Diehard Fedora loyalist here. I use shorewall and will never use NetworkManager on a wired system (like it or not, wireless is a pain on the command line and I haven't got all day to get that crap working). I can't speak for Ubuntu, but I can access the full bootup output by pressing one key, can view the log with one command, and can change permanently to the detailed, text-only boot with two commands. Linux is about choice, and as long as that choice is preserved, there is nothing evil about defaults that err on the side of ease of use.

I've never used one, but I've read some things from Apple's site and other sites, and it seems to me like they're very quality now.
I never had any interest in the Mac operating system, but since Mac OS X Leopard, it seems high quality and interesting.
Apples are a little expensive, though.

All I can say is that I live very happy with my dual boot. I use, in my desktop: Windows XP Professional (Only for entertainment, video-games) and Linux Mint 7 (Just installed it). On my laptop, I have Windows Vista (Which I hate with all of my guts, so I reduced it so that it only uses 9GB of my Hard Disk), and Mandriva 2009.

If I ever want my system to look like a Mac, I can do it by simply changing a few options, and installing that Cairo dock. However, I don't think I'm in need of doing that. Other than the looks, I don't really think Mac has anything better to offer when compared to Linux. But that's just me.

So, in short: I love Linux, I'm OK with Win. XP, I HATE Win. Vista, and I could really care less about Macs (any OS they come up with).

I'm just on the side of the Penguin on this one. Even more as I am studying its kernel... I'm loving it.

I don't really understand making one desktop look like one that belongs to another operating system, personally. It's a major clash.

Exactly, I don't understand it either, I was just saying it because many people choose OS's because of their looks.

So, if that is the case, if they want to have something that looks as "good" as a Mac does, then... they can just install Linux, pull a few switches here and there, do some clicking here and there, and some command-line work here and there too, and BOOM! There you have a Mac-looking Linux System.

That, however, I consider useless. I like the way Linux looks, not any better than how it works though!

Well, I thought maybe I'd get a bad response, I've been getting a lot of them lately.
I agree with you, I think it would be more looks than anything - the reason most people mimic another OS. I like the way Linux looks and works. I like GNOME, Xfce, KDE, and Fluxbox anyways ... I haven't really tried the others but for a few minutes, and they weren't really my thing ... but they weren't bad. Except twm.
I would consider it useless, personally, also. But it's not upsetting to me that people make those themes. I just avoid using them.

I'm not going to lie... I do it because of the looks too. But, there are other things I consider, for instance, I am not the only one using the computers, so I cant have something that is "all-out" like... Gentoo, or BSD's, why? Well, because I have family members that do not fully understand how to use Linux. I don't either, not fully, but I study Computers as my main thing!!! So I can get around things better than they can.

I know they use Win. XP most of the time, but sometimes they're curious enough to use Linux, so... I choose the one that looks good, yet works good too.

Still though, Macs are not even considered in my world. I'm trying to learn Objective-C... but I'm trying to find away around the fact that I may have to get a Mac to do it. I'd really hate to do that and will exploit all of my options before that... Armageddon... type of thing happens.

I used to be an avid apple user, starting with the apple][e in 1984, and even then there were options of going apple, with its applesoft basic and its own apple dos, versus going ibm, with its dos, (or commodore 64 or trs80, etc.)... but once Jobs got the gui from xerox and the first mac came out, the split began to be macs for audio-visual and pcs for business, and this split held for over a decade, during which, if one opened both up, it did seem that the macs were built more solidly... especially their top of the line (i.e. powerbooks over ibooks): their chassis was more solid... their components were more solidly anchored... the wires used thicker gauges... the plastic was thicker plastic, etc....

Nevertheless, linux and unix systems were already being used in academic and enterprise environments, however, you wouldn't see any commercials for unix or linux, and the masses were clueless (the masses are still clueless, except that most of them have at least heard of linux by now)... eventually it made more economic sense for enterprises and small businesses to use linux, because of how much they saved in licensing... this kept *nix growing, until eventually x windows and kde and other windows managers made linux a potential desktop system too... especially for developers... As more and more proprietary software got built with open-sourced standards, but licensed with modified GPL so they can sell it... the legions of open source programmers in the world, learning from man pages for free and trying to make a name for themselves began to outnumber the legions of paid serfs working for microsoft and apple... apple was the first to realize that the open source movement would win, therefore they scrapped their operating system and joined them with their own version of an open source unix kernel, based on bsd, called darwin... then they built quartz/aqua to run os x gui on darwin.

What they essentially did was make a gui for linux that was more user friendly than the windows managers available for x-windows and brought the security of users, groups, and posix permissions to the end user.

So I think now the question is no longer windows or mac, but mac or linux. The best solution depends on how much you are willing to learn and how much control you need to have... if you are willing to learn, and want complete control, then linux is for you... if you want to just click and things work, then macs are for you; if you need the latest and greatest libraries, then linux is for you; if you are comfortable operating about two-three years behind the cutting edge, then macs are for you (after all, the cutting edge is less stable)...

But now with the switch to intel, hardware wise, there is little difference between macs and pcs... to stay competitive and bring their costs down, apple has been using flimsier components, thinner gauged wires, and thinner plastics...

the only reason to buy a mac is to use os x...

if you have learned enough or are willing to learn enough, use linux...

for those who want to use linux on ppc: beware, good for enterprise, running apache, etc., but bad for desktop, as there is a severe lack of apps that run on x86 linux fine (i.e. adobe makes flash player binary for linux, but not for ppc linux, and they do not share the source, so you can't compile a flash player for ppc)... well it turns out that this is common with lots of other companies as well: they want to tip their hat to linux a little, so they provide an x86 binary, but ppc is left in the dark and in the dust.

well, that was enough procrastination... back to work (on linux)

to OP...

I am amazed that your trolling attempt ended up showing how mature is the people in this forum. No insults and very productive posts. Cheers for LQ.

Nice, I like that. Still though, I would only choose a Mac IFF work / school *forced* me to.
In the mean time... I'm happily married to Linux!
I'm talking about the SoftWare part, however, I still don't really mind Apple Hardware.

Back to work here too... well school / work... in Linux!

Peace,

MexDeath.

Macs do blow.
I am a die-hard Mac-hater. A lot of Mac haters argue that windows is better, but they are missing the point. There are OS's out there that can do more than a Mac can, faster, and look as pretty (if you really want, IMO its not worth it) that cost nothing at all. I have used Mac, and I own one just so I can prove that its slower than equivalent linux machines.
The Mac Kernel (xnu) I actually like a lot, its very fast and pretty small, but hard to compile. The kernel and source are available for free directly from Apple (look up Darwin). The problem with Mac is the software, the stuff that Apple charges an arm, a leg, and your firstborn for. Aqua (the GUI) is bloated and bogged down with worthless animations and effects. And all the iSoftware that Apple promotes to no end is just as bad, there is BETTER software out there and its all free.
I oppose Mac because its marketed as an OS for cool people, and they charge a ton of money for it, even though all the good parts are available for free anyway.
Plus hardware options are really limited.
Mac vs. Windows - Both suck, not worth arguing.
Mac vs. Linux - Linux is cheaper and better, so whats the point of a Mac? Why do Mac user try to shove it down our throats?
Linux vs. Windows - You are all on this forum for a reason. Linux is the way to go.

Not worth the energy. Stick with being happy about Linux. You'll feel better.


$29 is a ton of money? and your firstborn?

http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC223Z/A


Really? I'm sorry you've had that experience. I'm happily in a free choice environment now, though I have been in situations where Windows was mandated and there was no choice. That's much much more common. My health care spending account went to totally paperless operations and told us to download our statements online. Didn't work. When I contacted them, they said I had to use Internet Explorer to download them (this is just last month). IE hasn't been supported on a Mac for several years. The last version available is 3 full versions back, full of security holes, and has to be run on a Mac OS 9. I reported them. Then I found out they had already been dumped, and we will have a new provider starting in November.

I do have a colleague who frequently makes snide remarks about SlowLaris, and tells me I should put Linux on my Sun servers. He also suggests fairly often that I should dump my Mac and use Linux as my primary desktop. I find it annoying, but it isn't exactly being "shoved down my throat." He's very happy that I have ZFS daily snapshots running on the home directories in addition to our tape backups.

Its worth the energy if people do try to force OS X on you.


Well, that is quite an interesting link. You have to remember that the software must be run on Mac hardware, which is nearly identical to PC hardware, so if the hardware is equal, the extra cost must be software, right? Maybe I'm wrong and Apple is actually over-charging for Hardware.



Windows is forced somewhat by people who don't realize that there are other options.
Every Mac user I have known has tried to force it on me. I'm not the only person who has experienced this. Mac users are the main reason that people adamantly oppose the use of OS X.

Heres a page I enjoyed, its a bit old though (warning, strong language): http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse....gi?u=macs_cant

http://www.google.com/products/catal...26&sa=button#p

Here are some other prices I found for a single user. $95 being the cheapest.
Remember that Linux is free and you could consider anything more expensive than that to be over-charging.

Interesting that you are posting from Windows rather than Linux.