PDA

View Full Version : Random Debates about OS X, Windows, and Ubuntu



Pages : 1 [2]

cprofitt
October 30th, 2007, 02:20 AM
Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm using the latest versions of both Vista and XP. It's true that the drivers you can download (from Windows Update and/or a third-party website) are of a higher quality now, but that doesn't change the fact that you still have to download them separately and hope they work well together. Neither does it change the fact that sometimes a driver vital for the installation is missing from the installation DVD, such as it was in my case.

So, the situation has improved while at the same time it hasn't.

Would an install CD of OSX 10.0 have all the drivers necessary to work on a Mac bought yesteday? If not then the issue is the same for Windows and OSX... its just Apple has found a way to make people pay for service packs.

Also, why hold it against an OS that it allows for users to get "new" stuff and use it with a driver so easily. Are there drivers for 8800GTX cards out for OSX 10.0?

Matakoo
October 30th, 2007, 02:50 AM
Would an install CD of OSX 10.0 have all the drivers necessary to work on a Mac bought yesteday? If not then the issue is the same for Windows and OSX... its just Apple has found a way to make people pay for service packs.

True. And of course, if the hardware is newer than the OS it is impossible for it to be on the installation media . Unless it can use the driver of some other hardware, or there is one of those unified drivers (as the nvidia-drivers) available. All I'm saying is that Windows hardware support straight-from-install is, IMO, over-hyped, and always has been.


Also, why hold it against an OS that it allows for users to get "new" stuff and use it with a driver so easily. Are there drivers for 8800GTX cards out for OSX 10.0?

Acttually, I think it is good that Windows at least makes it somewhat easy. That's one occasion in the hardware-compatibility game where Linux could take a leaf out of Microsoft's book. Take what's good from the competition and let them keep the rest ;)

Chrisj303
October 30th, 2007, 12:35 PM
Would an install CD of OSX 10.0 have all the drivers necessary to work on a Mac bought yesteday? If not then the issue is the same for Windows and OSX... its just Apple has found a way to make people pay for service packs.


Err. No.

When 10.0 was released Mac's were PPC. Now they are Intel. The 10.0 Install disc would not work.

But a Mac bought yesterday would come with it's own install disc.

A driver designed for, say, Tiger will almost certainly work with it's predessor, Panther.

And no, you don't pay for 'service packs'. 10.5.x updates are done through software/system update.

I don't now what point you are trying to make, but it's very obscure.

peestandingup
October 30th, 2007, 02:36 PM
Err. No.

When 10.0 was released Mac's were PPC. Now they are Intel. The 10.0 Install disc would not work.

But a Mac bought yesterday would come with it's own install disc.

A driver designed for, say, Tiger will almost certainly work with it's predessor, Panther.

And no, you don't pay for 'service packs'. 10.5.x updates are done through software/system update.

I don't now what point you are trying to make, but it's very obscure.
Exactly. Every Mac comes with the newest OS, so there would be no reason why anyone would want to use 10.0 on a new machine. Thats the reason why macs can exclude that scenario from their machines. Since they control the OS & the hardware.

Also remember, development moves MUCH faster for OS X than it does for Windows. A 10.0 install would be like the equivalent of trying to run Windows 95 on a new PC. And these aren't "service packs", they are full fledged major releases. And I can guarantee Leopard will work great on every single Mac that meets its minimum requirements. You cant say that about PCs. Everyone knows that VISTA will be dog slow on a PC with minimum requirements. It'll "work", but it wont be usable.

Mac users are usually pretty savvy. I don't think anyone would pay $130 every 2 years for just OSX service packs. Linux & Mac users have that in common usually. You cant bullsh*t us.

Seq
October 30th, 2007, 04:11 PM
... its just Apple has found a way to make people pay for service packs.

If 10.4 to 10.5 is simply a service pack, then the same can be said about Windows 2000 (NT 5.0) and Windows XP (NT 5.1). XP was more than $129 i believe.

I think service packs would be more in-line with the minor version number, so apple would currently be prepping the eleventh service pack for 10.4.

NoSmokingBandit
October 30th, 2007, 06:08 PM
not really, even a few minor updates add the the version number (10.4.5>10.4.6) without really adding a whole lot of functionality. Tiger to leaopard is similar to the xp to xpsp2 transition. There was a crapload of features included in sp2, but MS doesnt flaunt them about as much as apple does.

aysiu
October 30th, 2007, 06:11 PM
All these arguments about service packs, updates, and upgrades come down to semantics.

Bottom line: people pay whatever they think is worth paying for. My wife liked the Dashboard feature so much that she paid to upgrade to Tiger. But she doesn't think the new features in Leopard are worth upgrading for, so she's staying with Tiger.

Apple is very clear about what users gain from upgrading to Leopard. It's then in the users' hands to decide whether it's worth shelling out $130 for.

NoSmokingBandit
October 30th, 2007, 07:31 PM
The same happens for any other os you have to pay for, but in the windows service packs they dont brag about offering a feature like "spaces" (which ironically was available for XP before osx implemented it), they just give you the service pack for free. Unless there is a major kernel overhaul i dont see the point in paying for an upgrade.

Chrisj303
October 30th, 2007, 08:08 PM
The same happens for any other os you have to pay for, but in the windows service packs they dont brag about offering a feature like "spaces" (which ironically was available for XP before osx implemented it), they just give you the service pack for free. Unless there is a major kernel overhaul i dont see the point in paying for an upgrade.

Well couldn't that be taken as poor marketing on Microsofts part??

You may not see the point in paying for a major upgrade - and that is your choice, but many do.

And as has been pointed out, Apple does make it clear what what each 'Big Cat' release offers.

All 3 major OS' have very different release cycles - it is pointless to try and compare them like for like.


I'd rather cut off my ***** with a rusty bread knife.
sorry, i do like the design. a lot. but osx annoys the hell out of me.

Aaah , that unmistakable call of the 'fanboi'.

About as attractive as a can of mustard gas for breakfast.

aysiu
October 30th, 2007, 08:27 PM
Unless there is a major kernel overhaul i dont see the point in paying for an upgrade. Then don't pay for it.

karellen
October 30th, 2007, 08:52 PM
129$ for an OS like leopard doesn't seem that much to me, especially considering the price of vista. if apple's hardware wouldn't be so expensive - god knows why - I'd pay for mac os x

NoSmokingBandit
October 30th, 2007, 09:33 PM
Well couldn't that be taken as poor marketing on Microsofts part??

Not really since they dont support the software that allows workspaces. It was made by the xp devs as a side project. Its just as reliable as any other ms product (lol) but its not official so ms wont advertise it.


Then don't pay for it.
I wont ever pay for a windows service pack. So i really dont see the point of you telling me this. If all you are going to do is reply with smart **** like that then this conversation is going to go nowhere.

cprofitt
October 30th, 2007, 09:42 PM
Err. No.

When 10.0 was released Mac's were PPC. Now they are Intel. The 10.0 Install disc would not work.

But a Mac bought yesterday would come with it's own install disc.

A driver designed for, say, Tiger will almost certainly work with it's predessor, Panther.

And no, you don't pay for 'service packs'. 10.5.x updates are done through software/system update.

I don't now what point you are trying to make, but it's very obscure.

The point was that devices produced after the OS would need drivers because the drivers would not have been included with the OS. So comparing Windows XP to OSX 10.4 is a little skewed due to release dates.

As far as the service pack comment I just don't see 10.0 - 10.1 - 10.2 - 10.3 - 10.4 - 10.5 as individual OS releases. 10.0 - 10.5 definately, but in between some of the releases felt more like Windows XP SP1 and Windows XP SP2 not a new OS.

cprofitt
October 30th, 2007, 09:49 PM
129$ for an OS like leopard doesn't seem that much to me, especially considering the price of vista. if apple's hardware wouldn't be so expensive - god knows why - I'd pay for mac os x

Hence my point...

Vista might be $249 for an ultimate upgrade... but I don't have to pay $200+ dollars for Apple hardware... Apple can afford to sell the OS for less because they make so much on their hardware.

cprofitt
October 30th, 2007, 09:53 PM
Not really since they dont support the software that allows workspaces. It was made by the xp devs as a side project. Its just as reliable as any other ms product (lol) but its not official so ms wont advertise it.


I wont ever pay for a windows service pack. So i really dont see the point of you telling me this. If all you are going to do is reply with smart **** like that then this conversation is going to go nowhere.

Spaces works just fine... heck the Nvidia drivers enabled it a while back too... was nice, but I prefer dual monitors... though if I get rid of my gaming habit a 24" wide screen would be nice too.

Frak
October 30th, 2007, 09:54 PM
Unless there is a major kernel overhaul i dont see the point in paying for an upgrade.

I think opposite, they have put development hours into the job, so I think that deserves some return for them.

As for just a Kernel Upgrade. Download Xcode and compile it yourself. The XNU kernel is licensed under the BSD license.

karellen
October 30th, 2007, 09:57 PM
Hence my point...

Vista might be $249 for an ultimate upgrade... but I don't have to pay $200+ dollars for Apple hardware... Apple can afford to sell the OS for less because they make so much on their hardware.

yeap...
anyway I've heard that leopard was hacked (already) to run on intel x86 pc's

Frak
October 30th, 2007, 09:57 PM
I wont ever pay for a windows service pack. So i really dont see the point of you telling me this. If all you are going to do is reply with smart **** like that then this conversation is going to go nowhere.

If you would actually think about it, he's telling you if it isn't worth your hard-earned money, then there is no reason to have it. For that, there is no reason to pay for it.

This conversation has been going to nowhere the entire thread, it was never meant to move at all.

aysiu
October 30th, 2007, 10:01 PM
I wont ever pay for a windows service pack. So i really dont see the point of you telling me this. If all you are going to do is reply with smart **** like that then this conversation is going to go nowhere. I'm not being a smartass. I'm saying, as I said before, that you don't have to pay for upgrades if you don't think the upgrades are worth the money. I used the real-life example of my wife (who is not you, by the way). She thought an upgrade to Tiger was worth it and so paid for it. She didn't think the upgrade to Leopard was worth it, and so she didn't pay for it.

How is that a smartass reply? It's a very practical reply with a real-life scenario. If you want the pay-for upgrade, pay for it. If you don't, don't pay for it.

P.S. Even without smartass replies, it's pretty clear this conversation is going nowhere anyway. It's already at 269 posts. Do you think any progress has been made?

Questioneer
October 30th, 2007, 10:53 PM
Hello-
When I first switched to Ubuntu, I'd had my full of Macs and PCs.
In Ubuntu, I experienced some things I didn't even dream of.

-Desktop Effects that I never dreamed were possible, and that go far beyond Vista and Leopard

-Apt-get is a miracle. I could install hundreds of programs simply by searching and clicking on them, without using the web or anything.

-Programs That Just work- OS X has this too, even a little better. However, I was overjoyed when my digital camera worked perfectly with F Spot, my wireless adapter was automatic, and my Creative Zen took 5 seconds of searching apt-get to find Gnomad, which syncs with it perfectly.

-Theme-a-bility- I marvelved at the ease of which I could download themes from gnome-look.org to customize my OS. I even was able to edit a theme with GIMP to create my own stuff.

-Security- Linux is probably the most secure OS out of XP, Vista, and even OS X. I just felt happy knowing there would be no more viruses or spyware.

-Incredible customization- I could create my own applets, use a ton of different window managers, docks/panels, and login managers. I could quickly change password files, source files, and OS files that has annoying configuration in Windows. Also, Ubuntu is made of all great open source applications,(like Firefox and Evolution and Nautilus) which I learned to easily hack and add in extensions and my own quick buttons

Reliability- I think Ubuntu wins by far in multitasking. I have been able to run 3D effects+XGL, download and install tons of programs, listen to music, write an e-mail, and check the news while hardly noticing a performance loss. Even when adding a movie to that, and Google Earth, Ubuntu still runs smoothly. If it gets too crowded, i switch some of the workspaces, so I hardly even notice all the background stuff.

Plus, Linux is fun. Its fun to use almost all open source programs, and be able to edit anything. Its nice to know you're in control.
Now, I can't live without wobbly windows. It just redefines what a window is for me. Using Windows and OS X just feels static.(For some reason especially OS X. This is probably because my ubuntu looks like OS X.)

Just my 2 cents, but there's no way I would go to OS X.(AND NO way I'd go back to windows!)

peestandingup
October 30th, 2007, 11:02 PM
P.S. Even without smartass replies, it's pretty clear this conversation is going nowhere anyway. It's already at 269 posts. Do you think any progress has been made?
I sure as hell dont. Which is why I was bitching so much about this earlier. Might as well lock this stupid thing cause its like beating a dead horse with some of these guys. It'll start to get legitimate again, and then some ignorant fanboy will put it right back in the crapper. Typical.

NoSmokingBandit
October 30th, 2007, 11:33 PM
I'm not being a smartass. I'm saying, as I said before, that you don't have to pay for upgrades if you don't think the upgrades are worth the money. I used the real-life example of my wife (who is not you, by the way). She thought an upgrade to Tiger was worth it and so paid for it. She didn't think the upgrade to Leopard was worth it, and so she didn't pay for it.

How is that a smartass reply? It's a very practical reply with a real-life scenario. If you want the pay-for upgrade, pay for it. If you don't, don't pay for it.

P.S. Even without smartass replies, it's pretty clear this conversation is going nowhere anyway. It's already at 269 posts. Do you think any progress has been made?

I didnt mean to be rude, but it just seemed like you were being an *** by telling me not to do something i obviously want going to do anyway. I was just stating my view and you made it sound like it wasnt welcome. curse the internet for not supporting voice inflection...

This thread does need to be closed. Its not even about gusty vs leopard anymore. People should know that these kinds of threads just lead to long useless battles in which everyone is just trying to prove themselves smarter than the rest of the crowd while failing miserably.

Frak
October 30th, 2007, 11:42 PM
I vote it to be placed in reoccuring discussions. I foresee many threads like this opening up, with the plus that whomever wants to argue here still can.

aysiu
October 30th, 2007, 11:56 PM
I vote it to be placed in reoccuring discussions. I foresee many threads like this opening up, with the plus that whomever wants to argue here still can.
I can agree with that.

There is also a new forum feature called Ignore this thread. It's under Thread tools.

I'm going to move this to Recurring Discussions. Those who want to argue more can argue more there. Those who are sick of this argument can add the thread to their ignore list.

cprofitt
October 31st, 2007, 12:57 AM
Wasn't the internet invented just for arguing?

:popcorn:

aysiu
October 31st, 2007, 01:25 AM
Wasn't the internet invented just for arguing?

:popcorn:
No, it wasn't. In fact... let's argue about it.

inversekinetix
October 31st, 2007, 01:30 AM
i like to imagine a leopard jumping through a 4 coloured window standing there all majestic as a pack of wild penguins peck it to death.

cprofitt
October 31st, 2007, 03:03 AM
The last two posts made this thread the end all be all of funny threads... thanks for the laughs guys.

NoSmokingBandit
October 31st, 2007, 03:31 AM
i like to imagine a leopard jumping through a 4 coloured window standing there all majestic as a pack of wild penguins peck it to death.

The topic of this thread is already lost somewhere, so ill just go ahead and ask: where did the penguin come from? What made the penguin synonymous with linux? Did Linus love penguins? I've always wondered that.

inversekinetix
October 31st, 2007, 04:36 AM
The topic of this thread is already lost somewhere, so ill just go ahead and ask: where did the penguin come from? What made the penguin synonymous with linux? Did Linus love penguins? I've always wondered that.


i dont know, but i guess it doesnt have to be a penguin it could be some other imaginary beast like a gryphon or something.

MONODA
November 10th, 2007, 08:14 AM
ok heres the thing. Macs have some very nice applications and software such as garage band and ilife that ubuntu doesnt have. But i think that is the only thing in which os x is a bit better than ubuntu. Mac has much more bugs, i was using tiger the other day and for some reason, every folder i would click on would get renamed to Rasmus... I really dont know why... also when i tried to open neo office, firefox and msn right after the other, it crashed...

Chrisj303
November 10th, 2007, 10:57 PM
ok heres the thing. Macs have some very nice applications and software such as garage band and ilife that ubuntu doesnt have. But i think that is the only thing in which os x is a bit better than ubuntu.

Well yeah, OSX has a LOT of software available for it that has nothing near a Linux equal. This is a MASSIVE plus for OSX.

If Ubuntu had the range of quality software that OSX has, I wouldn't even have switched to Mac's. If this was the case, I think that Linux would enjoy a much larger user base than it does now.


A great OS is one thing, but without quality software to back it up its mileage is very limited.

-grubby
November 10th, 2007, 11:02 PM
Well yeah, OSX has a LOT of software available for it that has nothing near a Linux equal. This is a MASSIVE plus for OSX.

If Ubuntu had the range of quality software that OSX has, I wouldn't even have switched to Mac's. If this was the case, I think that Linux would enjoy a much larger user base than it does now.


A great OS is one thing, but without quality software to back it up its mileage is very limited.

are you saying that all the Repo software is garbage?

TheWizzard
November 10th, 2007, 11:44 PM
Well yeah, OSX has a LOT of software available for it that has nothing near a Linux equal. This is a MASSIVE plus for OSX.


that's your opinion. i prefer linux software.

Chrisj303
November 11th, 2007, 03:51 PM
are you saying that all the Repo software is garbage?

Well I have yet to find anything on the Linux platform that comes anywhere near the standard of what I'm using on the Mac.

For music, I use Logic Studio - Ableton Live 6 - Reason 4 - LOADS of quality VST/AU plugs - Peak Pro 5.

For video editing I use Final Cut Pro - Soundtrack Pro - iMovie - Photoshop CS3 Extended.

Nothing on the Linux platform can match these combo's... both as individual pieces of software, and in the way that they are all tightly integrated into each other.

Honestly, I would LOVE to be able to use Ubuntu more than I do now - which is a fancy 3D web browser and geeky curiosity, but as it stands I just can't. I LOVE the look and feel that Ubuntu offers, but finding a purpose for it all is another thing altogether...