Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 22nd May 2014 18:21 UTC, submitted by Shane
General Development

I was at the OpenStack Summit this week. The overwhelming majority of OpenStack deployments are Linux-based, yet the most popular laptop vendor (by a long way) at the conference was Apple. People are writing code with the intention of deploying it on Linux, but they're doing so under an entirely different OS.

But what's really interesting is the tools they're using to do so. When I looked over people's shoulders, I saw terminals and a web browser. They're not using Macs because their development tools require them, they're using Macs because of what else they get - an aesthetically pleasing OS, iTunes and what's easily the best trackpad hardware/driver combination on the market. These are people who work on the same laptop that they use at home. They'll use it when they're commuting, either for playing videos or for getting a head start so they can leave early. They use an Apple because they don't want to use different hardware for work and pleasure.

Apple's laptops are still the best PCs money can buy at the moment (despite their horribly outdated displays). It's no wonder Linux developers, too, favour them.

Thread beginning with comment 589326
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I switched to OS X from... Linux
by torp on Thu 22nd May 2014 19:45 UTC
Member since:

Because on OS X I still get a Unix prompt to do my stuff with, but there the GUI actually works.
At first I bought a Macbook because of the hardware quality, and went OS X on laptop and Linux on desktop for 2 years.
Then I hackintoshed my desktop.
I'll probably get some Apple made desktop when my current machine dies - if there is anything resembling an Apple made desktop system when that happens.

Edit: i stay away from both iTunes and iCloud though.

Edited 2014-05-22 19:53 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Priest Member since:

This explains a lot of people I know. People that picked on OS9 moved to OSX mostly for the bash shell.

I think Microsoft made a mistake not supporting a native unix like shell. People who use powershell seem to like it but not of the people I know personally outside of windows admins use it for anything.

If Apple made a consumer version of Mac pro I'd probably using OSX instead of Windows at home. I've said before though that Apple doing that is extremely unlikely and I don't see them changing their stance on that any time soon. The only thing in that space are hackintoshes.

Reply Parent Score: 4

hobgoblin Member since:

Yep, i get the impression that OSX get a whole lot of traction because it frankly is a off the shelf *nix.

One that you can walk into any Apple store with and get tech support to look at.

End result is that they can be found in the hands of quite a few that otherwise only touch *nix on some kind of server.

And frankly, Apple is the only ones that can pull this. Because Dell, HP and the rest are so dependent on the MS bulk discounts for their margins that any serious attempt at getting anything similar out there instantly flatlines.

Yes, they may toy with it endlessly or test the water ever so often. Maybe offer a RH alternative for "workstations". But off the shelf on the high street, forget it.

Reply Parent Score: 5

thulfram Member since:

PowerShell doesn't feel like a shell, it feels like a replacement for VBScript and OLE Automation. Cygwin feels more like a shell, but seems to be falling out of favor for MinGW.

PowerShell is very powerful, as it combines DOS, OLE Automation, .NET, and POSIX philosophy. But the heavy-handed security requirements make it difficult to use at times.

I use Windows a lot, Linux a lot, Firefox OS a whole lot, but Macs become a distant fourth place because they're expensive and the new OS X updates won't work on not-that-old hardware.

And yes, iTunes on Windows is horrible and Safari on Windows is pretty much dead.

Reply Parent Score: 4