Mac Vs Windows Vs Linux - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit

Mac Vs Windows Vs Linux

megalomaniac Avatar
9y, 1m agoPosted 9 years, 1 month ago
Ok, so with all the Mac deals floating around at the moment and the new versions of OSX and Ubuntu etc. I've noticed there's an awful lot of anti-Mac and anti-Linux sentiment round these parts...

As someone who has used various flavours of all three pretty heavily, I can appreciate the differences between them, each has strengths and weaknesses.

Windows is best for games but about as secure as a paper safe, OSX is incredibly user friendly but lacks games and Linux is the most secure etc.

So my question is what makes people, who have in many cases clearly only ever used Windows in anger, so vehemently opposed to Mac and Linux? Also, Windows, Linux and Mac fans, why do you think life on your side of the fence is better?

Lights the touchpaper and stands well back ......:whistling:
Tags:
megalomaniac Avatar
9y, 1m agoPosted 9 years, 1 month ago
Options

All Comments

(20) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
#1
Mac Os X all they way, no argument needed, just google the subject innit
#2
the.tourist
Mac Os X all they way, no argument needed, just google the subject innit


Come on you can do better than that, here's a chance to put a coherent argument across about which you prefer and why. :thumbsup:

I think my opinions on the subject are pretty well known :giggle:.

And please everyone no unjustified "It's just better", "Macs are expensive" or "Windoze sucks" comments, I think we've all seen enough of those to last a lifetime ;-)
#3
Windows, because I know how to use it. Simple as that. Macos doesn't work on a PC so thats out and Linux... Well I did try it but it didn't offer what I needed, simple things like not being able to log onto my internet banking because 'internet explorer x.x wasn't installed' etc. If it wasn't for that I would have given linux a good seeing to, but as it is, no good to me.
#4
Shengis
Windows, because I know how to use it. Simple as that. Macos doesn't work on a PC so thats out and Linux... Well I did try it but it didn't offer what I needed, simple things like not being able to log onto my internet banking because 'internet explorer x.x wasn't installed' etc. If it wasn't for that I would have given linux a good seeing to, but as it is, no good to me.


Now that's the sort of thing, good man :thumbsup:

This may interest you on the Linux front: http://www.tatanka.com.br/ies4linux/page/Main_Page. Although to be fair it's not Linux's fault that your bank uses Internet Explorer only code, as any Web Developer will tell you the problem is that Internet Explorer does things that don't adhere to Web standards and Microsoft wont let anyone else know exactly how that stuff works. Which is a bit naughty given that there are international web standards in place to prevent exactly that sort of thing happening.
banned#5
id say windows for me but hopefully my mind will be with linux after the change to ubuntu in the next few days
#6
megalomaniac
Windows is best for games but about as secure as a paper safe


That's a very narrow view on Windows, and the bit about security is simply untrue.

Windows is the best OS because everything you can do with a PC can be done with Windows. Gaming is just one thing. There's nothing (nothing that I'm aware of, anyway) you can't do with Windows, and almost no apps or hardware that don't run on it, save for a few apps made for Apple's OS.

Security is ample. If you have Automatic Updates enabled, have a firewall, use Opera or Firefox as your browser, and aren't silly enough to install malware by believing what pop-up adverts tell you, using pirate software, or opening unrequested files, Windows can function entirely unperverted by anything undesirable. People seem to have this idea that malware just falls magically into Windows. It does if you don't update it, because there are at least a couple of worms that can sneak through its security holes, but if you do update it and think before clicking, it's fine.

Case in point, my installation of Windows dates back about six months, to when I built this system. Viruses? None. Spyware? None. Adware? None. I do scan every couple of months or so just to reassure myself, but fact is, I haven't suffered from a virus in years, and from spyware in many more.


Anyway.

Linux is good. It still has a very long way to go before it's as good as Windows (although the release of Vista shortened that distance somewhat...). It's got some great things going for it, like the fact that you can install it, and it'll have a stack of drivers and software bundled to support things like PDF files and the like, something Windows can't do. It's superb as a web server OS, and, erm, that's about it.

It's free, but WinXP OEM can be picked up for only around £50, so it's not a massive saving. Its problem is that it's painfully limited in what it can do. You can forget about using Linux if you're into producing music, videos, photography, or you're into gaming. It's okay if your needs are very unambitious.

Hardware support lets it down. Kudos to the nerd community for writing drivers for hardware, but, really, I feel sorry for them. I can use the same hardware in Windows without spending weeks writing my own driver first. I don't see the attraction there. It's while since I tried Ubuntu 6 on my laptop, but when I tried it, it didn't support my graphics card, and I couldn't get any further. An attempt on my desktop proved similarly fruitless, with it not supporting my ADSL modem, cutting me off from the internet. I didn't even bother trying any of my more obscure hardware. Drivers were available on the internet for the modem, but, well, here are the instructions for installing them. A bit trickier than just clicking Setup and Next a few times, that. Totally unsuitable for anyone that has a life.


I like MacOS. Shiny. Woo.
#7
Shengis
Windows, because I know how to use it. Simple as that. Macos doesn't work on a PC so thats out and Linux...



It does, these days. Apple migrated to PC hardware a couple of years ago, and their OS can be installed on most Intel based systems, albiet with a little tomfoolery.
#8
(although the release of Vista shortened that distance somewhat...)

:lol:
Totally unsuitable for anyone that has a life.

And there be it's downfall. I haven't got a problem getting deep down and dirty with any OS, but there really is no attraction to replacing something that works out of the box with something that takes weeks to get working, even for me.
#9
dxx
That's a very narrow view on Windows, and the bit about security is simply untrue.

Windows is the best OS because everything you can do with a PC can be done with Windows. Gaming is just one thing. There's nothing (nothing that I'm aware of, anyway) you can't do with Windows, and almost no apps or hardware that don't run on it, save for a few apps made for Apple's OS.


Out of the box, that view on security is very true it takes a lot of effort to secure a Windows box compared to OSX and Linux.

The thing with Applications and Hardware is that because Windows is dominant they are built for Windows, there is no reason they wouldn't work just as well or even better on other platforms if they were designed to do so. It's a bit of a Catch-22 really, people cite lack of support for their favourite app X or hardware Y as a reason not to switch and the developers cite lack of people switching as a reason not to make their software/hardware run on those platforms.

dxx
Security is ample. If you have Automatic Updates enabled, have a firewall, use Opera or Firefox as your browser, and aren't silly enough to install malware by believing what pop-up adverts tell you, using pirate software, or opening unrequested files, Windows can function entirely unperverted by anything undesirable. People seem to have this idea that malware just falls magically into Windows. It does if you don't update it, because there are at least a couple of worms that can sneak through its security holes, but if you do update it and think before clicking, it's fine.

Case in point, my installation of Windows dates back about six months, to when I built this system. Viruses? None. Spyware? None. Adware? None. I do scan every couple of months or so just to reassure myself, but fact is, I haven't suffered from a virus in years, and from spyware in many more.


All of which are extra steps you just don't need with Linux and OSX, they are that secure out of the box, at worst you'll need a few updates. With Windows you need to play around with anti-virus programs and anti-spyware and install Firefox and spend hours installing updates etc. You can make Windows very secure, there's no doubt about that but it takes a hell of a lot of effort to do so and it takes a level of knowledge most people just don't have.

dxx
It's free, but WinXP OEM can be picked up for only around £50, so it's not a massive saving. Its problem is that it's painfully limited in what it can do. You can forget about using Linux if you're into producing music, videos, photography, or you're into gaming. It's okay if your needs are very unambitious.


Not so much any more, there's only really gaming that's still an issue. It's the only thing apart from Visual Studio keeping a Windows partition on my machine. I like XP it was a nice OS in it's time but Vista has put me right off Microsoft with all its DRM nonsense etc. Besides with Virtualisation Apps like VirtualBoxParallels and VMWare you can run all your Windows Software under Linux and OSX, shame it's no good for games though :-( .

dxx
Hardware support lets it down. Kudos to the nerd community for writing drivers for hardware, but, really, I feel sorry for them. I can use the same hardware in Windows without spending weeks writing my own driver first. I don't see the attraction there. It's while since I tried Ubuntu 6 on my laptop, but when I tried it, it didn't support my graphics card, and I couldn't get any further. An attempt on my desktop proved similarly fruitless, with it not supporting my ADSL modem, cutting me off from the internet. I didn't even bother trying any of my more obscure hardware. Drivers were available on the internet for the modem, but, well, here are the instructions for installing them. A bit trickier than just clicking Setup and Next a few times, that. Totally unsuitable for anyone that has a life.


Ahh you should try Linux again mate, the hardware support is much better these days. Ubuntu 7.10 is well worth a go.


dxx
I like MacOS. Shiny. Woo.


I concur :thumbsup:
#10
Shengis
:lol:

And there be it's downfall. I haven't got a problem getting deep down and dirty with any OS, but there really is no attraction to replacing something that works out of the box with something that takes weeks to get working, even for me.


Again a few years ago that was true, but it's getting better all the time. With the likes of Ubuntu, openSuse etc. Linux is actually more likely to just work out of the box than Windows. There's no messing around hunting for drivers, no spending hours downloading updates, no anti-virus subscription to think about etc. and it's free :thumbsup: People seem to forget just how much running around you have to do to get Windows set up properly. Even if you buy a pre done Windows machine from Dell etc. you still have to remove all the crapware they put on it and spend a good while getting it set-up how you like it and securing it.
banned#11
megalomaniac
Again a few years ago that was true, but it's getting better all the time. With the likes of Ubuntu, openSuse etc. Linux is actually more likely to just work out of the box than Windows. There's no messing around hunting for drivers, no spending hours downloading updates, no anti-virus subscription to think about etc. and it's free :thumbsup: People seem to forget just how much running around you have to do to get Windows set up properly. Even if you buy a pre done Windows machine from Dell etc. you still have to remove all the crapware they put on it and spend a good while getting it set-up how you like it and securing it.

mate is it best getting ubuntu 7.10 or 7.10 beta which will be buggey?as well as 7.10
as my interest for linux comes from vulnabilities and networks and the sort of stuff windows is no good with
#12
hayton2k3
mate is it best getting ubuntu 7.10 or 7.10 beta which will be buggey?as well as 7.10
as my interest for linux comes from vulnabilities and networks and the sort of stuff windows is no good with


It's 7.10 you want. The beta was the pre-release version, the final version is out now so that is what you want. Go here http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/ here: http://releases.ubuntu.com/7.10/ or get the torrent from here: http://releases.ubuntu.com/7.10/ubuntu-7.10-desktop-i386.iso.torrent
#13
I used different flavours of windows for 15 years, using Acorn's Operating system before that.

I recently switched in 2005. I would NEVER go back to windows. So infuriating to work with when i'm asked to fix a friends windows box.

I'm also running Ubuntu on a mac mini.
#14
vista.. no ubuntu.. no vista.. ubuntu...
arh heck, who cares :w00t:
#15
megalomaniac
Out of the box, that view on security is very true it takes a lot of effort to secure a Windows box compared to OSX and Linux.


Not really - with SP2, the firewall is either enabled by default or you get nagged to enable it (which only requires a mouse click or two anyway), and I think the same is true for automatic updates. From there, it's just a case of user skill that determines whether the OS is to be secure or not, and that's kind-of a difficult point to argue. Poorly kept Windows PCs are definetely more liable to infection than poorly kept Linux or MacOS PCs, but it's not fair to blame the OS for not nannying its users.




The thing with Applications and Hardware is that because Windows is dominant they are built for Windows, there is no reason they wouldn't work just as well or even better on other platforms if they were designed to do so. It's a bit of a Catch-22 really, people cite lack of support for their favourite app X or hardware Y as a reason not to switch and the developers cite lack of people switching as a reason not to make their software/hardware run on those platforms.


Aye, all true.

In fairness, I can understand it from the developer's point of view. It's hard and expensive enough to produce and support software for one OS, nevermind the likes of Linux, MacOS, and whatever else.

But then, by god, is the policy frustrating. I'm a musician-nerd, and we probably suffer from it more than most, because the virtual instruments we use consume obscene amounts of memory. I've got one virtual instrument that won't even finish loading if I don't shut everything down first, even including Explorer.exe, it's that bad. Using it and another virtual instrument simultaneously is impossible. I've got 2GB now and I would dearly love to upgrade to four or six gigs of RAM, but I can't, because without upgrading to XP 64bit or Vista 64bit there'd be no point, and with the exception of Cakewalk, no-one is willing to support 64bit operating systems. So you'll have E-Mu saying there's no demand, Native Instruments saying the same, three nerds on a forum saying there is demand and being told there isn't enough, and it goes no-where. It's a massive pain in the bollock, and that's just getting developers to write for 64bit XP (which is really really needed), nevermind Vista, or Linux.

This does pose a massive oppertunity for the Linux community, mind you - they could develop a distribution of Linux tailored for muso nerds, and send teams of volunteers to work at companies like Native Instruments and E-Mu specifically to create 64bit, Linux-friendly versions of their software and drivers, make the companies a ****-load of money. It's a pipe-dream, but then, that's one of the things I love about open-source, the way its direction is shaped by its users, not a panel. It's why I can honestly see Linux being the desktop standard in fifteen years time - it's not without precedent now that we've had Firefox doing so well.



Not so much any more, there's only really gaming that's still an issue. It's the only thing apart from Visual Studio keeping a Windows partition on my machine. I like XP it was a nice OS in it's time but Vista has put me right off Microsoft with all its DRM nonsense etc. Besides with Virtualisation Apps like VirtualBoxParallels and VMWare you can run all your Windows Software under Linux, shame it's no good for games though :-( .


Microsoft have really screwed themselves over with Vista, didn't they? They've left themselves now with one OS which solid, mature, fast, stable, and exceptionally well supported that they slag off at any given oppertunity and have no intention of updating any more than they're obliged to, and one which just makes people want to install Linux.

But, aye, the emultators and all that lot are rather handy. I'd still rather run Linux under a virtual machine than Windows, mind you.


Ahh you should try Linux again mate, the hardware support is much better these days. Ubuntu 7.10 is well worth a go.


Jesus. You know fine well that in geek terms, that's like offering the finest steak ever crafted to a vegan.

I'm verrry tempted. But I know that there'd be no point. I wouldn't be able to play games, do any music stuff, work on the hideously complex ASP project I'm working on, and I'd probably not be able to use Dual View or my USB audio interface, or use files stored on my Server 2003 fileserver. But then I think of how swish that new OpenGL desktop The Register had an article on yesterday looked, and I'm eyeing up this 40GB external HDD and stack of blank DVDR discs that I have here on my desk, and, christ, you know what it's like. And now I think about it, the system downstairs doesn't do anything other than run Civ Conquests and Firefox, and it does have a spare harddisk in the case that's not hooked up to anything.

Hnnngr. I've got it downloading now, 1708KB/s. I feel dirty.


Edit: Fannies, the spare harddisk in the downstairs system freezes the POST check when it's plugged in. Shall be no Linux for me then, I guess. Sigh.
#16
Linux is the most secure


I know very little about Linux but surely OSX runs it very close, it's virtually impossible to get a virus on a Mac, all the one's that go round on email never bother Mac users even if they double click them and do whatever with the files.
#17
Money Spinning
I know very little about Linux but surely OSX runs it very close, it's virtually impossible to get a virus on a Mac, all the one's that go round on email never bother Mac users even if they double click them and do whatever with the files.


Macs are a very secure home computer, but because they are designed to be very user friendly they are no good for servers as it's not so easy to make them really water tight by for example disabling unnecessary services etc. in the same way you can with Linux. So yes they are a nice secure desktop machine but you probably wouldn't pop a web server on one.
#18
dxx
Not really - with SP2, the firewall is either enabled by default or you get nagged to enable it (which only requires a mouse click or two anyway), and I think the same is true for automatic updates. From there, it's just a case of user skill that determines whether the OS is to be secure or not, and that's kind-of a difficult point to argue. Poorly kept Windows PCs are definetely more liable to infection than poorly kept Linux or MacOS PCs, but it's not fair to blame the OS for not nannying its users.


Exactly, it takes effort to secure. The built in firewall is pretty much useless so you really need another firewall solution. It would be forgivable that takes so much effort to secure properly compared to the others were it not for the fact that the very people Microsoft aim Windows at are the very people that have no clue how to properly secure it.

dxx
Microsoft have really screwed themselves over with Vista, didn't they? They've left themselves now with one OS which solid, mature, fast, stable, and exceptionally well supported that they slag off at any given oppertunity and have no intention of updating any more than they're obliged to, and one which just makes people want to install Linux.


Yeah they've done a lot of good for the industry but this time they have just got it totally wrong.

dxx
I'm verrry tempted. But I know that there'd be no point. I wouldn't be able to play games, do any music stuff, work on the hideously complex ASP project I'm working on, and I'd probably not be able to use Dual View or my USB audio interface, or use files stored on my Server 2003 fileserver. But then I think of how swish that new OpenGL desktop The Register had an article on yesterday looked, and I'm eyeing up this 40GB external HDD and stack of blank DVDR discs that I have here on my desk, and, christ, you know what it's like. And now I think about it, the system downstairs doesn't do anything other than run Civ Conquests and Firefox, and it does have a spare harddisk in the case that's not hooked up to anything.


If you want to do ASP in Linux (or anything .NET related) look up the Mono project. Dual View I have working on a twin head 6800, there are plenty of tutorials out there on doing that it's not too hard these days, geeks love multiple monitors. Accessing your Server 2003 files should be a breeze with SAMBA which is included in most distributions these days. Some games will work on Linux via things like WINE but alas not many, although things like Half-Life 2 and World of Warcraft now run on Linux. I couldn't tell you about the audio stuff but I'd be surprised if some audiophile Linux geeks somewhere weren't doing something. It's definitely one for the future :thumbsup:
#19
I use Windows and Mac OS X all day long at w*rk for a variety of design and print tasks.

We have a primary server (number cruncher) which is based on Dell Poweredge PC's running Oracle database apps through Windows but use a dozen Macs to do the design tasks. Our server has 24/7 support from a call centre in Canada which we call on 3-4 times per month. It needs regular shutdowns/reboots and is a total PITA.
All the other PC's in our offices (some 50-60) running office type apps have a lifespan of 2-3 years and have a fully staffed IT department to keep them running, which is a busy job I can tell you.

The Macs are all now over 10 years old and, apart from a few DVD drives failing (Pioneer units mostly) they have run faultlessly without ever needing any engineers, replacement parts or upgrades (apart from OS and apps). Usually they have an uptime in excess of 5 weeks before they get troublesome to the point where a restart clears things up.

Our Macs have no virus protection, but the PC's are all shielded up, and need it. Our server recently got a virus and left us up the creek for 2 days.

At home I am still running an 8 year old Apple Powerbook G3 with just 400mhz and a 9.8GB HDD. It struggles these days with video content, but has been faultless in all it's years, apart from again, another 3rd party (LG) DVD drive (replaced with a DVD RW (multi-region) for £26). PC owning friends mock me for my Mac allegiance, but then are amazed with the speed I do basic tasks, and the ease that everything can be done. I find OS X so simple, satisfying and easy to use that when I get on a Windows machine I find myself getting angry within minutes. It's isn't that I don't know how to use it either, I just can't stand the whole experience.

I was going to upgrade to a shiny new 24" 2.8ghz iMac, but have decided to get a 20" 2.4 and use the spare cash to get a 2ghz Mini to run as a media server to my plasma TV, for the full home Mac experience.
#20
Linux every time for me. Out of the box, Windows is sadly lacking as an OS - the programs that you get bundled with it are a joke! Paint, notepad, wordpad etc are all awful, yet with an out of the box distro of any Linux flavour you get GIMP (almost as good as photoshop and FREE!), decent text editors, Open Office (admittedly I have not used the new version, but I hear it is meant to be very good and free).

Someone mentioned that with SP2 of XP, the windows firewall is enabled automatically... Sorry, but if you are relying on this piece of crud software to protect your system out of the box, you need your head read!

Ultimately, it really comes down to what your requirements are. For me however, it is Linux everytime - the fact that Windows machines are flakey as hell and need regular rebuilds are major reasons. Linux installations are extremely robust and need little or no maintenance in that respect. I agree with a previous poster's comments about previous Linux releases being very difficult to work with - I started on RH4 - but recent releases are far more user friendly (installation for one) and support much more hardware etc...

Tim (the geek)

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!