PDA

View Full Version : which OS is the closest to evolving to the best OS (for you)?



RAV TUX
August 11th, 2006, 04:36 AM
At work I use OS X, at home I use Ubuntu and Knoppix, my wife currently uses Windows XP Tablet Edition...

I have tested a great many of OS's, Linux, BSD, Hurd, BeOS, Solaris...

After much reflection I have decided there is NO prefect OS.....

OS X, has many faults, just as windows does....Linux, BSD, etc....all have there positives and negatives......

All OS's are just as good or just as bad as the other....I love the freedom with Linux.

There is NO perfect OS, technically we're still in the dark ages...slowly rising to the cusp of enlightenment.....

Honestly, which OS is the closest to evolving to the best OS?

I honestly feel it may be Ubuntu...as it has in place systematic evolution...

I am greatly disappointed overall in OS X...windows I never had high expectancies for.....Linux is revolutonary....Ubuntu is leading the way in desktop Linux usage...Knoppix is simply awesome.....Sabayon is a sign of the future....we have our fingers on the pulse of change and this change is inspirational!!!!

anyway just a bit of a rant,....what are your thoughts?

fuscia
August 11th, 2006, 04:40 AM
an OS is only as perfect as the morons who use it.

nalmeth
August 11th, 2006, 05:06 AM
I'm sure there will be a lot of "to each his own" and "in the eye of the beholder" comments, and I agree with that. I have my own vision of a perfect OS for me.

But a perfect OS for everyone/anyone? Naturally, it would be user/idiot/moron/deliquient friendly, totally scalable to a persons mood, behavior, demands and habits, but most importantly, free! And who is likely to provide that?

Mac/MS? Not in this lifetime. They could possibly provide all the other traits, but they will NEVER be free.

I think whenever the ideas of linux, open-standards, and open-formats is recognized, understood, and accepted by the masses, it will quickly pick up it's pace of development, and will emerge as the candidate.

And really it looks like Ubuntu is heading that front.

:idea: SNAP! OK, back to reality now!

bjweeks
August 11th, 2006, 05:12 AM
I'm sure there will be a lot of "to each his own" and "in the eye of the beholder" comments, and I agree with that. I have my own vision of a perfect OS for me.

But a perfect OS for everyone/anyone? Naturally, it would be user/idiot/moron/deliquient friendly, totally scalable to a persons mood, behavior, demands and habits, but most importantly, free! And who is likely to provide that?

Mac/MS? Not in this lifetime. They could possibly provide all the other traits, but they will NEVER be free.

I think whenever the ideas of linux, open-standards, and open-formats is recognized, understood, and accepted by the masses, it will quickly pick up it's pace of development, and will emerge as the candidate.

And really it looks like Ubuntu is heading that front.

:idea: SNAP! OK, back to reality now!

Untill computers cost less that a OEM copy of Windows, nobody gives a **** about "free"*.

*Take free however you want

bluntu
August 11th, 2006, 05:13 AM
I'm not a fan of LINUX but after using Ubuntu I'm converted. Ubuntu will never be the perfect OS but it will be the one people will try when they want to leave Windows.

My guts tell me that Ubuntu is heading into the right direction. Keep up the work!

TravisNewman
August 11th, 2006, 05:22 AM
Simply put, no, there is not a perfect OS, nor will there ever be.

nalmeth
August 11th, 2006, 05:32 AM
Untill computers cost less that a OEM copy of Windows, nobody gives a **** about "free"*.
Unless I misunderstand your point, the topic is about an OS.

I give a **** or two about free :)

I suppose we could leave it at "It depends on your definition of 'perfect'", but that seemed too dry

bjweeks
August 11th, 2006, 05:38 AM
Unless I misunderstand your point, the topic is about an OS.

I give a **** or two about free :)

I suppose we could leave it at "It depends on your definition of 'perfect'", but that seemed too dry

You are a nerd... When somebody drops $1000 on a computer that last thing in their mind is "I wonder how much of the price is for Windows" or "I'm funding Bill Gate's evil empire" or "ZOMG! I wont be able to read the source code for my OS, god help me"

nalmeth
August 11th, 2006, 05:39 AM
That depends on your definition of "somebody"

bjweeks
August 11th, 2006, 05:40 AM
That depends on your definition of "somebody"

95% of computer users is mine.

nalmeth
August 11th, 2006, 05:49 AM
95% of computer users is mine.
It depends on what the meaning of "is" is...

Seriously, I get your point, but we're (or I'm) not talking about perfect in the present tense, more in the far away, fuzzy, dreamy sense. Perfect is a pretty idealistic word, never really a practical one.

But, when somebody is looking at that $1000 dollar windows computer, and see's an $800 one beside it with the exact same hardware, when it's in their face I think they will give a ****. Maybe 'perfect' will be exactly what they're thinking.

bjweeks
August 11th, 2006, 05:51 AM
But, when somebody is looking at that $1000 dollar windows computer, and see's an $800 one beside it with the exact same hardware, when it's in their face I think they will give a ****. Maybe 'perfect' will be exactly what they're thinking.

The day Dell ships linux...

/me Waits

nalmeth
August 11th, 2006, 05:56 AM
Ha! Now you're the one who's dreaming! \/ :mrgreen:

bjweeks
August 11th, 2006, 05:58 AM
Ha! Now you're the one who's dreaming!

Pass the weed... :D

RAV TUX
August 11th, 2006, 06:55 AM
The day Dell ships linux...

/me Waits

They do: Rat Hat Enterprise edition.....atleast they offer downloads and support:

http://support.dell.com/support/downloads/devices.aspx?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs&SystemID=XPS_M1210&os=LE30&osl=EN


Welcome to the real world Neo

bjweeks
August 11th, 2006, 06:57 AM
I was refering to desktops.

user1397
August 11th, 2006, 07:32 AM
hey yozef, what are the actual reasons why you are dissapointed with Mac OSX? can you give specific reasons?

RAV TUX
August 11th, 2006, 07:38 AM
hey yozef, what are the actual reasons why you are dissapointed with Mac OSX? can you give specific reasons?

specifically it's a lot like San Francisco or even Salt Lake City....a lot of hype of how beautiful it was or how great it is, led to unfullfilled expectancies....specifically I have clocked page rendering in web browsers and found OS X slower then both Ubuntu and Windows...the OS in general appears to be particularlly slow overall in booting, loading programs etc...the desktop environment gets old fast....

I also have a bad demographic, socialogical image of Apple users....drives Range Rovers, sits in Starbucks, on thier Apple notebooks.....at least this is the reality in DC...a consumer whores wet dream come true:-&

Apple, Starbucks, Range Rover, Dickensin-like sweatshops, starving children, emptiness abounds.....we all have become consumer whores:

http://img212.imageshack.us/img212/5594/consumerwhoremq9.jpg

user1397
August 11th, 2006, 07:44 AM
specifically it's a lot like San Francisco or even Salt Lake City....a lot of hype of how beautiful it was or how great it is, led to unfullfilled expectancies....specifically I have clocked page rendering in web browsers and found OS X slower then both Ubuntu and Windows...the OS in general appears to be particularlly slow overall in booting, loading programs etc...the desktop environment gets old fast....

I also have a bad demographic, socialogical image of Apple users....drives Range Rovers, sits in Starbucks, on thier Apple notebooks.....at least this is the reality in DC...a consumer whores wet dream come true:-&ah I see....well w/e, im never getting a mac anyway. to me, the world seems like its devided into *nix and windows, and mac is just a little mite bound to be stepped on any given time. well, that's just my opinion.

professor_chaos
August 11th, 2006, 07:51 AM
From what I notice, many seem to be in the pursuit of that perfect OS, perfect windows manager, perfect computer....on and on and on. Nobody seems to be satisfied with what they have. So, yes there is a perfect OS, when and only when people stop looking for something better. Then the realization hits you that the OS is perfect, it's yourself that is flawed.

RAV TUX
August 11th, 2006, 07:56 AM
From what I notice, many seem to be in the pursuit of that perfect OS, perfect windows manager, perfect computer....on and on and on. Nobody seems to be satisfied with what they have. So, yes there is a perfect OS, when and only when people stop looking for something better.



Honestly, which OS is the closest to evolving to the best OS?

I honestly feel it may be Ubuntu...as it has in place systematic evolution...

I am greatly disappointed overall in OS X...windows I never had high expectancies for.....Linux is revolutonary....Ubuntu is leading the way in desktop Linux usage...Knoppix is simply awesome.....Sabayon is a sign of the future....we have our fingers on the pulse of change and this change is inspirational!!!!

anyway just a bit of a rant,....what are your thoughts?

as previously stated above from post #1 of this thread;)

aysiu
August 11th, 2006, 08:02 AM
specifically it's a lot like San Francisco or even Salt Lake City....a lot of hype of how beautiful it was or how great it is, led to unfullfilled expectancies.... I don't know what your expectancies were about SF, but I haven't been disappointed with it at all. I've found it goes far beyond the hype.

SF's beauty isn't the Golden Gate Bridge, Fisherman's Wharf, or trolley cars. It's not Union Square or old Chinatown.

The beauty of San Francisco is in the less touristy parts of Golden Gate Park (for example, the carousel), new Chinatown (Clement St.), Le Video--the best video rental store I've ever seen, the non-Zagat-rated restaurants and cafes, Twin Peaks, Fort Funston, the Stern Grove music festival...

I've generally found the "hyped" parts of any city are the most disappointing. Tourist traps are... tourist traps. If you want to find the beauty of a city, do what the locals do.

Probably the only touristy part of SF that lives up to the hype is Alcatraz's audio tour.

flaak_monkey
August 11th, 2006, 08:19 AM
no, but there will be. Its called...are you ready?....





GoogleOS (just google it up lol)

Gustav
August 11th, 2006, 08:41 AM
A perfect OS requires perfect hardware. And there can only be one perfect OS/Hardware combination and that is...

A mind-controlled computer that can do everything (and takes no space or energy)!

Before we have that we still have work to do.

Klaidas
August 11th, 2006, 01:29 PM
Is there really a perfect <anything>?
no

Stew2
August 11th, 2006, 01:53 PM
From what I notice, many seem to be in the pursuit of that perfect OS, perfect windows manager, perfect computer....on and on and on. Nobody seems to be satisfied with what they have. So, yes there is a perfect OS, when and only when people stop looking for something better. Then the realization hits you that the OS is perfect, it's yourself that is flawed.

I agree 100% on this statement! :)

PenguinMan
August 11th, 2006, 02:01 PM
I also have a bad demographic, socialogical image of Apple users....drives Range Rovers, sits in Starbucks, on thier Apple notebooks.....at least this is the reality in DC...a consumer whores wet dream come true:-&

Apple, Starbucks, Range Rover, Dickensin-like sweatshops, starving children, emptiness abounds.....we all have become consumer whores...

Well, I use Mac OS X a lot and have been a Mac user since Mac OS 7.6. I don't like Starbucks, Range Rovers, starving children, etc. I think Starbucks' coffee tastes absolutely horrible, and is way over-priced for a stale cup of coffee. If you want the freshest coffee available, go to The Coffee Fool, http://www.coffeefool.com/ (http://www.thecoffeefool.com/). Nothing can beat their coffee. I challenge anyone to find a better cup of coffee... :)

Linux is really nice, but I don't think it will ever match the user-friendliness of Mac OS X. I use three Linux distributions: Linspire, PCLinuxOS, and Ubuntu. From my viewpoint, Linux cannnot do some of the wonderful things I can do in Mac OS X. It is getting there but it is somewhat slow in its progression.

bruce89
August 11th, 2006, 02:03 PM
Is there really a perfect OS?
As long as there are fans of each one who say the others are rubbish without giving a reason, no.

PenguinMan
August 11th, 2006, 02:04 PM
Is there really a perfect <anything>?
no
Umm... Yes. There is someone that is perfect in every way, and walked on this planet at one time. His name is Jesus... :)

Yossarian
August 11th, 2006, 02:32 PM
A perfect OS would have to have some method of refilling my beer glass, or fetching me a CC on the rocks.

So atually, yeah, there is a perfect OS, it's a bartender.

bjweeks
August 11th, 2006, 02:38 PM
Umm... Yes. There is someone that is perfect in every way, and walked on this planet at one time. His name is Jesus... :)

um, no

bruce89
August 11th, 2006, 02:38 PM
Umm... Yes. There is someone that is perfect in every way, and walked on this planet at one time. His name is Jesus... :)

I think it's best to keep religion out of this...

bensexson
August 11th, 2006, 02:39 PM
Seeing how nothing is ever perfect, No there is no perfect OS.

fuscia
August 11th, 2006, 02:40 PM
Umm... Yes. There is someone that is perfect in every way, and walked on this planet at one time. His name is Jesus... :)

nice guy. i don't know about perfect, though.

dusu
August 11th, 2006, 02:48 PM
Nothing's perfect, there's no "zero defect", and that's nice :D .
If something were perfect, there would be no place for improvement, so no place for evolution... what a boring world it would be !

And that would mean no more release of a brand new Ubuntu every 6 months !
Let's enjoy imperfections :cool:

djsroknrol
August 11th, 2006, 03:51 PM
The last perfect thing I heard of died over 2000 years ago...;)

I like flawed...it's chalenging...

Mr. Picklesworth
August 11th, 2006, 07:00 PM
Yes, yes... let's try to keep religious debates out of here for Just a little bit longer :P

I agree, OSX disappoints me as well.
It's a bit too idiot-proof, to the extent that it makes me believe that Steve Jobs is arrogant enough to think that everyone else in the entire world is a moron.

Where did I get this idea?
Gather round, and read my horrific story of wireless networking on a PowerBook.
Yes, it was easy; but maybe a bit too easy? (And no, I don't mean that in the dramatic sense as in something bad is coming; it already happened).

So, I was helping to set up a brand new Powerbook. Started up, running the setup program. Quite easy to use, and nice to have everything preinstalled. It looks really nice, too.

Setting up wireless APs seemed like a piece of cake. It detected my network, and then when I clicked on it it asked me for one thing: Password.
It's a safe bet that this Password field is for the WEP key, but the whole thing was really just weird. Wireless networking is a very complicated thing; Nothing that intends to look in the slightest bit useable should limit itself this much. There was absolutely nothing giving me control over the IP address, the Subnet mask, the DNS, the gateway IP...'

Okay, maybe Apple, being apparently really good at UIs, have made a super-intelligent wifi setup wizard that can read my mind and get through the various strict rules in my network.
Nope. I selected my AP, entered my 128-bit WEP key into the "Password" field (No option anywhere to choose what kind of WEP it is... or if it's WPA), hit continue, and I got a very pretty and 'user-friendly' little error message.
It kept telling me, simply, that it didn't work. That is all it told me. Every other wifi network setup I have ever used has been able to give me some hint at what is wrong by at least giving me a log of what it did! This one, however, saw it fit to simply say that Something Failed.
I then tried connecting to my neighbour's network which is completely unprotected. Clicking on it did not bring up a Password field (proving my belief that it is asking for a WEP key), but telling it to connect gave me the exact same error message as above.

Of course, Mac OS is designed under the mean assumption that I am a moron who hates anything that dares to tell me technical information, so I'll just try to excuse all that.
In the end, I told it specifically to Not Connect To A Network.
So, it's set up. Yay, we're logged in.

Configuring wifi after setup led me to many irritating attempts by Apple to sell their bloody Airport routers until I finally found the config for everything else (the Utilities menu has two things that set up Airport wireless, while Normal Wireless is nowhere to be found -- that config utility is accessed by clicking the little Wireless status icon in the menu bar), at which point it turned out that I was already connected to the Internet. This is strange; The setup program quite plainly and simply told me that it can't connect to any wireless network (including the one it's connected itself to!)... and I definietly told it not to try (because that was the only way past that step due to it's unhelpful error messages).

After a bit of grumbling, I connected to my network and it worked fine. Curiously, the interface in this utility - hidden away to sell Airport routers, perhaps? - was much more normal than in the Setup program. It let me choose what kind of security I am using, it didn't have a "Password" field and it let me use a static IP.
So first it gave me a stupid error message, then it tried to sell me Apple's routers with no clear alternative, then it secretly connected to the Internet without my knowledge, and it broke an unwritten rule of politeness in the process which is that it had actually connected to my neighbour's unprotected wireless network.

Now, automatic wireless connection is nice and all, but I like it when an operating just does what it's told.
What if the braindead dummy that this OS seemed to be catering to at that point had simply seen that he was connected and not looked to find that this was not to his own network? What if he then went on to use his computer under his neighbour's network for a bit longer, and then printed out sensitive documents on his neighbour's printer?

Expecting zombies to use your OS is not good; it means that things become TOO simplified, and it digs a hole that is hard to climb out of.

Now, this can't be true; they must be catering to the wrong audience!
Every Mac user I've ever met has been quite intelligent, and I'm sure they could put up with a few more options in the wireless networking setup... and maybe even some more informative error messages.

(I'm not even going to mention my realization that the EU should really leave Microsoft alone and start fining Apple. Their bundled software is MUCH worse, because it really is difficult to switch off and completely defeating all sorts of competition. Also bothering is how many things Apple pimps as revolutionary, when Gnome has been doing them for years, and even Windows has an addon for *cough*Virtual Desktops*cough*).


Okay, that was my Apple rant. Sorry about that.
We all know what's wrong with Windows (IE: Explorer not letting me delete directories because it forgot to stop using them, forcing me to log off and on... or, in the case of empty EXE files, forcing me to end the Explorer process and delete the file through the command prompt).

Ubuntu is one of the only ones I can't justify moaning about, because I didn't pay money for it; the developers are doing the best that they can do out of the goodness of their hearts... and the fact that it is compareable to Mac OS and Windows is astounding!


Now, I like that idea of an operating system that changes its features based on your mood and experience...

Blondie
August 11th, 2006, 08:23 PM
Untill computers cost less that a OEM copy of Windows, nobody gives a **** about "free"*.

*Take free however you want

Actually, you might not have long to wait.

professor_chaos
August 12th, 2006, 12:45 AM
If a linux server has a kernel panic in the woods without network access and nobody can read the system logs did the kernel panic happen?

When artifically intellegent computers run the world, in their eyes they will be perfect and the only ones to disagree will be the humans.


Is there really a perfect <anything>?
no

energy is perfect! Its only when you stick your finger into an electrical socket and get the shock of your life, do you think there is a flaw in the system.

:D ;) :-k

Christmas
August 12th, 2006, 01:10 AM
I don't think something like a perfect OS can exist. It can't be perfect, and even if it would be perfect for someone it wouldn't be for another person, and we won't be all the same, ever. But it might get close to "perfect". Also depends how one defines the term "perfect". If it should do one hundred things well and it doesn't, it's not perfect, if it should do only three things and it does them very well, then it's perfect for that person.

RAV TUX
August 12th, 2006, 01:51 AM
I edited the title of the thread to reflect the other question in post #1 that most people seemed to ignore(see below in red):


At work I use OS X, at home I use Ubuntu and Knoppix, my wife currently uses Windows XP Tablet Edition...

I have tested a great many of OS's, Linux, BSD, Hurd, BeOS, Solaris...

After much reflection I have decided there is NO prefect OS.....

OS X, has many faults, just as windows does....Linux, BSD, etc....all have there positives and negatives......

All OS's are just as good or just as bad as the other....I love the freedom with Linux.

There is NO perfect OS, technically we're still in the dark ages...slowly rising to the cusp of enlightenment.....

Honestly, which OS is the closest to evolving to the best OS?

I honestly feel it may be Ubuntu...as it has in place systematic evolution...

I am greatly disappointed overall in OS X...windows I never had high expectancies for.....Linux is revolutonary....Ubuntu is leading the way in desktop Linux usage...Knoppix is simply awesome.....Sabayon is a sign of the future....we have our fingers on the pulse of change and this change is inspirational!!!!

anyway just a bit of a rant,....what are your thoughts?

djsroknrol
August 12th, 2006, 02:04 AM
It depends on what you need the OS for, doesn't it? If functionalty matters more to you, than you choose the OS which does what you want. Stablity what you want?...again you make a choice.

But if I had to choose, I would have to say, for the masses, any MS product would do the trick. Linux in general is great, and it works for me, but has a few more hurtles to overcome before it gets to be mainstream.

Not everyone is adept to be able to administrate their own computer as the next person. That's where MS products win out.

GuitarHero
August 12th, 2006, 02:09 AM
I would say OSX is most joe couchpotato ready. Windows frustrates a lot of people, they just dont know there are alternatives.

Carrots171
August 12th, 2006, 02:18 AM
The best OS for whom? There is no "best" OS. An OS can suit someone's needs better than another OS, but there is no single OS that's the best for everyone, just as there's no "best" automobile. Do you want a car that can scale boulders easily? Do you want the fastest, best-handling car possible? Or do you want the most comfortable, luxurious car? The same thing applies to operating systems: Do you want an OS for gaming? Do you want an OS that's open-source and free of charge? Do you want an OS that has the best eyecandy? There's no OS that's the "best", only an OS that can suit your needs the best.

RAV TUX
August 12th, 2006, 02:20 AM
It depends on what you need the OS for, doesn't it? If functionalty matters more to you, than you choose the OS which does what you want. Stablity what you want?...again you make a choice.



The "you" here is yourself, so "you" only need to answer for yourself:rolleyes:

Thread title edited once more (for "you"):


which OS is the closest to evolving to the best OS (for you)?
"you"...is you, the reader of the thread title/thread, there is no right or wrong answer for you. Just remember you are not needed to answer or respond for anyone other then yourself.

RAV TUX
August 12th, 2006, 02:26 AM
The best OS for whom?

yourself.

djsroknrol
August 12th, 2006, 02:50 AM
Well then...

which OS is the closest to evolving to the best OS (for you)?

I would say...for myself...Ubuntu Linux..I use it more than any other OS

SidneySM
September 20th, 2006, 03:47 AM
I'd have to go with OS X. It combines the usability and "tightness" of a traditional GUI-based OS with the freedom of dropping into a *NIX CLI.

Its makers care about design, which I like, and it runs in a very smooth way... the trackpad's motion is smoother than in Linux, window redrawing is cleaner... it just takes less effort to use.

Iandefor
September 20th, 2006, 04:43 AM
I'd have to say that pretty much any operating system I'm not familiar with would be my perfect OS. I hate it when I know too well how to work a system.

prizrak
September 20th, 2006, 04:54 AM
They all suck IMO. If one thing works properly something else is screwed up.

SoundMachine
September 20th, 2006, 05:17 AM
At work, Vista

At home, Slackware, Ubuntu and OpenBSD, and yes, i need all three.

SoundMachine
September 20th, 2006, 05:18 AM
They all suck IMO. If one thing works properly something else is screwed up.

Tell me one thing about OpenBSD that is screwed up, or Slackware for that matter. ;)