PDA

View Full Version : Windows or OS X?



Wheelhouse
02-01-2007, 02:03 AM
Just curious to see the distribution...

Jpup
02-01-2007, 02:17 AM
i think you got the wrong forum. :)

dougdirt
02-01-2007, 02:26 AM
I run windows....but I hate it. Windows 95/98 was nice. Windows 2000 was horrible, and XP didnt get much better.

beb30
02-01-2007, 09:24 AM
I run windows....but I hate it. Windows 95/98 was nice. Windows 2000 was horrible, and XP didnt get much better.


Yeah, but Vista is going to be awesome....

RedsFan75
02-01-2007, 09:53 AM
Have you seen Vista in use?

Personally, I use windows, as a programmer and technical support for several very large systems.... BUT my choice for home and personal use is Mac and OSX

besides doesn't a techie have to love something that has a form of Unix at it's heart. :)

Roy Tucker
02-01-2007, 10:36 AM
Have you seen Vista in use?

Personally, I use windows, as a programmer and technical support for several very large systems.... BUT my choice for home and personal use is Mac and OSX

besides doesn't a techie have to love something that has a form of Unix at it's heart. :)

Where is the love for Linux?

Basically, I'm a software *****. Whatever the customer pays for, that's what I use.

I've been running Vista as a VM instance for a while, mostly to look at the security aspects of it. Business users are going to need to be trained as to what all the allow/disallow prompts mean. MS really tried to batten down the hatches on it. With mixed results IMO.

OS X is based on the CMU Mach kernel and BSD isn't it? I think its got a little NeXTSTEP and A/UX flavor in it as well. I don't follow OS dev the way I used to.

RedsFan75
02-01-2007, 11:10 AM
Where is the love for Linux?

Basically, I'm a software *****. Whatever the customer pays for, that's what I use.

I've been running Vista as a VM instance for a while, mostly to look at the security aspects of it. Business users are going to need to be trained as to what all the allow/disallow prompts mean. MS really tried to batten down the hatches on it. With mixed results IMO.

OS X is based on the CMU Mach kernel and BSD isn't it? I think its got a little NeXTSTEP and A/UX flavor in it as well. I don't follow OS dev the way I used to.

Exactlly what I've been hearing... One of the MCSE's I work with was telling me that any type of program that needed access at a deeper level than your typical software had trouble... One of the things that he mentioned was your average PC Game. It had to run with ADMIN access levels to function properly, which really negates the lock downs. His comment.... "I'm staying as far from Vista as I can for as long as I can" He said trying to admin it in a business network would drive him crazy... What with us programmers trying to access stuff we need, and so forth.

Yes on the OSX, CMU Mach kernel and BSD sub layers with NextStep and A/UX flavors, Really has seemed to be pretty bullet proof and very flexible.

Oh... and Linux... :D I've got an additional Linux machine at home...

nate
02-01-2007, 11:20 AM
No "both" or "neither" option?

KronoRed
02-01-2007, 01:57 PM
Dos 6.22

HBP
02-01-2007, 05:21 PM
As I'm sure many people do, I use XP at both home and work. I can honestly say that I never have software problems with my XP PC. I keep antivirus and firewall running at all times and usually run spyware/malware programs weekly. I love having the control that a firewall gives so I can deny access to any programs that don't need it. Since my harware is aging, around 3 yrs old (Celeron, 768MB RAM, old graphics card), I don't try to run recent games or anything. But for just internet, office apps, media, XP is by far the best Windows OS I've ever used. I won't upgrade to Vista until I build a new computer with up to date hardware. As for PC's that I'm not in control of, who knows what problems I'll run into. OSX is definitely better safety wise.

In the next year or so, I'm going to try and have a Vista machine as my desktop PC and a MacBook Pro as my laptop. Best of both worlds I guess.

Highlifeman21
02-01-2007, 07:18 PM
Apple is for hippies.

oneupper
02-01-2007, 10:18 PM
What, no CP/M for us older guys?

Nowadays I prefer OS X...but I miss a thing or two from Classic (like being able to automate the OS with something called "OneClick").

Windows XP isn't that bad, i have a windows machine for bookkeeping and watching MLB.tv. Quicken and Quickbooks are better on the PC, IMO.

I also have Boot Camp for my Mac while allows me to run XP on the Mac...which I rarely do.

reds1869
02-01-2007, 11:04 PM
Switched to Mac five years ago and never looked back. OS X and Apple machines in general are light years ahead of Windows PCs. I do think XP is a decent operating system, though, if the person using it is competent.

Unassisted
02-01-2007, 11:27 PM
Yeah, but Vista is going to be awesome....
Walt Mossberg says that Vista needs 2 GB of RAM to run comfortably. That's the definition of bloatware, if you ask me.

ochre
02-02-2007, 06:21 PM
ubuntu is pretty nice.

StillFunkyB
02-02-2007, 06:28 PM
Windows on my main PC, and laptop.

Linux on my two F@H dedicated folders.

F@H is a distributed computing program from Stanford University.
http://folding.stanford.edu/

StillFunkyB
02-02-2007, 06:32 PM
ubuntu is pretty nice.

Yeah, running xubuntu on both my linux boxes. Switched over from Kubuntu Edgy Eft because these machines have SATA HDD's.

HBP
02-02-2007, 07:38 PM
Switched to Mac five years ago and never looked back. OS X and Apple machines in general are light years ahead of Windows PCs. I do think XP is a decent operating system, though, if the person using it is competent.

Isn't comparing actual computers an apple to oranges comparison though? Since Microsoft doesn't produce PC's, they have no control over what type of machine it goes on to. Obviously a year old Mac with Os X will be a better computer than a four year old PC that runs Windows. Yes, OS X does some things better than Vista, and yes Vista will be able to do some things better than Os X. But in the end, they both basically do the same thing.

What's great about Apple machines is that you know you're most likely getting a product that will be reliable, productive, and fun to use. But, you do have to pay a little more for hardware that can be bought cheaper. My PC can do mostly everything a Mac can and I paid about $400 for it by building it (not including monitor).

pedro
02-02-2007, 07:40 PM
ubuntu is pretty nice.

that looks really interesting. i might have to put that on one of my machines.

westofyou
02-02-2007, 07:42 PM
But in the end, they both basically do the same thing.

That's why I'm an applications guy, not an operating system guy.

ochre
02-02-2007, 07:55 PM
that looks really interesting. i might have to put that on one of my machines.
I just started goofing around with it a couple of weeks ago. It's really easy to set up and run. The networking tools on it (or easily installed on it) are just way better than the stuff generally available for xp.

reds1869
02-03-2007, 10:44 AM
Isn't comparing actual computers an apple to oranges comparison though? Since Microsoft doesn't produce PC's, they have no control over what type of machine it goes on to. Obviously a year old Mac with Os X will be a better computer than a four year old PC that runs Windows.

My five year old G4 runs better than my brand new Windows machines at work. I will agree with you on one thing, though: the only good, cheap PC I've ever owned was one I built myself.

oneupper
02-03-2007, 04:10 PM
Check this out:

http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyarchives/915.html