently, you can only edit within 120 minutes of posting. 
(February 17, 2013 at 7:32 am)LastPoet Wrote: Windows 8 definately has been a good OS for me. 
Why isn't it on the list?
"Lighthouses are more helpful then churches."
Benjamin Franklin
Posts: 593
Threads: 32
Joined: August 30, 2011
Reputation:
8
RE: OS Battle: which is the best? (OS X, Windows, Linux ...)
February 24, 2013 at 7:03 pm
I enjoyed XP the most.
It had the perfect mix of user-friendliness and access to more advanced options.
I use 7 now and I like it but XP was better for its time. A bit like how the N64 is better than the 360 even though I only play my 360 now.
I use Linux for server shit and it's cool and all but I need some aesthetics.
Fuck Apple.
Posts: 1062
Threads: 9
Joined: March 1, 2013
Reputation:
6
RE: OS Battle: which is the best? (OS X, Windows, Linux ...)
March 2, 2013 at 10:57 pm
(This post was last modified: March 2, 2013 at 11:02 pm by jstrodel.)
I used to use Slackware Linux 4.0 back in the day and prize that as my own possession. I am not really partial to any OS now and see it more as a tool than a mark of a certain lifestyle or something like that. I would like to go back to school and study philosophy and computational linguistics, I think I will use Linux or something similar because the UNIX environment is so good for computer science and text processing tools. I am on an Vista machine now.
Posts: 202
Threads: 8
Joined: April 19, 2013
Reputation:
9
RE: OS Battle: which is the best? (OS X, Windows, Linux ...)
April 30, 2013 at 2:01 pm
(February 16, 2013 at 8:30 pm)Meylis Lawrence Wrote: In your opinion, which is the best operating system?
As a home user, Windows 7 64-bit by far. I have experience with several distributions of Linux (Mint is my favourite), PC-BSD, Oracle Solaris and Apple Mac OS. Solaris and Mac OS are true certified UNIX operating systems and have a very good reputation for stability, but I just do not enjoy using them anywhere near as much as Windows 7. I find Windows 7 to have a vastly superior graphical user interface than any of its counterparts.
In terms of enterprise server systems, it appears that Microsoft has a huge market share with its range of Windows Server products. All of the companies I have ever worked for used one of the Windows Server products.
UNIX absolutely dominates the mainframe computing market, specifically with the certified UNIX OS "IBM AIX".
Linux dominates the supercomputer market.
I strongly dislike Apple because of its extremely disingenuous marketing techniques. For example, the outrageously overpriced MacBook Pro is, in essence, just a very powerful laptop. I feel that Apple have tricked consumers with the Mac OS operating system. Instead of allowing consumers to buy a laptop with exactly the same specification as a MacBook Pro for half the price (and manually install Mac OS), they have very cunningly developed Mac OS so that it searches for the "Trusted Platform Module" in Apple machines. At least Microsoft have not implemented such evil restrictions with Windows.
Posts: 7140
Threads: 12
Joined: March 14, 2013
Reputation:
72
RE: OS Battle: which is the best? (OS X, Windows, Linux ...)
April 30, 2013 at 2:10 pm
(This post was last modified: April 30, 2013 at 2:11 pm by Tonus.)
I use Windows most of the time. Windows XP was okay and Windows 7 is okay. Windows 8 I like less than Windows 7 even after adding the Start Menu via a utility, but in time it may grow on me.
I like MacOS X but have not used it enough to find things I love/hate about it. Same with Linux. So I can't say which is best, though I've got to give props to the guys who made the GEOS for the Commodore 64 way back in... 1987 or whenever it was. They put a graphical UI and turned my 9-pin dot-matrix printer into a graphics output machine and they did it in 38k of memory.
Maybe if I'd had a chance to use an Amiga in those days, that would be the best OS. It offered preemptive multitasking in 256K of memory, and... *chokes up*
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould
Posts: 14932
Threads: 684
Joined: August 25, 2008
Reputation:
143
RE: OS Battle: which is the best? (OS X, Windows, Linux ...)
April 30, 2013 at 2:49 pm
(April 30, 2013 at 2:01 pm)Love Wrote: I strongly dislike Apple because of its extremely disingenuous marketing techniques. For example, the outrageously overpriced MacBook Pro is, in essence, just a very powerful laptop. I feel that Apple have tricked consumers with the Mac OS operating system. Instead of allowing consumers to buy a laptop with exactly the same specification as a MacBook Pro for half the price (and manually install Mac OS), they have very cunningly developed Mac OS so that it searches for the "Trusted Platform Module" in Apple machines. At least Microsoft have not implemented such evil restrictions with Windows. A lot of factual inaccuracies there:
1) The MacBook Pro is highly priced, but I wouldn't call it overpriced. You get what you pay for: a durable, beautiful, powerful machine that works very well with the Mac OS X operating system precisely because the OS is designed for the hardware (rather than other operating systems, which have to work with multiple different combinations of hardware).
2) How are people tricked with the Mac OS operating system? Apple doesn't sell the operating system on its own; it sells it as an upgrade for a current Apple product. It also doesn't advertise or advise ways to get it working on other machines; so how exactly are they being disingenuous?
3) On the matter of getting it to install on other machines, it can be done.
4) Also, I have no idea where you got the information about the TPM, because it's utterly wrong. Besides, all Apple devices since 2009 have not included a TPM.
5) Microsoft have not implemented any "restrictions" on Windows because they are selling an Operating System, not an OS/Computer combo. Apple make the vast majority of their money from hardware, not software (upgrades to the next version of OS X cost around $20). Comparing their business models is like comparing apples to oranges.
Look, there are plenty of reasons to dislike some of the stuff Apple does; they don't have a philanthropic program (at least, they didn't under Steve Jobs...I have no idea if they have one now), and they don't allow adult themed apps into the App Store, plus they don't have a very good history of protecting user privacy.
My point is, their hardware and software are pretty damn good. By all means attack Apple for their ethics, but leave their products out of it unless there are actual legitimate reasons for hating them.
Posts: 202
Threads: 8
Joined: April 19, 2013
Reputation:
9
RE: OS Battle: which is the best? (OS X, Windows, Linux ...)
April 30, 2013 at 3:08 pm
(This post was last modified: April 30, 2013 at 3:09 pm by Love.)
(April 30, 2013 at 2:49 pm)Tiberius Wrote: A lot of factual inaccuracies there:
The MacBook Pro is highly priced, but I wouldn't call it overpriced. You get what you pay for: a durable, beautiful, powerful machine that works very well with the Mac OS X operating system precisely because the OS is designed for the hardware (rather than other operating systems, which have to work with multiple different combinations of hardware).
I am sorry, but you're incorrect here.
To say that it is "specifically designed for the hardware" is very misleading. The hardware inside a MacBook Pro is virtually no different from a normal laptop with the exception of the Trusted Platform Module (TPM) chip, which is utilised by Apple for control protection of Mac OS. If Mac OS detects that the TPM is not present, it will not boot, hence the requirement for "Hackintosh". Apple has stipulated that it is against the law to install Mac OS on anything other than an official Apple machine. This is what I hate about Apple. Mac OS is NOT specifically designed for all of the hardware present inside an Apple machine.
I have used the "Hackintosh" method to install Mac OS X on a virtual machine. It really is just a case of bypassing the hardware requirement for the aforementioned TPM.
Mac OS X is a very good and reliable true UNIX operating system; I have no problem with the actual functionality of Mac OS, just the slimey marketing tactics used by Apple.
Posts: 7140
Threads: 12
Joined: March 14, 2013
Reputation:
72
RE: OS Battle: which is the best? (OS X, Windows, Linux ...)
April 30, 2013 at 3:16 pm
I haven't followed the TPM issue/nonissue, but I would point out that if it is "against the law to install Mac OS on anything other than an official Apple machine" then it is not an Apple stipulation, but a matter of federal or state law. And I strongly doubt that the US government has made it illegal to install MacOS X on a non-Apple-specific hardware platform. Perhaps you meant that it's a stipulation in the end-user-license-agreement (EULA) for MacOS X?
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould
Posts: 14932
Threads: 684
Joined: August 25, 2008
Reputation:
143
RE: OS Battle: which is the best? (OS X, Windows, Linux ...)
April 30, 2013 at 3:21 pm
(April 30, 2013 at 3:08 pm)Love Wrote: I am sorry, but you're incorrect here. Yet you provide no proof. I at least had the courtesy to link to an article written by an Apple expert who wrote an entire book on OS X...
Quote:To say that it is "specifically designed for the hardware" is very misleading. The hardware inside a MacBook Pro is virtually no different from a normal laptop...
Right, but I didn't say the hardware was specifically designed for the operating system, in which case you would have a point. I said the reverse...that the operating system was designed for the hardware, which is true, and I can't see how it is misleading. Could they have used other hardware? No doubt, but they didn't...they chose specific hardware (which is common across the same type of Mac) and then made sure the OS works with that hardware. This is different to what Linux and Windows developers do; they try to make their OS compatible with as much hardware as possible, because their aim is to spread the operating system. Apple's aim is to spread their hardware.
Quote:...with the exception of the Trusted Platform Module (TPM) chip, which is utilised by Apple for control protection of Mac OS. If Mac OS detects that the TPM is not present, it will not boot, hence the requirement for "Hackintosh".
Again with the lack of supporting links. Look, even the Wikipedia article on Hackintoshes specifically says the TPM is not used in this way. Seriously, if Mac OS X booting correctly is dependent on a TPM being present...my laptops would not boot! They do not have a TPM at all, and no Apple product has since 2009. This is an irrefutable fact that you are just ignoring.
Quote:Apple has stipulated that it is against the law to install Mac OS on anything other than an official Apple machine.
Yes, and since it is their product they can put this in the EULA. However, it remains legal (at least, a grey area) if you make a Hackintosh for personal use.
Quote:This is what I hate about Apple. Mac OS is NOT specifically designed for all of the hardware present inside an Apple machine.
Being designed for specific hardware does not necessarily mean it won't function on other hardware. I'm not saying that, and neither are Apple. Clearly OS X can function on other hardware, since Hackintoshes exist. However, the fact remains that Apple don't support this hardware, and don't develop for it.
Quote:I have used the "Hackintosh" method to install Mac OS X on a virtual machine. It really is just a case of bypassing the hardware requirement for the aforementioned TPM.
Not according to the Wikipedia article I linked to...
Posts: 202
Threads: 8
Joined: April 19, 2013
Reputation:
9
RE: OS Battle: which is the best? (OS X, Windows, Linux ...)
April 30, 2013 at 3:24 pm
(This post was last modified: April 30, 2013 at 3:47 pm by Love.)
(April 30, 2013 at 3:16 pm)Tonus Wrote: I haven't followed the TPM issue/nonissue, but I would point out that if it is "against the law to install Mac OS on anything other than an official Apple machine" then it is not an Apple stipulation, but a matter of federal or state law. And I strongly doubt that the US government has made it illegal to install MacOS X on a non-Apple-specific hardware platform. Perhaps you meant that it's a stipulation in the end-user-license-agreement (EULA) for MacOS X?
Well, I think you are just being pedantic here. However you want to play around with the semantics, it is considered an EULA violation / copyright infringement (against the law) to install Mac OS on anything other than an official Apple machine.
Also, Apple machines are ubiquitous on a global scale, not just the United States. The United States government obviously does not have lawful jurisdiction over any other country, so your point falls there.
(April 30, 2013 at 3:21 pm)Tiberius Wrote: Yet you provide no proof. I at least had the courtesy to link to an article written by an Apple expert who wrote an entire book on OS X...
My apologies for not providing evidence.
Here is the FAQ section on the official "OSx86" website ( LINK). In the section with the heading " Do I need Apple hardware to run Mac OS X?", it states: " Not anymore. Projects such as OSx86 have succeeded in allowing the Intel-based version of Mac OS X to run on non-Apple hardware largely by bypassing the TPM in software".
I think you have some misconceptions about "hardware". You could find a laptop that has identical internal components as the MacBook Pro in terms of the CPU, memory, GPU et cetera; the only real difference would be the presence of the TPM in the Intel based MacBook, which is exactly what Mac OS looks for during the boot process. If TPM is not present, Mac OS will not boot or install. Hackintosh / hackboot bypasses the search for the TPM.
|
