Mac OS X or Linux

[ashvala]

Given you have a Mac Book pro with Boot Camp. it has Mac OS X 10.4.10 & Ubuntu 7.07...

Which would you use?

Mac OS X or Linux?

Id be on the MAC OS X :guitar:

[mostwanted]

Linux. If I wanted to use a proprietary operating system I'd probably use Windows because then I wouldn't have to bother with all the issues associated with being a minority computing platform.

But I don't want to use a proprietary operating system and I don't need Mac OS X to feel cool or different. My character has nothing to do with what operating system I use. The top selling point of Mac OS X is its image, that's why a lot of people buy Macs - to feel different, special and cool. Nothing wrong with it, I've just moved beyond that.

[ashvala]

Linux. If I wanted to use a proprietary operating system I'd probably use Windows because then I wouldn't have to bother with all the issues associated with being a minority computing platform.

But I don't want to use a proprietary operating system and I don't need Mac OS X to feel cool or different. My character has nothing to do with what operating system I use. The top selling point of Mac OS X is its image, that's why a lot of people buy Macs - to feel different, special and cool. Nothing wrong with it, I've just moved beyond that.

Good thought:guitar:

[ssam]

given that i have a powerbook G4 and it runs ubuntu, i think the answer is quite easy

linux

[Sir_Penguin]

Personally, I'd sell the Mac and build a cheap (and better) box to run Linux on. But if I had to keep the Mac I'd run Mac OS X. I mean... if I've got Mac hardware I might as well use it then buy another box for Linux and I'd use bootcamp to run Windows on the Mac.
@ssam, it's an Intel processor as the following equation shows:
Mac Book Pro + Bootcamp != G4.
:)

[izanbardprince]

From a technical and ease-of-use standpoint, Mac OS is probably superior to Ubuntu in a few ways, however, I don't feel Mac OS is better to the point I'd pay extramoney for hardware, plus $150 every time Apple does a point upgrade.

I think that Ubuntu is probably the best OS on the PC, and if you have an older Mac that you don't feel is worth investing in OS X over, then it couldn't hurt to load Ubuntu on it.

[~~Tito~~]

Run mac osx and run linux in a vm.

[stuh84]

I like the standard browsing, IM'ing and listening to music, I also like Pro Tools a lot (never will be in Linux), a clean interface (Gnome is good, but its lacking in areas), I like Photoshop (Gimp is good, but PS I find much better), iTunes, my M-Audio Firewire Interface (completely unsupported under Linux), VMWare Fusion (specifically Unity mode), etc. Being into audio recording and having a home/mobile recording studio, I want to pick my hardware for it based upon what it can do, not if the OS supports it, and from my experience in finding informaiton on pretty much anything audio/linux based, 90% of the audio devices I'm interested in are not supported under Linux.

I also don't care if something is closed if it is good, means nothing to me. I use computers because I want to get what I want done, when I want and with what I want, not because of some ulterior motive that everything HAS to be open. Sorry and all, I have a band, a job, a girlfriend who I love, a home studio, and trying to set up a mobile recording studio, and a lot more pressing matters on my mind than if the source is open on a computer, when I cannot program. I think there are far more important issues on this planet than if an OS is open source or not.

Hence why I would use OS X. I like Ubuntu. I like Linux. I don't like the zealotism.

[izanbardprince]

I like the standard browsing, IM'ing and listening to music, I also like Pro Tools a lot (never will be in Linux), a clean interface (Gnome is good, but its lacking in areas), I like Photoshop (Gimp is good, but PS I find much better), iTunes, my M-Audio Firewire Interface (completely unsupported under Linux), VMWare Fusion (specifically Unity mode), etc. Being into audio recording and having a home/mobile recording studio, I want to pick my hardware for it based upon what it can do, not if the OS supports it, and from my experience in finding informaiton on pretty much anything audio/linux based, 90% of the audio devices I'm interested in are not supported under Linux.

I also don't care if something is closed if it is good, means nothing to me. I use computers because I want to get what I want done, when I want and with what I want, not because of some ulterior motive that everything HAS to be open. Sorry and all, I have a band, a job, a girlfriend who I love, a home studio, and trying to set up a mobile recording studio, and a lot more pressing matters on my mind than if the source is open on a computer, when I cannot program. I think there are far more important issues on this planet than if an OS is open source or not.

Hence why I would use OS X. I like Ubuntu. I like Linux. I don't like the zealotism.

Yes, for some specialty applications, OS X does a better job, it's a niche market, the vast majority of computer users don't do heavy graphics or audio applications anyway.

As for iTunes, I really don't like it, I find AmaroK to be one of the best media players ever, certainly a killer app for KDE, I use GNOME but I have the QT library installed for several KDE apps.

OS X's interface is ok, I wouldn't say it's any better than GNOME or KDE, at least they don't have a massively oversized quick launch menu.

[starcraft.man]

Wouldn't have the Mac Book Pro to begin with, easy question to answer.

[immelman]

I am in a "somewhat" similar situation with an iBook G4 running Ubuntu and os X 10.4. I would choose os X for the following reasons:

1. The user interface is logical, some people do not agree but it is one of the only OS where I know where things should be right away.

2. Ubuntu is not complying to the mac keyboard, which makes it somewhat of a borked experience to me. For example I think it makes much more sense to have the function keys (F3 = mute) activated by default than having to click fn + F3. I did not find a way to change that default yet. Furthermore I did not understand (nor find) a way to make it behave like it does under os X (with the command key instead of control) and that is really bugging me.

3. The strict UI guidelines that a lot of mac developers stick to (even more so than Apple) make for highly usable applications. That's not always the case for OSS applications. For example Keynote for macintosh Vs. its equivalent in OpenOffice. I am a big believer in OSS but usability and functionality is key for me and unfortunately, most of the software offering that linux has does not have usability in mind which is a pity.

4. Hardware issues. Linux in general, I think that's a kernel level issue but I have no clue really, is not the best with power management and all the normal stuff you do with a laptop such as closing the lid. Mac does not offer any options concerning this but it just works while it does not always do with Ubuntu and when it does I need to log in again. Not the top for an "on the go" machine.

5. Installing and uninstalling things. on OS X, you throw the application in the garbage, maybe a .plist (some sort of config file) if you are really paranoid and you're done. When you want to install something that is not available through aptitude, you are in for some fun, especially at my knowledge level concerning command line. And let's not start with uninstalling.

As you can see, I am not a zealot or anything, and I truly hope some of the problems will be addressed in the future in order to make Linux a viable alternative (at least for me) on a macintosh machine.

[SunnyRabbiera]

Possibly OSX, It depends on the Linux distro

[stepan2]

I would use linux. After my experiences with Mac i was not happy with theevrything should fit with the average joe attitude.Every time you put a dvd it would assume you were burning a home movie and take you through hoops to ficking burn some data

[holiday]

I have a MBP and a Ubuntu desktop. Prior to buying the MBP, I was running Ubuntu on Toshibas for three years, Well not really running Ubuntu, I was balancing it on the sharp end of a pin. I'd spend hours getting it working and then suddenly it would break in some weird way as if a piece of software had just worn out. I've been MS-free at home for about eight years. At work I spend a lot of time on Solaris, but have to use XP.

The laptop is mission-critical. I use it for work when I'm at home or away. I found OO worked well enough for word processing and spreadsheets - unless I had to work with a complicated template. For diagramming, I had to TSC to my Desktop at the office. It was ok, but I lost too many hours getting something to work that had mysteriously broken overnight.

I bought the MBP because I wanted a stable Unix laptop. The GUI is not my style at all, in fact I find it hugely frustrating and sometimes just downright silly, but the MBP itself is a good, solid machine. I run a lot of Linux apps from the Darwin ports and they run very well.

I have no plan to install Ubuntu on my MBP. I will keep Ubuntu on my desktop machine because it is the best Linux distro I've tried.

When I have time, I will try to get Gnome fully installed onto OSX and see how that goes. I don't have a lot of hope for it because I find that the Linux GUI lacks discipline and commonality. Apps don't get along, won't talk to each other, hog the sound card or even break the sound system - problems arising from Linux's freedom and openness. I don't want that to go away, I accept the instability as the price of enjoying Linux.

As for the suggestion that Mac people use Macs because they think it shows they're cool, well - I'm guessing that people who make such suggestions are the kind of people who choose their OS to support their coolness. That's ok, but the assumption that everyone makes choices for the same reason you do will lead you into darkness. To understand what makes people go, you need more information than the logo on their laptop. Way more.

[juxtaposed]

I'd try OSX to see how I liked it. Then decide.

[karellen]

mac os x

[Sp4cedOut]

Ubuntu, without hesitation.

[jonfenton]

I have a linux desktop and love it. I have however just replaced my Linux laptop with a MacBook and I have to say I love it. Enjoying the effortless wireless which I do not have to fix after every kernel change and finding it very intuitive. But no intention of changing the desktop - they both seem to network well together.

[RandomJoe]

I'd run both! :)

Both have nice points. I have a Mac Mini I bought a couple of years ago to try out OS X, and it was my primary home-office machine for six months. It is currently my "media box", playing movies on a projector.

The Mini got a demotion simply because after 10 years of using Linux, I am way too accustomed to the incredible flexibility it offers. While the Mac ran well - certainly lived up to a "just works" motto - I felt like I was wearing a straightjacket while using it. And "focus follows mouse". I can't live without that anymore! :lolflag:

So I'd run both - spend most of my time in Ubuntu, but use OS X on occasion because I do like it in many ways.

[stmiller]

Linux! :KS

[Dimitriid]

I would never use a mac, even if given to me, out of general principle. Other than that even if it was possible to try OS X without owning a mac I wouldn't bother unless it was open source.

[rgcrowley]

I decided to find out so I did clean installs on my Toshiba Satellite laptop of the following: 1. Ubuntu Feisty Fawn, 2. Sabayon Linux, 3. pcBSD, 4. Ubuntu Gutsy Gibbon, and 5. Windows 2000. Of course MAC OS X was on the iMac. I came away with the following impressions.

Gutsy Gibbon - This is going to be great but still too alpha for general use. Too many programs still do not work yet.

pcBSD - I really like this, super graphics but limited hardware recognition. Many packages that I'm used to are apparently too bleeding edge to be available. There appears to be a steep stability/ availability tradeoff.

Sabayon - Never used a gentoo derivative before but I really liked it and that each package is built for my particular pc. But this also meant that some packages take a lot of work and/or time. I used the miniCD and then had to install openoffice from source, this took five hours. Never could get vmware installed. I will surely put this on a machine to play with until I learn more about it.

Windows 2000 - A must have for certain windows programs so I just keep an image for use with vmware. But my host has to be linux.

Feisty Fawn - Does what I need done (if I add automatix), installs fast, and looks great. This is the absolute winner and I'll keep it on the laptop.

Mac OS X - I like that it just works with whatever I throw at it. Of course for the price of an iMac it should.

[aysiu]

Cons for Mac
OS X looks great at first (actually, it still looks great even after a while), but once I actually start using it, it just annoys the hell out of me. I realize a lot of it has to do with a learning curve, but I just don't want to unlearn my Linux/Windows habits, and I don't buy all those silly arguments claiming that Mac is more intuitive.

F2 is rename. Enter launches a program or opens a file. No, I don't want to have to do Google searches to figure out that the keyboard shortcut to open a file or launch a program is Cmd-O.

The Dock prevents me from resizing a window, which I can resize only from the bottom-right-hand corner. No thanks.

If I minimize an application, it won't restore if I Cmd-Tab to it.

Minimized thumbnails usually give me no idea what programs are minimized anyway.

Closing the last window of a program doesn't quit the program, so unless I remember to Cmd-Q, I have about ten programs open at any given time, even though I'm not using them.

I can't show hidden files with Control-H.

I can't maximize windows. I don't want to have to keep rezooming every time what I want to look at gets bigger.

apt-get and fink are possible on Mac OS X, but they're a pain to set up, and their package selections are limited/outdated.

My experience (I realize others will disagree) with Macs is that they're slow. My wife needed to upgrade to 2 GB of RAM just to make her Powerbook performance bearable. Even still, she complains that it's slow. I pop in a Ubuntu live CD on that same computer, and it flies.

Upgrades cost money. When Gutsy comes out, I'll upgrade for free. When Leopard comes out, my wife will have to pay for it if she wants it (she does not want to pirate the software, thanks).

The Cmd-Shift-A shortcut to launch the Applications folder works only if Finder is in focus.

Mac suffers from a lot of the same support issues that Linux suffers from (no Internet Explorer... in fact, it's easier to get IE6 running in Linux than it is on an Intel Mac; few commercial games; Canon printer compatibility problems).

I don't know how common this is, but I can't get WPA or WPA2 support working on my wife's Powerbook. WPA will appear to work for a minute or two but keep dropping. WPA2 won't work at all, so we have to use WEP for our wireless connection, even though it's less secure. Ubuntu Feisty with Intel Pro Wireless 2200 can handle WEP, WPA, and WPA2 out of the box with no extra configuration.

Pros for Mac
It looks good. I know some people get tired of the Aqua/Milk/Brushed Metal look, but I still love it and have loved it for years. I have tried to get a Mac-emulated style on Gnome, KDE, Xfce, IceWM, but it never looks quite as seamless.

Plug and play for monitors, especially extended desktop, is much, much better. Hopefully this will be fixed in Gutsy, but I don't think it'll be polished until Gutsy+2.

Even though Mac suffers from some third-party support issues, it supports a lot more commercial desktop software than Linux does (Adobe Creative Suite being the big one, of course).

If something goes wrong, you can still claim it "just works" and people won't look at you as if you're nuts.

[Hex_Mandos]

I tried installing OSX86, and beyond hardware recognition issues (which aren't Apple's fault, seeing as OS X isn't meant to run in my PC) I have to say Linux is the better OS. The OS X interface is very confusing. It doesn't have as much eye candy as Linux. Tiger doesn't support multiple workspaces. There's no evident way of managing packages like I do with Linux. Installing and uninstalling stuff is more difficult (I'd rather use a package manager or double click on a .deb. The dock isn't as good as a real taskbar, IMO (although I know many people like docks... I don't see the point). OS X might have better app support, but I don't need professional design software. I'd much rather just use Ubuntu and virtualize Windows for specific apps.

[aysiu]

It doesn't have as much eye candy as Linux. I disagree. Everybody raves about Compiz/Beryl, but it still feels choppy to me or not well integrated (granted, I've seen it only on my machine, so maybe I installed/configured it badly). Mac OS X's effects seem smooth always... even the rainbow circle of death, sadly.
Tiger doesn't support multiple workspaces. Yeah, but Leopard will.
There's no evident way of managing packages like I do with Linux. Installing and uninstalling stuff is more difficult (I'd rather use a package manager or double click on a .deb. Agreed. I got really frustrated with software installation the first time I used Mac OS X. I kept trying to click the icon inside the white volume thing in order to get a Windows-like setup wizard. The application would run, but when I ejected the white volume, the application would close. I had to search online to realize that "intuitively" you open the white volume, drag the icon to the Applications folder and then eject the white volume.
The dock isn't as good as a real taskbar, IMO (although I know many people like docks... I don't see the point). People like the Dock for the same reason they like OS X--it looks cool, even when it does the magnification effect. I have tried many a Linux dock, and the magnification is never as smooth as the OS X Dock. For actual practical use, the Dock isn't great, but it does look good.
OS X might have better app support, but I don't need professional design software. I'd much rather just use Ubuntu and virtualize Windows for specific apps. It's a person-by-person thing, of course. I do fine without Mac OS X. But my wife uses Flash, Photoshop, InDesign, and Illustrator for professional work (i.e., to make a living) and isn't going to trade it up for F4L, GIMP, Scribus, and Inkscape.

Back to the original question
Given you have a Mac Book pro with Boot Camp. it has Mac OS X 10.4.10 & Ubuntu 7.07...

Which would you use?

Mac OS X or Linux?

Id be on the MAC OS X If I had a Macbook Pro, I would definitely use Mac OS X. Every tutorial on the web I've seen about installing/configuring Ubuntu on Macs makes the process look like a real headache just to get basic things to work.

[misfitpierce]

Linux... I sold my mac b/c all in all its still locked software etc and im not for that so I like linux just fine thanks. :)

[Tiekyl]

I'd dual boot...

Can't give up a chance to use mac software, garage band is awesome. I'd love to have the hardware though, its very purty ^^

[Monky]

You guys could give darwinports or fink a try. They install gnu software under mac os x. The mac core is unix.

I have a couple command line tools like aria2, but i haven't tried installing openbox just yet. I would say darwin

ports is the better one. But it compiles everything, so it takes time.

[aysiu]

You guys could give darwinports or fink a try. They install gnu software under mac os x. I have. Pain to set up. Not a great repository selection. Usually need to run X11 for the application also.

[tigerpants]

Given you have a Mac Book pro with Boot Camp. it has Mac OS X 10.4.10 & Ubuntu 7.07...

Which would you use?

Mac OS X or Linux?

Id be on the MAC OS X :guitar:

Never see the point of owning a mac if you aren't going to use OS X.

[Hex_Mandos]

I disagree. Everybody raves about Compiz/Beryl, but it still feels choppy to me or not well integrated (granted, I've seen it only on my machine, so maybe I installed/configured it badly). Mac OS X's effects seem smooth always... even the rainbow circle of death, sadly.

Compiz and Beryl aren't perfect in Ubuntu, but seeing what other distros have done, by Gutsy Compiz Fusion will probably be running flawlessly. For me, Feisty + Beryl is better than OS X in the eye candy department, but it's a matter of taste.


Yeah, but Leopard will.

We're even (as I said Gutsy's integration of desktop effects would be better than OS X's). Maybe by the next release they'll also have them arranged like a cube (I find it much better to switch workspaces in Beryl or Compiz)


People like the Dock for the same reason they like OS X--it looks cool, even when it does the magnification effect. I have tried many a Linux dock, and the magnification is never as smooth as the OS X Dock. For actual practical use, the Dock isn't great, but it does look good.

That's the reason I gave up on Linux docks too: they're pointless. At least Linux DEs give me the option to make a GUI the way I need it. OSX seems too rigid in that respect.


It's a person-by-person thing, of course. I do fine without Mac OS X. But my wife uses Flash, Photoshop, InDesign, and Illustrator for professional work (i.e., to make a living) and isn't going to trade it up for F4L, GIMP, Scribus, and Inkscape..

Your wife has special needs different from mine (and most people's). I wouldn't advise using free tools for professional design, but most people (myself included) aren't graphics designers.

OTOH, IIRC MBPs have just one touchpad button. Using an OS designed for two or three mouse buttons with one would be tricky.

[benhagerty]

If I absolutely had to I would use Linux. I don't like macs. I don't really have much against them (actually I do) but they just arn't for me

[quattro4]

I have both, I use both regularly.
My preference is definately OS X.
But I'm not afraid to wreck my Linux, so programing stuff I do my Linux.
It's also the best option for a PC you have, cause windows sucks.
I've seen and had the OS X with x86 architecture, but it's sketchy at best.
OS X all the way.

[Sayers]

Linux. If I wanted to use a proprietary operating system I'd probably use Windows because then I wouldn't have to bother with all the issues associated with being a minority computing platform.

But I don't want to use a proprietary operating system and I don't need Mac OS X to feel cool or different. My character has nothing to do with what operating system I use. The top selling point of Mac OS X is its image, that's why a lot of people buy Macs - to feel different, special and cool. Nothing wrong with it, I've just moved beyond that.

So true. Linux effects me because I feel like a true computer user. However Mac seems like its trying to be everything and it really isn't that great.

[ry4n]

Given you have a Mac Book pro with Boot Camp. it has Mac OS X 10.4.10 & Ubuntu 7.07...

Which would you use?

Mac OS X or Linux?

Id be on the MAC OS X :guitar:

I would never own a mac, most mac owners buy apple because they think it makes them “cool” or “different” not because of the real issues. I will say that certain programs look appealing and I admit that Ubuntu has a while to go but I love it for my day to day use.

[Patrick-Ruff]

As for the suggestion that Mac people use Macs because they think it shows they're cool, well - I'm guessing that people who make such suggestions are the kind of people who choose their OS to support their coolness. That's ok, but the assumption that everyone makes choices for the same reason you do will lead you into darkness. To understand what makes people go, you need more information than the logo on their laptop. Way more.

amen to that. this relates to a psychological concept called expectation confirmation, in which humans tend to ignore unexpected attributes and look for ones that confirm their own pre-existing beliefs.

so, in essence, if you believe mac is crap, you will ignore most good things about it and seek out the bad. same applies to people who think it is good, you will ignore all the bad things about it and find what confirms your beliefs.

[Depressed Man]

I'd use Linux.. I really don't like the universal menu bar in OSX. It drives me crazy whenever I use a Mac. Despite using them in the lab, I can't get use to them.

[handy]

My wife is a professional musician & she has students, this requires her to use Sibelius software. Initially this was installed on winxp, these days we are a windows free house & she uses a Powerbook with OS X. She will use Linux if/when Sibelius make a version that will run on Linux. There is no substitute for Sibelius, it is superb software with no equal at the moment, so OS X it has to be.

Apple are at least as closed up as microsoft. If Apple had of licensed there software in the early days, Bill Gates wouldn't have become a house hold name, & Apples OS would be on 90% of the worlds desktops.

Apple's ego blew it big time with that decision.

[DeadSuperHero]

I'd like to get Mac OSX. I've heard some very nice things about it, their latest release looks both fun and gimmicky (hooray!), and it also has official support from EA Games.
That said, I love Linux, and I see it as my "Inspiration" system. I can basically f*ck around with anything I want, and I get to see immediate results that can be easily corrected, one way or another. That's why I use Linux, it's inspiring, and a great learning experience. It also changes your way of thinking, complex problems are sometimes solved through simple solutions, and this teaches you patience.
I'd love to get an iMac and Mac OSX 10.5. Why? Because it's different, I'm sick of Windows XP, and sometimes Linux doesn't cut it (only sometimes)
Besides, the whole reason I switched to Linux was to try something new, so why not?

[handy]

I'd like to get Mac OSX. I've heard some very nice things about it, their latest release looks both fun and gimmicky (hooray!), and it also has official support from EA Games.

I believe that the EA support is via the Transgaming's Cider (http://www.transgaming.com/products/cider/), which is Cedega (http://www.transgaming.com/products/cedega/6.0/) for Mac's.

When you read the blurb at Transgaming, be aware that there is a lot of spin there, things are not a good as they make out, & there support is virtually non-existent.

That said, I have used Cedega for over 18 months to play Guild Wars which it supports really well. Cedega has been improving over the last months too.

There have been a lot of discussions regarding Transgaming & Cedega, as you will find if you do a search in the forums.