OS Wars

[ron]

Just curious, what operating system(s) do you use? What's your favorite and why?

 

[skylinec]

i like DOS and windows

 

[Jung]

linux: gotta love open source, stability, and unrestricted commond line, i use it everyday at work, what an OS should be= "does what you want it to, not what they want you to do with it" <3 debian

dos: gotta love command line and batches

windows: for games and a few other apps, forced to use it at work

HP-UX: used it for a few years, i like solaris better though <3 RISC

BSD: close enough to linux for me, love the "out of the box" security and portage.

 

[ron]

I prefer Irix. My workstation at home runs Irix 6.5 on a MIPS platform. Lots of developers porting open source software to Irix these days. Sweet.

I forgot to add Solaris; should have added that and SunOS in the same line.

I use Linux at home and work (this computer, for instance) and HP-UX at work. Good, stable platform and solid performance. Our ERP and database stuff all runs under HP-UX on PA-RISC.

I also like Inferno and Plan9, but that's another story.

There are a lot of good operating systems that I purposely left out: Amiga, UNICOS, VMS, VAX unix, Inferno, Plan9, etc.

 

[Jung]

lol at plan9 and vms, haven't used those in a while. i used plan9 when i worked for the telco and my university used vmx for the longest time.

hp-ux and solaris are great for databases, although i hate dba used both extensively for oracle.

 

[voiceofreason]

Love the IDEA of Linux, it's just not mature yet....

 

[Jung]

plz explain. linux is far more mature than windows, just has a steeper learning curve. just cuz you can't click install.exe and have it deon for you doesn't make in an immature OS. i think nix in general has proven itself quite well in the busisness world. granted it's not for everyone's home use, and can be very annoying if you don't know what you're doing.

p.s. i'm not questioning your linux ability, just your statement.

 

[voiceofreason]

plz explain. linux is far more mature than windows, just has a steeper learning curve. just cuz you can't click install.exe and have it deon for you doesn't make in an immature OS. i think nix in general has proven itself quite well in the busisness world. granted it's not for everyone's home use, and can be very annoying if you don't know what you're doing.

p.s. i'm not questioning your linux ability, just your statement.

A mature product:
1) is easy to install and operate
2) has a deep catalog of user applications
3) is accessible to the masses

Not saying it's bad, just saying it can't compete the the 300 lb gorilla. When it can, it will kick ass.

 

[Jung]

A mature product:
1) is easy to install and operate

it's easy to install and operate. it would be no harder to learn linux than to learn windows after using mac all your life or the reverse.

2) has a deep catalog of user applications

www.sourceforge.net , linux has apps for everything win/mac does. if you posted what you use windows for on a day to day basis, i'm sure i could point you in the direction of a linux app that does the same.

3) is accessible to the masses

linux is more accesable than any other OS being open source and available for free download(with out pirating)

Not saying it's bad, just saying it can't compete the the 300 lb gorilla. When it can, it will kick ass.

like i said linux isn't for everyone, most people are scared by it and shy away from learning new things.(not targetting you with that comment) If more people would give it a real chance and learn a little bit they would realize it's 100% more stable and useable than windows.
bottom line, linux isn't for the average computer user.

 

[TwisT]

I like OSX. better than Windoze, and have not had the linux experience. Some day though!

 

[tzedek]

it's easy to install and operate. it would be no harder to learn linux than to learn windows after using mac all your life or the reverse.

i have to disagree with you there. I considered myself to be very good with computers before i tried out linux. For instace i taught myself html and know a good amount of C++. not bragging or anything. but then i when i jumped into linux it was like :question: . it was a good week before i knew just the basics, as in installing programs, running programs, configuring, etc. just normal things you dont even think about with windows. No, it isnt very hard to learn, but IMO that doesnt mean it's easy to install and operate.

you are absolutly correct about catalog of user applications. For every win app there are like 3 linux ones that do the same. the same goes with accessibility. where as Windows is 100 - 200 dollars you can get at least 5 different distros that dwarf windows in every aspect for free.

 

[Jung]

For instace i taught myself html and know a good amount of C++. not bragging or anything.

lol i remember when i was like 12 or 13 i used to write webpages in notepad, this was before flash, css, dhtml, xhtml, swift 3d etc. it's good you know C, you'll never fully use nix to it's potential until you master C. i've taught myself a lot of languages for personal use, but they never make to to my resume. i had one job as a code monkey and i'll never d it again. the extent of coding i do at work now is batches and shell or vb scripts. my life is happier because of it

 

[Shurikane]

Windows. Quick to fresh-install (hopefully) and when it's configured and broken-in, it can be pretty stable. Unless you install 95, 98, ME or XP.

 

[ron]

A mature product:
1) is easy to install and operate
2) has a deep catalog of user applications
3) is accessible to the masses

Not saying it's bad, just saying it can't compete the the 300 lb gorilla. When it can, it will kick ass.

By your definition, HP-UX and Solaris are not mature products because they are not easy to install and operate. I beg to differ. Not all operating systems are designed for use by your great aunt Myrtle.

Linux is accessible to the masses. It has a DEEP catalog of user applications (visit freshmeat.net, for instance), and it is both easy to install and operate if you RTFM.

Most software under Linux is installed thus:

$ ./configure
make
su
# make install; make clean

What's hard about that? It's even easier if you use a package manager, like RPM:

# rpm -i packagename.rpm

 

[Jung]

./configure && sudo make && make installl; make clean

&hearts; debian

 

[ron]

./configure && sudo make && make installl; make clean

&hearts; debian

Yes, that works, too. See how easy it is?

 

[tzedek]

Windows. Quick to fresh-install (hopefully) and when it's configured and broken-in, it can be pretty stable. Unless you install 95, 98, ME or XP.

yeah im with you on that one lol

 

[Icarus]

I use Windows XP. I'd try out other OS's, but my family would FREAK at the mere mention of it.

However, I've had Windows XP crash/freeze only twice, and I think I've had this computer at least three years. It's perfect for what I need it for: Fucking around on WTF.com

 

[mariusthegreat]

Windows. Quick to fresh-install (hopefully) and when it's configured and broken-in, it can be pretty stable. Unless you install 95, 98, ME or XP.

so then youre saying that the only stable windows version is 3.11?

 

[Jung]

I use Windows XP. I'd try out other OS's, but my family would FREAK at the mere mention of it.

However, I've had Windows XP crash/freeze only twice, and I think I've had this computer at least three years. It's perfect for what I need it for: Fucking around on WTF.com

2000 and XP pro can be stable if you know what you're doing. i made a .reg i import into all my xp pro computers that disable all of the useless resource hogging services. the uptime on my xp pro box at home(for gaming and graphic design only) was up to around 4 months before the hurricane. In the absence of ivan it would still be up and running, blue screen and crash free.

so then youre saying that the only stable windows version is 3.11?

i'd assume he was reffering to win 2000, but he doesn't realize that xp was built on 2k's technology. sadly (xp even pro) received a bloat of useless services that are all enabled by default.