OS Wars

[NiX]

In case anyone hasn't noticed, I'm a big tech fan (though I only like admiring without necessarily buying).

Here's a link to PCWorld's mini-head-to-head between Apple's new Leopard OS and Microsoft's kinda new Vista OS.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,138819...ticle.html

[Grim]

I've heard great things about Leopard, and honestly it looks primed to win what market it has for the next few years, as well as start to impinge on Microsoft's huge share. Mac-users are a highly loyal bunch, and the Mac's always been tempting to people wanting to try something new.

Too bad Macs are freakin' expensive. >_<

Vista, on the other hand, will be staunchly defended by some and greatly hated by most for quite a while still. MS really went wrong with the choices they made in designing the system, with the whole deal with DRM and administrative controls. It's supposed to be an improvement over XP in all areas: aesthetics, security and usability, or it's not worth investing in. But then technology advances, and MS forces everyone to use Vista by locking out people who're looking for XP support.

Double >_<.

[NiX]

Vista sucks. MS was forced to extend support for XP because several people are still buying XP rather than Vista. And with Service Pack 3 in the works for XP, things are looking good for those that don't want to upgrade to Vista yet.

Leopard is looking good but I hear there's a lot of compatibility issues right now. Well that's to be expected with every new OS.

I hear that more than one in every 6 laptops sold in the US have been Macs. That's an excellent figure. However, MS still dominates corporate networks.

[Grim]

Vista sucks. MS was forced to extend support for XP because several people are still buying XP rather than Vista. And with Service Pack 3 in the works for XP, things are looking good for those that don't want to upgrade to Vista yet.

Leopard is looking good but I here there's a lot of compatibility issues right now. Well that's to be expected with every new OS.

I hear that more than one in every 6 laptops sold in the US have been Macs. That's an excellent figure. However, MS still dominates corporate networks.

Oh yeah, totally forgot about Service Pack 3. Of course, that's only a temporary hold-off from what MS plans to do: make everyone buy their bloated OS, sooner or later. They're like a shark, gobbling almost every PC user in sight.

But yes, for businesses who are looking for robust solutions and portability/compatibility within their systems, it makes sense to purchase a license for software for which there is professional support. Who'd do so otherwise, anyway? Macs on the other hand have always taken the different route. Even their old slogan (the "Think differently." ones) say so. They package themselves to appeal to those craving to be perceived as different and possibly elite from the crowd.

In the end though, it's all just software. Each one will copy certain things from the other and each one will innovate in its own way.

[NiX]

So Grim, tell us where Linux fits into all of this.

[Grim]

Hahaha! Linux is for cheap bastards who don't want to pay. Of course there will always be ways to obtain Leopard and Vista for free, but Linux is free from the start to the end, upgrades in between included.

Ideally, Linux and free software in general break the status quo between the two giants. Ideally, they shake up any lack of innovation by providing people with an alternative should they wish to not buy a license from Microsoft or Apple. However, since MS and Apple have more visibility and both have systems that are arguably easier to learn, many will never know alternatives exist.

When you've used any flavor of Linux you'll start to notice how both proprietary systems attempt to copy features from them. Mac OSs are Unix based (the foundation of Linux) though, so whatever basic functionalities and security measures they have, Linux systems most probably already have also. It's in Vista that it's more apparent, like the presence of a root account, or the prompts that ask you if you're the administrator of the system. In Linux it's typing your password everytime you begin an administrative action. It's actually pretty funny how people bash Vista for that, but when it's Linux doing it they dismiss it as "part of the security!". But I digress.

Linux does provide legitimate competition to both parties, as Microsoft and Apple often watch the open-source community for updates and attempt to incorporate whatever technical framework they deem as useful into their own products.

[NiX]

I'm really interested in LINUX but I don't have hard-drive space to spare even for partitioning. My CD-drive is busted too. >_< Maybe on my next PC.

Onto other news: ZOMG Macs have malware too!

http://www.webware.com/8301-1_109-980848...=cnetfd.mt

[NiX]

Why XP is still the one:
by Sascha Segan

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2210387,00.asp
(with various paragraphs lifted from the link above)

"I love Mac OS. It’s more stable, secure, and elegant than XP. It’s built on a more modern foundation, and Apple’s consumer media applications are very close to perfect... ...I run into various applications that I need but can’t find on the Mac OS platform..."

"Vista is basically XP with Microsoft clones of a bunch of third-party add-ons, minus a lot of driver and program compatibility. It’s like your old best friend with an embarrassing and expensive new haircut."

"Linux is beautiful and stable, but the applications problem on Linux is even worse than it is on Mac OS. And even in this age of Ubuntu, desktop Linux users are expected to be comfortable with the command line... ...the culture around Linux demands that you join the Linux community to stay in touch with what’s happening on the platform."

"Yes, XP has security issues. But here’s the thing about XP: With choice comes responsibility. Rather than including one preset solution for a problem the way Mac OS does, XP demands a little more of you. It demands that you go out there, weigh competing options, and enhance your system accordingly."

"Ah, but Vista is the future, you say. Maybe. Vista is the future only because Microsoft is giving consumers no choice, slapping Vista by default on new PCs. It’s a "success" only in situations where people have no alternative. Vista’s new features just aren’t enticing enough to compel people to spend money on them, and Microsoft made no changes to major core underpinnings of the OS. Vista will slowly creep over the world’s desktops in a weirdly lethargic way, with users neither welcoming it nor working very hard to fight it."

[NiX]

http://www.computerworld.com/action/arti...ws_ts_head

Windows XP SP3, according to beta testers, increases XP's performance by around 10%. Wow. Hahah looks like I'm really sticking with XP for quite a while.

----
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,139826...ticle.html

Microsoft, on the other hand, is trying to keep SP3 as hush-hush as possible. They don't want XP taking anything more away from their precious Vista.

---

http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,139783...ticle.html

And Windows Vista needs even MORE RAM than the Windows version for Supercomputers. LOL.

[Grim]

This is funny. Microsoft releasing improvements that they don't want the public to know.

I can really relate, because I've heard of Vista's SP1, but none about XP's SP3. )

[NiX]

http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,139961...ticle.html

LOL even Microsoft is confused regarding marketing strategies for Vista.

-----

"Hackers will feed on Vista in 2008, says McAfee"

http://www.computerworld.com/action/arti...ws_ts_head

LOL
-----

http://www.news.com/Windows-XP-outshines...g=nefd.top

LOL AGAIN.

XP SP3 HAS TWICE THE PERFORMANCE OF VISTA SP1 ACCORDING TO BENCHMARK TESTS.

[NiX]

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2223921,00.asp

In this article, the writer rants about how Apple's Leapord OS sucks just as bad as vista.

[Grim]

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2223921,00.asp

In this article, the writer rants about how Apple's Leapord OS sucks just as bad as vista.

Wow I did not expect that. Having no Mac of my own though I can't really agree or disagree with him, but I'll say this: Apple's OSs have always been famed for their ease of use. Maybe this'll be one of the first ones to need service packs.

[NiX]

http://www.puppylinux.org/home

# Small size, around 93MB! This lends itself to some very useful and unique features;
# 'Live' booting from CDs, DVDs, USB flash drives, and other portable media.
# Ability to run entirely from RAM, making it unusually fast and particularly relevant to modern PCs with solid state CF drives as used in Netbooks
# Very low minimum system requirements
# Boot times, well under a minute
# Usability and Compatibility
# Complete range of applications: wordprocessors, spreadsheets, internet browsers, games and image editors. Extra software in the form of dotpets and dotpups. There is a Puppy Software Installer included
# Puppy is easy to use and little technical knowledge is assumed. Hardware is automatically detected. You will often find, whereas on other operating systems you had to install extra driver software to get your particular device functioning, Puppy will succesfully detect and install the driver without prompting.

Being less than 100MB, bootability from a flash drive, RUNNING ONLY IN RAM - irresistible! I think I'll initiate myself with Linux using this puppy. XD

Should be great for securely scouring the darkest corners of the interweb.

Edit: but yes, puppy does look like dogshit -- until you customize it. And then it ain't so light anymore. But then yeah, it's the pocketability I'm after. Apparently, there are other linux-live builds out there... but this does seem to be the smallest one.

http://www.slax.org/ this seems to be good too, though. And it's much prettier.

[Grim]

I haven't tried Puppy yet, pero yan na daw yung pinakamabilis na Linux na meron, short of compiling Linux from scratch. Yes it does look like, in your words, dogshit.