| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
redfox
Apprentice
Joined: 21 Dec 2002
Posts: 172
Location: Vicksburg, MS
|
 Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 7:48 pm Post subject: OSX vs. Linux |
 |
|
Heh, I've got a friend that I keep arguing with about Linux. He complained at netjuke that was running on my server when he clicked the N/A under albums, saying it shouldn't have brought the songs with no albums in the ID3 tag up, only the N/A albums for that artist. He can't browse for flip, he couldn't find the weather link on http://www.thejacksonchannel.com . So there. Anyway, he also said Mac was first, I did some quick research to show him how long unix has been around.
| Quote: | | Mac is a base, except for OSX, and a way better operating system than anything that has come out since. The old OS 1 was better than today's Windoze. |
Who wants to contradict this? My server has never crashed, neither has my main machine(except the USB M$ Intellimouse losing connection and nuking that USB hub). |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Athas
Guru
Joined: 04 Sep 2003
Posts: 394
Location: Brøndby, Denmark
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 7:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The MacOS X is better than GNU/Linux for some things, and vice versa. There is no "one size fits all" operating system, even though both GNU/Linux and Microsoft Windows attempt to be everything to everyone (with GNU/Linux having a bit more success in that department).
_________________
Emacs-optimized danish console keymap - My .emacs
Climacs - next generation Emacs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stonent
Veteran
Joined: 07 Aug 2003
Posts: 1139
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 8:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Now that portage runs on OSX, I see no reason to really switch off of OSX to linux for desktop use.
_________________
Inspiron 4100 & Sun UltraAXe
Portage on Solaris|Dell Laptop Hacks
The way you feel about organized religion is the same way I feel about organized socialism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SlicerDicer
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 105
Location: Swirling in the Dunny, and please remember close the seat.
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 8:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Athas wrote: | | The MacOS X is better than GNU/Linux for some things, and vice versa. There is no "one size fits all" operating system, even though both GNU/Linux and Microsoft Windows attempt to be everything to everyone (with GNU/Linux having a bit more success in that department). |
This is True OS X is better in some ways but not in others. I own 2 Linux boxen and A OS X boxen.
_________________
Cheers, SlicerDicer
Life isn't like a box of chocolates. It's more like a jar of jalapenos. What you do today, might burn your ass tomorrow. I mean... just look at them! Walking meat-bags, I tell you! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SLH
n00b
Joined: 06 Jan 2003
Posts: 58
Location: Newark, DE
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 8:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I would love to try out OSX, but I don't have the $5,000,000,000,000,000,000 dollars for a Macintosh.
_________________
...space shuttle of sin - redseal, circa December 2004
ALL ABOARD! First stop, Uranus! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fernandotcl
Veteran
Joined: 20 Nov 2003
Posts: 1396
Location: Sao Paulo, Brazil
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 8:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I'd never run anything that didn't use or give the option of using a tiled WM. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DaveArb
Guru
Joined: 29 Apr 2004
Posts: 510
Location: Texas, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 9:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
He can't figger out what temperature it is in $LOCALE, and doesn't know that UNIX predates Apple Computer Corporation, but -knows- that Macintosh is God's gift to computing?
Best of luck... 
If you really want to beat your head against this wall, you might start by asking him to define "better", since it can mean such different things to different people.
Dave |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox
Apprentice
Joined: 21 Dec 2002
Posts: 172
Location: Vicksburg, MS
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 9:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SLH wrote: | | I would love to try out OSX, but I don't have the $5,000,000,000,000,000,000 dollars for a Macintosh. |
I would too, but it won't work on x86 arch. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fitzsimmons
Guru
Joined: 01 Jan 2003
Posts: 415
Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 9:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Same. If OSX worked on the hardware I already had I might think about giving it a try. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mekoryuk
Apprentice
Joined: 17 Sep 2003
Posts: 174
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 10:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Linux has more games than OSX.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gsfgf
Veteran
Joined: 08 May 2002
Posts: 1266
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 11:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mac can do all the powerful stuff that linux can do, but it makes the simple stuff easy. Macs do Just Work. For example, i got a digital camera. I plugged it into my mac. iPhoto opened with the import tab open. I clicked import and it imported all my pics. Linux would have taken 1000x longer to do so.
| fernandotcl wrote: | | I'd never run anything that didn't use or give the option of using a tiled WM. |
Mac can do this, you know. in fact, if you don't dig aqua you can run normal xfree with $WM or even just the CLI.
Also, macs aren't really that expensive (Don't compare Powermacs to $800 Dells, that's a different league. Compare those to the eMac)
And iBooks are dirt cheap and nothing can compete in that price range.
_________________
Aim:gsfgf0 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SlicerDicer
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 105
Location: Swirling in the Dunny, and please remember close the seat.
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2004 12:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| gsfgf wrote: | | Also, macs aren't really that expensive (Don't compare Powermacs to $800 Dells, that's a different league. Compare those to the eMac) |
no shit 800$ dell is no way to compare a comptuer to a mac yeash... A dual G5 will slaughter a 800$ dell 100x over just as my current computer would. Its got great parts in it and thats the way it goes. Dells use horseshit parts.
Ohh well yea Macs are good I like em alot
_________________
Cheers, SlicerDicer
Life isn't like a box of chocolates. It's more like a jar of jalapenos. What you do today, might burn your ass tomorrow. I mean... just look at them! Walking meat-bags, I tell you! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
uglyb0b
Apprentice
Joined: 07 Sep 2003
Posts: 280
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2004 1:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Personally, I would trade in all of the PCs I own for a 17" Powerbook or a dual 2.0 ghz G5. I love OSX, from it's interface to it's subtlities, I think it's all amzging. I think that it hits home to the fact that a UNIX-based psuedo POSIX-standard OS that is a lot easier to maintain than, for example Windows. Apple has done an amazing thing with it, and I truly do dig it. Of course, I do not especially like how freaking expensive the hardware is, but I suppose you get what you pay for.
_________________
Blog.
Linux geek and Mac whore. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox
Apprentice
Joined: 21 Dec 2002
Posts: 172
Location: Vicksburg, MS
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2004 1:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| gsfgf wrote: | | For example, i got a digital camera. I plugged it into my mac. iPhoto opened with the import tab open. I clicked import and it imported all my pics. Linux would have taken 1000x longer to do so. |
There's a project for Linux to do that, I don't remember what it is called, but there is one. Plus, I plug the camera in here, and in the directory I want the pictures, do gphoto2 -P. In Fedora Core 2, I can just go to a pretty gui program and tell it to grab the photos. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox
Apprentice
Joined: 21 Dec 2002
Posts: 172
Location: Vicksburg, MS
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2004 1:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| uglyb0b wrote: | | Personally, I would trade in all of the PCs I own for a 17" Powerbook or a dual 2.0 ghz G5. I love OSX, from it's interface to it's subtlities, I think it's all amzging. I think that it hits home to the fact that a UNIX-based psuedo POSIX-standard OS that is a lot easier to maintain than, for example Windows. Apple has done an amazing thing with it, and I truly do dig it. Of course, I do not especially like how freaking expensive the hardware is, but I suppose you get what you pay for. |
Yeah, SCSI is just a tad more expensive than IDE. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox
Apprentice
Joined: 21 Dec 2002
Posts: 172
Location: Vicksburg, MS
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2004 1:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| A Linux box with dual top-of-the-line processors, and at least 1 Gig of memory, SCSI Raid, killer sound card and graphics card, with compile flags, so it would be optimized would do some buzzkilling Mac, plus it would make a quick server. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wdreinhart
Guru
Joined: 11 Jun 2003
Posts: 569
Location: 4QFJ12345678
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2004 1:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
I was going to post a long winded price-vs-performance comparison between a top of the line x86 system and a similarly equipped Macintosh here, but I couldn't find a Mac with 3.4GHz processors...
/me ducks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fernandotcl
Veteran
Joined: 20 Nov 2003
Posts: 1396
Location: Sao Paulo, Brazil
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2004 1:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| gsfgf wrote: | | fernandotcl wrote: | | I'd never run anything that didn't use or give the option of using a tiled WM. |
Mac can do this, you know. in fact, if you don't dig aqua you can run normal xfree with $WM or even just the CLI. |
But then I'd have almost a BSD. I think I'll pass this one...  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SlicerDicer
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 105
Location: Swirling in the Dunny, and please remember close the seat.
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2004 1:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| wdreinhart wrote: | I was going to post a long winded price-vs-performance comparison between a top of the line x86 system and a similarly equipped Macintosh here, but I couldn't find a Mac with 3.4GHz processors...
/me ducks |
Umm can you find a 3.4 ghz amd?
I tend to think AMD and Apple are very close on the true MHZ where as Intel bloats there MHZ to make it sound better.
_________________
Cheers, SlicerDicer
Life isn't like a box of chocolates. It's more like a jar of jalapenos. What you do today, might burn your ass tomorrow. I mean... just look at them! Walking meat-bags, I tell you! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blendmaster
Apprentice
Joined: 02 May 2004
Posts: 196
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2004 1:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
i really like mac just because of the eyecandy. i just don't want to buy a whole new computer for it
_________________
shuttle sn25p
2.6.12-gentoo-r10 in 64bit
amd64 3500+
geforce 6600gt |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox
Apprentice
Joined: 21 Dec 2002
Posts: 172
Location: Vicksburg, MS
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2004 1:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Almost forgot, Linux will run on anything, OSX won't. Plus, we have support for the AMD64, I know M$ made a big fuss, saying ohhh, look, we beat someone, when in reality they didn't. Plus, I'm sure M$ stuff runs horribly like crap. Does Mac have a 64-bit processor?
Also, this is sort of personal, Linux gives you full control of your system, I like that. I don't like my computer doing stuff unless I tell it to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SlicerDicer
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 105
Location: Swirling in the Dunny, and please remember close the seat.
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2004 2:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
umm read about macs they have had a 64bit CPU as long as AMD almost i think cant remember who did it first it was very close.
Either way yes they have them yes they scream and fast.
| Code: | Model: AMD Athlon 64 3400+
Core: ClawHammer
Operating Frequency: 2.2GHz |
| Code: | Model: AMD Athlon 64 3000+
Core: ClawHammer
Operating Frequency: 1.8 GHz |
AMD true MHz or GHz is not like Intel its more in tune with Apple. I would take what intel says with a grain of salt
_________________
Cheers, SlicerDicer
Life isn't like a box of chocolates. It's more like a jar of jalapenos. What you do today, might burn your ass tomorrow. I mean... just look at them! Walking meat-bags, I tell you! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox
Apprentice
Joined: 21 Dec 2002
Posts: 172
Location: Vicksburg, MS
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
myuser
Apprentice
Joined: 31 Jan 2004
Posts: 218
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2004 2:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Don't Macs use a RISC processor?
Hz is not a good comparison really between the processors (it is just a handy one, as it can be measured relatively easily). IPS (Instructions per second) is the better way.
Macs look nice and are generally well built, but I would be interested to see how a Mac compares to the one below top specification in the x86 world (especially with the AMD 64).
My suspicion is you pay extra for the Mac and in the world of computing that means less bang for your buck.
I am not after a warm fuzzy halcyon experience out of the box. I enjoy climbing a few tech mountains from time to time, as long as my eventual experience is slicker overall.
But, if it can be shown that the hardware in the Mac offer me a better deal than buying separates in the x86 environment, I am all ears. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SlicerDicer
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 105
Location: Swirling in the Dunny, and please remember close the seat.
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2004 2:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
AMD uses that 3800+ to explain it competes with a 3800MHz equivlant even tho the core clock 2.4GHz
_________________
Cheers, SlicerDicer
Life isn't like a box of chocolates. It's more like a jar of jalapenos. What you do today, might burn your ass tomorrow. I mean... just look at them! Walking meat-bags, I tell you! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Duplicate Threads
