Submitted by “I kept my Linux desktop, but moved most of my daily work to the laptop. I also repartitioned my hard drive and reinstalled Mac OS X to give myself space to use Linux/PPC. I tried to get used to Mac OS X for six months, but when a new version of XFree86 came out and supported my video card fully, I finally switched away from Mac OS X. Why? There are plenty of reasons, most of them related to my primary goal.”
every system has its pros and cons. however this particular author doesn’t seem to be anything close to an average user. i mean no interest in mp3s, photo editing, office etc.
..not to mention he’s excited about XFree86, who still uses this?
but you can play mp3s with linux.
in fact my favorite method of dealing with crazy codecs on osx was mplayer (via darwinports), which comes from the free software world.
you can also edit photos on linux. if you are a photoshop user strictly, well duh, you are not using linux. we already know that.
office apps? once again, linux has handled these formats fine for some time.
Don’t you have a calculator on one of those systems ? 😉
I have never tried Mac OS X. Linux has been my desktop since 1994. I do get tempted once in a while when I look at the beautiful Mac hardware but I had a suspicion that I would have a frustration just like
you have if ever I try.
Your experience confirms it. TO all those who keep pronouncing that how linux is not ready for desktop,
there are people like me who find Linux easier than
either Windows or Mac. Ease of use doesn’t end with having a GUI. Ease of use also comes with how aesthetically the underlying system is designed.
Ease of use also comes with how aesthetically the underlying system is designed.
Yet GNU/Linux is a nightmare in that regard compared to the BSDs, Solaris, et al.
The best Linux can hope for is hiding the underlying system from the users. It really needs some modernisation.
there are people like me who find Linux easier than
either Windows or Mac.
=====================
How is this comment modded up to 4 when he proclaims that Linux is easier to use then OSX when earlier in his post he has admitted he has never tried OSX
very strange….
“Ease of use doesn’t end with having a GUI. Ease of use also comes with how aesthetically the underlying system is designed.”
Yeah, I want you to say that to my mom …
Edited 2006-06-05 19:54
The article showed many of the trials and tribulations that anyone faces when swapping one OS for another. Its not limited to OS(Windows, Linux or OS/X) but even betwee n the various flavours of Unix (eg HP/UX, AIX & Solaris)
I use OS/X, Linux & Windows and sometimes feel like putting my size 13’s through the monitor when Daddy Jobs or Daddy Gates says “You can’t do that!” etc etc.
I do suffer some frustrations with Linux but in the main, they are far fewer than Windows.
On a personal note, I wish that I could ditch Windows once and for all but at the moment I can’t but its getting closer as time goes by.
should use the tools that work best for him/her; but geez, he didn’t even know how to set up OSX to not mount any desktop icons??? WTF is up with that….blows credibility out of the water.
I guess its not a intuitive as everyone says then…
yes, clicking on finder, then preferences.. what is this? a mensa test?!
edit: i realize that sounds snide.. i should expand, all i really meant is, if youre going to go into any os trying to use it like another, rather then relearning, youre always going to have some trouble, os x is not windows is not linux is not os x.
Edited 2006-06-04 19:42
Amazing he can fill a couple of pages explaining that OS X isn’t a Linux distribution, stating every difference between them as a fault of OS X.
I did my time on Windows, Linux and OS X. For me it’s obvious OS X is the best desktop OS of those three.
Every Linux distro looks like it’s a messy collection of a bunch of beta software with a logo of the distro maker stuck on together with the reason why this one out of a thousand distro’s does it all right.
I did my time on Windows, Linux and OS X. For me it’s obvious OS X is the best desktop OS of those three.
For you, it IS obviously the best desktop OS. For him, Linux obviously is the best. What is the difference between him having an opinion based on his experience and you having one based on yours?
Every desktop OS has flaws, depending on who is using it and what you’re using it for, and that’s the subject of his article. I’ve found things I really love AND really hate about Windows, OS X, Linux, BeOS, OS/2 and DOS. However, I use what I need to use for the job I’m doing. At work, it’s Windows because our software is written for Windows. At home, it’s Windows strictly for gaming because I cannot use it efficiently as a desktop OS, and Linux for everything else. Once I install World of Warcraft via Cedega I may drop Windows altogether. For a time, I used OS X for both gaming and all other home uses, and I loved it apart from a few minor annoyances, but I couldn’t afford to keep buying Mac hardware so I went back to x86.
All I’m saying is don’t knock the guy for using what is best for him when you have stated that you use what is best for you. It really makes you look stupid.
The difference between him and me is that I don’t write multi-page articles complaining about something I don’t even use.
He isn’t really stating what’s wrong with OS X, he’s just complaining that his pizza is bad, because it’s not a pie.
He uses Linux, spends a few moments with OS X, goes back to Linux and writes an article that OS X isn’t Linux (so it sucks). If that’s his personal opinion that’s great for him, but most people don’t care. Yet he presents his opinion as a “Linux is the benchmark and OS X doesn’t come near it” article.
If he ran the OS X division the next OS X release would be a Gnome based GNU/OS X Linux distro.
I used a Linux desktop for years and still do on occasion (depending on where I am as I only have one iMac). There is still a lot wrong with Linux (despite every year is the year of the Linux desktop), making it very easy to write an article with even more pages than this one talking about why Linux is so crap (because it doesn’t work like OS X).
But that’s a waste of time, just like writing why dogs suck because they aren’t cats.
If you like Linux, great. If you like OS X, great. You can even like Windows XP, but it’s stupid to downgrade something different because it isn’t the same as something else.
It sounds like in the end, you and I agree on the main point: Use what works for you. That said, you made one assumption that bothers me. You said:
He uses Linux, spends a few moments with OS X, goes back to Linux and writes an article that OS X isn’t Linux (so it sucks).
From reading the article again, it sounds like his experience with OS X starts with 10.2 on his laptop, but later he is running 10.3 based on his description of Exposé. I get the feeling he used the OS for at least the better part of a year before making his decision that it didn’t fit his needs. I personally didn’t take that long myself; I spent about 8 months on OS X and for the most part loved it, but the thought of having to buy another Mac just for an OS upgrade sent me back to x86 and Linux. OS X worked for me, but Apple didn’t.
Well, if he’s talking about 10.2-10.3, why share this with us now?
If you go to the shop and buy a new Mac now you won’t find anything less than OS X Tiger on it.
I had some isues when switching from Windows 3.1 to Windows 95 too, but I don’t it will be real usefull info at this point in time.
Like the author I switched from Linux to OS X too and it took me a little while to settle in. I have used many operating systems, so I guess I’m more used to learning something different.
Personally, I wouldn’t say linux distros are just a collection of beta software. I am sure emacs/vim/gimp/etc. are more stable than Applescript/Safari/etc.
However, it appears the author of this article is simply more used to the linux way. Also, his needs seem to be best fulfilled by linux (no multimedia and office and plenty of text editing)
Personally, I wouldn’t say linux distros are just a collection of beta software. I am sure emacs/vim/gimp/etc. are more stable than Applescript/Safari/etc.
However, it appears the author of this article is simply more used to the linux way. Also, his needs seem to be best fulfilled by linux (no multimedia and office and plenty of text editing)
What is the Linux way? Linux is just a kernel. Emacs/vim/gimp run just as well on FreeBSD. Most flagship software like Firefox, OpenOffice and The Gimp even run on Windows.
Linux is credited for a lot of things, while it’s software doing it that runs on many other operating systems too. Solaris runs Gnome too, FreeBSD runs KDE.
When you have a Linux desktop, what do you really have? KDE/Gnome? Not Linux. X11/Xorg? Not Linux. Safely browse the web and do MS Office stuff? Firefox and OpenOffice aren’t Linux either. Chat with Gaim/Kopete, again not Linux. You can set up a FreeBSD machine that runs all those things too.
SUSE, Ubuntu, Debian, Slackware, etc… that’s not Linux, they are Linux based operating systems. They use the Linux kernel, the GNU stuff and a bunch of apps.
Sure the kernel is an important part of an operating system, but in the whole picture it’s a small part. When it comes down for the user to do stuff he uses applications in a desktop enviroment that run just as well on other operating systems.
I really wonder which one modded this one up.
Author was specific about his personal preferences and specified few times this should not reflect to public opinion.
For me personally, OSX is the worst, Windows next, and Linux rocks. And as I always specify, I’m prepared to throw ammounts of money on HW, but being 11 years Apple customer, made me switch away from Mac. Currently I’m ditching Apple completely and as soon as my G5dual and mini are outdated, this will be the end of Apple history at me.
But to be fair, every user has and is entitled ot his own preferences, and so are you. Enjoy OSX. Just please don’t generalize it for the humanity.
Author was specific about his personal preferences and specified few times this should not reflect to public opinion.
Then he should not write a public article, but make some notes in his private diary. If you write public, you’ll get the public’s response.
It really has nothing to do with OS X vs Linux, it just comes down to someone who complains that two different things aren’t the same.
And what’s worse, he isn’t the first! And they all do it the same way: they’re an expert on one system and an obvious noob on another. Then they say their own system r0x and the other one sucks (basicly because it’s not what they are used to).
We even had this a couple of times with Linux pitted against…Linux! “I love my Slackware, tried Fedora and boy did it suck, because it wasn’t Slackware. I’m a Debian user for years, tried SUSE and it didn’t even have apt-get, so it sucks.”, etc…
Then he should not write a public article, but make some notes in his private diary. If you write public, you’ll get the public’s response.
Agreed, but the diff between you and him is he specified personal opinions, while you said it in general way that should apply to whole population. Also in public as original writer (so, where do you find the strength to bash over him?).
This was the reason for my post, not the endless pissing contests my [put anything inside] is better than yours.
Do, not take me wrong. I agree with your opinion that articles as such are unwanted, I don’t agree with the way you put it out (your opinion as truth for population).
Do, not take me wrong. I agree with your opinion that articles as such are unwanted, I don’t agree with the way you put it out (your opinion as truth for population).
I don’t think I stated my personal opinions as facts. In my personal opinion OS X is the more complete and better working desktop OS and in my personal opinion Linux distributions are collections of software sometimes dubious quality. Not to say some stuff is very good though, but it’s never a unity.
There is one real solid fact and that is the author complaining that two different things aren’t the same thing and he needs a couple of pages to do so. Now sometimes it’s funny to read how an expert on System A makes a mess on System B, thinking it works just like System A, but this time the author really taking it out on OS X. And for what? For not being a Linux distro?
He should have written: I like Linux a lot, but I tried OS X anyway and I didn’t like it because it isn’t Linux.
He should have written: I like Linux a lot, but I tried OS X anyway and I didn’t like it because it isn’t Linux.
Funny you put it like this. If you’d put it like this originaly, I would confirm your comment not attacked you. Hell, I would even mod you up if I would have damn mod points. You could even add “… it isn’t Linux and shut the fsck up” and I would still agree.
Now, let me disect your original comment:)
I did my time on Windows, Linux and OS X. For me it’s obvious OS X is the best desktop OS of those three.
This is generaly, not personally spoken. If you’d wanted to speak personally, then you should put something like this:
For me and my use OSX is the most suitable.
Every Linux distro looks like it’s a messy collection of a bunch of beta software with a logo of the distro maker stuck on together with the reason why this one out of a thousand distro’s does it all right.
Again, generaly spoken. Now look for example my side.
Please, do not be offended with this next part, it is merely trying to represent my point of view on your comment, not to insult you in any way.
While that might be truth from where you stand, I can assure you that I can’t achieve as much conforming, uniform and well balanced system as on Linux distros (but real fact is that in my opinion OS9 was the most conforming and consistant OS of all, ever). It is all about personal choice. And the most messy OS? Definitely OSX. As I finally set up all the tools I need (and most of them were still crapped out. yes, using linux apps under x11 on OSX is crap worth) my desktop looked like holly damnation of the crappy rainbow (btw. I did first tried to find OSX equivalents of the apps I need, and whenever I did, I used that one, but that still wasn’t enough to make a difference), not even two pieces of software looked similiar.
One could say you’re not capable to set up Linux, then again one could say I’m not capable to set up OSX. On the other hand, what is the truth? You’re probably most productive under OSX which seems to suit you best. I’m most productive under Linux, which seems to suit me best. Everyone got its own best, where best completely differs. And in the end all that it matters is that we both are happy. And this should be reason enough why one OS can’t be better than other. Sooo,… Which is better, yours or mine? Answer is, neither when speaking for humanity. And yes, one is better when you look at this thing personally. But then again, speak like you did in this last comment of yours.
This is why I often ask people to stop speaking their opinion as general. Go trough my comments and you’ll find out I never speak my version as humanity opinion, except in few comments where this really is general opinion or real state of the things.
And even this being so, I don’t just attack everyone, I just attack posters that post “hollier than thou” like comments (like you did, rightfully accusing writer of the mistake, by repeating his mistake) but being just as guilty as the reasons for their post. Maybe you didn’t ment it to be like it was, but you did it.
Fair enough?
Edited 2006-06-05 16:15
I think “For me it’s obvious OS X is the best desktop OS of those three” is clearly a personal opinion, because of the “for me” part at the beginning.
Now I do give you a point for claiming I generalised Linux distro’s for being a messy collection. Ubuntu and SUSE aren’t messy.
But I think things do become a little messy when you use Gnome and start using KDE apps or when you use KDE and install some Gapps. Simple things like a file requester start to differ from application to application. XMMS isn’t Gnome or KDE, so it introduces its own file requester.
Install Ubuntu and only extra Gnome apps you start with a consistent system that stays consistent.
However there are (and have been) distro’s that just fill your hard disk with 5 browsers, 4 e-mail clients, 7 news readers en 4 instant messengers. These kind of distro’s are messy (IMHO). To attain this level of “choice” a lot of beta crap is included. Like I remember a version of SUSE where you had about 3 programs to control the sound volume.
I’m happy Ubuntu still manages to deliver a good functional system on only 1 CD.
because of the “for me” part at the beginning.
Not really enough, but close… But then again you noticed the part because of which I attacked so vigorously.
Take summary of what you said in my viewpoint:)
I can take OSX, install some apps with fink, add some java apps using swt, add some older apps, which still use their theme (I will stop here but I could continue) and I get completely the same mess as you mentioned about Linux.
Consistancy is up to user, and this is just a nicer way to put up what you said in the next paragraph.
[distros filling your hdd with 5 browsers, 4 e-mail clients]
And while I don’t like that for most of the things, you don’t like that… there probably exist a lot of people that like that thing. And here I take on your claim.
For example, web developer is happier if he can test his pages on more than one browser, but all on one computer.
I use 3 mail clients. Why? To be able to actively track some things, by fashinably being selective about what do I see and what I don’t in that particular moment. My previous use was using different mail clients, which was easier to set up. Nowadays I just use evolution under 4 different users. Even though it is more hassle to set up (and to use, I don’t use username without password and I don’t use keychains for that particular purpose), it is far more productive.
Personally, I use two rss feed readers constantly (I had to install both additionaly). One to keep history (liferea, running minimized in tray but maximized when I search for something being older, and the fact beagle indexes liferea should be enough), and one to have quick access to daily news as fast as possibly which liferea sure isn’t.
I use two messengers, Gnome-X-Chat for IRC and Gaim for MSN and Jabber. While IRC (I’m on development chanels only) is 24-hour on, Gaim isn’t (I want to be selective when people can bug me and when not. And closing software is much easier than using busy, off-line etc). Both of those were already installed.
Are you saying my usage is wrong? That I can’t be productive, because I don’t use software as you do? Hell, all those things boost my productivity and for sure boost web developers productivity. But, then again. Looking from the perspective of the OS which doesn’t have virtual desktops, that claim would be acceptable (btw. I know OSX has a thrird-party virtual desktop solutions, but none I tried was worth anything).
IMHO, if you don’t understand the reason why some distros like that exist, don’t crap on them. There probably was a reason why that particular distro was being worked on. You not understanding the reason (or you not liking it) is not reason enough to say something like that. Some people would disagree, and the fact that people are happiest if they get all they need already installed by default.
Again, another even nicer example of exposing your flawed assumtion. DeMuDi (or Agnula), I’m spare time musician and I really enjoy with one distro providing me with more tools than I will ever need, but without a single hassle of installing my audio setup (yeah, before Agnula, this was a real pain in the ass). And Agnula provides a lot of duplicated things, that is as long as you don’t see the diversities between implementations.
Edited 2006-06-05 18:03
I’m not saying your usage or preference is wrong, if you like using Linux that’s good for you. I like Linux too, good for us.
Concerning the messiness of OS X and Linux, you can make OS X a little messy, but some Linux dsitro’s are messy by default. Most users aren’t web developers and don’t need a number of graphical browsers and a few console based ones. And if they do they can add them later.
I think we are seeing more distro’s just selecting the best apps for their default install. Adding thousands of apps is just marketing.
But it’s not consistency or quality of apps that makes me prefer OS X over a Linux distro. It just works under OS X. If it just works under Linux it often still is a pleasant supprise.
Inserting an USB key just works under OS X (and Windows XP and even Windows 2000). I had a SUSE distro that locked up the PC, a SUSE distro that took ages to mount it, another distro (could have been Slackware or Ubuntu) that detected the key as sdb, but tried to mount sda instead.
So I just mount it by typing some commands. People at work often ask me why I have to do all that stuff in DOS just to access an USB key.
Things are improving of course, but I do wonder why it’s taking so long. And me personaly I just want things to work, it’s 2006!
So what do a lot of people do? They hop from distro to distro or upgrade their current one, hoping things finaly fall in to place. In the meantime they use Google to add MP3 and DVD playback support and fix other things they want/need.
You don’t seem to get my point don’t you:)
Concerning the messiness of OS X and Linux, you can make OS X a little messy,
A little? my OSX was a lot more messy than any other OS so far. But as I already said, its me.
but some Linux dsitro’s are messy by default.
Fact 1) There are clean distros. Use those if you preffer. I seriously doubt that anyone was forcing you to use some distro with a gun pointed to your head.
Fact 2) As long as some people enjoy having mess and use those distros, why are you so opposed to the fact that some people would like the mess some XYZ distro provides. Example. Agnula is quite a mess of non-consistant software. But very, very good and professional at the same time. You know why. It serves its own purpose. Having a complete audio station installed by the time CD install is over. I like it.
Another thing. Now on my machine (actualy I bought two same machines at the same time, for a little research of mine) I use fc5 (on both). And so far I refuse to use console on that machine (I would like to see what one can do without console on this one). I haven’t used it even once so far and still all my software and hardware (including NVidia drivers is installed). Mounting and unmounting USB drives is my daily routine. And so far machine was rebooted twice. Now second machine is where I allow my self to use console, just to see the difference, so far only XGL is different (where I can’t get it worked out without console, and I’m serious enough that until option without my pushing and helping with the second machine I simply won’t have it) besides XGL, completely identical software runs on both.
Things are improving of course, but I do wonder why it’s taking so long. And me personaly I just want things to work, it’s 2006!
They do work for me under Linux, they don’t under OSX. Why would this help your case?
Just one single example (I will restrain my self of naming others), I simply install ufraw and almost any earthly known raw format is supported on my linux machine with file manager preview included (I needed to run Add/Remove Software and search for ufraw, select it and click install. btw. I do get a lot of photos from different photographers with cameras ranging from canon-Dxx to H2 and other similiar like Sony). On OSX, what a hell this is. I had to install all softwares for all cameras, where not even one version was free and after test period has finished, I had to delete it. Free software on OSX? except ufraw and gimp not even one was really universally usable and even those two were crippled because they weren’t integrated into DE. Talk about just works and consistant gui now.
Ok, the second one. I refuse to have iPod (why would I buy player with restrictions and crappy support?), my mp3 player unfortunatelly doesn’t works no matter how many times I plug it into mac and recite “Just Works”. Works from base Linux and with driver support from Windows though.
So what do a lot of people do? They hop from distro to distro or upgrade their current one, hoping things finaly fall in to place. In the meantime they use Google to add MP3 and DVD playback support and fix other things they want/need.
why would upgrading be bad? this is beyond me.
Second one, as I already said, no console and both just worked with adding few repos (yes, in gui).
And finally, don’t you get it? Some people like mess, some people like jumping from distro to distro, some people must run bleeding edge just to be a little before their fellow geeks.
Why would you be so important to te counted as deciding factor what people need and what people don’t need?
And remember one more thing, for every case you’ll name I will find you counter case. Why? Because I want to. Viewpoint of someone not liking something is completely different from viewpoint where someone wants or like something
Edited 2006-06-05 20:49
You don’t seem to get my point don’t you:)
I do get your point, you like Linux, you don’t mind a mess and OS X is not your thing. Much like the author of the article, so I understand your defensive stand on this one.
Sometimes I like a mess too, fiddling around with Linux trying to get things to work my way (the undefault way apparently) and OS X is my thing.
In my situation I didn’t had to add much software to my OS X machine. LimeWire, Google Earth, a RSS reader, Palm software, MS Office and a few games. And I do own an iPod and it never restricted me. I could import all the MP3s on my Linux server to iTunes and I can play them on my iPod, mail them to anyone I like or stream them to iTunes on my XP laptop. For me OS X + iLife filled my needs for the most part.
I don’t mind upgrading my Linux distro. In fact I enjoy seeing all the version numbers go up and awaiting a new & improved system. I do mind everytime I install a distro from scratch I have to find out how to add MP3 support, getting the DVDs to play, getting all the browser plugins. Sometimes this can be fun, but when you’re not in the mood it isn’t fun.
And my point, as mentioned before, if you like Linux, great. Same for OS X and Windows. If it’s your thing, use it. I was never the type of Linux user that was trying to convert the Windows world.
It’s just my opinion that Linux distro’s (not all) tend to be messy. It’s an opinion based on almost 25 years of using computers, from the Commodore 64 at the start to the iMac now. In between I used Amiga OS, DOS, OS/2, Windows 3.1 to XP, FreeBSD, a whole bunch of Linux distributions and the classic Mac OS.
Of that whole collection it’s the Linux distributions that force me to fiddle the most to get things working right (much much more than trying to modify CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT to get enough free mem to load a mouse driver AND a game).
It’s messy and you admit your Linux distro it too. So I think we agree. It’s messy, you like it, I sometimes like it and I don’t mind if you like it.
I feel like I’m talking to a wall.
I do get your point, you like Linux, you don’t mind a mess and OS X is not your thing
No, you didn’t get tha slightest point
1. I don’t like mess, I like consistancy. All software I use on my linux computers is either gtk based or I don’t use it. Blender being the first case of gtk exemption, but I don’t really mind that. It runs on special machine which has only one single purpose, runing blender (and IceWM as WM, no panels and other things, just blender mostly full screen). And computer installed with Agnula being the second case of exemption (but audio apps are mess on all systems, every damn coder seems to have its own opinion which widget set is best to use).
2. OSX is not my thing, yes. I hate it because it forced me to be to much inconsistant, it was (or is, I still own G5dual and mini, but I avoid them as much as possible) a complete mess when I finally achieved functionality I need. Too much of mess for me to swallow
3. It is not a mess if you use two or more apps for the same purpose, in fact it sometimes brings more order and consistancy. It just depends on how and what you need.
4. Did you feel at any time I would like to convert you? Well, if you did you didn’t understand what I was talking about. My point was solely: Who are we to say something is generally good or bad, messy or consistant? Are we even entitled to that fact? Only when speaking personal opinion.
5. I tended to use Linux from console, but as of late I try to avoid that for one sole reason. To see where one can get without it. For example, this is why I bought two machines (NForce4, AMD4400X2, NVidia6600, DVD-RW, etc…). To see where one can get with clicking and where can he get without. One computer (my main), is set up completely without any fiddling, just by clicking.
6. When did I ever admit my Linux distro is messy? I install FC5, without KDE and without many other things just so I can have less mess and more consistancy. Again, using two or more pieces of software for the same purpose is not necesarry meaning mess, if it used to provide more order.
7. You’re not the only one to start using computer in that time, btw. mine goes even further in history. And probably more colorfull too.
8. I’m nothing like the author. As I already said I disagree with the way he put it out. But, I hate “hollier than thou” even more than articles like that one.
9. (talking only about those people who have mess) I only said there are people who like mess, are forced to have mess in some cases or mess is working for them. You know that one? “What is someones shit is another ones gold”, or translated to fit this case “what is someones chaos is another ones order”. This would be the reason why we’re not entitled to say what is a mess and what is not (exemption is speaking personal opinion). So some (or most as you say) maybe just tend to be messy (as in, for mine and yours viewpoint) because people see some special kind of purpose for that particular mess which we don’t or can’t.
Now be a good boy and point out:
1. where did I admitted I like mess?
2. where I said I don’t mind mess?
3. where did I tried to convert you?
4. where did I say my distro is messy?
I feel like I’m talking to a wall.
That tends to happen when you try to change someone’s opinion.
I never claimed you were trying to convert me or anyone else, I claimed I wasn’t the converting type like some Linux users are when they go public. But I do start to get the feeling you are trying to at least convince me of your own personal opinion.
You don’t like OS X, yet you have two Macs, including a dual G5! Are they P.O.W.’s? People make valid claims they’d like to use OS X, but think Apple asks too much money. Why don’t you donate those two machines. Then you don’t have to avoid them anymore.
Next you say you can make OS X messy, so I conclude we agree it isn’t messy by default. And it’s hardly Apple’s fault OS X can be made messy.
Then you claim you can make FC5 less messy (not mess free), by excluding some software. This is the opposite. You have to put effort in to make OS X messy and have to put effort in to make FC5 less messy.
Furthermore you use some unknown Linux distro, that is messy, but it’s the only one that fits your needs. While most people just need to install the software to fit their needs you have to install an entire operating system!
You balance between claiming Linux distro’s aren’t messy and stating mess can be good or mess isn’t always a mess.
Linux distro’s are becomming less messy, because apparently people got fed up going through a lengthy install to have their hard disk filled with stuff they don’t need or use. Ubuntu is the latest and greatest Linux distro and it’s only 1 CD selecting the best apps for their purpose.
The author of the article made some personal statements, I responed with my own personal opinion and now you object to that by forcing your own personal opionion upon me. Even asking why I was modded up!
You hate people being holier than holy, but you do the same thing and even do it more evil by questioning why I was modded up.
Now what do you want from me? How I rate OS X, Linux and XP was clearly a personal opinion. I admitted I generalized Linux distributions, but again it was a personal opinion. You aren’t going to change my opinion, one based on years and years of Linux usage and you certainly aren’t going to do it with some unbalanced statements.
You use a number of computers and Linux distributions to get things done, that’s fine with me. I just use an iMac with OS X.
We both agree the article wasn’t much use, looking at an older version of OS X and claiming it isn’t a Linux distro and we both like Linux, only I’m not allowed to called it messy.
Are they P.O.W.’s?
Nope, the last of the remnants where Macs were part of my bussines. But with the latest Apple actions, I plan to drop it. Simply, too much hassle and too small ammount of worth.
Next you say you can make OS X messy, so I conclude we agree it isn’t messy by default. And it’s hardly Apple’s fault OS X can be made messy.
Wooow, and OSX by default is very usable. Yes. You can’t do shit without installing additional software. So, if you want to use it mess (that would be my case not general) is unavoidable
Then you claim you can make FC5 less messy (not mess free), by excluding some software. This is the opposite. You have to put effort in to make OS X messy and have to put effort in to make FC5 less messy.
Clicking “desktop setup” is a hassle? Desktop setup in fc5 is consistant gnome only variant. Yep, you have strange viewpoints. And I do get a lot more software by default on Linux.
Furthermore you use some unknown Linux distro, that is messy, but it’s the only one that fits your needs. While most people just need to install the software to fit their needs you have to install an entire operating system!
Agnula unknown? Google is your friend. It is a specialized musician distro.
You balance between claiming Linux distro’s aren’t messy and stating mess can be good or mess isn’t always a mess.
Nope, I balance between people opinions. I can’t say what is mess and what is not. Because people tend to differ.
Trouble is you don’t see past your self, while I do.
The author of the article made some personal statements, I responed with my own personal opinion and now you object to that by forcing your own personal opionion upon me. Even asking why I was modded up!
What you don’t get it is: I agree withthe point of your post. I attacked you because you were preaching something by spewing the same non-sense as original author. This is “hollier than thou” like comment.
Forcing my personal opinion, well that is a new one:) Trying to explain someone that it is not horizon what he sees when he’s bended and looking at his ass is not forcing an opinion.
Now what do you want from me? How I rate OS X, Linux and XP was clearly a personal opinion. I admitted I generalized Linux distributions, but again it was a personal opinion. You aren’t going to change my opinion, one based on years and years of Linux usage and you certainly aren’t going to do it with some unbalanced statements.
Did I ever asked for your opinion about linux, osx, windows? Nope, please recheck the posts and correct me if I’m wrong. But you play the same song all over again.
I just wanted to refute your claim “something is messy”. It could only be messy if whole humanity would agree it is messy, but as long as some people find it usable and “the best” who are we to judge what is a mess. I tried to show you different ways when some “mess” (like you called it) can really become order which boosts productivity. You and I can’t define what and how one would like to use his computer.
You use a number of computers and Linux distributions to get things done, that’s fine with me. I just use an iMac with OS X.
Yep, I have (current PC setup, but it constantly changes) 2 testing machines with bleeding edge, 5 specialized machines, 7 coding machines and 5 servers all running unix, then G5dual and mini running osx. One G3 with linux and few others not worth to mention.
Coding clustered HPC services (which is my primary job) demands setup like that just to be able to test it.
By this kind of setup I’ve learned I had to find some way to organize thigs really neat to be able to keep track of all. And sometimes it is easier to introduce special purpose machine, than mix some job with what already works.
We both agree the article wasn’t much use, looking at an older version of OS X and claiming it isn’t a Linux distro and we both like Linux, only I’m not allowed to called it messy.
Yep, exactly like that
Well you can even call it a mess, by specifiying personal opinion.
Now look how you said that:
Concerning the messiness of OS X and Linux, you can make OS X a little messy, but some Linux dsitro’s are messy by default.
However there are (and have been) distro’s that just fill your hard disk with 5 browsers, 4 e-mail clients, 7 news readers en 4 instant messengers. These kind of distro’s are messy (IMHO). To attain this level of “choice” a lot of beta crap is included. Like I remember a version of SUSE where you had about 3 programs to control the sound volume.
Every Linux distro looks like it’s a messy collection of a bunch of beta software with a logo of the distro maker stuck on together with the reason why this one out of a thousand distro’s does it all right.
And that was just a quick copy/paste from your comments.
What is wrong with those comments? Stop generalizing like you know what is mess and what isn’t. Agnula was just one example when something messy is in fact order because it brings higher usability. Most of those “messy” distros like you called them are special purpose distros and all I try to tell you there might be a reason why it is like that, and that we probably don’t understand the order of the things completely.
Now lets see, you choose your nick Chaos_One? Funny, since you don’t seem to get past the first rule of chaos? Every kind of chaos is some kind of order, one just has to analyze it.
Wooow, and OSX by default is very usable. Yes. You can’t do shit without installing additional software. So, if you want to use it mess (that would be my case not general) is unavoidable
It comes with Safari, a mail client and iLife. This covers the basics more than enough. The only extra application I installed and I use daily is MSN Messenger.
Clicking “desktop setup” is a hassle? Desktop setup in fc5 is consistant gnome only variant. Yep, you have strange viewpoints. And I do get a lot more software by default on Linux.
You said you had to leave out stuff, that’s what I called putting effort in, not even hassle. The number of applications doesn’t say a thing, 100 crap apps don’t beat 10 great ones.
Agnula unknown? Google is your friend. It is a specialized musician distro.
Never read anything on it on OSNews. Even if I google it it doesn’t mean it becomes a mainstream distro. I never used Gentoo, Fedora, CentOS and Vector, but I know them.
I do know one musician. He switched from Windows to Linux and he was quite upset with all the hassle (now I do use the word) involved to get things done. I didn’t tell him to buy a Mac, I just answered his Linux questions, which wasn’t easy as he did an install in Dutch and eventhough I’m Dutch too I always select English. But in the end he did buy a Mac and then an iBook because he liked it so much.
Nope, I balance between people opinions. I can’t say what is mess and what is not. Because people tend to differ.
Trouble is you don’t see past your self, while I do.
If you realise people have different opinions why can’t you accept my opinion about Linux distributions? I accept your opinion, why can’t you accept mine? You keep on judging me and my opinion. I just keep telling you it’s my opinion.
What you don’t get it is: I agree withthe point of your post. I attacked you because you were preaching something by spewing the same non-sense as original author. This is “hollier than thou” like comment.
Forcing my personal opinion, well that is a new one:) Trying to explain someone that it is not horizon what he sees when he’s bended and looking at his ass is not forcing an opinion.
I’m fully aware that people looking at the same thing can see different things. And when I look at Linux I think it’s messy. At least more messy than OS X (GUI) and FreeBSD (the underlying system). Even you use a messy Linux distribution!
You admit it being messy, but you say messy things can be good too. I never disagreed with that. So what are we talking about? I say it’s messy, you say it’s messy, only you add that messy can be good and I don’t care (mind) if it’s good or not.
Did I ever asked for your opinion about linux, osx, windows? Nope, please recheck the posts and correct me if I’m wrong. But you play the same song all over again.
In my original post (the one that upset you, although I’ve seen some stranger comments) I rated OS X, as a desktop, above XP and Linux. I never pretended to be holier than the author. I just stated he complains OS X isn’t Linux, we agree on that and I made a statement about Linux distro’s being messy. This was put a bit strong and I changed that opinion on your request, but that doesn’t change my view that Linux distro’s were messy and a number still are, like your well known unknown distro.
I just wanted to refute your claim “something is messy”. It could only be messy if whole humanity would agree it is messy, but as long as some people find it usable and “the best” who are we to judge what is a mess. I tried to show you different ways when some “mess” (like you called it) can really become order which boosts productivity. You and I can’t define what and how one would like to use his computer.
Of course I can say it’s messy, if that’s my opinion. You called me stupid, I doubt if entire humanity agreed on that one. I for one would veto that vote!
You don’t have to convince me a messy Linux distro can be fun or productive. I know that already, I used messy Linux distro’s. I got things working, I had fun. I bought about 7 DVDs for 2 euro each last Saturday, all crap Kung Fu classics (explains the price tag), but I like them. If someone asks me if they are any good, I’ll say they are crap without consulting humanity.
Yep, I have (current PC setup, but it constantly changes) 2 testing machines with bleeding edge, 5 specialized machines, 7 coding machines and 5 servers all running unix, then G5dual and mini running osx. One G3 with linux and few others not worth to mention.
Coding clustered HPC services (which is my primary job) demands setup like that just to be able to test it.
By this kind of setup I’ve learned I had to find some way to organize thigs really neat to be able to keep track of all. And sometimes it is easier to introduce special purpose machine, than mix some job with what already works.
In my personal opinion it seems you have a great and interesting job.
Well you can even call it a mess, by specifiying personal opinion.
It always has been my personal opinion. If I wanted to state it as a fact I would have mentioned supporting facts. Without peeking I may even think that in every reply to you I have put up a personal opinion sign.
What is wrong with those comments? Stop generalizing like you know what is mess and what isn’t. Agnula was just one example when something messy is in fact order because it brings higher usability. Most of those “messy” distros like you called them are special purpose distros and all I try to tell you there might be a reason why it is like that, and that we probably don’t understand the order of the things completely.
Linux distro’s tend to turn messy easily. A Linux distro is a person, group of people or a company, whatever, that takes a Linux kernel (not written by them), the GNU stuff (not written by them), bundles a lot of apps (not written by them), adds an installer (could be written or borrowed) and perhaps some config utils (good chance of being written by them).
So you have a lot of stuff that has nothing to do with each other and you have to combine it in to a unity. Ubuntu does this by hiding the console stuff and only using Gnome and Gnome apps. Some distro’s don’t do this, they just fill up the CD(s) with everything they can find.
You know the ones where KDE menu’s start Gnome apps or even console apps in a xterm window. I personally consider this messy.
And I guess this is why some distro’s now only select the best app for the job, try to make their desktop look and feel consistent and why Gnome has instructions for coders how to make their apps behave the Gnome way.
Now lets see, you choose your nick Chaos_One?
Oh no, it’s the cheap shots bonus round.
Funny, since you don’t seem to get past the first rule of chaos? Every kind of chaos is some kind of order, one just has to analyze it.
Order is chaos seeming organized.
I did my time on Windows, Linux and OS X. For me it’s obvious OS X is the best desktop OS of those three.
I think you are wrong. The best assesment of usability between the various desktop OS was carried out last year at the Birmingham City Library in the UK.
They made Mac, Windows and Gnome and KDE systems available for both library staff and members to try. This is a summary of what they found as told by the Birmingham City Council’s IT manager with responsibility for the open source trial:
“We had Mac, Microsoft Windows and best-of-breed open source configurations, including KDE and Gnome. We had 300 people using the PCs. The one they preferred was Gnome.”
http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2005/11/15/212909/Birmingham…
So it shows that all HIG and usability work put in to GNOME is paying off. Gnome is turning out to be a more intuitive interface than OSX.
Of course I am biased, I am a GNOME user since version 1.0.
Edited 2006-06-04 23:15
I think you are wrong. The best assesment of usability between the various desktop OS was carried out last year at the Birmingham City Library in the UK.
I can’t be wrong about my personal opinion. 🙂
I rate my desktop OS as something I use for work and in my private live. The library people just work with their computer, I have to sleep with it too.
Like most people on OSNews I do a little more with my computer than just surf the web and send an e-mail. I do a very wide range of stuff with my computer.
I doubt the library people in Birgmingham inserted any DVDs, edited pictures or played MP3 files. If they’re presented with OS X/XP/Gnome/KDE and asked to wiggle their mouse I’m sure they’d prefer Gnome because it’s the most simplistic DE.
I like Gnome too, I prefer it over KDE. But for me it’s not the GUI or DE. After spending a lot of time with Linux, googling my way to solutions for problems I found OS X a welcome relief. Fiddling around to get things working can be fun, but after a while you get old and tired and you want something that “just works”.
For that matter I’d rate XP over Linux/Gnome, but given a choice between them I’d go for Linux ’cause it’s more fun.
But in the end it’s your personal taste which OS you prefer. I don’t doubt there are people around who prefer MS-DOS to XP, Linux or OS X.
I like to visit the Apple stores and play with OSX and see what Apple adds with each new version. Apple deserves credit for creating a homogenious OS where all the applications blend together nicely. It looks really good all the time.
Funny thing is though I can do everything I need to do on linux already using the Fedora distro. I don’t think I could get used to having to pay for all the applications I have downloaded. Whether you are using apt-get or yum I have gotten used to typing ‘yum groupupdate Gnome’ and having all my applications update. To have to start buying individual applications and keep them updated would be tedious and costly. For now I guess I will have to make do without glowing buttons and dancing icons and cool transparency effects. When you have basic work to get done you don’t miss those eye candy effects that much.
Edited 2006-06-04 14:55
I switch between OS X and Linux on a regular basis (Linux on a laptop, OS X on a desktop), and I have to say it’s a fair toss-up between the two. OS X is more flashy, but GNOME’s HIG paranoia has resulted in a very good interface. It also looks great — GNOME is a lot more contrasty and easier to use over long periods of time. In Dapper (which rocks, btw), it even looks quite sexy, in a demure sort of way.
That said, my next laptop is probably going to be a Macbook. OS X has some very good software, for which its hard to find Linux equivalents (eg: Emacs.app, TexShop). It’s lacking native-looking versions of some other software (notably, an Excel replacement, and a free vector-graphics package), but at least OpenOffice and Inkscape run on OS X. The real dealbreaker for me, however, is GNOME’s lack of a composited desktop. It’s 2006 — dragging one window over another should not result in artifacts, ever! It’s positively uncivilized. XGL is supposed to fix that, but its prospects seem hopeless at this point…
I mean…you mis os X software (Emacs.app, TexShop !!!) for which there is no linux equivalent….
I’m probably missing something there,
what are the advantages of Emacs.app and TexShop over say
Emacs/Xemacs and
TeTeX or MikTeX (which is rapidly coming to all unixes near your home)
for a linux distribution ?
Through work, I received the opportunity for a sizable discount on a new PowerBook. Mac OS X 10.2 had recently come out and my Mac-using friends claimed that it was much more powerful and usable than previous versions. (Many of my friends still pined for the performance of Classic, especially on older hardware.)
and
I kept my Linux desktop, but moved most of my daily work to the laptop. I also repartitioned my hard drive and reinstalled Mac OS X to give myself space to use Linux/PPC. I tried to get used to Mac OS X for six months
then:
I want working virtual desktops. Exposé is not a solution; by the time I’ve hit enough keys to make Exposé do its thing, watched its animation, and selected the correct application, I could be working with the correct application if I had proper virtual desktops selectable by key combination.
Aroo?!
The writer of this article never mentions which version of OS X he’s using.
From the opening of the article, one might think it’s the 10.2.x that came with the lap top, but then Expose is mentioned, and I remember that being a feature that didn’t arrive until 10.3.
The writer mentions the animation that Expose uses. What animation?! Hitting the F11 key on my keyboard gives me a nigh instantaneous view of the desktop. (And I’m on a 4 year old machine with the original nVidia video card.)
—
I won’t get into details on my disagreements with the other matters of preference that the writer brings up — I really prefer the OS X software install method to apt-get/synaptic, have yet to have a problem with dragging and trashing as an uninstall, and for me a well set up dock trumps multiple desktops — except to say, that I would also like focus follows mouse on OS X and in Win XP. It’s cracktacular.
It’s 2006 — dragging one window over another should not result in artifacts, ever! It’s positively uncivilized. XGL is supposed to fix that, but its prospects seem hopeless at this point…
I know what your talking about but I haven’t seen this happen ever in Gnome 2.12-2.14+. All the cool transparency effects will eventually get in there via XGL or some of the newer hybrid window managers/compositing engines. In general it takes about 2 years for a feature to trickle down from proprietary software to open source. At the risk of being flamed here it has been this way for a while. OSX gets desktop searching and a year later Gnome adds it via Beagle. Anyone remember what version 1.0 of Gnome was like? I remember struggling to use just the drop down menus since they looked like copies of Windows features but didn’t respond correctly. Two years later the menus worked just fine. Windows XP gets transparent windows, 2 years later Gnome gets transparency features. Trickle down — wait long enough and it will end up in open source. Of course there is innovation also in KDE and Gnome but I have always felt the GUI’s were playing catch-up with Apple and Microsoft’s features.
Edited 2006-06-04 15:16
i made the exact same move, just some weeks earlier. osx turned out to be a disappointment for me.
my osx gripes:
– its slower than a gnome-based linux (i.e. dapper) on the same hardware
– it has bugs (beach ball of death – i actually was seeing DUAL beach balls of death)
– it is a unix…kinda
– it had problems finding and talking to our printer at work – ubuntu found it and deals with it, no problem (its an HP printer)
– no obvious built-in features like virtual screens (i found many free and open utilities to do this, but something so trivial should be built in)
– no unifying package management. darwinports etc live in a different universe.
– ANNOYING nag notes to update crap i didn’t use – itunes etc
BUT, like the author states, the wifi support was good, and connecting an external monitor to the laptop with osx was easy. the external monitor thing in particular needs to get fixed, almost every laptop user i know has an external monitor….
in any case i put dapper on this laptop and never looked back. i won’t ever get to use flash, etc (i highly doubt a PPC linux flash will ever emerge), but i’ll live
“my osx gripes:
– its slower than a gnome-based linux (i.e. dapper) on the same hardware
– it has bugs (beach ball of death – i actually was seeing DUAL beach balls of death)
– it is a unix…kinda
– it had problems finding and talking to our printer at work – ubuntu found it and deals with it, no problem (its an HP printer)
– no obvious built-in features like virtual screens (i found many free and open utilities to do this, but something so trivial should be built in)
– no unifying package management. darwinports etc live in a different universe.
– ANNOYING nag notes to update crap i didn’t use – itunes etc”
So at least you tried to use it 🙂
Maybe it is slower and maybe sometimes there is a bbod (never had two of them), and yes it is more like unix than linux, but
– both use CUPS for printing, so this should not be a problem.
– virtual screens are so trivial that even Windows had them build in (TM). Why should they copy this when they have Expose?
– so no unifying package management. Prrrft. Sorry, thats too much. You have (m)pkg or Drag&Drop via .DMG. It is easy enough.
– never found the “ignore this update” function? You are sure you used OS X for more than 1 minute?
– virtual screens are so trivial that even Windows had them build in (TM). Why should they copy this when they have Expose?
Actually Windows does not have virtual screens built in. There is a lousy application from Microsoft to handle it, as well as many 3rd party applications.
Perhaps I should use an ironic flag next time…
my osx gripes:
– its slower than a gnome-based linux (i.e. dapper) on the same hardware
Really? I have *extreme* curiosity about that statement.
I haven’t yet done my set up with Dapper, but I’ve got a dual boot Breezy/10.3.9 Pismo Powerbook (g3 500/512) and OS X is far and away faster than Breezy and I never get “ghost arrow” with OS X. I get it all the time with Breezy.
It isn’t obvious how to change this feature, you are correct. However, the ability to change it has been present since at least 10.1, and has been documented in the help files since at least that revision as well.
This is one of the worst articles I have ever read here on OSnews… the user says he tried OSX por 6 months but didn’t know how to do the simplest things… also every difference between OSX and Linux is seen as OSX’s fault… he didn’t install any extra on OSX, just stated that Y and Z is missing out of the box… hell, he even says that OSX being UNIX is a bad thing! Really bad article! Nothing interesting at all! He didn’t have to choose between OSX or Linux, he just had to be fair. Every system has its pros and cons…
I’m a Win, OSX and Ubuntu user and I know I first need to learn before being able to criticise. Sorry my poor english.
Edited 2006-06-04 16:41
also every difference between OSX and Linux is seen as OSX’s fault…
He likes to do stuff in a certain way, which is not possible with OS X and is possible with Linux. Can you blame him if he considers this to be a plus for Linux and a minus for OS X? Isn’t this what every user is after: personal comfort?
He didn’t have to choose between OSX or Linux, he just had to be fair. Every system has its pros and cons…
Fair has nothing to do with it in this particular context. This isn’t an impartial review or comparison. He’s a particular kind of user with particular needs and he explains why Linux is better suited to him than OS X. That’s all.
Expecting one desktop interface or operating system to be good for everyone is not realistic.
“Awhile back I switched to eating oatmeal w/raisins for my daily breakfast. After some several weeks of this, I’ve gone back to oatmeal w/apple. Here’s why…”
So, uh, good. Go with what you like, my friend, and more power to you. Once I tried to do my daily work using Windows 2K, but I didn’t stick with it because I’m more familiar with and happier doing it on my OS X machine. Is that news? Now I’m not technical editor of the O’Reilly Network, but how does that matter in this case?
Note to the editor of OSNews: If there’s no (os) news to post, then don’t post anything. Though surely there is actual (os) news out there – the web is a big place.
how many personal stories about “i switched back because…” are we supposed to read? I really don’t give a **** about one specific user switching for a specific reason, and I can only imagine most of the readers heredon’t care.
You are totaly right! This is pure fundamentalist, the author has nothing constructive to say at all. Much the same way people will mod me and other opinions down even though my comment is not including personal attacks, using offensive language, being off-topic or including advertisements. I just gave my honest opinion and was moded down by yet another fundamentalist…
Bu the way,I’m a Win, OSX and Ubuntu linux user and I know I first need to learn before being able to criticise. Sorry my poor english.
This article is a total crap. The first reason (most important I guess) the author mentions is *drive icons on a desktop*! Yeah, right. Scream, panic, run!
Then he continues with even more schizophrenic “After rejecting the fourth or fifth iTunes update in a row, I realized that the updates had come so frequently because Apple wanted to prevent people from sharing their music.”
As someone already mentioned, nobody needs these “switching” articles here on OSNews. Especially poorly researched desperate troll attempts that seem to be written by a teenager. I wonder how it got on oreilly in the first place anyway.
ktracing Mail? Right. That’s THE way to troubleshoot. I mean, if mail (or anything else) on the system is misbehaving, the first thing to do is run a trace app of course! What a boatload of crap.
So this article is about 10.2??
<em>I don’t want to have icons on the desktop. I don’t even want to see my hard drive on the desktop. I never use it. It is just a distraction — everything that is visible on my screen should pertain to the task at hand.</em>
Then click on Finder preferences and UNCHECK THEM.
<em>Fink did a reasonable job of working around the lack of a useful package manager, but it was often painfully obvious how much of a workaround it was.</em>
???
<em>trash is easy only after you have found the bundle, found all of the related files stored elsewhere, and made sure that you have removed the dependencies appropriately.</em>
What dependencies? The drag and drop (onto your disk) applications are all-in-one. Their libraries are included within them, with the exception of the cocoa/mac os dynamic libraries and you don’t want to be cleaning them up.
<em>Perhaps it was my unfamiliarity with Mac OS X or Darwin, but I couldn’t figure out how to use these or similar tools when I encountered problems.</em>
Perhaps!!
<em>Lack of Freedom</em>
Oh boy, here we go.
But then I thought, oh well, he is an OSS/linux fanboy or something… but then he starts laying in on PPC/Linux!! He concludes there…
<em>Perhaps I’d have better luck if I switched to an Ubuntu/PPC distribution</em>
Yes, perhaps you should, instead of complaining about it. You claim to like linux for its freedom, then you should be used to building apps on your own… instead of just expecting it to be done for you and dropped in some APT repository.
I don’t know… this guy just doesn’t seem like he is happy with anything…
Sorry for all the quotes, but if I just state my conclusion someone will say “read the article”… well I did. Maybe you and I just don’t think alike.
It’s 2006 — dragging one window over another should not result in artifacts, ever! It’s positively uncivilized. XGL is supposed to fix that, but its prospects seem hopeless at this point…
Why do you say XGL’s prospects seem hopeless at this point? Do you specifically mean with Apple hardware? Because I’ve had it working on some hardware, and it is both fast and stable, and once you turn off the more annoying eye candy, very usable…
Just curious.
Xglx itself, which is what you’re referring to when you talk about XGL, cannot have a future. It’s a massive hack, running one X server on top of another X server. Progress on any sensible alternative, however, seems to have completely stalled. There are some very key things that need to be fixed and developed. The various kernel drivers touching the video card need to be coordinated or merged in some way. Then, the DRI and DRM need to be retooled to properly support memory management and concurrent rendering for multiple clients. Then, an EGL implementation has to be built on top of the DRI. Then, the GLX calls in XGL needs to be ripped out and replaced with EGL calls. In any sensible implementation, the next step would be to move input drivers out of X11 too, and run the whole thing as a non-priveleged user.
At that point, you’ll have a system comparable with OS X 10.4 (with Q2D Extreme enabled). In other words, you’ll have enough to be able to have a composited desktop with nifty window management effects. That’s probably okay for the next couple of years, at least. If you want to go beyond that, you’re going to have to fundementally address how clients talk to the X server. RENDER in its current form is really not sufficient to do either what WPF can do, or, I’d argue, what it was designed to do. Addressing this issue, while retaining X’s network transparency is going to be very challenging.
The above sequence is itself a technical challenge, though I’d argue its not any more out of reach for a small team than many, already-successful projects. What fundementally puts a Vista and Leopard competitor in the realm of “wishful thinking”, however, is the organizational issue. First, what we’re talking about here is trying to build a graphics stack without having a system architect. Second, we’re talking about not just building a graphics stack, but building a suite of software and intermediate implementations to preserve compatibility with a huge amount of obscure hardware and software. When Apple built OS X’s graphics stack, they didn’t have to worry about how to support FreeBSD running on a SPARC machine with a framebuffer sitting on sbus. This is something, however, that anybody digging into OSS graphics code will have to face, whether they want to or not. And of course, let’s not forget the hardware vendors, without whom the current state of affairs would probably not be possible. I can fully understand why NVIDIA and ATI choose to keep their specs and source code closed, but there is no denying the fact that their doing so puts a severe damper on any project that involves leveraging the GPU.
Of course, Novell is a dark-horse here. It could very well be they are working, behind closed doors, on a proper foundation for XGL. You might see a code-drop one day with all the pieces sorted out. Sure, it may just support a couple of drivers (Radeon, Intel), and a few platforms (PPC, x86, and amd64), but it’d be something, and something is better than nothing. Short of that miraculously happening, any proper implementation of XGL is a ways away.
I agree with Tuishimi.
I mean really, he’s comparing it against OS X 10.2?
That’s like me comparing how I don’t like SuSE 8. Or something ‘old’ in the Linux world.
And they all seemed to be pet peeves about the OS.
All of the things he complained about, have either been fixed, or take a very simple google search.
Every single point is just worthless, can’t view logs, wow, amazing. Lets either go into the System Profiler and click logs, or maybe he likes to tail logs like normal. Can even get a system maintenance program and view the logs and clear them.
The problem I have with these articles, is that someone with a big website, they are going to believe him because they don’t know any better, who cares if they are completely wrong.
I mean really, he’s comparing it against OS X 10.2?
Well, there several areas of that article that raised my horsefeathers flag.
1) Talking about Expose — that was a 10.3 feature.
2) Talking about the different versions of iTunes that he was nagged to upgrade to. I’ve run OS X since 10.1 and don’t recall there ever being more than 2 updates to iTunes in a 6 month period.
3) His saying that you have to remove dependencies when trashing/uninstalling an application.
4) His calling software update a bit of nagware.
{sarcasm}Because yeah, if there’s a system critical security update and/or point release, I would sure as hell hate to find out about it in a prompt fashion. Oh, the incovenience.{/sarcasm}
(Besides, every time I boot Ubuntu I’m prompted to update software. So I suppose that being told to update Python — a program I plan to use on the 25th of No-never — is just Ubuntu’s nagware.)
—
So, given all that … I really wonder how much time he really spent with OS X.
If any at all.
Edited 2006-06-05 01:44
2) Talking about the different versions of iTunes that he was nagged to upgrade to. I’ve run OS X since 10.1 and don’t recall there ever being more than 2 updates to iTunes in a 6 month period.
During the eight or so months I had a Mac, iTunes updated five times that I recall. One of those was a major version update and the rest were minor point updates.
(Besides, every time I boot Ubuntu I’m prompted to update software. So I suppose that being told to update Python — a program I plan to use on the 25th of No-never — is just Ubuntu’s nagware.)
You may not use Python, but a lot of software on your system probably does since it’s one of the more popular scripting languages. To my knowledge, LSongs from Linspire is written entirely in Python (not saying you use that program, just an example).
You may not use Python, but a lot of software on your system probably does since it’s one of the more popular scripting languages. To my knowledge, LSongs from Linspire is written entirely in Python (not saying you use that program, just an example).
I should’ve extended my “sarcasm tag”.
The writer of the article was calling software update nagware because it was letting him know there were iTunes updates and he doesn’t use iTunes.
I’m about as interested in Python and GIMP as this guy is in iTunes, but I’m not complaining, nor do I consider it nagware or get all bent out of shape about it.
What I do care about is that my system sends me a prompt, easy to deal with notice that there’s new software out there that I might be interested in.
—
As for the iTunes updates, I’ll take your word on it that there were more updates than I recall.
I used a typewriter for years. I moved up to OS X for six months and found it is not really what I am after, so have gone back to my typewriter (I’m using that now). The typewriter allows me to print directly to paper, and I can use an eraser or white-out to remove my errors. I tried them with with the Mac, and got white marks all over my screen, or bits of the eraser in the keyboard (plus they didn’t really do the trick).
When I type to the end of a page, I love hearing a nice bell sound, again, something that isn’t standard with OS X. When I have finished my document on the typewriter, I can power it down, but don’t loose my documents (which can be stored in a drawer or somewhere. I can even post them using industry standard envelopes and stamps to anywhere in the world. With OS X I can “email” things, but the other party has to have a computer with email software and have an account set up!!!
I could go on couldn’t I 😉
What is my point?
The guy is trying to make OS X behave like Linux, he doesn’t get it. That’s OK, I’m fine with him continuing to use Linux like lots of others. But I don’t think he should get too upset that OS X doesn’t behave like Linux, if it did then it would be Linux…
The article is very much spot on with a lot of things – the nonflexible and semifunctional GUI and limited package management are things that put me off each time I try using a Mac as a desktop system. With a more powerful window manager like fluxbox I can easily manage and navigate 50 windows in four virtual desktops, grouping them and putting them in different layers according to my liking. A lot of RAM and a good WM is essential for the bioinformatics stuff I work with. After something like ten mixed windows and apps open on a Mac I get confused and disorganised. Installing and managing “UNIX-sphere” biopackages (like Staden, clustalw, hmmer, bioperl) on a Mac is possible, but painful as compared to how easy it is on any GNU/Linux system with a decent package manager. Even setting up and configuring bash or X11 can be cumbersome in comparison.
OSX is clearly the UNIX-derivate that separates the user from the underlying system the most of all systems I’ve tried. This may be fine for people mainly doing some simple iLife stuff, but not for people doing life sciences. In our department it is pretty clear that the staff relying on their OSX systems also have the most difficult time to accomplish anything that isn’t GUI and point-and-click driven (which a lot of our tools are not), mainly because UNIX-land is so alien to them but also because it is very poorly integrated into the desktop.
A quick example: working with molecular sequence data requires orginizing and editing a lot of text files in deeply nested project directories (usually done with the Finder and BBedit [remember to change those line breaks!]). When it comes to subsequent sequence analysis with UNIX tools it’s a different matter. Usually, they copy the binaries over to the project directory and open Terminal and cd all the way to the directory [$HOME? X11 needed sometimes? xterm instead of Termial? autocompletion, huh? blank space in directory and file names?], ending up with binaries scattered all over the place and having to repeat a series of tedious task over and over again. On my, or pretty much any, Linux system it is as simple as typing some install command or start a manager that grabs and installs the package for you ONCE and also UPDATES it for you. Say you are using Konqueror for file management. Copying files back and forth is pretty much the same as in Finder. However, starting the analysis tool and applying the files is so much easier. Either you can have a small terminal window inside Konq that automatically follows your directory movement and you just type the command to start the program or you just press F4 and voila! – a new terminal with the correct location, just like that. Now brain dead cd’ing here and there. The integration is there to help and the ones that need it the most is stuck on a platform that doesn’t really care to help out, because, as people keep pointing out, the activity is too distant from the core user activites that sells the machines. It is a complete mystery to me how the rest of the OS can be found so good that they keep forgiving Apple for the shortcomings after having completed each frustrating UNIX task.
Sorry for the long rant, but well, not all desktop systems are good for all things. Apple users are often very smug about their GUI, but it is not all that powerful in its present state. On the other hand, I wouldn’t dream of trying to snatch DV-video from a Sony camera over firewire on my Linux laptop whilst having an iMac just standing around in the same room. Please stop bashing the author of the article, he is describing a lot of problems that a “power” UNIX user can have on an OSX system. Apple should consider these shortcomings and think about how these power users affect and interact with their fellow non-geek colleagues – winning over more geeks is a good way of spreading mindshare in small companies and academic departments and institutions, which is essential if they ever want to expand their “core” business.
Edited 2006-06-05 15:29
Why I am not surprise at all …
Yes, and after having read this crap, the first reason is lack of brain.
I love Linux, and I just started loving Mac OS X. I don’t know much yet, but I know this guy, after so many years, still doesn’t know anything about Mac OS X. I stopped reading the article when I read this:
“I don’t want to have icons on the desktop. I don’t even want to see my hard drive on the desktop. I never use it. It is just a distraction”
–> Man, go to Finder -> Preferences -> don’t show HD icons on Desktop
“I want working virtual desktops. Exposé is not a solution” “I tried several add-on programs to add virtual desktop support.”
–> Did you try Virtue? I don’t think it’s that buggy.
“It was seriously disconcerting to click on a Terminal.app window”
–> Did you try iTerm? It’s like complaining about gnome-terminal. I use aterm in Linux.
A crybaby that can’t disable the Desktop icons.