PDA

View Full Version : Which OS is more advanced?



MasterNetra
April 2nd, 2009, 01:02 AM
Here is a question I have, Is Ubuntu or Windows more advanced? Which of the OS line is more up to date essentially? Sound off I would like to hear the opinions on both sides. :)

schauerlich
April 2nd, 2009, 01:04 AM
It all depends on who maintains the installation. Generally Ubuntu will be because it pushes updates more frequently.

kpatz
April 2nd, 2009, 01:07 AM
I would say Ubuntu, since a new release comes out every 6 months, compared to 2-6 years between Windows releases.

And even when a Windows release comes out, it's already a year or two behind the curve due to the lengthy beta/RC cycle. From development to release of a Windows, there will have been 2-3 Ubuntu releases.

And I'm a nimrod. I accidentally voted Vista/Win7 on the poll, and there's no way to retract/edit a vote once it's submitted... :oops:

swoll1980
April 2nd, 2009, 01:08 AM
I would say Linux. They hardly wait until something is stable before they start shoving the next big thing down your throat.

OutOfReach
April 2nd, 2009, 01:09 AM
In term of updates, Ubuntu definately. Not only does it provide updates for the major parts of the system (kernel, etc...) about every month or so, it also provides updates for the programs installed on your computer. Plus of course, the 6 months release cycle.

MasterNetra
April 2nd, 2009, 01:09 AM
Not asking which one recieves updates more frequently which OS's system code is superior/more advanced or something like that.

swoll1980
April 2nd, 2009, 01:10 AM
Not askign which one recieves updates more frequently which OS's system code is superior/more advanced or something like that.

I don't think many people have ever seen Vista's code seeing as how they can't.

OutOfReach
April 2nd, 2009, 01:13 AM
Not asking which one recieves updates more frequently which OS's system code is superior/more advanced or something like that.

Well Windows is proprietary so we cannot really compare the two.

MasterNetra
April 2nd, 2009, 01:14 AM
Err. Don't mean base code...trying to figure out how to best put it...Which of the OS's is superior..I want to say in Tech but its software so...I guess which one is superior i guess idk.

gnomeuser
April 2nd, 2009, 01:15 AM
The design of Linux hails back to that horrible idea known as UNIX. While a collective group of malfeatures, design quantisms and baby eating wrong decisions, it is a design that tricked us into thinking it has serves us surprisingly well for decades.

Regardless of where Vista comes in comparison it's feeling a little like the special olympics. Does it really matter?

MasterNetra
April 2nd, 2009, 01:17 AM
...Regardless of where Vista comes in comparison it's feeling a little like the special olympics. Does it really matter?

Of course it does. :p

ivaarsen
April 2nd, 2009, 01:20 AM
Quantisms? I'm going to have to remember that one.

Vista, for the lulz. Even though it was a giant step backwards for Microsoft, it still seems to pull desktop effects off better than any machine I've seen running Linux. And 'pretty' is what people like.

BTW, and COMPLETELY off topic: Why the HELL does my post count never increase when I post on this forum?

Simian Man
April 2nd, 2009, 01:22 AM
In the area of file systems, Linux wins handily. My Vista machine is set by default to defragment itself once a week. Seriously, what year is it?


Vista, for the lulz. Even though it was a giant step backwards for Microsoft, it still seems to pull desktop effects off better than any machine I've seen running Linux. And 'pretty' is what people like.


A little late for April fool's jokes no?

Giant Speck
April 2nd, 2009, 01:24 AM
I think it greatly depends on the user's idea of what "advanced" means, and even then, it's usually nothing more than opinion.

ivaarsen
April 2nd, 2009, 01:34 AM
A little late for April fool's jokes no?

Perhaps. But it's April 1 where I am. Will be for another 4 hours.

But I'd have still done it, no matter what day it was.

cardinals_fan
April 2nd, 2009, 01:45 AM
DragonFlyBSD is more advanced than either. However, it is also a bit immature for daily use.

Giant Speck
April 2nd, 2009, 01:45 AM
Perhaps. But it's April 1 where I am. Will be for another 4 hours.

But I'd have still done it, no matter what day it was.

It'll be another seven hours for me.

Ooh! By the way, where in Iowa are you?

ivaarsen
April 2nd, 2009, 01:51 AM
It'll be another seven hours for me.

Ooh! By the way, where in Iowa are you?

North west corner, a little town called Le Mars. About 30 minutes north of Sioux City, if you're familiar.

I think I might be the only Linux user in town. If I'm not, I wouldn't be completely surprised, but a little (besides friends I try to 'convert').

Giant Speck
April 2nd, 2009, 01:54 AM
North west corner, a little 'burb called Le Mars. About 30 minutes north of Sioux City, if you're familiar.

I think I might be the only Linux user in town. If I'm not, I wouldn't be completely surprised, but a little (besides friends I try to 'convert').

I've never been to that part of the state. The closest I've ever been to either Le Mars of Sioux City is Fort Dodge, and that was when I was very little. I'm grew up in Keokuk, way down in the southeastern corner of Iowa.

Le Mars is famous for its ice cream, isn't it?

CJ Master
April 2nd, 2009, 01:54 AM
I guess which one is superior i guess idk.

You just comdemned your topic to Reacuring topics.;)

ivaarsen
April 2nd, 2009, 02:02 AM
I've never been to that part of the state. The closest I've ever been to either Le Mars of Sioux City is Fort Dodge, and that was when I was very little. I'm grew up in Keokuk, way down in the southeastern corner of Iowa.

Le Mars is famous for its ice cream, isn't it?

The very same! 'We' hail ourselves as the Ice Cream Capitol of the World. In fact, I used to work for Wells' Dairy - the company that provides the means for this claim - but in the milk / culture plant as opposed to the ice cream plants. I've sent products to Keokuk, so "Hello there, fellow Iwegian!"

Don't worry, you're not missing much. I haven't spent much time on your side of the state either, but from what I gather, it's a lot more interesting!

Giant Speck
April 2nd, 2009, 02:07 AM
The very same! 'We' hail ourselves as the Ice Cream Capitol of the World. In fact, I used to work for Wells' Dairy - the company that provides the means for this claim - but in the milk / culture plant as opposed to the ice cream plants. I've sent products to Keokuk, so "Hello there, fellow Iwegian!"

Don't worry, you're not missing much. I haven't spent much time on your side of the state either, but from what I gather, it's a lot more interesting!

Eh... we have the rolling hills and the Mississippi River, but besides that, it's not that interesting.

Christmas
April 2nd, 2009, 03:01 AM
From a technical point of view I'd say definitely Ubuntu (and I include Kubuntu with KDE4 here too).

mamamia88
April 2nd, 2009, 03:13 AM
you are asking ubuntuforums which is better windows or ubuntu? what do you expect

Sinkingships7
April 2nd, 2009, 03:55 AM
BTW, and COMPLETELY off topic: Why the HELL does my post count never increase when I post on this forum?

Your post count only goes up when you post in support forums. The cafe is considered leisure-time chatter.

MasterNetra
April 2nd, 2009, 04:07 AM
you are asking ubuntuforums which is better windows or ubuntu? what do you expect

I expect nothing at all. No expectations no let downs. ;)

donovan1983
April 2nd, 2009, 07:46 AM
Although I really don't care for Windows much at all, I'd have to say that Windows NT 6.x (Vista/7) is the more advanced system compared to Ubuntu or Linux in general. I'd have to say the same in comparison to Mac OS X, too.

There are many reasons why. A big one is how they kludged a proper security model onto an OS that previously allowed programmers to write files all over the place. And that kludge works remarkably well. For drivers, it can load and unload video drivers without requiring a system reboot despite the drivers still running at a very low level. The sound system allows independent app-level volume control and is very compatible with older applications and the overall implementation is quite stable. Multimedia in general is handled very well. It is binary-compatible with (properly-written) programs that may have been written up to 18 years ago (using the Win16 API), at least in the 32-bit version. It is hard to discount the incredible amount of backward-compatibility in the NT 6.x line despite it being a rather significant revision of many parts of Windows that changes how a lot of things work. Microsoft also managed to improve startup and shutdown times as well as overall responsiveness over Windows XP. It's hard to deny that the UI hasn't had some influence on other systems, too.

That said, I much prefer using a Unix-like system to Windows. I don't like the cluttered file system, still rather poor handling of most drivers, the Windows registry, and seemingly haphazard updates to the OS. Windows is pure hell to troubleshoot when something goes wrong and fixing it too often involves just wiping and reinstalling the OS. The idea of the file system being divided into multiple drives is just awful compared to a file system where all volumes are accessed through various directories. All configuration on Unix-like systems can be done through plain text files while Windows has configurations scattered between text files, the registry, and binary configuration files. Unix-like systems are just plain better designed even if they aren't the most up-to-date technically.

Naz_Farooq
April 2nd, 2009, 07:58 AM
The rational answer is Linux because it reaches new positive updates (not virus) sooner than Windows. I collect updates whenever they are round the corner.
Thanks Linux.
Thanks Ubuntu.

Phreaker
April 2nd, 2009, 08:09 AM
Both have their good sides

Eisenwinter
April 2nd, 2009, 11:15 AM
Both have their good sides
I agree.

I also think those OSes are not comparable, they both have a completely different background, and goals.

MasterNetra
April 2nd, 2009, 07:01 PM
* Still reads the posts *