Linux vs MacOSX

Message

Mystilleef · Post by **Mystilleef** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 1:10 am

JHuber wrote:OS X is bringing *NIX to the masses, providing a user freindly interface for your common user. isnt this what we all want to happen? sure there are always going to be power users who want more, i know i always will. but you simply have to be happy that apple is bringing a UNIX based desktop to people who dont even know what unix is.

I do not believe using OS X resembles a Unix experience. I also do not believe that by using OS X you automatically understand what Unix is all about let alone understand how to use it. Put a MacOS X user, who has no experience with Unix, in front of a terminal and see if his OS X experience transfers easily to Linux or *BSD. Believe me, it doesn't.

Shan · Post by **Shan** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 1:19 am

Wow, I most certainly didn't expect this many replies, or this large of a Mac / Linux war. I guess my thread title was somewhat inappropriately named. It was meant more to examine just how closely OSX follows along *BSD / *NIX, and while I appreciate all of the information you've provided, I still have a few unanswered questions. Primarily....

Shan wrote:<snip>I'd heard (unofficially) that OSX was supposed to be using a [Free|Open]BSD kernel, but I wasn't aware that it so closely cloned Linux (or Unix, whatever you prefer) Cron, init, CUPSd, file system layout (/etc /usr, et al). Am I the only person who didn't know this? and how did Apple get away with this without infringing on the liscencing?</snip>

As I said in my initial post, I'm by no means an expert on *NIX or its world, I just try and learn as I go, and outside of OSX, I've never touched a machine running a BSD deriv kernel. As such I know nothing about their liscencing, but it seems to me that if its anything close to the one used by Linux Distros, then apple would be in violation wouldn't they? Or does the BSD liscences not require the source to be available...?

JHuber · Post by **JHuber** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 1:19 am

i dont mean the unix expirience. im talking about somethinf other than Windows. We as *NIX users know what a great os's they are. now apple is showing people who normally wouldnt diverge from a wintel machine that it is too.

and actually The UNIX part of BSD is not that bad. well at least OS X Server. i admit it is missing some stuff. but its not like i cant install all that stuff anyways.

Shan · Post by **Shan** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 1:23 am

Mystilleef wrote:
JHuber wrote:OS X is bringing *NIX to the masses, providing a user freindly interface for your common user. isnt this what we all want to happen? sure there are always going to be power users who want more, i know i always will. but you simply have to be happy that apple is bringing a UNIX based desktop to people who dont even know what unix is.
I do not believe using OS X resembles a Unix experience. I also do not believe that by using OS X you automatically understand what Unix is all about let alone understand how to use it. Put a MacOS X user, who has no experience with Unix, in front of a terminal and see if his OS X experience transfers easily to Linux or *BSD. Believe me, it doesn't.

True, but the same can be said for *shudders* "Lindows" can it not? Afterall, its using a *NIX derivative base and hiding it from the end user as much as possible. Though in the case of Lindows, they're also going for Wintel capable program emulation and a pseudo-clone of the Windows interface.

Honestly, I think what we should all be shooting for (for the time being) isn't an OS market share dominated by Linux, but a market in which Windows isn't the dominating force. Really now, would you all complain if it were 60% Apple 35% Linux, 5% Windows? Our goal should be getting rid of Windows and MSFT FIRST and worry about where we are afterwords.

JHuber · Post by **JHuber** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 2:43 am

to answer your question, Darwin, which is the name of the UNIX System apple uses, is freely available for download source and all for ppc and x86 at http://developer.apple.com/darwin/ so no violations

chrispy · Post by **chrispy** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 2:44 am

Mystilleef wrote:-I'm glad you agree with me on most of my points. However, somewhere in the mist of your arguments, you labeled me a troll. I find that amusing.

I didn't label you as troll, I wrote that you were obviously trolling on purpose. However you seem to be even more passionate than me when you argue.

-I use Jaguar on the iMac. Correct me if I'm wrong, but to the best of my knowledge that qualifies as OS X.

Fine. but I was ASKING if you were using OSX. I had doubts, but you confirmed you did. I'm not going to correct you, I'm not that arrogant, and you are right.

Of course, I have an edge. If tomorrow GNOME bores me or exasperates me, I have an alternative desktop environments to choose from. That's a plus.

Indeed it is, to you.
I have an old sony laptop here that runs Gnome, and on which I experiment with all kinds of WM and DE. But I come back to my mac when I need to do things quickly and concentrate on the content of my work. I guess I have different idea of using computers. To each his own ?

After using an environment for I while it gets boring and monotonous. [...] So you win here.

Win what ? I didn't start the discussion to win anything

I don't care what people tell you. Jaguar has frozen on me on several occasions, even when I'm not working on it.

Allright. My experience with macs is most probably more limited than yours. My one and only mac is my 1 year old powerbook. I never experienced deep freezes or kernel panics, but we also probably do not use our computers for the same things. I do guitar stuff on it, as well as database queries, reports, wordprocessing, mail... you see, nothing fancy. Sorry to hear you had bad experiences with Jaguar. I haven't.

Oh, please let's not talk about servers.

OK

It's expensive period. You can argue all you like. But for the kind of stuff I use my computer for, it's just overpriced.

I will not and cannot argue the price, simply because it's more psychological than tangible. In my opinion, newer macs are fairly priced for what they offer. I do not know you and funnily enough, different people have different values. I guess this applies here.

Indeed, it comes down to choice. But I also think common sense is a better reason for using an OS. Like I said earlier, if you are a multimedia professional, I highly recommend MacOS X. If all you do is listen to music, browse the web, chat, write reports run a home based webserver, and you happen to be a home user, you have no business with the Macs, except of course you are lured by their prettiness and cool looks and you have the cash to burn.

As stated above, different people, different values. I guess that by your standards, I have cash to burn.
I have several x86 gentoo boxes to handle various things for me. One server that does filesharing, router, p2p and mythtv. Indeed I would never have bought a mac for that. not because it would not be suitable for the task, but because I wanted a minimalistic setup and didn't like to have a big tower that needs a mouse.
Another gentoo box is the VPN server I installed in our office. I could have bought a mac, in fact I intended to do so, but we had unused x86 boxes lying around, so I gave in and "built" the thing myself.

Instead I'd recommend you order nephew to run over to purchase Lindows, Lycoris or Xandros and help you install the whole OS for you. Oh, and don't worry about configuring stuff with those distros. Stuff just works, like you put it.

Well well well, if that isn't trolling on purpose, I do not know what it is !

I do not have any nephew yet ( give a few years to my sister, first !) but I'm sure that if I can handle openBSD by myself, I can handle Lycoris and the likes just fine, thank you for your kind advice.

Again I'm not saying make OSX sucks! Far from it. I'm just saying it doesn't make sense purchasing a Machine just because it looks good, or pretty. Prettiness hardly gets the job done. From a price/performance analysis, Linux wins hands down. It's cheaper, it more flexible, it's more robust, it's scalable, it doesn't force you to upgrade paths, and from it's core, it's designed to handle unimaginable workloads that home users will never have the need for. Which further lays credence to its stability.

"again" ?? where did you state that in the first place ? anyways, once again you give a price/performance comparison and that is just not what this discussion is about. How can you compare the price of something free and a $129 software package ?
Who said that I bought my machine only because it was pretty ? By stating so you imply that I'm too stupid to base my needs on looks ? How rude. Yes, I whole-heartedly agree that prettiness doesn't get the job done. No one will argue with that.
Also, you are not obliged to upgrade OSX, you know ! Apple doesn't put a gun on your forehead asking you to hand in the cash... I know a few people that are very happy with OSX 10.1 and that are not even remotely considering to upgrade.
And I never said that linux is not more powerful than OSX. That, also is a dull argument, as we (or so I thought) were discussing desktop OS...

Finally, because MacOS X evolved from Unix doesn't make it as robust or as stable as its older Unix clones *BSD and Linux. Apple is still new in Unix land, which is evident by the slew of security fixes and patches that they've released for their OS X over time. Compared to FreeBSD and Linux developers, the Apple folks are Noobs with regards to Unix and are likely to make mistakes or implement things that are non-Unix-like. I don't take OS X as serious Unix clone as compared to Linux or *BSD, partly because of Apple inexperience with Unix, and the fact that some of the features I find useful in Unix are absent in OS X natively. {hint env variables, file system, powerful scripting tools via cli, text base configurations etc}. Yes, I know I can run X in OS X and what not. But there is nothing like doing it the real way.

Your point ? no one stated that OSX has a 30 years history. It is based on *NIX and tries to build a useable *desktop* OS out of it. It's only been 4 years, and Rome wasn't built in one day, nobody claimed OSX (wether server of desktop editions) was up to par with 13 years old linux or 35 years old BSD. They claim that is a viable alternative for desktop. I believe that is an honest statement.
file system ? granted, HFS+ sucks
scripting via the cli ? hello ? bash tcsh applescript ??
test-based config ? check /etc on your mac

Linux vs OS X. No brainer Linux.

Sure. For YOU it is a no brainer. Not everyone thinks like you. And for me, a laptop running linux with gnome/kde/whatever is not as productive a tool than a laptop running OSX.

avenj · Post by **avenj** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 2:48 am

The BSD license gives you the freedom to take BSD-licensed code and make it proprietary so long as you retain the original copyright notices.

In other words, it gives you the freedom to deny freedom. This is why I refuse to license anything I do under the BSD license.

Mystilleef · Post by **Mystilleef** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 2:50 am

The BSD license does not require commercial users to disclose the source code they use from a BSD licensed project.

wilburpan · Post by **wilburpan** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 2:54 am

Mystilleef wrote:Macs are overpriced and overhyped. It's funny how people talk about getting the job done on Macs. What job? Macs can't handle the load a typical Linux box would easily handled.

On the other hand, there are some things that are difficult for me to do using only Linux:

1. Create office documents that can be easily shared with colleagues that work in a non-Linux environment, especially Powerpoint files and Word documents with more than minimal formatting elements, especially tables.

2. Get video streams from websites.

3. Hooking up an LCD projector to my laptop in order to give a Powerpoint presentation.

Now, #2 and #3 are not crucial, but #1 is for me. And honestly, #1 is what >90% of computer users need to be able to do with their computers. #1 is very easy to do on a Mac, since MS Office exists for OS X. I'll be really happy the day that OpenOffice gets to the same level of compatibility, and it's almost there, but ensuring that my colleagues can read my office documents is one reason I still keep a Windows partition on my work laptop.

Mystilleef · Post by **Mystilleef** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 3:48 am

wilburpan wrote: On the other hand, there are some things that are difficult for me to do using only Linux:

1. Create office documents that can be easily shared with colleagues that work in a non-Linux environment, especially Powerpoint files and Word documents with more than minimal formatting elements, especially tables.

Save your documents as PDF or RFT or doc file formats in Open Office. Save you power point files as .ppt/.pps in open office. It works perfectly for me.

wilburpan wrote: 2. Get video streams from websites.

I have no problems doing that. It depends on you DE and setup. Do you have realplayer installed. What browser do you use? Do you have the necessary plugins installed?

wilburpan wrote: 3. Hooking up an LCD projector to my laptop in order to give a Powerpoint presentation.

If the LCD projector is OS independent, why not? I've been to several events where Linux presentations where done via LCD projectors. I admit I have used one yet. So I don't know how it will works on Linux.

wilburpan wrote: Now, #2 and #3 are not crucial, but #1 is for me. And honestly, #1 is what >90% of computer users need to be able to do with their computers. #1 is very easy to do on a Mac, since MS Office exists for OS X. I'll be really happy the day that OpenOffice gets to the same level of compatibility, and it's almost there, but ensuring that my colleagues can read my office documents is one reason I still keep a Windows partition on my work laptop.

I use openoffice.org ximian edition version-1.1.0 and its' compatibility with MS Office is almost flawless. All my reports, essays, assignments, spreadsheet and presentation work are done on it. And I've had no problems.

wilburpan · Post by **wilburpan** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 4:17 am

Mystilleef wrote:Save your documents as PDF or RFT or doc file formats in Open Office. Save you power point files as .ppt/.pps in open office. It works perfectly for me....[and other suggestions on MS Office compatibility]

First off, thanks again for the cflags recommendation you made in one of my other threads.

I've already tried your suggestions, and the bottom line is that it does not work perfectly for me -- especially for Powerpoint files. Many of the Word documents that I need to send to other users have multiple elements in them including charts, tables, and other graphic elements that OpenOffice does not translate correctly. I would say that it is 85% there as far as compatibility, but it certainly is not all the way there yet.

The problems are even more amplified in Powerpoint, especially if I am using a Powerpoint presentation that has been themed in MS Office. Many times slides that are well formatted in Powerpoint will need to be reformatted (changing font size, repositioning titles, etc.) in OpenOffice. Furthermore, one of the key features that I use in Powerpoint is the increase/decrease font size feature, which increases and decreases the font size of selected text while keeping their relative proportions. OpenOffice Impress does not have this functionality anywhere in it.

I have noticed that for documents that I originate, there are fewer problems with compatibility with other users.

My original point was that you asked what kind of job a Mac is good for. Office document compatibility is a big area where OS X still outperforms Linux.

I will repeat what I have stated earlier: I will be very happy when OpenOffice or any other program will replace MS Office. I would much rather use Linux than Windows, and I do use Linux at work most of the time instead of Windows. But at this point in time, OS X provides a better solution for office document compatibility than Linux does.

Oh, and regarding LCD projectors -- this is something that I often do at work. I keep a mental list of which rooms have projectors that will work while my laptop is running Gentoo, and which ones don't. The breakdown is that about half of the LCD projectors I've run across will not work well with my laptop running Linux. One major issue is the difficulty in getting X to switch resolutions on the fly.

This weekend I am travelling to Washington, DC to give a talk. You better believe that I will have a copy of my Powerpoint presentation on my Windows partition, because I have no idea if the projector that will be supplied to me will work with Linux. I will try Linux first because I like to show that you don't need Windows to give a Powerpoint presentation, but I can't take the chance of being stranded.

I would not have this problem if I had a Powerbook. Again, this is another area where OS X provides a better solution than Linux at this point in time.

zojas · Post by **zojas** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 4:32 am

Shan wrote:
Shan wrote:<snip>I'd heard (unofficially) that OSX was supposed to be using a [Free|Open]BSD kernel, but I wasn't aware that it so closely cloned Linux (or Unix, whatever you prefer) Cron, init, CUPSd, file system layout (/etc /usr, et al). Am I the only person who didn't know this? and how did Apple get away with this without infringing on the liscencing?</snip>
As I said in my initial post, I'm by no means an expert on *NIX or its world, I just try and learn as I go, and outside of OSX, I've never touched a machine running a BSD deriv kernel. As such I know nothing about their liscencing, but it seems to me that if its anything close to the one used by Linux Distros, then apple would be in violation wouldn't they? Or does the BSD liscences not require the source to be available...?

OS X is a mach microkernel with a bsd compatibility layer, and a large suite of bsd command-line utilities.

I've ported a couple things to OS X (lavaps & free) and for those type things I ended up having to use mach system calls, the BSD interface for getting process status (or more accurately task status) doesn't work.

and as has been mentioned previously, the source code is available from apple for everything 'below' the cocoa or carbon level. if you get a free apple developer account, you can check it out from cvs within a day or two of a binary release. I think you can get it through a web cvs interface without signing up too, but I'm not sure about that.

Mystilleef · Post by **Mystilleef** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 5:03 am

wilburpan wrote:
Mystilleef wrote:Save your documents as PDF or RFT or doc file formats in Open Office. Save you power point files as .ppt/.pps in open office. It works perfectly for me....[and other suggestions on MS Office compatibility]
First off, thanks again for the cflags recommendation you made in one of my other threads.

I've already tried your suggestions, and the bottom line is that it does not work perfectly for me -- especially for Powerpoint files. Many of the Word documents that I need to send to other users have multiple elements in them including charts, tables, and other graphic elements that OpenOffice does not translate correctly. I would say that it is 85% there as far as compatibility, but it certainly is not all the way there yet.

The problems are even more amplified in Powerpoint, especially if I am using a Powerpoint presentation that has been themed in MS Office. Many times slides that are well formatted in Powerpoint will need to be reformatted (changing font size, repositioning titles, etc.) in OpenOffice. Furthermore, one of the key features that I use in Powerpoint is the increase/decrease font size feature, which increases and decreases the font size of selected text while keeping their relative proportions. OpenOffice Impress does not have this functionality anywhere in it.

I have noticed that for documents that I originate, there are fewer problems with compatibility with other users.

My original point was that you asked what kind of job a Mac is good for. Office document compatibility is a big area where OS X still outperforms Linux.

I will repeat what I have stated earlier: I will be very happy when OpenOffice or any other program will replace MS Office. I would much rather use Linux than Windows, and I do use Linux at work most of the time instead of Windows. But at this point in time, OS X provides a better solution for office document compatibility than Linux does.

Oh, and regarding LCD projectors -- this is something that I often do at work. I keep a mental list of which rooms have projectors that will work while my laptop is running Gentoo, and which ones don't. The breakdown is that about half of the LCD projectors I've run across will not work well with my laptop running Linux. One major issue is the difficulty in getting X to switch resolutions on the fly.

This weekend I am travelling to Washington, DC to give a talk. You better believe that I will have a copy of my Powerpoint presentation on my Windows partition, because I have no idea if the projector that will be supplied to me will work with Linux. I will try Linux first because I like to show that you don't need Windows to give a Powerpoint presentation, but I can't take the chance of being stranded.

I would not have this problem if I had a Powerbook. Again, this is another area where OS X provides a better solution than Linux at this point in time.

It is very strange indeed that you are having problems with openoffice.org's Windows filters. I suggest you file a bug report when you can. I have absolutely no problem with the filters. From tables, to charts, to pics almost everything works fine. There have been occassions where Microsoft windows doesn't support the bullet fonts in OO and vice versa but that is easily solved. And yes, once in a while I need to adjust formating here and there. I understand StarOffice is even much better than OO. You could look into that as well.

I do agree that Microsoft Office on Mac OS X has better filters than Open Office on Linux.

But we both know why.

Check out StarOffice if you can for Linux. I haven't used it myself but I understand it's outstanding. Oh and good luck on your trip and the projectors.

zhenlin · Post by **zhenlin** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 9:03 am

chrispy wrote:
Oh, please let's not talk about servers.
OK

It's expensive period. You can argue all you like. But for the kind of stuff I use my computer for, it's just overpriced.
I will not and cannot argue the price, simply because it's more psychological than tangible. In my opinion, newer macs are fairly priced for what they offer. I do not know you and funnily enough, different people have different values. I guess this applies here.

I've heard from some people that Japanese people value compactness, looks and general 'coolness' over technical superiority. Culture has a lot to do with values.

check /etc on your mac

Generally useless. Changes to NetInfo don't get reflected in /etc and vice versa. You also have to configure Directory Access to enable BSD file configuration support.

chrispy · Post by **chrispy** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 9:19 am

zhenlin wrote:I've heard from some people that Japanese people value compactness, looks and general 'coolness' over technical superiority. Culture has a lot to do with values.

Living here and seeing what Japanese people buy, I'd say yes. It's funny to see them choose a rice-cooker over another one with the same functions just because it has more flashing lights...

didn't know that /etc wasn't really used. Granted, I only modified the sshd config in there...

zhenlin · Post by **zhenlin** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 9:31 am

chrispy wrote:didn't know that /etc wasn't really used. Granted, I only modified the sshd config in there...

Ah, that is one of the few things /etc is used for: Unix-style server daemons.

I assumed you meant the /etc/passwd, /etc/shadow, that kind of system configuration stuff.

Shan · Post by **Shan** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 9:48 pm

I don't know about hard crashes but I've had programs lock up or quit quite often on me in OSX (Jag, not Panther, which I hear is really bad). Though truth be told, it usually only happens with MSFT products (IE, Office), all of which I try to avoid using. More often than not I'll load Safari over IE, mostly because I'm a KDE nut and the HTML parsing thingy is from Konqueror. If it were my machine I'd go with Firebird and avoid things alltogether, but then I'd also be using Gentoo on it instead of X.

chrispy · Post by **chrispy** » Fri Nov 07, 2003 1:08 am

Shan wrote:I don't know about hard crashes but I've had programs lock up or quit quite often on me in OSX (Jag, not Panther, which I hear is really bad). Though truth be told, it usually only happens with MSFT products (IE, Office), all of which I try to avoid using. More often than not I'll load Safari over IE, mostly because I'm a KDE nut and the HTML parsing thingy is from Konqueror. If it were my machine I'd go with Firebird and avoid things alltogether, but then I'd also be using Gentoo on it instead of X.

true, loads of problems with Office X, which seem to have been fixed with the rather numerous "service packs". I had WordX quit on me more times than I can recount. MacOSXHints is a good resource for tips and quick hacks to make your life in OSX easier.
First thing I did when I got my pbook was to download Camino (don't remember what was name change) and completely erase IE. Life was good after that.

ebrostig · Post by **ebrostig** » Fri Nov 07, 2003 1:21 am

What puzzles me when it comes to Apple, is that people who are so anti-ms all of a sudden go completly ga-ga over Mac's. Apple is much worse monopoly than MS is. At least I can run Windows on my choice of PC's. Apple only run on their own hardware.

Also, people hate MS because it is closed source, How is Apple different? Yes, I know that part of OSX is OSS, but not all. Besides, OSX costs quite a bit, esp when you want to upgrade, MS all over again.

I see no reason to spend a few grand on an Apple when I can build a comparable PC for a LOT less and with free OS and free apps to run on it.

My impression is that you have a lot less freedom to customize OSX than you have with Linux. So why is it that geeks go ape over Apple? Is it the fashion factor? "An Apple eye for a straight geek?"

Erik

nerdbert · Post by **nerdbert** » Fri Nov 07, 2003 1:23 am

In reply to oai79 (Eric blocked the topic while I was writing a reply to his thread. Eric said it was a dup of this thead so I am posting it here.)

oai79 wrote:But I want also a system that when they need some extra functions (another software unknown to them), they don't have to come ask me to find and install for them.

That is an illusion... they will always call

However, I do not know how much your parents are up to it. My experience concerning relatives was quite disillusioning. I got my grandfather an IMac 3 years ago - he still does not understand the difference between single- and doubleclick. I also equipped my mother with a vaio recently. It works most of the time, but whenever she wants to send some pictures or burn a CD she fails (this results in calling me - so I tell her click this or that and hit burn).
My mother is 52 and my Grandfather is 84. They both IMO belong to a generation which can not understand basic principles of contemporary computers. It does not matter if they are sitting in front of a Mac or PC - they are just not able to comprehend the idea of pull-down-menues or focus stuff. I do not think it makes a difference for somebody of that group whether they are using a Mac or a PC (I even doubt they could tell a difference).

chrispy · Post by **chrispy** » Fri Nov 07, 2003 1:43 am

ebrostig wrote:What puzzles me when it comes to Apple, is that people who are so anti-ms all of a sudden go completly ga-ga over Mac's. Apple is much worse monopoly than MS is. At least I can run Windows on my choice of PC's. Apple only run on their own hardware.

Also, people hate MS because it is closed source, How is Apple different? Yes, I know that part of OSX is OSS, but not all. Besides, OSX costs quite a bit, esp when you want to upgrade, MS all over again.

I see no reason to spend a few grand on an Apple when I can build a comparable PC for a LOT less and with free OS and free apps to run on it.

My impression is that you have a lot less freedom to customize OSX than you have with Linux. So why is it that geeks go ape over Apple? Is it the fashion factor? "An Apple eye for a straight geek?"

Erik

ebrostig
We went over that in a few threads, and I do not want to start the war over which color button does what again, but I'll try to make it interesting :
No one can deny Apple is a small monopoly in its niche market. However they clearly endorse the idea of one platform fully controlled by them. They are the small guys. no matter how much control they have over their customers, they will always be the guys that offer the alternative over the MS giant.
But Apple does not target geeks or computer litterate people, initially. They target people that have not been introduced to computers. People that, no matter how simple the problem can be, will be clueless.
Some people do not make the difference between simple click and double click; so you can imagine the ignorance when they have 2 or more buttons on the mouse. Apple has one button, colorful and meaningful icons, all apps menus will always be on the top bar, etc. etc.
They offer consistency for those who would type their email address in Internet Explorer to check their messages (do not laugh, I saw that happen with my own eyes)

With OSX, they lured geeks with the command line, a UNIX base, and the holy grail for all *nix users : a lickable interface. Now, wether YOU like it or not is irrelevant, because it comes down to personal taste, and that remains free will.

I will admit that the cool looking, 1" thick titanium laptop with a wide-screen was in the top 5 of my reasons to pick an Apple machine, but it was also among price (yup, powerbooks are imho cheaper than a similarly EQUIPPED -I don't care about cpu power- x86 machine), battery life, equipment and OSX with the command line.

One other topic was "could you fall in love with a computer". While I certainly will not, I however was lured by the chic factor of a machine that is also great to work with.

ozonator · Post by **ozonator** » Fri Nov 07, 2003 1:45 am

nerdbert wrote:That is an illusion... they will always call

Yes, true, but in my experience, the Mac users call a lot less frequently.

Depends on the users in question, of course, but even if the person doesn't know much about their machine, I'm happier to leave an uneducated user with a Mac than with a Windows machine. This isn't just because Mac users sometimes seem to have a greater ability or propensity to figure things out themselves -- this is also because when a Mac user calls and asks about the latest virus that arrived in their e-mail or security threat they've heard about, I can tell them they don't need to worry, rather than having to start the process of "did you open the attachment" and "update your virus checker and get to windowsupdate immediately".

Shan · Post by **Shan** » Fri Nov 07, 2003 3:37 am

I really don't understand why people think Linux is that hard to switch too. I've got two completely computer illiterate individuals running Gentoo remotely (that is, where I don't have easy access to the box regularly). Admittedly I did the initial setup for them, and occasionally have to ssh in to fix a small thing that I can't walk them through just via IM, but overall they both have grasped it very well.

And for the record, one is my brother in laws father, and the other is one of my best friends, with over 40 years in age between them, so its not just the fact that they grew up on computers or anything.

Mystilleef · Post by **Mystilleef** » Fri Nov 07, 2003 3:42 am

Shan wrote:I really don't understand why people think Linux is that hard to switch too. I've got two completely computer illiterate individuals running Gentoo remotely (that is, where I don't have easy access to the box regularly). Admittedly I did the initial setup for them, and occasionally have to ssh in to fix a small thing that I can't walk them through just via IM, but overall they both have grasped it very well.

And for the record, one is my brother in laws father, and the other is one of my best friends, with over 40 years in age between them, so its not just the fact that they grew up on computers or anything.

It's called good marketing and propaganda. The media doesn't help either. Even if you could install Linux with one click. The whole world will still say their grandmother can't use it. It's a stigma and curse.

Shan · Post by **Shan** » Fri Nov 07, 2003 3:54 am

Well yes, I understand that much of it, but at the same time, marketing and propaganda can only be believed for so long when the truth is quite self evident. If I, an average linux user, can transfer two computer illiterate mouse monkeys over to a fairly complex distro (when compared to RH, Mandrake, and others of the like) with no troubles, and leave them across state lines, hours away, without trouble, how hard can it be to move over the rest of the masses? lol