Give me one reason why Mac OS X is better than Ubuntu...

[mamamia88]

Because its an overpriced OS that only installs on computers made by one company and could install on other computrers if only its parent company were not such money grabbing SOB's then they could take microsoft on and win if it not for the overpriced systems?

Good enough reason?

I would argue that they are taking on Microsoft since they are more profitable. And what is wrong with making a high quality niche product? And you can install their os on other computers they just don't make it easy on you. But can you really blame them? They make more money by selling the os as part of the hardware.

[MadmanRB]

I would argue that they are taking on Microsoft since they are more profitable. And what is wrong with making a high quality niche product? And you can install their os on other computers they just don't make it easy on you. But can you really blame them? They make more money by selling the os as part of the hardware.

Yes but that whole masc hardware quality is questionable at best.
If you know what to buy and when to buy you can make your opwn mac capible machine for cheaper using parts that are vjust as goiod as what is offered in a mac computer.

[mamamia88]

Yes but that whole masc hardware quality is questionable at best.
If you know what to buy and when to buy you can make your opwn mac capible machine for cheaper using parts that are vjust as goiod as what is offered in a mac computer.

That applies to literally everything that you are capable of buying. An educated consumer will always find something that fits their needs the best at the price point they are willing to pay. But I really don't think macs are targeted at people who know enough about how to pick their own parts, put them together, and install a linux distro on. Their target market is people who A)don't know or care to know about computers and B)people who know so much about computers that they don't want to use windows but Linux doesn't cut it. I look at mac users like i look at hip hop artists. They buy Ferraris and Lamborghinis because they look cool and go fast. I look at linux users like I look at auto mechanics. They love cars and love playing around with them and are probably able to find something like a Mustang that is a good compromise of value/performance.

[nikonian]

People who say windows is unstable are either super unlucky or using a very old version. I'm sorry but you don't get to sell a billion units world wide if the thing is flat out broken. Especially to businesses who rely on it for making money. If it just crashed all the time then no matter how many applications ran on top of it you'd see mass exodus. It just hasn't happened.

So true.

I use Win 7 as my main, daily OS for 9+ hours a day, for 26 months on my Acer PC, and the ONLY crash was when my WD drive failed. Fanboys find any outlandish reasons to deride other platforms.

"A computer is like air conditioning: it becomes useless when you open Windows."

Dear Linus, you also sound like a fanboy, which is fair enough, but this is utter nonsense. One-sided arguments are easy to form, when you *only* see the one side, and cherry-pick all the negatives from the thing you are deriding.

[uc50_ic4more]

I don't claim to know much one way or the other about "better" or "worse"; but I've found this, using a MacBook Pro circa 2006 running OSX 10.6 versus an ASUS K53 using Ubuntu 12.04 and 12.10 (I've been using Ubuntu since Hoary on varying hardware):

I never, ever have hardware issues on the MBP. This is due, of course, to the fact that the software and hardware are deliberated together, and is an inherent disadvantage for anyone trying to make a reasonably hardware-agnostic OS. Ubuntu has reliably given me troubles over the years suspending and resuming from suspend, trackpads freezing, wi-fi dropping, etc.

In that same vein, I have had (mostly in the past) hardware and driver problems with all sorts of distro's, relative to their proprietary counterparts. This, again, is simply the nature of the development models and corporate relationships between vendors and their general lack of interest in catering to a small user base with an aversion to paying for stuff.

I make my living in media production and I need Logic and ProTools, Photoshop, InDesign, Illustrator, Final Cut, etc.; both because they're far, far superior than anything I've ever tried on Linux and because I need some interoperability and file interchange with others. Once again, this is not a matter of "better" but one of circumstance, development models, corporate culture and profit-seeking.

I use Ubuntu for all of my non-professional activities, and I administer ~12 boxen for friends, family and neighbours with delight. All of these people love Ubuntu and have almost nothing in the way or problems; and never have problems that can't be easily solved with a quick VNC or ssh session.

[MadmanRB]

So true.

I use Win 7 as my main, daily OS for 9+ hours a day, for 26 months on my Acer PC, and the ONLY crash was when my WD drive failed. Fanboys find any outlandish reasons to deride other platforms.

Well I do agree wibndows 7 is rock solid as OS's go, it is probably the best Microsoft has done since 2000.
But with that said I can make a few slams on Windows 7, such as if you installing it bare bones it is actually harder to use then Linux.
I say my biggest grief to wibndows 7 is the same one all windows versions have, system updates are a pain.
Not to mention the security issues you may have, windows still lacks proper administration methods.
I wish there was something like sudo on windows.

[blackbird34]

Well, it does separate user and admin privileges. The real problem is the HUUUUGE amount of time it takes to complete updates after RESTARTING ... non existent in Ubuntu (even after kernel updates).

I've not had a mac in my hands for 2 years, and never a version later that 10.6 Snow Leopard, so I'm not entirely sure if this applies to Macs.

[mamamia88]

Well, it does separate user and admin privileges. The real problem is the HUUUUGE amount of time it takes to complete updates after RESTARTING ... non existent in Ubuntu (even after kernel updates).

I've not had a mac in my hands for 2 years, and never a version later that 10.6 Snow Leopard, so I'm not entirely sure if this applies to Macs.

yeah update time is a pita and they won't let you postpone restarting until you manually do so, and they'll just keep pestering you every few hours to reboot. And heaven forbid you forget and leave important work open then go out and come home to find the computer rebooted

[nikonian]

yeah update time is a pita and they won't let you postpone restarting until you manually do so, and they'll just keep pestering you every few hours to reboot. And heaven forbid you forget and leave important work open then go out and come home to find the computer rebooted

I think you could be getting confused with Windows; Mac OS X needs you to put in your admin password AND press "[Restart]" button before it restarts, and if things have changed since last time I used one full time (10.6.X), the app or update will explicitly notify you of the need to restart BEFORE installing, and you have to accept that AND click "[Restart]" afterwards.

Now with Windows, I can understand this happening - it's happened to me a few times on older versions.

[mamamia88]

I think you could be getting confused with Windows; Mac OS X needs you to put in your admin password AND press "[Restart]" button before it restarts, and if things have changed since last time I used one full time (10.6.X), the app or update will explicitly notify you of the need to restart BEFORE installing, and you have to accept that AND click "[Restart]" afterwards.

Now with Windows, I can understand this happening - it's happened to me a few times on older versions.

I'm talking about windows reffering to the 2 or 3 posts above