Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 18th Sep 2006 20:36 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu "A friend of mine phoned to ask if I thought he should install Ubuntu Linux on his Macs - a 1.33 GHz G4 iBook currently running OS X 10.4 Tiger and a 1.25 GHz Power Mac G4 tower with OS X 10.3 Panther installed. My friend had read a feature in the local newspaper extolling the virtues of Ubuntu Linux and thought it sounded interesting. Does Ubuntu Linux make any sense for Macintosh users? In my friend's case, I would say no, and I did." My take: I wrote about this subject earlier.
Order by: Score:
One Word
by vondur on Mon 18th Sep 2006 20:50 UTC
vondur
Member since:
2005-07-07

No. Apple controls the hardware and software combo. That is why there are fewer problems with Windows/Linux on Intel. Too many different pieces of hardware to support.

Reply Score: 4

RE: One Word
by jdub on Tue 19th Sep 2006 01:12 UTC in reply to "One Word"
jdub Member since:
2005-08-19

Actually, that's one of the reasons why Ubuntu is pretty good on Mac hardware (in spite of temporary incompatible bits when they lack drivers). Thanks to Apple's small range, and clearly defined hardware lines, once you know what's in the machine, they're easy to support over the long term. Contrast that with the wild west in the world of PC hardware -- thousands of vendors, thousands of variations.

Reply Score: 1

RE: One Word
by alcibiades on Tue 19th Sep 2006 03:18 UTC in reply to "One Word"
alcibiades Member since:
2005-10-12

There's a common myth among Mac users, dating back to probably Win 95 or earlier, that there are lots of hardware related stability problems with Windows. There just are not. The problems with Windows today are about security. They are real, and either OSX or Linux or the BSDs are enormously better. But on hardware, in fact, anyone who has spent any time supporting Macs knows that hardware interface problems are far more common with Macs than Windows machines.

Another variant of the same argument is that in some way OSX was made for Apple hardware in a way that Windows is not made for its hardware. Or is it the other way around? At any rate, this is false too. Drivers, they all use drivers. You don't believe it? Well, if it was all so flawlessly designed to work together, why have PPC Macs never been able to boot from an external USB drive? They have the interface, they just can't use it fully. Just one example.

Why do we keep hearing this argument if its so obviously wrong? It is probably the rather obsessive desire to defend to the bitter end every little aspect of Apple's conduct.

The OS is not permitted to run on non Apple branded hardware, for purely commercial reasons. They may be valid reasons. The reasonable approach would be to say, that's just how it is. Some Mac people feel obliged to go further, and so they make up bad reasons, often factually incorrect, for why the Apple way is objectively better.

What's better is not signing on as root routinely. Restricting support to only three or four graphics cards has nothing to do with it.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: One Word
by Adam S on Tue 19th Sep 2006 12:52 UTC in reply to "RE: One Word"
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

There's a common myth among Mac users [...] that there are lots of hardware related stability problems with Windows.

There are. Well, maybe not directly, but is essense, this is true. It's not hardware as much as drivers. A single bad driver can blue screen XP, or at least could back in 2001-2003, before XP had drivers for nearly all mass availability hardware built-in.

The "myth" is based in the reality that, for years, OEM Windows machines were often filled up with after-market drivers that caused instability. Most didn't hear about this - they experienced it. That's where the image comes from.

Reply Score: 1

what?
by tryphcycle on Tue 19th Sep 2006 15:54 UTC in reply to "One Word"
tryphcycle Member since:
2006-02-16

>>>""There's a common myth among Mac users, dating back to probably Win 95 or earlier, that there are lots of hardware related stability problems with Windows. There just are not.""<<<

how soon people forget!!!!! DUDE... long before the issues with windows security became a main stream understanding.... windows hardware related instability issues DOMINATED your user experience!!! so dont even tell us that this is a Mac User Myth!!!!!! there is no myth buddy.... this was fact!!!!!!!!!

>>>""But on hardware, in fact, anyone who has spent any time supporting Macs knows that hardware interface problems are far more common with Macs than Windows machines.""<<<

WHAT? come on!!!! that is just ludicrous! hardware interface problems or more on a MAC.... than Windows? what are you smoking? maybe you are confused..... sure there are lots of hardware where you can get mac drivers for.... and of cource, just about every thing else has available windows drivers..... but what you just said is just BOGOUS! you sound like one of those geek squad dorks that work at best buy! "oh... i have never used anything but windows, so every thing else must suck!"

and as far as the rest of you comment.... i anit even going to reetort.... because...

YOU are certified troll!

Reply Score: 1

need "a Sensible Alternative"?
by milatchi on Mon 18th Sep 2006 20:56 UTC
milatchi
Member since:
2005-08-29

Do Mac users need "a Sensible Alternative"?

Reply Score: 5

RE: need "a Sensible Alternative"?
by EmmEff on Mon 18th Sep 2006 20:59 UTC in reply to "need "a Sensible Alternative"?"
EmmEff Member since:
2005-09-16

What was wrong with OS X in the first place to justify seeking a replacement

Reply Score: 3

Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

The need for the 4 freedoms. These are not priorities in decision making for everyone, but still valid they are. And in an increasing world of DRM and proprietry lock in, I believe the four freedoms will be coming to forefront over time (disc. I run OS X)

Reply Score: 5

jessta Member since:
2005-08-17

Agreed.
But the freedoms are only directly useful to those who use them, developers, system admins etc.
People who work with a computer instead of just using it.

Reply Score: 1

collywolly Member since:
2006-06-19

"But the freedoms are only directly useful to those who use them, developers, system admins etc.
People who work with a computer instead of just using it."

Bollox.

Windows 98 is now unsupported by Microsoft, so users are no longer being offered security updates. So end users are affected by the lack of fredom in this software. IF it was open source, then someone would likely provide these update.

Edited 2006-09-19 12:21

Reply Score: 1

RE
by Kroc on Mon 18th Sep 2006 21:00 UTC
Kroc
Member since:
2005-11-10

Sometimes you need tough love. Horrible, and nobody wants to have reponsibility in the age of the Internet. The more times linux users discover that linux isn't as desktop ready as it is often touted to be, then the faster that situation will improve. Blindly ignoring those few large bumps in desktop linux, in the name of zealously will get them nowhere.

I feel that, however, I am discrediting those fine volunteers who work without zealousy on the solution of desktop linux, the meek shall inherit the earth.

Reply Score: 3

RE
by Bnonn on Mon 18th Sep 2006 23:07 UTC in reply to "RE"
Bnonn Member since:
2005-09-02

Fair comment, and I agree---these sorts of articles, where there is sensible user feedback, do indeed help to highlight certain issues for developers. But bear in mind that "desktop-ready" is a fairly relative term. For some people, such as myself, OSX is not nearly as desktop-ready as Ubuntu, because the things I use my desktop for are quite different, and I have different expectations of it than OSX was designed for. For example, even the look of OSX is grating to me; I much prefer Gnome, and would never switch.

Naturally, given that I'm a geek, I will always find OSX nothing but restricting. Hence, Ubuntu is a much better desktop for me. That doesn't mean it's better for other people, and maybe it's not even better for most people when compared to OSX (compared to Windows is another story). Just bear in mind that desktop-readiness isn't a solid line you can differentiate.

Reply Score: 5

RE
by netpython on Tue 19th Sep 2006 07:25 UTC in reply to "RE"
netpython Member since:
2005-07-06

Sometimes you need tough love. Horrible, and nobody wants to have reponsibility in the age of the Internet. The more times linux users discover that linux isn't as desktop ready as it is often touted to be, then the faster that situation will improve. Blindly ignoring those few large bumps in desktop linux, in the name of zealously will get them nowhere.

Linux has more networking apps is modular and more important has repositories.No more endless hunting for apps and digging through ad banners and such.

But i sincerly believe in the saying:"The right tool for the job".If i ware an professional photographer,musician,graphics artist i would most likely have a mac pro (desktop!).Now i code and use networking apps,linux is heaven.

It all depends on what you want and or need,your mileage may vary.Linux has allways been ready just not for everyone.The same can be said for every other OS that exists today.

Reply Score: 2

My take:
by thecwin on Mon 18th Sep 2006 21:01 UTC
thecwin
Member since:
2006-01-04

It depends on how you use your computer. I recently bought a MacBook Pro. First long term use experience with Mac OS X, and so far I am loving it. Most stuff Just Works, and while it's not been as stable as my previous laptop was with Ubuntu, the proprietary support means that most stuff works -- particularly creative type stuff.

The biggest pain is for "advanced" stuff like coding, using my laptop as a wireless access point, messing around with hardware to achieve a desired effect... I generally prefer to use Linux over Mac OS X or Windows. Nautilus can be better than finder in many circumstances for me, but this is jut my opinion.

Reply Score: 1

RE: My take:
by MikeGA on Mon 18th Sep 2006 21:20 UTC in reply to "My take:"
MikeGA Member since:
2005-07-22

I'm confused. I've always found setting up OS X to share internet over wireless almost ridiculously easy.

The Finder does need quite a lot of work though ;)
On the other hand, I've been having to use Windows at work, and I hadn't realised just how much better column-view is!

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: My take:
by thecwin on Tue 19th Sep 2006 00:45 UTC in reply to "RE: My take:"
thecwin Member since:
2006-01-04

Setting it up in an adhoc is ridiculously easy, brilliantly so. Setting it up as a portable router, using ethernet bridging and master mode on the wireless card isn't so easy (is it possible?). This, however, is a very limited use case, but something that's come up a few times for me.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: My take:
by tryphcycle on Tue 19th Sep 2006 16:15 UTC in reply to "RE: My take:"
tryphcycle Member since:
2006-02-16

>>>The Finder does need quite a lot of work though ;) <<<<

YES it does! I love using OSX... but the finder pisses me off to NO END!!!!!!!!! FTFF steve!!!!! show us this thing called Chardonnay!!!!!

Reply Score: 2

support?
by Epyon on Mon 18th Sep 2006 21:14 UTC
Epyon
Member since:
2005-11-21

I'd say no if only due to a distinct lack of hardware and software support (on PPC macs). I tried a couple of versions of Ubuntu on my iBook G4. The touchpad never worked right. The sensitivity was way too low and raising the sensitivity via the gui did nothing. Also the sound card drivers were buggy. The first moment of a sound would be of a normal volume and then it would immediately go almost silent. The wireless network card in the thing (broadcom) never worked right in Linux (this was before the bcm43xx drivers... haven't tried those).

Then there is the complete lack of commercial software for Linux on PPC. I didn't have Flash, Java, or any other commercial software. No win32codecs to watch wmv files.

Reply Score: 1

RE: support?
by alwayscrashing on Mon 18th Sep 2006 21:24 UTC in reply to "support?"
alwayscrashing Member since:
2006-01-13

You can get java for PPC macs. I used to have it on Gentoo running on an old iMac G4 years ago.

Reply Score: 1

RE: support?
by gleng on Tue 19th Sep 2006 11:00 UTC in reply to "support?"
gleng Member since:
2006-02-16

You can download Java for PPC Linux here:

http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/java/jdk/linux/download.html

For a G4, you need the download for 32-bit iSeries/pSeries. (And you need to register, unfortunately.)

I think ffmpeg/mplayer can play most WMV files now, but it's not 100%. It's better than nothing.

Flash is a sore point, though. Gnash is looking promising, but it's got a long way to go.

Reply Score: 2

i have kubuntu and os X installed on mine
by riha on Mon 18th Sep 2006 21:14 UTC
riha
Member since:
2006-01-24

I have an powerbook 13", 1.33 GHz with both os X and kubuntu installed.

Only reason for having both installed is for testing and playing. I do work with linux based systems and for me it is sometimes easier to logon to kubuntu to verify an script or anything else writen for linux, instead of doing it in X11 in OS X, which isnīt always 100% compatible with the way linux works.

Reply Score: 2

MikeGA Member since:
2005-07-22

Wait a minute, 13" PowerBook? Are you from Apple's secret internal prototyping department? ;)

Reply Score: 1

BlackJack75 Member since:
2005-08-29

The extra inch is from the finger that holds the screen.

Reply Score: 2

Why?
by k9_engineer on Mon 18th Sep 2006 21:17 UTC
k9_engineer
Member since:
2006-02-04

<<Consequently, if I had a non-Apple PC, Ubuntu Linux would probably be my first choice of operating systems, but with a Mac, you already have the best operating system in world.>>
I must agree, having run "X"buntu, SLED and of course windows from DOS all the way to 11 currently running win XP and my home machine is an iMAC. The elegance and joy has returned to comututing for me. BTW, have tried em all: Mandrake 8.x to 9.1, SuSe 8X to 10, SLED, buntus, PCLinux, Vector, Mephis and the list goes on. Nothing compares to the MacOSX experience. Dang, hated typing this on my work PC XP! :-))

Reply Score: 1

I'm pretty happy with it
by macisaac on Mon 18th Sep 2006 21:25 UTC
macisaac
Member since:
2005-08-28

Some folk just don't get it, not everyone can be shoeboxed into one preference and way of thinking (so much for that whole "think different" marketing foo.)

Mac OSX is a fine OS, for what it is. Regardless of what some would have you think, it's certainly not perfect, far from it. None the less it's ok, if you're alright with a proprietary OS that locks you to a single platform.

Personally, I'm not, but regardless even of the philosophical issues, I just _really_ like Linux, and my current distro of choice on this Mac G4 I'm typing this from is Ubuntu Edgy Eft (or whatever it's called now...). As a server, as a desktop, as a workstation, for me it just fits, really really well. I love the fact that one day I can use GNOME or KDE, and the next play with Enlightenment or some other far out WM. I love that I have access to a wealth of software right at my finger tips (for free. as in $0 to me. as in no registration, no shareware guilt, no $15 to get joystick support for some emulator, etc etc.). Sure, I still have an OSX partition on it, but I hardly ever use it now. My powerbook running only OSX largely sits there collecting dust, mainly just being used to play DVDs on my TV now and then.

Now, I'm a different sort of user by trade, not everyone will share my particular interests, so how about your "average" users and that, take my wife and kids for instance. For my wife, so long as she can get on the internet, type up the occasional paper (and print it), and maybe play some music, that's all the computing she needs/wants. For my kids, they like to play games of course. What, Linux as a gaming platform?? Well no, (without some work that is) half life 2 and what have you won't run on it, but guess what, I don't want them playing that stuff anyhow (one's 3, the others 7). For the younger, tuxpaint and gcompris keeps him happy. For the latter, recently he's fallen in love with FreeCiv (though there's a host of other free games he adores).

Linux as a desktop to me == having fun with your computer again. I have some nostalgia for computing in the 80s (commodore and friends, not IBM and DOS), seems to me computers were just more inviting to tinkering and playing around with (was just discussing today with a coworker how important having a BASIC interpreter built into computers back then was in terms of the whole experience they provided). Linux today comes about the closest to bringing back that enjoyment in computing, for work _and_ home...

Reply Score: 5

RE: I'm pretty happy with it
by twenex on Mon 18th Sep 2006 21:30 UTC in reply to "I'm pretty happy with it"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

Amen!!!

Reply Score: 1

RE: I'm pretty happy with it
by Kroc on Mon 18th Sep 2006 21:38 UTC in reply to "I'm pretty happy with it"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

If you could divide the whole world into two, to point out where it all went wrong; this is how I would do it:

MOS 6502 v 8086
Apple II v PC
Mac OS v Windows
Firefox v IE

All the things on the left are the products of the love of computing. All the things on the right are the products of greed and control of computers.

Computers stopped being fun in the early 90's when Windows paved over those companies and people who designed with love not greed.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: I'm pretty happy with it
by DoctorPepper on Mon 18th Sep 2006 21:44 UTC in reply to "RE: I'm pretty happy with it"
DoctorPepper Member since:
2005-07-12

Computers stopped being fun in the early 90's when Windows paved over those companies and people who designed with love not greed.

Amen! That's exactly the way I felt, until I started playing around with Linux. I'm not advocating using Ubuntu Linux (or any Linux) on a Mac (my wife uses and loves OSX on her iMac), just that Linux rekindled my early fascination and love of computing. It was no longer a lock-step bore that Windows had turned it into.

For all you Windows users out there, if that's what you use and love, that's fine. For me, it wasn't, that's all.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: I'm pretty happy with it
by h3rman on Tue 19th Sep 2006 07:20 UTC in reply to "RE: I'm pretty happy with it"
h3rman Member since:
2006-08-09

>> Computers stopped being fun in the early 90's when Windows paved over those companies and people who designed with love not greed. <<

Computers started being fun in the early 90's when the Linux OS started being developed via the internet, by people who designed with love not greed.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: I'm pretty happy with it
by happycamper on Tue 19th Sep 2006 07:56 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I'm pretty happy with it"
happycamper Member since:
2006-01-01

I had to add BSD in there.


Computers started being fun in the early 90's when Linux and the BSDs OS started being developed via the internet, by people who designed with love not greed.

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: I'm pretty happy with it
by h3rman on Tue 19th Sep 2006 08:20 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: I'm pretty happy with it"
h3rman Member since:
2006-08-09

>> I had to add BSD in there.

Computers started being fun in the early 90's when Linux and the BSDs OS started being developed via the internet, by people who designed with love not greed. <<


Sorry, you're right I should've added BSD.
I just didn't know when that development started. ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: I'm pretty happy with it
by eggman on Tue 19th Sep 2006 13:39 UTC in reply to "RE: I'm pretty happy with it"
eggman Member since:
2006-05-09

You forgot:
Communism vs. Democracy
Fascism vs. Freedom

But I suppose you were too busy getting down on your knees for Stallman, so it's alright.

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: I'm pretty happy with it
by g2devi on Tue 19th Sep 2006 13:56 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I'm pretty happy with it"
g2devi Member since:
2005-07-09

You're both missing something. The comment: "If you could divide the whole world into two, to point out where it all went wrong;" actually points to where things went wrong. By dividing the world into an "us versus them" culture, you're missing out on more viable alternatives. Let me fill in the blanks that shows that the world is not so polar:

MOS 6502 v 8086 v 68000 v MIPS v SPARC v ...
Apple II v PC v Commodore v Atari v ....
Mac OS v Windows v Unix v GEM v Next v AmigaOS v ...
Firefox v IE v Opera v Safari
Communism v Democracy v Technocracy v Government by Elders v ...
Fascism (i.e. Orwell) v Freedom (i.e. Darwinism) v various moderate various of the two v ...

The key problem was not that one side started losing out to the other but that we lost a great deal of diversity of choices so that only two sides dominate. Fortunately, in the computing world at least, choice is beginning to return, but its not something that can be taken for granted.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: I'm pretty happy with it
by Kroc on Tue 19th Sep 2006 18:52 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I'm pretty happy with it"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

I never mentioned Linux at all. You have issues.

Reply Score: 1

RE: I'm pretty happy with it
by Duffman on Tue 19th Sep 2006 05:06 UTC in reply to "I'm pretty happy with it"
Duffman Member since:
2005-11-23

None the less it's ok, if you're alright with a proprietary OS that locks you to a single platform.

It's always funny to see linux users telling to other "you are locked to ...." as they are locked in a GPL world ...

It is just as a prisoner in a jail making fun of another one about his cell.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: I'm pretty happy with it
by dylansmrjones on Tue 19th Sep 2006 05:48 UTC in reply to "RE: I'm pretty happy with it"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Clarify!

How do you get locked-in by the use of open standards, open documentation, and open source?

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: I'm pretty happy with it
by Duffman on Tue 19th Sep 2006 06:21 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I'm pretty happy with it"
Duffman Member since:
2005-11-23

How do you get locked-in by the use of open standards, open documentation, and open source?

I talked about GPL not open source. Tell me why there is no port of technologies from OpenSolaris if not because of the GPL ?

Reply Score: 1

dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

GPL _IS_ Open Source.

Are you sure there are no technologies AT ALL from OpenSolaris? And doesn't that rather point at limitations in the license of OpenSolaris rather than in the GPL-license?

AFAIK there's quite a bit of (L)GPL in OpenSolaris.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: I'm pretty happy with it
by codehead78 on Tue 19th Sep 2006 07:59 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: I'm pretty happy with it"
codehead78 Member since:
2006-08-04

"GPL _IS_ Open Source"

What kind of zealot are you? GPL is Free Software. Open Source is everything from BSD to Apache to GPL.

And yes, GPL does create boundaries and locks you in to a degree. Because of the GPL you have to jump through hoops to get a closed source driver on your system. Yes the GPL protects things, but it also gets in the way.

Reply Score: 0

dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Actually GPL _is_ Open Source. But Open Source is _not_ necessarily Free Software.

Yes - there are boundaries with GPL. So there is with the BSD-license or the MIT-license (my favourite - it's so wonderfully simple).

One does not have to jump through hoops to get a closed source driver on your system. You may have to jump through hoops to distribute the close-sourced driver, but that's due to the license of the close-sourced driver and not due to the GPL.

You cannot get locked-in by GPL'ed software (or open standards for that matter). You can always switch if you don't want to use that particular GPL'ed software. You cannot do that with close-sourced software, relying on closed "standards".

At the very least, you ought to give an example of your claim of lock-in. So far nobody have been capable of doing so - not even through redefining the meaning of "lock-in".

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: I'm pretty happy with it
by drynwhyl on Tue 19th Sep 2006 06:22 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I'm pretty happy with it"
drynwhyl Member since:
2006-05-14

> Clarify!

Have you ever see a troll explaining his point?

> How do you get locked-in by the use of open standards,
> open documentation, and open source?

You don't.

But since GPLed operating systems are competitors to his beloved Apple OS X, which put apples Endsieg at risk, and he is a pro Appe troll, he decided to just use slander as a way to express his anger that out there exists anything else besides Apple and Mac OS X.

Reply Score: 0

RE[4]: I'm pretty happy with it
by Duffman on Tue 19th Sep 2006 07:40 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: I'm pretty happy with it"
Duffman Member since:
2005-11-23

Well, I forgot the funniest with Linux Zealots, they think for you and tell others what you think (with no clue).

I use MacOSX/Solaris/AIX/Linux/HPUX all the days. I am just tired about GPL zealots.

Anyway this article says that Ubuntu is not an alternative for Mac Users and immediatly we saw post claiming the contrary.

It seems that linux zealots don't like to see their beloved Linux distro not to be the solution for everything.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: I'm pretty happy with it
by h3rman on Tue 19th Sep 2006 08:28 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: I'm pretty happy with it"
h3rman Member since:
2006-08-09

>> I use MacOSX/Solaris/AIX/Linux/HPUX all the days. I am just tired about GPL zealots. <<

If I'd have to use 5 different operating systems every day, I would be just tired of operating systems.

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: I'm pretty happy with it
by Duffman on Tue 19th Sep 2006 09:24 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: I'm pretty happy with it"
Duffman Member since:
2005-11-23

I am tired =)

But learning diffent OSes is the better way not to became a zealot.

Reply Score: 3

dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

It didn't help in your situation, though I agree trying out different OS'es is a wise step to avoid zealotry.

Reply Score: 1

Sadomasochism
by Joe User on Mon 18th Sep 2006 21:48 UTC
Joe User
Member since:
2005-06-29

Wanting to switch from OS X to Ubuntu is being sadomasochist!

Reply Score: 0

is there really such a thing as a perfect OS?
by HanZo on Mon 18th Sep 2006 22:12 UTC
HanZo
Member since:
2006-03-10

I mean, on OS is a tool that satisfies need, an OS will be perfect if it satisfies all needs of user in the best of all possible ways. now the problem is, every user has a different need. one need the computer to play games the other to write an email once evry month and other need it to everything in their life... so what it a perfect OS one that does everything in the way everybody wants it to be done? yes... but that's the problem, every user has a different approach to how they use the computer and to how they want things to be done.
Apart from that I think Mac OS can be the best OS out there for many people and many tasks...it would be even better if it didn't suffer of the terrible designer-syndrome...
having studied design I know how many people in that area think... a lot of designers think they can (must somtimes) design stuff to change the way people use a certain object regardless of the fact that people maybe have a mind of their own... so what design (and architecture as well) sometimes is doing is to treat people like a horde of stupid clueless sheep.
that sometimes applies to the Mac... which, you'll agree, is a heavyly design-oriented machine. The machine does not just give you tools but tries to force you into a cerain way of thinking and acting.
Some people may like it (or don't mind), some people may find it a bit irritating. that's where Linux has a clear advantage. Linux does not force you to act or think in a certain way... it's all your choice...
Now don't say that I'm a linux fanboy, bacuse I'm not, I have a mac with OS X and a PC with windows/Ubuntu, I'm going to get rid of windows to use just Ubuntu... but my mac will still run OS X, because as I said before, I need tools to do what I need to do, and what I do on may mac is best done with OS X... but nonetheless I can perfectly undestand that come people may prefer Linux.

Reply Score: 4

Ubuntu Macbook walkthrough
by ubit on Mon 18th Sep 2006 22:24 UTC
ubit
Member since:
2006-09-08
There gets a point
by Finchwizard on Mon 18th Sep 2006 22:27 UTC
Finchwizard
Member since:
2006-02-01

Time gets to a point where some people just want an OS that works with minimal problems.

Linux is a great OS, it's interesting to see how far it's come, and it's great to see what's happening with your OS.

OS X really is a great OS that's got the looks, it's got great functionality and simplifies a lot of things.

Windows has it's strong points, which is mainly gaming.

Each OS has it's strong point, there's nothing wrong with Vendor Lock in or proprietary software, it's whether it does the task that is needing to be done in an efficient and easy manner, at a reasonable price.

I do not see the point on trying to spend no money on an OS, just because it's free, and I'd have to do more tinkering with it.

If the software is free, Open Source and works better than what's available, then great, but if not, why waste your time.

All OS's have their strengths, and weaknesses, I just feel OS X has the minimal amount of problems.

Edited 2006-09-18 22:28

Reply Score: 2

Not If It Won't Boot
by enloop on Mon 18th Sep 2006 22:41 UTC
enloop
Member since:
2005-11-13

Ubuntu won't even boot on my late-model iMac G5. Neither will any other Linux flavor I've tried. Ubuntu works as advertised on the PC in the next room, but the Mac is by far the more polished piece of work. Even if Ubuntu came up to that standard, a small number of apps that are not available for Linux would keep me in Appleland.

Reply Score: 1

dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Neither can Windows.

Reply Score: 0

dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Modded down? Oh well ;)

Reply Score: 0

WPA-PSK
by nick_h on Mon 18th Sep 2006 22:57 UTC
nick_h
Member since:
2006-02-19

Does OS X support WPA-PSK?

-n-

Reply Score: 1

RE: WPA-PSK
by Kroc on Mon 18th Sep 2006 23:02 UTC in reply to "WPA-PSK"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

As of 10.4.2 http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=301722

Edited 2006-09-18 23:02

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: WPA-PSK
by tryphcycle on Tue 19th Sep 2006 15:26 UTC in reply to "WPA-PSK"
tryphcycle Member since:
2006-02-16

"Does OS X support WPA-PSK?"

Yes, it most certanly does! I just set up my airbport base station at my house with WPA2 with the Preshared key. of course youl need the 10.3 somthing and airport extreme.....

look like at least on the client level OSX supports WPA-enterprise. not suure if the apple base stations do or not at this point!

Reply Score: 1

yup
by happycamper on Mon 18th Sep 2006 23:04 UTC
happycamper
Member since:
2006-01-01

I think Ubuntu Linux does make sense, because i don't like any software, operating systems included that conatains proprietary code, like part of the mac os x is open source and the rest is made of Apple's proprietary code.

Edited 2006-09-18 23:16

Reply Score: 1

Nope
by IronWolve on Mon 18th Sep 2006 23:23 UTC
IronWolve
Member since:
2006-01-17

I'm using a G4 with OSX and fink no need to go linux only. Unless you need a lightweight desktop on a low/slow g3/g4 then no.

Reply Score: 2

I switched...
by arctic on Mon 18th Sep 2006 23:30 UTC
arctic
Member since:
2006-04-19

from OS 9.1 to Debian etch as OSX was a catastrophe on my 512MB, 450Ghz G3 PowerMac. The machine runs pretty well now. Linux is a valid alternative in cases such as mine, where the hardware has problems running OSX.

Reply Score: 1

Quoth the article
by Bnonn on Mon 18th Sep 2006 23:36 UTC
Bnonn
Member since:
2005-09-02

Consequently, if I had a non-Apple PC, Ubuntu Linux would probably be my first choice of operating systems, but with a Mac, you already have the best operating system in world.

C'mon, this is just flamebait. He says, "the main advantage, as I see it, of using a Macintosh is that it runs the Mac OS, which is unmatched and unchallenged in terms of user-friendliness. Like Linux, OS X gives you the stability and power of Unix (albeit from different branches of the Unix family tree), but combined with the best graphic user interface yet devised for personal computers, ease of software installation, and, with rare exceptions, true plug and play - "it just works" - with peripherals and networking support" (emphasis mine).

I don't want to be reactionary, but this is just one guy's rather exaggerated opinion. Personally, as a power user interested in choice and freedom, and concerned about vendor lockin, I find OSX to be quite unfriendly to me---in terms of user-friendliness is it extremely challenged. I prefer the Gnome interface and way of doing things to the OSX way, and completely disagree that OSX has the best user interface yet devised! All the times I've used OSX I've found myself frustrated at what seem to me to be very strange and ineffecient ways of doing things. I've also heard tell that OSX is not as stable as Linux generally is (I've certainly never seen a kernel panic in Ubuntu), and I also find it hard to believe that OSX has a repository containing thousands of software packages which can be installed with a couple of clicks of a button, so the claim about the ease of installing software is pretty dubious. Similarly, plug-and-play has never been a problem for me using Ubuntu (even old Ubuntu versions), so why mention OSX's plug-and-play abilities?

Let's get some objectivity here. "Best operating system in the world"? Maybe for certain people who have simple needs and aren't interested in tinkering, in freedom, etc. I have nothing against this guy having an opinion, or even against the advice he gave his friend---perhaps OSX is the better choice for him. Ubuntu is not for everyone, and if OSX is working well for him, why switch? But the way he presents his point surely makes this a bit of a troll.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Quoth the article
by trezzer on Tue 19th Sep 2006 00:33 UTC in reply to "Quoth the article"
trezzer Member since:
2006-01-05

"I've also heard tell that OSX is not as stable as Linux generally is (I've certainly never seen a kernel panic in Ubuntu)"

Nor have I, but I've seen it just plain reset. The only time I've seen kernel panics in OS X was in the 10.0.x days and on one machine where I had a bad ram module. Kernel panics are something the majority of OS X users will never see.

"and I also find it hard to believe that OSX has a repository containing thousands of software packages which can be installed with a couple of clicks of a button"

I quote from the Fink package database:
"The database was last updated at 23:08 GMT on Monday, September 18 and currently lists 6937 packages in 23 sections."

If you prefer BSD-style ports there are 3420 packages in DarwinPorts.

Besides that places like versiontracker.com and macupdate.com serve as virtual software repositories that indeed let you install with a couple of clicks.

"Similarly, plug-and-play has never been a problem for me using Ubuntu (even old Ubuntu versions), so why mention OSX's plug-and-play abilities?"

Funny you should mention that after I've spent several hours today (in vein but even if I had been successful it would have been quite an operation) to get a USB DVB-T receiver working. Needless to say it's entirely plug'n'play on OS X. That said Linux is certainly improving in this area and out of the box more of my hardware is supported (and properly set up) than with an XP SP 2 install.

Edited 2006-09-19 00:35

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Quoth the article
by aent on Tue 19th Sep 2006 04:30 UTC in reply to "RE: Quoth the article"
aent Member since:
2006-01-25

Besides that places like versiontracker.com and macupdate.com serve as virtual software repositories that indeed let you install with a couple of clicks.

They aren't like the real thing though. I don't get alerts on every single update available, get them automatically downloaded for me, and every single one installed with just one click. With macupdate, I would have to manually compare the version numbers. Then, I need to manually download each file. Then, I need to manually install each package. Thats a whole lot harder then having it do everything for me, like Ubuntu would.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Quoth the article
by trezzer on Tue 19th Sep 2006 11:19 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Quoth the article"
trezzer Member since:
2006-01-05

Indeed.

There are tools that are capable of handling that though - like versiontracker pro and some widgets.

Reply Score: 1

Reminded why I dislike Mac people
by cptnapalm on Tue 19th Sep 2006 00:05 UTC
cptnapalm
Member since:
2006-08-09

What I find interesting is how vocally opposed the Mac Zealots are to anyone trying out a different operating system. From what I gathered in the article, the guy wanted to give Ubuntu a try. The writer then, apparently, talked him out of it. Why? If the guy wants to give something a shot, maybe he'll like it, maybe he won't. It isn't like he will suddenly lose his ability to install Mac OS X.

When I got my laptop, which my only machine, it naturally came with Windows XP. I wasn't having any problems or anything. I was wondering what was up in Linux land these days, so I downloaded Ubuntu. Within 30 days, Windows was no longer on my laptop. I found that I liked Ubuntu more than Windows. Why does this guy feel the need to talk his friend out of finding out for himself?

Whenever Mac people do their brand boasting: "Less choice!" "Look at the pretty pictures!" "I don't have to read!" "I don't have to know anything!"

If BSD is for those that love Unix and Linux is Unix for people who hate MicroSoft, is Mac OS X Unix for the ignorant?

Sorry guys, you brought the flamage on yourselves.

(can Mac OS X play mkvs? Just curious)

Reply Score: 4

t0mLe Member since:
2005-07-28

Yes, OS X can play .mkvs . For more info read this thread
http://www.moviecodec.com/topics/6953p1.html

Nite Nite

Reply Score: 2

cptnapalm Member since:
2006-08-09

thanks. I really was just wondering. Its such an improvement over avi that I wonder why more people don't use it.

Reply Score: 2

roger64 Member since:
2006-08-15

same experience
after about four weeks, I knew I would NOT come back to Windows. Long life Ubuntu!!

Reply Score: 1

vikramsharma Member since:
2005-07-06

I am a mac user and while I agree with you about some mac users being over zealous, it's not true that only mac users are opposed to trying out new operating system. The one of the prime reasons Linux or Mac OS X low market share is people do not want to learn. Most of the computer(average Joe) users have already invested their time and effort learning windows and find learning a new operating system be it Linux or Mac OS X a waste. Last thing I wanted to say is; it's easier for programmers to design a complex system for expert users it is much more difficult to design a computer system that even a moron can use. Also if you work in an office you would know that just because a woman is beautiful does not mean she is not intelligent.

Reply Score: 1

tryphcycle Member since:
2006-02-16

dude.... thats like saying you dont like black people.... it is a prejudice generalization!

you are assuming that to be a mac user is to be a zealot! maybe all of the mac users you know... if you actually know any mac users, are zealots.... then again.... maybe is not the mac uses that are being the ZEALOTS....

for example...
i have Windows friends that allways are trying to proove to me how much better windows is compared to the Mac.... yet i have NEVER tried to convince them of the opposite... because.... I AM NOT A ZEALOT....use what ever you want to use... who am i to judge?

... but they seem to think because i got rid of all my PC hardware, and i dislike Microsoft, and have like every thing apple has made in the last 5 years... that i must be a ZEALOT! its crazy! again.... i really dont care what you use... i have never tried to force a mac down any body throught....
so actually... i think THEY... are the actual ZEALOTs... and it seems that YOU are a ZEALOT!

yea... there are Mac Zealots out there... OF COURSE.... but i am willing to bet, that for every 1 Mac ZEALOT.... there ar about 95 anti mac zealots....

the market share numbers PROOVE that....

so... as far as i am concerned.... calling me a Mac Zealot... is like calling me a Ni**er! so you should watch you mouth!

Reply Score: 2

codehead78
Member since:
2006-08-04

In this case of Mac OS X vs Linux, going with Linux is more for a warm fuzzy than any practical reason.

Reply Score: 1

I'm not opposed
by yakirz on Tue 19th Sep 2006 02:20 UTC
yakirz
Member since:
2006-05-11

to dual-booting OS X and linux on a Mac. Both have their advantages, but I'm mostly happy with OS X, and can still play around with different window managers in X11.

I have experienced more difficulty with compiling and package management in OS X than linux, I often get errors in fink on my iBook.

When I've tried running a live Ubuntu cd (an older version), suspend has caused me to reboot every time, so I rarely bother.

Browser: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 95; PalmSource; Blazer 3.0) 16;160x160

Reply Score: 1

v ??
by cozby on Tue 19th Sep 2006 03:01 UTC
k
by davegetrag on Tue 19th Sep 2006 04:09 UTC
davegetrag
Member since:
2006-03-31

OHHHH ALRIGHT!

Fine! If you already have a OS AND are perfectly happy with that OS, satisfied with that OS and you enjoy that OS then, NO, NO there is no reason to think about linux. OKAY!

Of course if someone IS asking about linux then are you sure someone shouldn't at least try it? I mean, why are they asking about another OS if they love the one they have now. Sure there are other problems - but at least it is some new problems and not the same old boring ones. (sounds like my new girlfriend actually, same but different)

Reply Score: 1

No way
by DevL on Tue 19th Sep 2006 06:00 UTC
DevL
Member since:
2005-07-06

Ubuntu is an excellent Linux distro, in fact it's the one that I use and promote. But I would never think of replacing Mac OS X on my Macs with it or anything else for that matter.

Maybe in 5 years time when my PowerPC macs are no longer supported I might install Ubunutu 11.04 or 11.10 on them to give them a few more years of life but other than that I don't see it happening.

Reply Score: 2

Why only talk about Ubuntu on a Mac?
by h3rman on Tue 19th Sep 2006 07:41 UTC
h3rman
Member since:
2006-08-09

Of course, Ubuntu is all the hype, but the only reason for that is the free shipit CDs that are all over the place.
Personally, I think Ubuntu can't yet keep up with the expectations it has created by being hyped.
There are more distributions that run on Macs, among which Fedora Core, and if certain Ubuntu-specific bugs are a reason not to try Linux on a Mac, you might want to try Fedora, or Suse.

Personally, I don't think there's a reason for me to get rid of OSX on our iBook, but I do see a couple of areas where Fedora/Gnome (on the other PC) is better/easier than OSX.
Noone is forced to try out anything, but I think some OSX users would be surprised when using it for a few weeks, and would like to see some of its features in OSX too.

Among them package manager+repositories, multiple DEs, "this window always on top", very fast menu browsing with Alt+letter underlined, shortcuts for virtually everything, fastest copy-paste ever (copy: select, paste: middle mouse click, done).
I started using OSX after having used Linux for a few years. I like Expose and eye candy in general, but I still think Linux/Gnome's easier to use.

Edited 2006-09-19 07:42

Reply Score: 3

Money already spent on a decent product?
by nzMM on Tue 19th Sep 2006 08:22 UTC
nzMM
Member since:
2006-06-22

If you have paid for Mac OS, a product many say is the best OS around (i don't know). In this case I cant see a sensible reason for a person with no tech interests to switch.

But if you are buying a PC and want to save a few bucks on a Windows OS, then i would def recommend Ubuntu.

Or if you have a penchant for experimenting in an alternative to MacOS or Windows, then Ubuntu is a great place to start as well.

Reply Score: 2

I have one
by Kris on Tue 19th Sep 2006 11:01 UTC
Kris
Member since:
2005-07-24

I run Ubuntu on my Powerbook G4 (867MHz). Works like a charm, I'm not looking back. The initial reason to buy this machine (apart from that it looks nice, is not very heavy and the battery life was good) was to see what all this OSX huff is about. Tried it for a while but what can I say I'm too used to Linux so i decided to get the real deal as soon as my OSX was not the most recent version anymore.

However there are of course some issues like no Flash and Java always lagging behind but because I hate Flash and ignore all sites using it anyways this is not an issue. As for Java, there's always the option of using the slightly older version and of course there are other languages to write code in (not naming any to avoid flamewars).

Reply Score: 2

RE: I have one
by kadymae on Tue 19th Sep 2006 14:03 UTC in reply to "I have one"
kadymae Member since:
2005-08-02

because I hate Flash and ignore all sites using it anyways this is not an issue.

Well, cool for you, but every time I get sent a link to YouTube (I have friends who do a lot of video related projects and post them via YouTube for con-crit), or I want to view a flickr slideshow, I have to reboot into or go to another computer.

As much as I like Xubuntu, this is a gaping hole in the web that prevents me from making the Linux switch.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: I have one
by tryphcycle on Tue 19th Sep 2006 15:34 UTC in reply to "RE: I have one"
tryphcycle Member since:
2006-02-16

hateing flash sites in general is just lame! YES... i do agree lots of site mis use flash, or just dont understand GOOD interface design..... HOWEVER.... if you check out a site such as google finance.... you will see how good a flsh site can be! its a pretty subtle implementation... but google has really pushed the limits of what flash can and should be used for!


of cource, you'll have to stop blocking flash in order to use the site!

finance.google.com

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: I have one
by sbergman27 on Tue 19th Sep 2006 19:23 UTC in reply to "RE: I have one"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

I can't recall your platform, but it seems like it's ppc?

I think, but am not certain, that you can do something with nspluginwrapper and qemu to get around this problem. nspluginwrapper allows 32bit binary plugins to plug into x86_64 firefox. Seems like I read somewhere that you can run the 32bit flash plugin under qemu and get it to plug in to a ppc firefox via nspluginwrapper.

This is a very vague recollection, but I firgured I'd mention it.

I *might* have seen it somewhere on the Ubuntu Forums.

-Steve

Reply Score: 1