Windows or Linux or Mac?

Just my opinion

Published on March 6, 2006 By DJBandit In Personal Computing

I read an interesting article by one of our comrades of JU, Thomas, which spoke of the New Microsoft, soon to be released, Windows Vista. Previously called Longhorn, Windows new OS seems to have a lot of improvements over previous Windows OS’s. While XP is the latest and best out at the moment, it’s not the safest OS out there when it comes to security from hackers, viruses, Trojans, spyware and all other types of malware that can be installed in your PC. Your other alternatives? Linux, UNIX, and Mac OS X (and other kinds of OS’s similar to Linux). These all have some serious advantages in the security arena over any of Microsoft Windows versions. But there are some things that make these OS’s different from each other, differences that can decided who will most likely use them and which one will be used the most. In this case Microsoft Windows, mostly 98 SE, 2000 and XP, sit at the throne today with about 80% to 90% of the home PC’s running one and at times 2 of them. What does this tell you? Well, either everyone is too stupid to know how to use a computer with Linux and probably should drop computers all together or maybe Microsoft offers something (or things) that Linux can’t, yet.

In futuristic movies like Star Wars and TV shows like Star Trek, everyone, including young children, can use computers and manipulate, alter and/or better them as easy as changing the empty toilet paper role in the bathroom. But that is not the case in the real world we live in. Computers have only been out for so many years and were eventually introduced to homes and offices years later. So the truth is computer technology has come a long way in such a short time, but too fast for most people to understand them. The average person barely knows how to clean a mouse or how it’s even connected to the PC. The fact that the connections on both the PC and the device are color coded for ease of plug and play makes it obvious. Heck most people don’t get the concept of “plug and play”; they think it has something to do with games.

To many people, a computer is about as easy to use as setting the clock on a VCR (biggest head-ache ever created). You can go about talking about Windows to anyone and most people have an idea of what you’re talking about, computers. Try doing that with Linux to average people you don’t know. You’ve got better chances of finding out how to put the time on a VCR than having an understandable conversation about Linux. Heck, most people probably wouldn’t notice the difference between Windows and Mac OS X compared to Linux. They do seem to have the same visual platform. To a computer savvy person the difference is obvious.

I believe (this is my opinion based on info I have researched) that 9 out of 10 people would pick Windows over Linux and 6 out of 10 would pick Windows over Mac. Why? Let’s see:

1) Easy installation and upgrade of software.

a) Microsoft – Piece of cake.

Mac – Very easy as well.
c) Linux – I have heard of the occasional software that is fairly easy to install but rare, otherwise each file that composes the programs has to be manually installed in its folder and the configured.

2) Customer support.

a) Microsoft – Just call the 1-800 number.

Mac – Same as Microsoft
c) Linux – You will have to do a lot of goggling to find help with Linux, bits and pieces from different sites, if you can understand the info on the site. No 1-800 number. Good luck.

3) Software availability.

a) Microsoft – Has the most software available.

Mac – Not as many as MS but some of the best.
c) Linux – Most software for Linux is usually basic, free, alternatives to the expensive ones for MS and/or Mac. I many cases these also run on Windows. Not as many though.

4) Games.

a) Microsoft – That’s what Windows excels on.

Mac – Not that many but still have some.
c) Linux – Nope, no games. Sorry gamer, Linux creators do not have people like you in mind.

5) Security.

a) Microsoft – Not the best.

Mac – Almost as good as Linux.
c) Linux – The best there is so far, it’s highly know for it’s security features.

6) Stability and Reliability.

a) Microsoft – Windows can be very unstable at times so this makes it a not so reliable system compared to Linux. Still not that bad.

Mac – it is much more stable than Windows, but it does have its glitches every now and then. Nothing is perfect, not even Linux.
c) Linux – It’s a very stable system with hardly any glitches, if installed properly.

So, out of those 6 qualities in an OS, what would the average person, most likely, go for when buying the OS or a computer with one? I would, personally, have to say the first 4 with the 5th one in mind. Problems with computers are so common that most people will simply learn to deal with them as they go or will have someone help them with it. Even though both Windows and Mac are very well know PC’s (by this I mean the OS), Windows has a small advantage over Mac when it comes to being more out there, specially due to most software being promoted to work on Windows than anything else and games are the one thing people use Windows for. Linux is just not game friendly and software, well people tend to trust name-brand items for fear of not being able to use the product without customer service and these two go hand in hand. I, myself, am very edgy of unknown brand-names and the prices on them, free only makes it even scarier. Examples;

Newspapers: while there are free papers almost anywhere you go in the US, people are more likely to pay for one because free ones will not give away info that another newspaper is charging for because it cost money just to get the story.

Water: while there are water fountains in many places like parks, hospitals, schools and Gov’t building that are free, chances are the water is not clean or filtered; the machines themselves probably don’t even work right. Bottled water is filtered and if not it would be false advertisement and a lawsuit waiting to happen.

Get my point? Free isn’t always better, especially in today’s world where everyone is out to make a buck. Not that Linux and most of the software for it is exactly free. While you may not pay to acquire them, you will pay the price when you try to install them, even with experience in some cases. I would rather pay for ease, which is almost the same as paying someone else to install it for you on Linux, but you might need to keep that person around for every installation, glitch and question.

So you see, comparing Linux to Windows to the average person is apple and oranges. Even though they are both OS’s and both serve the basic same functions, they just aren’t the same in terms of how PC’s are used today in most homes. Those in the IT business are smart enough to know which OS serves their purpose best and know when an upgrade is necessary, so in reality the real focus should be on the average user which, on average, does not have an IT bone in their body. With that said, people like new stuff, otherwise technology would never get better, and because of that and the main qualities that average people look for in computers, I believe that Vista will be a successful sales venture for Microsoft. Maybe not within the first few days, weeks and maybe even months, but it will catch on faster than most people think.

Most people don’t think that eye candy is that important. I think these people live in an alternate reality, because people are obsessed with looks. From hair styles, to make-up, their bodies, clothing, shoes, cars, phones (home and mobile), houses, and yes, even their PC’s. When was the last time you saw someone not having a screen background of something they like? Looks and money is all that matters now a days. Just look at all the mods for PC’s. Microsoft is appealing to what people like, giving them a chance to have a PC style of their own, just like what the creators of Stardock had in mind when creating all of their great programs. I, myself, am sold to all the eye candy, it makes it easier on the eyes, easier to find and it just looks plain cool. So eye candy is more important than most think and will be a big factor in the sales of Vista. So long as Microsoft gives them a good OS to go with all the fancy looks, they should do just fine. And judging by the article linked on Thomas’s article on JU, it seems they doing just that. Let’s just wait and see, give them the benefit of the doubt, before we condemn Microsoft as more of a habit than truly finding out whether Vista is good or not.

In my next article I will talk about how a guy on _______ gave a very bias review of the article from _______ and Vista itself based on his fanboy love for Linux. He claims to have 20 years of experience with OS’s so he’s ideal for reviewing Vista. To bad that his 20 years are only about technology and none about writing reviews. Till next article.

DJBandit

Comments (Page 2)

ExodusCrow

on Mar 06, 2006

#5 by Developer Sembetu
Mon, March 06, 2006 0:35 PM
Mac OSX is to me the best operating system on the market today for a couple of things: 1) Graphics and Web Development

I'm going to have to disagree with you on that one. I think that's a common misconception because most pro's use Macs for graphics. Photoshop and say Dreamweaver both work the same on a PC and a Mac. Personally I think it's easier on a PC for one reason; the second mouse button

As for the audio, I completly agree.

Leauki

on Mar 06, 2006

What? So it becomes more stable if you run it for longer, but unstable if you run it for a short period?

No, that's not what I said. Read it again.

Photoshop and say Dreamweaver both work the same on a PC and a Mac. Personally I think it's easier on a PC for one reason; the second mouse button.

Excuse me? Why is it easier on a PC than on a Mac because of a second mouse button? I don't get it. If the number of mouse buttons is the difference, why would you change computers rather than mice?

Buying a new mouse costs less than 20 quid, I thought. I like my Apple Pro Mouse (which has one button), but if I thought a two-button mouse would be a huge advantage, I would buy a two-button mouse (but I wouldn't use a Windows PC instead of my Mac, that would be stupid).

Markdotnet:

I think that guy used a security hole in sshd. Note that sshd is not running by default on Mac OS X. The security hole likely exists in all implementations of sshd, including the Windows version.

The point is that Windows actually has Windows-specific security holes PLUS those added by packages like sshd. And some of the Windows components with vulnerabilities are actually present after a standard install. That's the difference.

Chasbo

on Mar 06, 2006

Man oh man I shoulda been more specific. The reason I booted my Mac everyday was because after it was booted it ran better. There were days it wasn't booted but I guarantee you that if that machine wasn't booted for a week it would have just sat there locked up like Fort Knox. We used Photoshop, Indesign, Illustrator, Acrobat and Quark. I worked a lot with PDF's that were for print publishing so you needed a powerful machine because the PDF's had to be at higher DPI's, better quality, larger files and manipulating them took up more resources on the machine. OSX was wonderful, the Mac was wonderful, don't get me wrong. There were days that I could hear the MAC startup up sound all around me, the sound of other machines being restarted. If you use the machine A LOT and switch back and forth between applications that use up a lot of memory you are going to slow the machine down.

Sembetu

on Mar 06, 2006

#16 by ExodusCrow

1. I think that's a common misconception because most pro's use Macs for graphics.

2. Photoshop and say Dreamweaver both work the same on a PC and a Mac.

Okay, I am not saying this because I am a Mac fanboy. I promise. As a matter of fact, until about a year ago, I had used Windows-based PC's more often than Macs. With that said... I currently work by day on a PC and by night on a Mac, and here are the specs on my two very healthy machines.

The PC is an HP laptop with 1 Ghz of Ram and a 2.8 Ghz Pentium 4 Processor, the rest on that laptop is just gravy, but that ought to get the job done...

My Mac on the other hand is only a Mac mini with a 1.5 Ghz Power Pc Processor and 1 Gig of Ram.

Let me assure you, that not only does my Mac boot up quicker, it opens Photoshop Illustrator, Flash, and Dreamweaver quicker than my PC, which I work on ALL DAY. Both machines are mine, and I have them very stable and nice. Like I said, The programs listed open quicker. In addition, the color is EXCELLENT on my mac and GOOD on PC. Also, the feel of the desktop while in use is VERY smooth, in comparison to a more static feel on my Windows machine.

3. Personally I think it's easier on a PC for one reason; the second mouse button.

As far as the second mouse button, I apologize for that, because I forget that the vast majority of the Mac using population does not have a Mighty Mouse (IMHO the most wonderful mouse on the market..30 scroll etc...)

/////////////////

In any case, like I said I am not a fanboy, as I give equal time to both platforms, however, I stand by my assessment of the professional uses for the Mac.

Sembetu

DJBandit

on Mar 07, 2006

I think I see a Mac laptop in my future, and a Windows one as well. This is great info.

Sembetu

What would be your reason for using 2 different PCs? Or why do you use Windows during the day? Just curious.

Leauki

I can understand your love for Mac computers, but you have to admit that even Mac has it's problems and what Markdotnet linked proved it. I do love how you try to find a good excuse to show that it really want Mac the problem. But I think I will believe security researcher Neil Archibald instead. That doesn't mean Mac sucks, just that it also has to admit problems. Hehe.

Here we must difference between WindowsXP and the previous versions. XP is very stabile. What causes most of the BSODs are bad drivers, but you can't really tell that from the cryptic crash message that appears when it happends.Macs has got an advantage here as they are run on a spesific set of hardware.As for Linux,.. as mentioned: if installed properly. I belive that too be the key point there. if installed properly. It's not the easiest thing to do. At least not compared to XP and OSX.

I agree, after messing around for a while with XP Pro with SP2, it seems much more stable than before. I have had problems but I am using a screwed up MoBo that I have to change. The problem is store here in Puerto Rico do not have a lot of alternatives when it comes to PC parts so I have to go with what they got cause I have no credit card. That will change once I go back to the states this summer.

Dr Guy

on Mar 07, 2006

I think I see a Mac laptop in my future, and a Windows one as well. This is great info.

If you want both, dont buy Both. Buy the Mac and get Microsoft Office Pro. it comes with Virtual PC and you can then run a windows computer on your Mac Desktop. It is very slick. Caution: If you do, get LOTS of RAM!

Leauki

on Mar 07, 2006

Don't believe authorities, make up your own mind.

The "exploit" the "hacker" was talking about was the fact that he already had a user account. It is not an excuse to point out that the article failed to mention that and pretended that the "hacker" started from nothing.

Comparing how easy it is to hack a Mac compared to a Windows PC is only useful when both are held to the same standards. But this guy started with a user account.

Believing Neil Archibald doesn't change that fact, I'm afraid.

So don't just believe him, make up your own mind. The story as presented was simply not true.

There is a vulnerability in sshd. Sshd is not enabled on Macs by default. And the exploit only works when you the attacker has a user account on the machine. (Presumably sshd will have to be running as root as well.)

What Markdotnet linked proved only that one shouldn't enable sshd AND give strangers user accounts allowing them to log on.

Why do you dismiss simple facts as "love" for Mac computers? I don't get it.

I didn't say anything about Macs having no problems either, so why are you implying that I did?

Leauki

on Mar 07, 2006

"Firstly, the hack was that of privilege escalation, not a pure remote exploit. The web site author had enabled SSH, the Unix "Secure Shell" tool that has replaced telnet as a means for accessing networked machines from the command line. He then configured an LDAP (Lightweight Directory Access Protocol) database and added a web-based interface so that visitors to the site could add their own shell accounts to the system."

"Needless to say, most web servers are not set up with the ability to give out free shell accounts to anyone who wants one. SSH is not even enabled by default on OS X, although server administrators can choose to do so if they wish. So the "hacking" contest was not very indicative of the security of an OS X computer, even a web server, that is set up open to the Internet."

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060306-6321.html

DJBandit

on Mar 07, 2006

Will keep that in mind. But might by both anyways so that my wife can have her own laptop. Hehe.

The "exploit" the "hacker" was talking about was the fact that he already had a user account. It is not an excuse to point out that the article failed to mention that and pretended that the "hacker" started from nothing.

I know, I know, I read the other commonts already. Still it is a problem. I would like to, however, see something like this without the SSH active.

Why do you dismiss simple facts as "love" for Mac computers? I don't get it.I didn't say anything about Macs having no problems either, so why are you implying that I did?

Hey I'm only messing with you. I know you are not a Mac fanboy. Otherwise you would be putting Windows down like it was Hitler. You have actually opened my eyes to the idea of getting a Mac laptop someday soon.

Leauki

on Mar 07, 2006

Oh, ok.

Sembetu

on Mar 07, 2006

#20 by Citizen DJBandit
What would be your reason for using 2 different PCs? Or why do you use Windows during the day? Just curious

I am like Superman (j/k): By day I am a mild-mannered Windows-based Web designing company man, and by night I am a damsel-saving, graphic creating, self-employed web-design action hero.

No, but seriously, at work I have to work in a Windows environment because of support issues etc... blah blah blah... and since I have better hardware than my place of employment, I choose to use it for my development. At night, though, since I am on my own time (and servers), I use my preferred development platform. I don't really mind though, because it gives me good experience on both.

To be honest, nowadays I mostly code by hand, so the supported or preferred environment is really the only determining factor besides taste for choosing to work on one platform or the other.

Sembetu

Dr Guy

on Mar 07, 2006

I am like Superman (j/k):

Really? then what were you doing in that phone booth?

Jafo

on Mar 07, 2006

You guys DO realise it's a 'fact' that if you removed every porn site from the net then traffic would decrease to about 10% what it is now.......and if you removed all the Mac Vs PC threads/wars/commentaries you'd have lost most of what was left....

It's like flogging a dead horse....it doesn't even benefit the horse...

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!