I have been using a pure Linux PC for a few months. We are a perfect match and it has not taken long for Windows to become alien to me. When I come to use XP on someone else's computer, I find it isn't comfortable. It's quirky. Bless, Microsoft probably don't realise that if they ever crushed Linux, I'd simply stop using PCs.

To me UNIX is the constant, not the PC architecture. I've never owned an Apple, but now that they use the UNIX based OS X, I am very interested indeed.

Hmmm, what should my next machine be?

- Apple Mac with OS X
- A PC with Linux. And, no, I wouldn't be dual booting with Windows
- Some other architecture + a UNIX that a normal home user could afford but I've overlooked?

I'm more interested in applications and multimedia than games...

I think I am in a similar position to you. I have used Linux for years, mainly as a desktop system and I am planning on building or purchasing a new PC and was seriously considering getting a MAC. Now, I am in sort of a dilemma coz MAC's are expensive, whereas Linux will run on nearly any PC. It seems like if I dont get rich in the next few weeks , I'll be getting a new PC running Linux.

If you don't mind paying through the nose for hardware, go for a mac. The advantages MacOS has over Linux are pretty obvious; Linux's advantages over MacOS have more to do with its openness, and the fact that it can be installed on practically any hardware you can scrounge up.

Agreed. If you have the money to burn, you'll be happy with Mac. If you don't, a PC is the cheaper way to go, by a lot.

Frankly, I think a PC is more versatile. Possibly you feel that buying a Mac is sticking it to the man (Microsoft), but I think Apple is actually worse than MS. They have both the software AND hardware locked down.

At least with a PC you can, first of all, have a much faster system for far less money than a Mac. Secondly, just install Linux on it and pretty it up like a Mac with various icons and themes. Plus if you need to, dual boot into Windows for games and what not.

if i ran linux over a mac, would that mean that any applications i want to install would have to be designed for the PPC architecture? Or could i just compile any pc linux application from its source?

most should work fine, the only ones you'll run into problems with is ones that require hardware specific things ...

just get freebsd, its whats mac os x is based off of

This proprietary "lock" makes for a stable solid architecture. And, if you wanna, the shell is just underneath. Its an either/or situation. I'm not rich, so I'd not get a Mac, but that's really why. If I had the bucks, I'd get two.....one to throw Yellow Dawg on.

I gave my parents an iMac, but use Debian myself. MacOS X is very easy to use, very userfriendly and beautiful to see. It's perfect for anyone, easy on newbies and great to use for advanced users. I can't see why anyone would run Yellow Dog on a Mac. But that's me.

I use Debian now, but the next PC might well be a Mac. I've still several years to consider this, because the current one is well up to date.

Go to a Mac-store and fall in love!

I said that if I had two - one to play with. Its the same reason you see a Honda Civic all tricked out. Why? because it can be done.

kinda.

macos is based off darwin (http://developer.apple.com/darwin/), which is based of freebsd.

try darwin on your pc and see how you like it.

The reason that people buy macs is the prettyness of the actual box. However, you can do this with a pc... have you ever seen CaseModding? the reason to get an Apple for aethetics is quickly dropping through the floor. I like macs, for editing and for publishing. They are the best at this, but for regular stuff...
PC all the way.
(PS finalcutpro and indesign)

titanium_geek

I would prefer linux, definitely... I'm a tweak-freak, the kind of guy who changes his window manager every 2 weeks and piddles constantly with trivial things like menus, fonts, colors, etc.

So that's why I'm turned off to Macs. However... they are stable. They are BEAUTIFUL. The g4 is an amazing piece of hardware, 3 times more efficient than most x86's (Don't post about this, I know that new intel chips are more efficient than they used to be. I don't want to start a flamewar, that's not the point.) OSX even has unix underneath. but Unix is not open, and is not configurable.

I would stick to linux for the simple reason that I'm a tweak freak and I like to be in complete control over every aspect of my OS from the kernel to the boot process to the ftp server to the way the fonts look in fluxbox. when on my mac at work, I feel locked in and I don't like it. Also, the way they have the filesystem set up is retarded, the directories have a bunch of spaces and uppercases and long words in them. Yucky. i much prefer 'etc' over 'Application Settings' or whatever.

But if you're using a mac for graphics stuff, ppc is definitely the way to go, not x86.

This is all my opinion, so please *PLease* do not turn this post into a ppc vs. x86 thread.