Ubuntu cannot compete with OS X or Windows 7

[alakazam]

What can Mac do that Linux & Windows car'nt?


So then, what justifies the cost of a Mac, the hardware used is high end but that same quality and performance hardware range on a PC is half to 3/4 the price.

I know many that put Linux on a five year old PC and complain that Linux is slow and crap because that's the very first experience of Linux they have when in reality it's their hardware that's slow and crap, put Linux on the latest kit and the experience is amazing.

So I have ruled hardware out of the equation. Mac software from the system to apps justify the cost? if so then it would have to be much better then Linux and Windows and do much more?

[jrusso2]

To me OS X does the same things as Linux but I don't have to worry if software is going to work.

Its the mix of commercial and open source thats the best. Very polished and makes Unix very simple. Best and easiest to use Unix ever. Nice job Apple.

[mivo]

- I did a lot of research and came to the opposite conclusion.

You apparently did not do any research. It is okay, though, I didn't expect it anyway. (Dec 2009 ...)

[Roasted]

To me OS X does the same things as Linux but I don't have to worry if software is going to work.

Its the mix of commercial and open source thats the best. Very polished and makes Unix very simple. Best and easiest to use Unix ever. Nice job Apple.

Meanwhile, I feel the exact opposite. I find Apple to be cumbersome, overpriced, and quite nazi driven and ridiculous in their practices as a company.

I have a Mac, and I really don't understand why people can praise them in the manner they do. Sure, it does the job, it may burn you CDs and have web browsing software, etc. But I have yet to see why Apple's computers/software justify even half of the price they retail at. Yet on the flip side, I can fire up Kubuntu. Things just make sense. It's solid. Reliable. Stable. Easy to use. And yet, wait... wtf? It's free?

For the record, I got my Mac for free. Otherwise, I wouldn't own a Mac.

[yester64]

Meanwhile, I feel the exact opposite. I find Apple to be cumbersome, overpriced, and quite nazi driven and ridiculous in their practices as a company.

I have a Mac, and I really don't understand why people can praise them in the manner they do. Sure, it does the job, it may burn you CDs and have web browsing software, etc. But I have yet to see why Apple's computers/software justify even half of the price they retail at. Yet on the flip side, I can fire up Kubuntu. Things just make sense. It's solid. Reliable. Stable. Easy to use. And yet, wait... wtf? It's free?

For the record, I got my Mac for free. Otherwise, I wouldn't own a Mac.

Mm.. i do agree that i would also go with linux before mac os, but i have to say that mac os is surely easier to use.
It has linux under the hood and a nice top where everyone can feel home right away. Meaning the learning curve is smaller.
I do not agree on some of apple policies, but i would (if i could afford it) rather use a mac than a pc. Harware is better in my opinion and i think design justifies price.
Its like compare a jugo to a bmw. both bring you from point a to b, but b is more luxurious.

Linux is not lesser luxurious but you have to put a little more affort into it.
(how did you get a mac for free? from a truck?)

[TWO]

<rant>

You cannot claim to be an easy to use operating system if you cannot even get Input Method Editors right. As someone who needs to type in different scripts and is currently unable to run Windows/OS X due to faulty computer/money constraints, having to battle with installing SKIM/iBus/UIM alone and then the problems that each has bought me just isn't worth it.

I appreciate the efforts of countless volunteers around the world, but if the likes of Canonical are pumping money into this OS, then at least get the basics right.

I just don't understand. The wealth of programs available through the repositories is amazing, but when you have some which haven't been maintained for years, some which are half-baked and the rest which are just plain buggy, then you do begin to wonder.

Sticking with installing things, how about making .deb the standard way to install programs along with the repositories. Why would we/should we have to adopt the compile a binary method? It may only be me, but I have never come across a more cumbersome installation method, and don't even get me started on using ./configure...

That and I can't even play music CDs at the moment.

Honestly, the pretty window switching effects on the latest Kubuntu count for nothing right now. Glad to see some improvements, but I grow tired of IME failing with every upgrade...or (K)Ubuntu opting for less featured programs as the new standard e.g (K)Packagekit/iBus...

</rant>

[Ylon]

Clients right? I don't think so.

I can think of no-one who isn't into Linux giving a fsck if their hardware works with anything other than Windows.

Well, I know about Windows user that give defragging every weeks.. and Windows user that don't: the WU (Windows User) that don't... see their pc going painfully slow by time in time.


On other side, Linux Ubuntu force an automatic check/fix (Ubuntu uesr don't need to run anything by themselves).. and now any Uinux User see their PC run smooth: no matter how much you'd copy/move/install files.

(And for the record, I am being light-harted )

Also I am, but if we keep on serious tone: we should give the right merit to Microsoft's product.. and not just idealize what's wrong with other.

Linux way to deal with filesystem is evolved with scientific empiricist approach. Microsoft way is the "business kind".
There are advances in both Linux and Windows style. But only the Windows's one is forced to the public: this is not fair play. IMHO

But the average computer user isn't up to the challenge since their brain may lock up if they have to type anything starting with "sudo".

And you shouldn't use "sudo"

You use "sudo" to almost (if not always at all) everytime you need to fix your hardware problem.. and "you shouldn't fix your hardware issue"... the hardware manufacturer should do this for you; the same way they are doing it for Windows!



I am used to give sudo apt-get install [programm] to install software: but is my own choice: you can do the same thing:
1.double click on a .deb file
2. look in synaptic
3. Ubuntu Software Manager
4. Mint Install (frontend with rewiev, screenshot, and votes for each software), you can install it on Ubuntu!

[Danimoth]

You apparently did not do any research. It is okay, though, I didn't expect it anyway. (Dec 2009 ...)

You aparrently think i have been using linux for as long as i am registered to the ubuntu forums ^_^. That's go tragically funny :].
If you judge people opinions by their number of posts/beans they have, then its obvious what the quality of your research is and i am pretty sure my research is way more in-depth and not-biased compared to yours.

[alakazam]

<rant>

You cannot claim to be an easy to use operating system if you cannot even get Input Method Editors right. As someone who needs to type in different scripts and is currently unable to run Windows/OS X due to faulty computer/money constraints, having to battle with installing SKIM/iBus/UIM alone and then the problems that each has bought me just isn't worth it.

I appreciate the efforts of countless volunteers around the world, but if the likes of Canonical are pumping money into this OS, then at least get the basics right.

I just don't understand. The wealth of programs available through the repositories is amazing, but when you have some which haven't been maintained for years, some which are half-baked and the rest which are just plain buggy, then you do begin to wonder.

Sticking with installing things, how about making .deb the standard way to install programs along with the repositories. Why would we/should we have to adopt the compile a binary method? It may only be me, but I have never come across a more cumbersome installation method, and don't even get me started on using ./configure...

That and I can't even play music CDs at the moment.

Honestly, the pretty window switching effects on the latest Kubuntu count for nothing right now. Glad to see some improvements, but I grow tired of IME failing with every upgrade...or (K)Ubuntu opting for less featured programs as the new standard e.g (K)Packagekit/iBus...

</rant>

That's your hardware's fault, not (K)Ubuntu's. If your hardware is as old as the hills then ranting is really not your right.

[yester64]

<rant>

You cannot claim to be an easy to use operating system if you cannot even get Input Method Editors right. As someone who needs to type in different scripts and is currently unable to run Windows/OS X due to faulty computer/money constraints, having to battle with installing SKIM/iBus/UIM alone and then the problems that each has bought me just isn't worth it.

I appreciate the efforts of countless volunteers around the world, but if the likes of Canonical are pumping money into this OS, then at least get the basics right.

I just don't understand. The wealth of programs available through the repositories is amazing, but when you have some which haven't been maintained for years, some which are half-baked and the rest which are just plain buggy, then you do begin to wonder.

Sticking with installing things, how about making .deb the standard way to install programs along with the repositories. Why would we/should we have to adopt the compile a binary method? It may only be me, but I have never come across a more cumbersome installation method, and don't even get me started on using ./configure...

That and I can't even play music CDs at the moment.

Honestly, the pretty window switching effects on the latest Kubuntu count for nothing right now. Glad to see some improvements, but I grow tired of IME failing with every upgrade...or (K)Ubuntu opting for less featured programs as the new standard e.g (K)Packagekit/iBus...

</rant>

Gosh, i read this kind of message a lot.
You need to understand some things first.
Linux distributes programs in different ways. For one you can install the most popular programs over the software center. So no compiling there, unless you select the tab for seeing whats going on under the hood.
Many other programs come in just source form and therefore require you to compile them yourself.
Linux does not have executables like Windows does. So you will never see an .exe file which you can click on.
Windows and Linux (or Unix for that matter) work very differently.
You can always check the sourcecode if you wish to know whats in the program and you may even alter the code.

The other thing is that in the linux world, there are many many projects going on. Most of them are privately done, meaning there is no company working on the program. So there are people like you and me working on a program in their sparetime.
Some projects just die, for several reasons like no time or any other reason.
However you can takeover the code and continue to code the program further.
And yes, there might be some programs there are buggy. Altough i rarely had a buggy program and most of them work fine.

Besides, Windows is a permanent workplace too. Windows itself is getting fixes on a daily base and some 3.party programs get no fix at all and you might paid for that.

And whats the problem with your Input Method? I don't get that. It is something i never used i have to guess.

Anyway, since its a holiday, i wish you and everyone here a nice holiday. Cheer up