Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Favorite Os?

Rate this topic


Prometheus98876

which of these is your favorite Operating System and why?  

71 members have voted

  1. 1. which of these is your favorite Operating System and why?

    • Linux based
      9
    • Windows
      29
    • Mac
      16


Recommended Posts

OK, I am curious to see which Operating Systems you people prefer. If you would would you please give the version of the Operating System(s) you are using. If you are using Linux, what flavour of Linux (Fedora Core, Mandriva or whatever).

And why do you prefer that OS?

I think that Linux OS variants are the best generally. Fedora Core, Mandriva and I am starting to think Xandros are the best distrubution I have found so far. But given that so many of the programs I need to run are Window-based I find that I have to dual-boot Windows as well. Windows is a good, easy OS, if error-prone. But I find that Linux is more fun to tamper with and I like that it is more challenging, and the fact it is Open Source.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Favorite operating system for what purpose? My answer depends upon the purpose of the system.

Generally, for desktops I will answer Windows. For servers, Linux. Thus, I cannot participate in your poll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that Linux OS variants are the best generally.  Fedora Core, Mandriva and I am starting to think Xandros are the best distrubution I have found so far.  But given that so many of the programs I need to run are Window-based I find that I have to dual-boot Windows as well.  Windows is a good, easy OS, if error-prone.  But I find that Linux is more fun to tamper with and I like that it is more challenging, and the fact it is Open Source.

[Mock Shock]

You didn't list the BSDs!

[\Mock Shock]

When I dabble in learning how to use and administer a Unix-like operating system, a bit of research led me to look at the BSD variants. BSD stands for Berkeley Software Distribution, which was the product of a Department of Defense-funded research team at UCal-Berkeley. BSD grew out of AT&T's UNIX, but for legal reasons, cannot be called a UNIX system, and if you have some free time, Google about the BSD lawsuit.

The result of the lawsuit was that UCal-Berkeley could distribute a UNIX-derived full-fledged operating system under a very liberal license, one which allows for copying and modification, but does not require that the source code be shared. It is even possible to make some modifications to the code base and sell the product with only the legal obligation to give attribution to the source. I've come across the BSD copyright notice in Windows--the internet protocols are from BSD, and even in some PlayStation 2 games.

The present-day BSD projects, Free-, Net-, Open-, and DragonFlyBSD all share important foundations in common beyond having the same source code in common. The project developers all insist on having a theoretically correct and well-tested design before any code is even written. In fact, the most recent forking was between DragonFly- and FreeBSD, with regards to the foundations of multi-processor coding-a dispute which developers on both sides believe will be best shown by having a working model to demonstrate their approaches.

Any BSD project's offering will also be well-documented and fully-integrated. All the basic applications needed to run a minimal installation have been tuned and modified in order to better work with each other, and the documentation included with any BSD is top-notch.

I personally use a computer with OpenBSD on it in my spare time. Theo DeRaadt, the OpenBSD project leader, has a devotion to code quality and security beyond even the other BSD project leaders. They are one and the same to him. The OpenBSD developers have audited the codebase for errors of all kinds, regardless of the security implications, yet most security problems are due to coding errors. In fact, for the upcoming semi-annual release of OpenBSD, Theo has instituted a new memory mapping change which will not play nice with poorly-written programs, all in order to better detect these subtle errors, and to encourage correct programming practices. In many ways, Theo has the same attitude about software design as Howard Roark does about building design, there was one recent interview at http://www.theepochtimes.com/news/5-7-5/30084.html which was very reminiscent of Roark's reasons for designing the Cortlandt.

For the other Open Source projects--check the developers' premises.

[Edit -- sleepy typos fixed]

Edited by DArcMatter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've got to go with the Cowboy Neil option here as well. It really depends on what you want to do. At work we use W2K for our desktops and that's only because we replaced our old Solaris desktops. Solaris NEVER crashed but now that we look at pretty MS Office things regularly and some vendor support issues, we have to use it. 8( I give the 3 finger salute way to frequently now. If I'm going to serve something, I'd have to go with BSD of any flavor or Solaris being a Sun bigot.

At home I prefer to use a Mac. I like Macs from a design standpoint. They just have a graceful interface. And the boxes themselves are gorgeous if a bit overpriced. Actually, my all time favorite OS was OS/2 Warp as I could multi-task DOS programs in protected modes, run Windows 3.1 programs, and OS/2 programs natively and by golly it scaled and networked so easily it was scary. And for the time it blew everything else out of the water. Most important of all, the built in solitaire had a "cheat" function.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use Fedora Core 3 with KDE on my laptop, primarily for software development. I was considering to buy a Mac laptop, but the lack of separate Page Up, Page Down, etc. keys is a no-go for programming purposes. When I buy a desktop, it will probably be a Mac, as the GUI of Mac OS is the most efficient and beautiful of them all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a lot of things about Windows that annoys me, and from reading others discuss the subject, it seems that most of them are not present in linux. I've had brief experiments with various linux distros, and they seem nice enough. However, the amount of effort it would take to learn and become comfortable with a new operating system is more than I am currently prepared to invest. So, I'll continue to use Windows (with cygwin) for the time being, in the full knowledge that it is probably inferior. But if I were recomending an OS to someone starting from scratch, it would be a linux distro.

Edited by Hal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Favorite operating system for what purpose?  My answer depends upon the purpose of the system.

Generally, for desktops I will answer Windows.  For servers, Linux.  Thus, I cannot participate in your poll.

I really have to agree with this. In my experience, when it comes to end-user related tasks such as web browsing and playing games, Windows wins no contest (compared to Linux at least). But when it comes to 1. servers or 2. resurrecting old machines, Linux is the best solution. Right now most of my interaction with computers is through Windows. But all the networking related functions (firewall, DNS, DHCP) are handled by Linux machines on my network. In fact, I have an old Packard Bell Pentium 90 happily serving up dns and dhcp requests for about a year without one single problem. Try to do that with WinXP! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a Mac user because I like the product, I like the company, and I like their design philosophy.

Macintosh computers are reliable, fast, and easy-to-use machines. Now at version 10.4, Mac OSX "Tiger" absolutely leaves Windows in the dust (hell, come fall of 2006 Microsoft will just be catching up to Mac's innovations from 2001).

The company has pioneered and brought to market almost every new computer technology since 1984. GUI, the Mouse, iPod, FireWire, PDAs, USB, WiFi, good-looking cases, Bluetooth, the Click Wheel, online music stores, 64-bit computing, etc etc etc. Their stuff may be more expensive, but they evidently put a LOT of their cash into R&D. I have to laugh at the Windows juggernaut because despite the overwhelming size of the PC side, they often follow Apple's lead.

And of course, where everything comes together: the design. I don't need to clarify this as their reputation for gorgeous and functional design precedes them.

Steve Jobs may be an ex-hippie, but he is the coolest guy on the planet. He is a great idea man, a fantastic visionary, and he has tons of pride and dignity in his product and company.

I like Linux as well, and I appreciate the advances that it has made possible in computing. I'm simply not enough of a computer geek to use it regularly :(

Edited by Durandal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I stick with what I know, so I just go with Windows XP. Most of the programs I have been educated on are associated with Windows so that is the program I use.

However, I am with Durandal in his support of Steve Jobs. I may not own any Apple stuff, but I am in full support of them. Make Microsoft work for it, I say, competition among companies is a win-win situation for us.

Hell, I even have an Apple background on my PC. True it is because it features Ayn Rand, but it is an Apple background nonetheless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's funny this thread has come up because I've been thinking of purchasing a Mac. I have a PC with Microsoft Windows XP but I've been reading about Macs and how many of its users are staunch supporters. Much like Matt, I just learned (at school) to use computers on PCs so that's what I bought. I do have a friend who is an avid Apple supporter and who's been trying to convince me they're better than PC's.

I think I will end up getting a Mac for my next computer just because I'd like to see for myself if it's true. My own experience with PC's (especially at work) is that they do crash and are susceptible to viruses. Plus I also agree that Apple's design is much more stylish than any PC I've ever seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Favorite operating system for what purpose?  My answer depends upon the purpose of the system.

Generally, for desktops I will answer Windows.  For servers, Linux.  Thus, I cannot participate in your poll.

I meant, which OS is best for what you usually do on your system.

Surprise, surprise, you say Linux for servers. Somehow I doubt you are alone...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very good point, I totally forgot the BSDs. I have never tried a BSD OS as of yet, they are difficult to get hold of here unless you can get it from someone with broadband. But from you say and other things I hear, I should definetly try BSD at some stage in the near future. After all, one day I intend to make an Unix based system, so it would be best if I checked out not only all the main Unix systems, but every mainstream OS I can. Besides OpenBSD, what other flavours would you suggest I try and why? I must say that Open does sound like it might be the best though, what with Theos devotion to quality etc.

Thanks for reminding me to look into BSD further.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After all, one day I intend to make an Unix based system, so it would be best if I checked out not only all the main Unix systems, but every mainstream OS I can.  Besides OpenBSD, what other flavours would you suggest I try and why? 

The different BSD projects have their own priorities: Free for performance on i386 and related systems; DragonFly forked off of Free in order to demonstrate a better approach for running on multi-processor systems; Net focuses on having a portable codebase which can run on almost anything (not your old VIC-20, tho'); Open focuses on security through correct coding, but forked off of Net due to a personality conflict. OSX (or its free sibling, Darwin) has been mentioned before as a BSD, and while it is true that it was based on FreeBSD, it's a mishmash of many other things. That's why the duck-billed platypus is the Darwin mascot.

While there are 'entry-level' efforts underway as an adjunct to FreeBSD (PC-BSD and FreeSBIE, look 'em up)--realize that it doesn't take very long to become proficient in navigating your way around the system and setting things up. If you keep at working with the system, you'll be a novice for less time than you'll be proficient. Any UNIX-like system that holds your hand by hiding the arcane parts of the operating system will keep you from learning about those arcane parts.

From my experiences with OpenBSD, the base install is very bare, and you will need to learn what you need to add or turn on, and how to get it set up. Once you do, you will come to learn about the structure of the system, the basic commands and configuration files. So far, my home PC has something like what was on the computer accounts that I used when I was in school. I also have a paid shell account on a server that runs OpenBSD, and I'm picking up other skills along the way.

If you have dialup access and still want to pick up some experience in using a Unix-like system, there are a few servers out there that provide a basic free shell account. Give them a try. www.metawire.org is one that provides a free OpenBSD shell account with 100MB worth of space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right. I think I will try and get OpenBSD at first then, become familiar with that and then try some other distrubtions then. I think I would be advised to try Net and to analyse its code, since I want my OS to be able to run on 'legacy systems', or at least I want to release a legacy system version of my OS.

I am looking forward to the learnign expereince involved in getting to grips with BSD, that is one of the things I like about Linux, that it is abit more challenging to learn. Although some distros such as Xandros are much easier, and given that it is very Window like in design, it is alot easier for ex-Windows users of course.

At the moment I would have to say that at the moment the OS I am most impressed with is Xandros.

It comes very bare bones, even if you get the paid versions. But, it has a much more robust and fast file manager than other linux distrubutions, and it comes with the Crossoffice Windows Emulator so that you can run some Windows applicatons on Linux. Which is not so useful if you dual-boot, but at least it can save you the hassle of rebooting if you are feeling abit lazy. Mind you, this will become less of an issue once the proccessors capable of runing multiple OS's at once ship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hey another option I don't think anyone mentioned is BeOS. I'm not sure it's even in production anymore, but I tinkered with it one time and it was pretty neat. The only problem is it's so obscure that I don't think there is much software at all for it.

If I recall, it was the first OS to implement a database-like filesystem. Similar in concept to WinFS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey another option I don't think anyone mentioned is BeOS.  I'm not sure it's even in production anymore, but I tinkered with it one time and it was pretty neat.  The only problem is it's so obscure that I don't think there is much software at all for it.

If I recall, it was the first OS to implement a database-like filesystem.  Similar in concept to WinFS.

A friend bought a BeBox from PowerComputing, oddly enough the Mac clone maker in Austin and I swear the thing went from cold to fully booted in less than 10 seconds. He used it for DJ'ing and I seem to remember there were quite a few BeBoxen that were used for that purpose alone. That and some radio station functions. When he booted the MacOS it worked much slower compared to the BeOS. But you are right, there wasn't much software at all for it. Kinda like my favorite OS/2 Warp.

But then even the most obscure OS and hardware has it's uses and devotees. Look at Quantel Paint Boxes and ancient Amigas that were used well past their prime to produce series like Babylon 5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But then even the most obscure OS and hardware has it's uses and devotees. Look at Quantel Paint Boxes and ancient Amigas that were used well past their prime to produce series like Babylon 5.

Oh yes I forgot about Amiga! My high school (I graduated in 2000) had an old Amiga that they used to control our morning TV announcements. I didn't mess with it at all, but from what I was told, it was the best machine for that particular task.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use a Powebook G4 that runs Mac OS 10.4 (Tiger) for pretty much everything. I've been a mac user for 5 years, ever since my dad bought me an iBook. So i've stuck with it becuase I've never had a compelling reason to want to switch. I love my little Powerbook. It's great for making home movies, because iDVD and iMovie are wonderfully integrated. Plus, on my school's network, PC's have a lot more security measures they need to follow. For example, if a PC user unplugs their computer for a few days, it will get taken off the network because the network can't check it for viruses. I've never had that problem. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A friend bought a BeBox from PowerComputing, oddly enough the Mac clone maker in Austin and I swear the thing went from cold to fully booted in less than 10 seconds. He used it for DJ'ing and I seem to remember there were quite a few BeBoxen that were used for that purpose alone. That and some radio station functions. When he booted the MacOS it worked much slower compared to the BeOS. But you are right, there wasn't much software at all for it. Kinda like my favorite OS/2 Warp.

But then even the most obscure OS and hardware has it's uses and devotees. Look at Quantel Paint Boxes and ancient Amigas that were used well past their prime to produce series like Babylon 5.

BeOS still lives on, tho' it has been supported by a ragtag bunch of developers. There's a commercial release of mainline BeOS, called Zeta, released by a German company called YellowTab. There is also an open source BeOS-derived OS called Haiku.

There is also a professional re-release of the Amiga operating system, made for PowerPC systems. I came across a preview of the thing a while ago, and the impression was that the AmigaOS wasn't changed much, but feels incredibly modern, and it feels fast. Too bad that Commodore couldn't even sell water to a man dying of thirst, as the Amiga's fundamental design decisions are being adopted by all present companies, what with every system having its own processor.

Both of these OSes are in a good position to get a leg into the embedded devices market, and both should be enjoyable and worthwhile to study.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BeOS still lives on, tho' it has been supported by a ragtag bunch of developers.  There's a commercial release of mainline BeOS, called Zeta, released by a German company called YellowTab.  There is also an open source BeOS-derived OS called Haiku. 

There is also a professional re-release of the Amiga operating system, made for PowerPC systems.  <snip>

Both of these OSes are in a good position to get a leg into the embedded devices market, and both should be enjoyable and worthwhile to study.

The same applies to OS/2 with eCommStation. Though it isn't open sourced it is still out there and in development. Plus OS/2 is still a workhorse in ATM's and POS systems. It's slowly being replaced by linux but it does still live. Though it's kind of like watching an elderly dog you love struggle. You want to put it out of its misery but you love it to much to pull the trigger.

Edited by scottkursk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After posting this forum, I soon realised that this would be a good way to be reminded about some of the more obscure OS's that I might have forgotten about, like OS/2 for instance.

At the moment I am trying to look more into Solaris as a likely candidate for basing my OS on (for those whom might not be aware of this, Solaris is Unix based), as it has recently become Open-Source. It also has many advanced features that if I could pull of in my OS, would certaintly make it more appealing. These features, as far as I can tell attempt to prevent hardware crashes and conflicts, which of course is a major cause of computer crashes/glitches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...