Slashdot Log In
Ubuntu Linux vs. Mac OS X
Posted by
CmdrTaco
on Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:10 AM
from the begin-the-battle-royale dept.
from the begin-the-battle-royale dept.
An anonymous reader writes "An article on InformationWeek pits an Apple user against an Ubuntu Linux user (although he talks about other distros as well) as to which OS makes a better desktop operating system. As might be expected, the conclusion seems to be "different strokes for different folks," but it's interesting to see Microsoft cut (mostly) out of the equation."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
They're not mutually exclusive (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
But it's Ubuntu vs. Mac OS X, right? Not Ubuntu vs. Mac hardware. I know next to nothing about Ubuntu, but I'm assuming you can't run it from within Mac OS X...
Re:They're not mutually exclusive (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, you can via virtualization (Parallels, VMware, etc).
Parent
FWIW: (Score:3, Insightful)
I use both Linux (Fedora Core: where Men are Men and modules are scared) as well as OSX (10.3.9 - yeah, I'm lazy - on a dual G5).
I originally got a Mac because that's where all the affordable non-Windows 3D/CG compositing software was at that time. POV-Ray I love (on occasion), GIMP I love, Blender, umm, I love in an S&M sort of way (which is why I eventually bought AC3D [ac3d.org])... but there was no compositing thingy back then for less than ten zillion bucks, a'la Shake and Maya.
An
Re:I also use both (Score:4, Interesting)
I have ubuntu at work and printing to samba printing was as simple as adding a printer. I haven't looked at smb.conf on the machine.
As for mounting shares, I don't really know. I mounted them by editing
Firewall is installed on ubuntu, and enabled by default. The lack of open ports on a default install makes this less of an issue too.
VPN is just as easy to set up on ubuntu as OSX. Actually, I'd say easier. On OSX to add keys for VPN use you have to go into the keychain as root which requires you to go to the terminal and sudo open
disk encryption. If I have a zip file with a password then I can click on it, enter the password and browse/edit files on it using a finder-like interface. That seems very like disk encryption to me. I suppose there is no flashing neon-light saying 'disk encryption' though... maybe the next version will highlight it more.
Sound is largely a fixed problem now, your desktop environment provides a sound server and everything connects to it. Not perfect, but not a problem for normal users. I remember when I used to switch user in OSX and be unable to play sound because another user was using the sound device too...
Every widescreen monitor I've used with ubuntu has just been plug'n'play, same as OSX.
I'm not claiming ubuntu is perfect (and I have two macs at home), but it works pretty damn well out of the box. Having all your OS updates in one place rather than just Apple updates available via software update is a huge benefit too. And the same program which does updating lets you add and remove programs. That's how it SHOULD be. Apple's drag to the Applications folder is kinda cute, but now and again it screws up with trying to drag an application out announcing 'permission denied' - WTF, why didn't it prompt me for my password if I don't have permission? Maybe 10.5 will fix that.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:They're not mutually exclusive (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Not sure I would consider Apple to be the Rolls Royce of the computer industry. They make a nice product, for sure, but the difference in quality is more like the difference between a Toyota and a Honda.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, no, no. (Score:5, Funny)
Windows is like a mid-size luxury SUV. Apple is like a Fox Terrier. And Ubuntu is like a Pomegranate. Except, not in the *same* analogy, of course.
Don't you get it now?
Parent
Re:They're not mutually exclusive (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:They're not mutually exclusive (Score:4, Funny)
A PC and a Mac are actually the same car, except the Mac has the passenger door(s) and the trunk welded shut.
Parent
Re:They're not mutually exclusive (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:They're not mutually exclusive (Score:4, Informative)
Actually, the Rolls Royce analogy may be apt. But really I think it's more like a BMW analogy. Both Toyotas and BMWs are nicely built, one has more luxury trimmings than the other, but all in all they still get you from point A to point B. Both are likely to experience problems during their lifetimes, and the difference comes out then. With the Toyota you will receive adequate service after bitching at the warranty guy, whereas with the BMW you will receive prompt, courteous service that addresses your concerns quickly and completely.
Having owned both Macs and PCs (guess which one I'm on now), I can tell you without a doubt that this is true. When my Toshiba broke down I had to bring it to the retailer, deal with a support tech who was more than unwilling to help me, and in fact tried to deflect every malfunctioning bit as normal behaviour, or somehow make it seem like accidental damage. I was extremely dissatisfied.
Compare and contrast to when the hinge on my MacBook Pro broke. I phoned it in (no Apple store where I was), my call was answered in less than 5 minutes (try THAT with any other major consumer laptop manufacturer!). The tech took my serial, verified my warranty coverage, and immediately passed me off to a product expert who is more familiar with case issues. The other tech answered in less than 2 minutes, and the first tech even stayed on the line to summarize the problem for him, so I don't have to repeat myself. The second tech immediately gave me an authorization number for the repair, and my laptop was back to tip top shape in a couple of days.
Time taken with PC: 2 hours.
Aggravation: 10
Time taken with Mac: 15 minutes.
Aggravation: 0
Many people will feed you with BS about how Macs are unbreakable or such other BS. They break like any other laptop. The difference is in how you're treated after that fact.
Parent
Re:They're not mutually exclusive (Score:5, Funny)
Doesn't mean I wouldn't do it if I had the option.
Parent
Re:They're not mutually exclusive (Score:4, Interesting)
a true rolls-royce computer would probably be more like this one anyway: http://www.sun.com/servers/highend/sunfire_e25k/i
Parent
Re:They're not mutually exclusive (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:They're not mutually exclusive (Score:5, Informative)
Sure, you can get cheaper hardware elsewhere, but you normally get exactly what you pay for.
Parent
Re:They're not mutually exclusive (Score:5, Insightful)
Using your logic, since in most cases all anyone has to do is transport themselves from point A to point B, we should all be content with a Chevy Aveo5. Or maybe, according to your worldview, we should all be quite content covering our genitalia with used burlap sacks, because, really, in the end you're just covering your junk, right? What should quality, comfort, style or utility possibly have to do with anything?
Look, bs, you're just a person who doesn't mind living life surrounded by inferiority. And that's fine, you're entitled to your way of living, but don't try to compare a $179.98 redlight special with a capably designed machine, it just makes you look foolish. But, then, I'll bet you look foolish a lot, don't you?
Parent
Re:They're not mutually exclusive (Score:5, Insightful)
But the thing that this system runs is OS X, which other systems can't run. (and I'm not talking about hacked OS X running on Dells or other such things). So, I could with a restart run either OS X, XP, or Linux if I wanted. Another Intel based system would only have (mainly), XP/Vista or Linux to choose from.
So even if I agree with your "overpriced, proprietary" hardware analogy, it's still a system I can run any OS I want on.
But hey, if you don't like it, don't like it. But it amazes me why some people take things so personally. Why do you care if people want a Mac? I don't care that people want a PC or a Pontiac or a Big Mac with super-sized fries.....more power to 'em I say!
Parent
Print Version (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.informationweek.com/shared/printableAr
It's about switching. (Score:5, Insightful)
MS isn't out of the equation at all. The whole point of TFA is about switching AWAY from Vista.
Re:It's about switching. (Score:5, Interesting)
The fact that Dell and others are still selling computers with Windows XP is not a good sign for Windows Vista.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.dell.com/open [dell.com]
Mod article flamebait (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, religious wars aside, you pick the tool that will best meet your needs. That's largely going to be based on applications. Increasingly, there are good choices on both platforms here for a wide variety of different things. The one thing I will say -- if you're looking to do video editing, buy a Mac. 'cause the state of video editing on Linux right now still sucks. If you need Microsoft Office, buy a Mac.
For me, I do a lot of software development work and audio production. I could pick either platform, really, but lots of factors make me choose Linux over Mac OS X -- software freedom, hackability, and cost are my 3 biggest reasons. OS X is nice, don't get me wrong, it's just not for me.
Re:Mod article flamebait (Score:5, Insightful)
In addition to learning the GUI stuff, learn some of the command line; you are most productive with a mixture of the two. Also, the shell (command line/cli) is fairly static, and your knowledge transfers to every OS, er, except, for, um, Windows.
As for OS X vs Ubuntu. At work, I use both on the desktop (an OS X box right next to a PC running 7.04, using synergy to span my mouse and keyboard), and I prefer OS X; but mainly that is because I love TextMate so much; if I still used VIM primarily, I wouldn't prefer one over the other (although Cream in LInux is very nice, so that may sway me). On servers, it's Linux all the way, period.
For home, it's a no brainer, I use OS X. I'm a programmer, so I want to tweak my shell and my editor to a very fine point, but for stuff like music and movies, I just want the stuff to work, frankly. Oh and Quicksilver, Linux really needs a Quicksilver clone (no, you don't have one, if you think you do then you've never actually used Quicksilver)
Parent
Re:Mod article flamebait (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Mod article flamebait (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Mod article flamebait (Score:5, Funny)
I only own one hammer: a 16-ounce claw hammer with a fiberglass shaft and the proper balance to give a good, powerful swing.
And it worked great on my last Windows box. :p
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple holds and will probably always hold the high end where people feel like they're getting special stuff for their extra money.
I think Linux will eat up the very low end then expand slowly from there.
Microsoft was cut from the equation because... (Score:4, Insightful)
"If you're a Vista-wary Windows user who would rather switch than fight, should you move to a Linux distro or Apple's OS X?"
Why would they put MS into the equation?
Re:Microsoft was cut from the equation because... (Score:4, Interesting)
Because everybody other than Windows users would have already picked between OS X and Linux?
Parent
Oh... (Score:5, Funny)
Do something less controversial (Score:5, Funny)
One Button Mouse Charge Stale (Score:4, Informative)
Re:*** It's not JUST about the button *** (Score:5, Interesting)
That's simply not true - I use the right mouse button in all applications I use, and I notice almost no differences between my OSX, Ubuntu and Windows boxes.
Maybe you care to name a handful of applications which fall under your above mentioned category? Maybe I'm just getting you wrong or you haven't even used a Mac much.
(And about that middle mouse button - I have set it up with Exposé's "show all windows" feature, and that boosts my productivity with a lot of open windows *greatly*. Just middle-click to see all windows and left-click on the one you want to switch. I'm eagerly awaiting an Exposé clone for X11, it just ain't coming...)
Parent
iTunes for Ubuntu (Score:3, Informative)
Just mulit-boot it (Score:3, Insightful)
from TFA (Score:5, Funny)
Re:from TFA (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:from TFA (Score:5, Informative)
The new Core Duos pull more current than you'd expect.
Parent
Going from skiing to snowboarding (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm a skier, been skiing for over 7 years now and (if I dare say it) I'm pretty reasonable. I'm not an expert, but as long as it isn't icy moguls (or moguls for that matter) can handle most of the pistes ... and I enjoy it.
Now snowboarding looks cool. You can do things you can't do with skis, it certainly looks like fun and you can do some great tricks. So I gave it a go, several times. The problem was that here was I, standing at a resort with my snowboard on and looking at what I could do. The black down the mountain? Nope. The long red? Nope. The winding blue through the trees? Nope. The rubbish green which snakes past the lifts. Well, sort of as long as I didn't mind falling over a bit.
So here am I, completely unable to go off and explore the mountain because the tool I was using to do it, I couldn't use properly. I hadn't invested the time and the effort to learn and here was I, unable to get the best out of it.
So what should I do? Spend the next week (and only week of my holiday) falling about on a green run? Or slap back on my ski's and head off and explore the mountain, try all the runs, get to the summit and check out the blacks down the back - plus a little off piste?
I did what, I suspect, a lot of people did. I put my ski's back on. My weeks holiday in the snow is precious. I don't have the time and money to fly abroad to ski again multiple times a year so in the end I wussed out, picked what I knew was comfortable and that I could do and went with that.
I rationalise that my holiday was too short to be sitting face down on a green run when I could be taking full advantage of what the mountain had to offer. I did the training and the falling over 7 years ago when I was learning to ski - it's taken me years (literally) to get where I am now and, in one fell swooop, I don't want to go back again to that.
I think a lot of people consider Windows vs something else in the same way that I consider skiing vs snowboarding.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It took me about 3 weeks to stop booting into Windows on laptop after I installed Ubuntu. And that's considering that I've never ever hadn't even laid my eyes on any flavor of *nix before.
Your analogy of skiing and snowboarding is flawed, because you're comparing both levels of skill and levels of difficulty that are not applicable to OS usage. The fact is that (again following your analogy) most of us are not doing the black diamonds on our Windo
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think a lot of people consider using Windows to be much like using cardboard skis.
Re:Going from skiing to snowboarding (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, imagine that someone skied up beside you, turned your skis the way they wanted, stole your lift ticket, and finally broke your skis halfway down a black diamond run.
Then imagine that on the way up the ski lift, you are informed that in order to prevent ski theft, you will have a slope protection agent. "You are trying to turn left. Cancel or Allow?" But when you get to the top of the lift, you learn that you have to replace your favorite skis with more expensive skis. Then you need to upgrade your boots to this special limited selection. And none of them will fit into the bindings on the skis.
Now, you are realizing that the choice of an expensive-ish (not really) snowboard ready-to-ride, or a roll-your-own board shop will get you down the hill in one piece. Cancel or Allow?
Parent
so sick of the os wars everyday (Score:4, Insightful)
I use both (Score:3, Insightful)
At work I'm on Linux almost exclusivly with some things running on Solaris.
Summary of conclusion is wrong (Score:3, Informative)
So how does this article say "different strokes for different folks"? It's clearly states that OSX is the winner for most people looking to switch away from Microsoft.
Cloning Mac OS X (Score:5, Informative)
So if your hard drive dies, you have a bootable backup that works just as well as the internal drive (if you're using FireWire, USB is a little slow). If the computer dies and you have access to another Mac, you can boot from your backup drive and it will be just as if you were still using your own computer, barring any extreme differences in memory and processor speeds. With enough RAM available the processor speed makes very little difference under general usage like web browsing, email and office applications. When you get your computer fixed (or replace a failed hard drive) you can then clone your backup drive back onto the drive in the computer, reboot, and it's like nothing ever happened. Click a button, walk away for about an hour, and get back to work.
With a properly implemented cloning schedule you can recover any system, including a Mac OS X server, in about 5 minutes (as long as it takes to restart the computer, hold down the Option key, and choose to boot from the latest backup drive). I could teach a monkey to do it.
No resetting hidden magic identifiers.
No reinstalling a hundred different drivers for different motherboards, video cards, network cards, etc.
No, "I'm going to refuse to work at all because there is too much different hardware." (I tried to Ghost a Win2K system from one laptop to a virtually identical laptop once. The clone failed to function, ended up having to reset the registry and reinstall most of the pre-installed software.)
No, "This copy of your operating system needs to be reactivated because the hardware changed, you dirty pirate." The non-server version of Mac OS X doesn't even require a serial number, so of course there is no product activation crap to make your life more difficult. Even the server version can be freely cloned and moved to a different system. It requires a serial, but there is no product activation.
No shutting down the system and booting from some special magic CD just to do a clone. That's right, Mac OS X can be easily cloned LIVE, while it's running. It can be cloned automatically on a schedule, so the user doesn't have to even have to think about it.
The target media can be smaller than the source media, as long as there is enough room for the data. It's a smart clone, only the relevant data gets copied. That's all automatic too, the user never needs to go through any complicated preferences or command-line arguments. No need for defragmenting the drive or anything like that either.
In short, Mac OS X is the first operating system I have ever encountered where it is incredibly easy to make a complete USABLE system backup that doesn't require jumping through hoops for hours to restore the system. Any non-technical user can be told in one short paragraph how to keep their system backed up and how to recover from a typical hardware disaster in a matter of minutes. Observe:
"Here is your external backup drive. Her
Cloning UNIX (Score:4, Interesting)
Carbon Copy Cloner is a wrapper around a command to make a disk bootable, plus a recursive copy.
That's all cloning *any* single-partition UNIX system takes. Linux is a bit more complex because they don't support single-stage booting so you need to run *two* commands to make a disk bootable, not just one.
The only reason you need a GUI program on OSX is because getting that "recursive copy" bit right is way too complex and tricky compared with the same operation on any other UNIX.
And it's a MAJOR step back from doing the same thing on classic Mac OS... *that* was a matter of a single drag in Finder, because they built that "make the disk bootable" operation into Finder. And they *still* haven't been able to make Finder copy all the fiddly metadata they keep whacking onto the side of HFS like a tumor.
Parent