This is topic mac, win or linux? what do you prefer? in forum Rants, Raves, Rumors! at The Geek Culture Forums!.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.geekculture.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=19;t=000771

Posted by emcisquareisequaltoenergy (Member # 4459) on October 07, 2005, 23:10:
 
Choose what´s the easier os to work for you.
 
Posted by Rhonwyyn (Member # 2854) on October 07, 2005, 23:15:
 
If you'd read through the archives, you'll discover that each one of us has at one time or another talked about our OS preference(s). If you become a SuperFan, you can even take part in a poll created to discover your Linux Distro preference(s) (and IIRC, it polled for Win and Mac).

Sometimes it's best to shut up and listen when you're new to a place like this. Mmkay?

/me stops patronizing the new person

I did have a good day today! I really did! [ohwell]

And for the record, I'm loving Tiger, but WinXP did have its good points (most notably, my familiarity with it!). I've been Mac-only for the past month and this Mac-immersion program isn't going as quickly as I'd like. I'm still working on learning all the file extensions and what they do.

EDIT: Indeed! Here's the Fave Flavors poll.
 
Posted by Jace Raven (Member # 2444) on October 08, 2005, 22:42:
 
ubuntu!!!!!!!!!!!

okay, I started out on SuSe and HATED it. Moved to RH and swore by it. Got ahold of an ubuntu buff and she swore up and down that ubuntu was good because it didn't break itself. Worked a little with Mepis and tried kubuntu but prefer Gnome. I love Debian, maybe that's why I like ubuntu so much..hmmm...

WinXP was horrible. It was easy though, and didn't require so much knowledge in the pure operation of it. Fixing it was a completly different story and after working for the USMC troubleshooting for it, I began to hate the sound of those 5 letter and no i'm not talking about Devil.

Mac OS X 10.3 was the last Mac OS I used and Loved it. I'm sure .4 is even better, couldn't say but I love mac.

A long time ago I had an opportunity to experience BeOS. I would say, its begining phases weren't the greatest.
 
Posted by Callipygous (Member # 2071) on October 09, 2005, 15:25:
 
I like my OS with cheese and no pickle

OSX of course
 
Posted by Erbo (Member # 199) on October 09, 2005, 18:10:
 
I'm a Linux man myself, as all and sundry should know already. My preferred distro is now Debian, but it's been different in the past; I also use Fedora Core on a fairly regular basis, and Knoppix when it's needed.

If you gotta use Windows, though, 2000 or XP are the way to go. But, for XP, I gotta turn off that damn Fisher-Price user interface and go back to the "classic" Windows look & feel.
 
Posted by Dauthúr (Member # 3247) on October 09, 2005, 18:53:
 
lol my favrit os is AOL LOL

Yes. I'm currently stuck between a jumble of them all. I dualboot with Phlak and Gentoo, Windows XP on a RAID0, and I have a G4 that has Tiger. I love them all equally for different reasons. Windows for compatability, Linux because it's Linux, and Mac because it's simply the most beautiful thing ever created.
 
Posted by Shinaku (Member # 2027) on October 10, 2005, 01:56:
 
I'm with Dauthúr, I use an OS depeding on the application I need.

If I want games and compatability with software from college, WinXP.

If I want to code or do something more technical, Linux.

If I want to actully enjoy using the computer, OSX.

I belive that all OSes have their strong and weak points, and that to declare over all love for a single one is pretty dumb.
 
Posted by supaboy (Member # 183) on October 10, 2005, 07:47:
 
quote:
Originally posted by Shinaku:
I belive that ... to declare over all love for a single one is pretty dumb.

No: it just means that you don't have commitment issues.
 
Posted by maximile (Member # 3446) on October 10, 2005, 07:57:
 
quote:
Originally posted by Shinaku:
I belive that all OSes have their strong and weak points, and that to declare over all love for a single one is pretty dumb.

True, but we're being asked which is easiest to use (I think). I've never found Windows or Linux easier to use than OSX.
 
Posted by GameMaster (Member # 1173) on October 10, 2005, 08:29:
 
quote:
I belive that all OSes have their strong and weak points, and that to declare over all love for a single one is pretty dumb.
I think it's pretty dumb to assume that anyone who favors one OS over another is dumb. I think there are very good reasons to use one OS for all applications. There are several reasons for this:
(for average Joe User)
- It's easier to use one OS, so that you have a single consistant interface to use.
- Porting data between system can some times be a pain.
- COST, it can get very expensive to buy every properitary OS on the market.
- support - some OS have better support than others. If your a general user, this might be important to get an OS that is well supported.

(for geeks)
- Linux and BSD are free as in beer, and speech -- if you buy what RMS is selling then you'd have to believe there is no reason to use closed system.
- If everything you is server-client, then you'll lean toward an OS that has lots of network tools, is very stable and is very secure.
- If you need/want catchy eye candy, and things that "just work" then X11 and Windows isn't for you.

On the tail end, I see value in most of the popular OSes, some more than others, and in that regard I use Linux, Macs, BSD and Windows... I have my preferences, and when I have the choice I use Linux. It's not that I think all programs should be FOSS -- but I certianly think it has it's place in the current market.
 
Posted by dragonman97 (Member # 780) on October 10, 2005, 09:08:
 
Honestly, Linux is still easier for me for certain tasks - but I must admit that OS X is pretty damn fine.

Posting with:
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.8b5) Gecko/20051010 (No IDN) Firefox/1.4.1 ID:2005101005
 
Posted by quantumfluff (Member # 450) on October 10, 2005, 11:09:
 
Originally posted by emcisquareisequaltoenergy: Choose what´s the easier os to work for you.
Which is "easiest" depends on what I intend to do. I choose whatever is appropriate at the time.

---
Ask a silly question, you get a smug answer...
 
Posted by Jace Raven (Member # 2444) on October 10, 2005, 15:01:
 
I think this is where a lot of flame wars originate from. Ask me what OS is easier to do a certain task for me is and I will tell you a specific OS. If I want to Pirate all sorts of multi-player games and have vast databases of porn and mp3s, well Win 2k & XP any day. If I want an OS that works, and does so well, give me OS X. If I am getting a little more technical and am doing some Hacking and dont want to have to deal with compatablilty issues, I'll take my flavor of linux any day. I'm currently attempting to learn more about programming and open source software so I have completly left the world of windows and X.

This is just me. Some people find it easier to do different things on different platforms.
 
Posted by quantumfluff (Member # 450) on October 10, 2005, 17:10:
 
Exactly. "Easiest" is a meaningless dimension, unless you qualify it with a purpose. If I was writing software to handle classified secret data, then Multics would be the "easiest" to use. If I was using an ancient piece of software that handled my business needs really well, then MS-DOS might be "easiest".

What constantly amazes me is the percentage of seemingly intelligent people who will ask questions in the form of "what is the best X?" without being willing to think about why they want X in the first place.
 
Posted by freewaybear (Member # 4488) on October 17, 2005, 10:15:
 
I dual-boot Xandros 3.0/ WinXP, but to tell the truth, I only use XP because there is no Linux 2.6 kernel driver for my POS built-in sound. But I'll get a newer rig eventually (Currently using a hand-me-down HP Pavilion P2 400MHz beater). At that time, goodbye Microsuck!
 
Posted by serishema (Member # 4481) on November 05, 2005, 19:37:
 
I'm one of the few geeks that actually prefers windows. It's virtually a crime these days, but i freely admit it.
 
Posted by G-3PO (Member # 1851) on November 07, 2005, 17:46:
 
I'd prefer Linux if I hadn't just spent so much time wrestling with ATI's impossible-to-install Linux drivers. Still don't have 3d acceleration working.
 
Posted by csk (Member # 1941) on November 07, 2005, 18:00:
 
quote:
Originally posted by G-3PO:
I'd prefer Linux if I hadn't just spent so much time wrestling with ATI's impossible-to-install Linux drivers. Still don't have 3d acceleration working.

Yeah, if you want to run Linux, use nVidia, seems to be the case.
 
Posted by The Famous Druid (Member # 1769) on November 07, 2005, 18:26:
 
One word.

Ubuntu.

You just install the fglrx package, manually change one line in the xorg.conf file (driver fglrx) and It Just Works™
 
Posted by dragonman97 (Member # 780) on November 07, 2005, 21:02:
 
I just found this, and love it!
http://www.eskimo.com/~johnnyb/computers/stl/

Just what everyone needs - Serial Terminal Linux. [Big Grin]

Hey...it helped me get some very cool stuff set up on my desk - put it in an old laptop of mine, booted up, and was in it in ~30s. Set to 9600 8N1, and I was watching the boot sequence of a purty new networking toy... (a hell of a lot faster than booting up to the copy of Win95 on there, and using the dreaded Hyperterminal).
 
Posted by littlefish (Member # 966) on November 08, 2005, 00:47:
 
Thats pretty cool. I want a wireless thin client so I can surf the net in front of the telly. I was considering an old clamshell ibook, but saw this from nokia which is pretty cool.

Of course I have no money anyway, so it is all just dreaming...
 
Posted by littlefish (Member # 966) on November 08, 2005, 00:49:
 
Edit: Double post. How did that happen?
 
Posted by drunkennewfiemidget (Member # 2814) on November 08, 2005, 06:47:
 
Debian or Gentoo Linux.
 
Posted by G-3PO (Member # 1851) on November 08, 2005, 13:41:
 
Actually, Druid, I am running Ubuntu. The ATI drivers are still crazy. I don't know if I'm supposed to use the official ATI RPM, or the .debs someone made, or the package from synaptic...craziness. By now I've tried so many methods that everything is screwy. My repositories are fubared as well.

It also seems I can't have more than one program access my on-board soundcard at any one time.
 
Posted by The Famous Druid (Member # 1769) on November 08, 2005, 13:58:
 
quote:
Originally posted by G-3PO:
Actually, Druid, I am running Ubuntu. The ATI drivers are still crazy. I don't know if I'm supposed to use the official ATI RPM, or the .debs someone made, or the package from synaptic...craziness.

I just installed the fglrx package with synaptic, and got no result, still the old unaccelerated driver. A friend who's running Ubuntu on the same model laptop as I told me about the manual change to xorg.conf and now it works fine.
 
Posted by G-3PO (Member # 1851) on November 08, 2005, 14:13:
 
So, install the official RPM as ATI suggests, but change the Xorg.conf line?

Or install the Synaptic package and change it?

and what about configfglrx?
 
Posted by The Famous Druid (Member # 1769) on November 08, 2005, 16:18:
 
quote:
Originally posted by G-3PO:
So, install the official RPM as ATI suggests, but change the Xorg.conf line?

Or install the Synaptic package and change it?

and what about configfglrx?

Installed Ubuntu using the default driver, then used synaptic to install the fglrx package. Then changed the 'driver' line in xorg.conf to fglrx. Didn't need to stuff about with configfglrx.

I can send you a copy of my xorg.conf file if you like, it'll probably need changed for your monitor (mine is a 1680x1050 LCD on a laptop) but it should be a good start.
 


© 2018 Geek Culture

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.4.0