I prefer Mac OS ... i havent had any good experience with linux and i really dont care about cube effects and stuff i just wants an os that works in a logical way , translation = im too lame to make Linux work fully functional on my PC

i tried linux ubuntu ans suse and Mac OS X on My PC.

now i can say i don't use any OS otherwise Mac OS X.

it is easy to use and nicer OS i had seen and i was hope in the past that can use Mac OS X and this be true now and i'm very happy about that OS Thanks for all who help us to make us use this os in our pc.

especialy,you can't work with linux if you don't have background in programming.

i can say that linux still hard to us it especialy i'm graphic designer and don't found my favorites programms version to linux so,how can i use it? and many programms esle not graphics only.

this is my view in (MAC or linux).

bye,khaled

My interest in OSX came about when Apple nicked the code from BSD.and made their changes. I run OpenBSD and FreeBSD and would use OSX more if Apple hadn't deliberately handicapped their implementation of X. I like the Apple hardware but I also like to compile from source. Until I can do that on OS X my use of it will be limited.

I also disagree with the previous comment about having to have prior programming experience to run linux. I've been running linux for 2.5 years now and I've never picked up a book on C++. Almost all configration files are in plain text and if you can read and know how to use the internet you can always find a solution to your problem. Unless there's a bug in the code, but no OS is immune to those. Then again, if there is a bug - and you have the knowledge - you can fix it yourself. That's something that can't be said of closed source/proprietary operating systems.

I couldn't agree more. Besides they have stolen everything from Debian, they have renamed it and forked. And they have given nothing back.

I prefer OS X but i still like Ubuntu, but i would prefer OS X anyday, Linux is just too fiddly for me.

Well, last night, I wiped my entire Powerbook and replaced Mac with Ubuntu.

It's taking a little getting used to, but it's fairly quick compared to the versions of Mac I was using.

I'll keep it this way till Leopard is out

For people who said linux is complicated, maybe they never used it, just heard people say that, or maybe they tried linux 10 years ago and they should update their information. I use ubuntu linux, and i find it very nooby and had a very friendly interface. In my experience i had some difficulties with my wireless, so i use a windows emulation for the driver, it worked
I don't say linux is better than Windows or MAC OS and i don't say the opposite, but i prefer linux because it's free (liberty) and it's an opensource, and free (money matter)

Well, i've been using several Linux distro's for about 6 years now. I've started with Redhat 6.2, which became Fedora later on. From Redhat 7 i switched to SuSe, because it had yast and a system-updater. Something Redhat lacked . Got it 3 year running before i switched over to Ubuntu.

And now i'm still running Ubuntu. It's a powerfull & fast distro. The GUI (gnome by default) is very clear and simplistic, however i don't use X .

Also got OSX running on my Macbook. "Wow, what a beautiful operating system" was my first thought when i bought my PowerBook G4. Now a days i only use Linux as a server distro and OSX for the rest.

I run Vista, OS X, and Gutsy Gibbon. I prefer OS X by far simply because everything just worked when I installed it, even when I put it on my Dell and VAIO machines. I have a MacBook and I love it. I really like Linux, but for some reason I find it too complicated and I consider myself pretty good with computers. Maybe I'm missing something, but the ease of use just isn't there like it is for the "big two".

I find Ubuntu also "complicated", simply because almost nothing works out of the box for me and it has tons of bugs. I am not a newbie, having used Linux for years and having tried literally hundreds of distributions.

In order of my preference: Ubuntu, Vista, OS X

os x, openSuSE, ... windows

Is this even a question? OS X obviously.

every OS has is pro's and con's. I choose OSX as a client OS and linux for server-purposes .

What, in your opinion, makes OS X the best?

I have OS X 10.4.10 and not seeing anything that jumps out at me. I have Debian 4.0 and it seems solid though different. Windows Vista seems to be very user friendly, but not much more than XP unless you run the 64bit version of Vista.

So I am just curious what I am missing as I try to compare all three OSes.

Thanks.

Well I used Windows almost all my life , have tried some Linux distros and actually use OS X ( and Windows for some gaming of course ) .
For me OS X is by FAR the best . Actually I don't like Linux for some motives that people already explained here , like the lots of distros and
different ways of doing things ( due to this loooots of distribuitions , even if this can be seen as something good ) , for me it's unpractical
with installing things and THE WORSE ( of what I've experienced ) is messing with drivers ( did I mention sound ? I think someone already
mentioned that ) . Other thing , thing that may be not important to some people ( or lots of them ) is interface , I just don't like Linux interface ,
I don't like KDE , nor Gnome , I just don't find it good as OS X and Windows ( you can throw a stone at me , Windows is buggy , it crashes and
bla bla bla , I don't like it as well , BUT I don't think it has a bad interface , Vista has a very good one even thou being a resource hog ) .
Someone talked about applications , for me the one that makes lots of difference ( and that Linux doesn't have ) is Adobe Creative Suite 3 , mainly
Photoshop CS3 , DreamWeaver CS3 , Illustrator CS3 and one apart from the suite , LightRoom , you can say what you want but GIMP doesn't come
close to PS , sorry .
Someone I think , asked to say some OS X only applications that are very good , for me they would be iWork '08 , iLife '08 , Final Cut Studio , Logic Pro ,
and of course there are several little apps like MoneyWell that are just very nice ( maybe there are some like it in Linux , but I never heard of anything
like it ) .

Regards ,
Chaos

As a GNU/Linux user since 10 years now, it's easy to predict what I prefer


Here some explanations btw :
-Windows : The most biggest joke I ever seen !! It's unstable, closed source and self-destructing (the more you use it, the more it's fragmented/polluated by temporary keys/files/folders) and Windows Vista is by far the worst OS I've ever seen (it take 512-640Mb of memory by itself, doing nothing !!!)

-Mac OSX : Almost Perfect on a REAL mac, a complete disaster most of the time on hackintosh. it's normal, Apple made an incredible OS BUT it really run like it was intended to work on a CONTROLED/RESTRICTED/MASTERED hardware. it's basically like a PS2/Wii/Xbox360 : with a very restricted hardware's list, you can make a far better code, you know exactly what hardware will run this code, what this hardware is capable of and what to do to maximize is potential.

-GNU/Linux : By far the most stable and hardware compatible OS I've ever seen. It become better every day thanks to the community and the fact it's totally open-source, it have a monstrous list of softwares, growing every day too. Nothing to add, it's heaven !!

here is my desktop on my (kinda old) laptop Compaq nx9105, run perfect :


Linux Rulez !!

Operating Systems in my preffered order:

Leopard > Vista = Tiger > openSUSE > XP > Everything else > Ubuntu

It's all about productivity. Mac and its Applications walks it in most fields, though that said there is nothing to stop you installing Parallels and running XP or Vista or Linux in a window within Leopard/Tiger. The best of all worlds. Linux is very useable these days, though. If you're just surfing, writing documents and watching movies, look no further. Ubuntu is absurdly easy and, keeping to the topic of this thread, the graphical user interface is very easy on the eye. If you're new to computers you're more likely to struggle with XP than Ubuntu, I would think, plus it and all the applications you are likely to need install in under and hour, whereas with XP or Vista you're talking the better part of a then wasted day! There are Linux distros which look identical to Vista and have a similar feel. There are Tiger themes to make Vista look like OS X. Now, if someone would come out with a Vista theme to make it look like Ubuntu, Microsoft might be on to a winner! Sort of kidding. If Microsoft and Apple keep ramping up the colour of their eye candy, someone is going to sue for retina damage.

OpenSUSE 10.3 features a relaxing green theme!

Well, I know people like Alessandro17 are probably gonna hate me for saying this (sorry ), but for me it's Linux, specifically Ubuntu. I know it's a fork of Debian but I'm not particularly interested in the politics surrounding it; as far as I'm concerned it's got the best balance between power, flexibility and usability and packages. There's less crap to deal with compared to MOST other distros, although admittedly I haven't tried the latest version of OpenSUSE, but after spending years looking for a good distro, once Ubuntu came along I stayed with it like a loyal pet and haven't tried anything since.

I've seen Leopard in action after getting the flat image to work (never owned a Mac myself). Seems interesting, very slick, has a lot more punch out of the box, plus it supports a lot more commercial software than Linux such as Photoshop/Lightroom, which is something I hope to see change in Linux's future. But, since I prefer a native OS compared to a hack, in answering the question I'd have to go Linux. For now.

Should also mention the high profile of Ubuntu plus its rather large community helps too. There's a few zealots, but you live with them I suppose.

Wrong! I never hate people because of a preference

Ubuntu > Windows 2000 > Windows XP > Mac OS X Tiger > Windows Vista > Mac OS X Leopard > Mac OS 9

Just a quick list of favorite operating systems that I have used in the past few months on various machines based on performance, usability, application available, and {censored} that I have had to deal with. Each operating system has its little bit of {censored} to deal with, all on about the same levels, but with different things...

Keep on macKIN'

I suppose it depends, really. If I owned an honest to goodness Mac, myself, I -might- just say OSX. However, to date, I always had mid-level to serious hardware issues with OSX running on my hackintoshes. To the point where I stopped having anything to do with it between 10.4.8 and 10.5.1

Over the years, I've moved back and forth between Windows, FreeBSD and various linux distros (to end up on ubuntu). At present, I have all three installed in one place or another. I enjoy the console goodness inherent in FreeBSD, but the limitations on my (primarily) ATi graphics hardware inescapably turns me off to it. Ubuntu, on the other hand, is easy to install, supports just about the free world and is oodles of fun to play with. Not to mention fast and powerful. Windows covers most of my work needs (I have the software for it...).

However, now that my Leopard install seems to support everything, I may just convert. Which is not to say I'm not an AVID supporter of OSX and a proponent for the last several years. It's just been unfeasible for me 'till now.

So, at present, it's a toss up between Windows and Ubuntu (if for no other reason than compatibility and usability). :/

If you can get everything working right, go for OS X. If not, just go for Linux and Compiz Fusion.


Mine:

Leopard < Vista
Vista < Tiger
XP < Ubuntu

Leopard > Tiger > Ubuntu > Panther > Fedora > Windows 2008 > DSL > Windows 2003 > Windows 2000 > OS9 > Windows XP > Windows Vista

OpenSuse doesn't even figure for me, since Novell got in bed with MS.

Well, OSX is basically *nix with a really attractive GUI and native support for creative suite and office.

I'd run *nix because it requires less hacking and modification, but native support for the two suites I run is my reason for choosing Leopard.

There's not even a question about it: Mac OS X. It's a *nix system without the headache; the tiny bit of flexibility and "true *nixish-ness" you sacrifice is more than made up for by the zero-headaches zero-questions zero-problems philosophy. Sure, it's mostly closed-source and stands against the philosophy that GNU elitists love to live by (do everything yourself and stick it to the man!), but operating systems are supposed to be about improving our lives and helping our productivity, not making socio-political statements.

You'll never get Flash or Photoshop in Linux. And these two are essential for my business...

if you're willing to spend some initial time.
PC-BSD or DesktopBSD are both a great way of getting the GNU environment and Mac OS X Snappiness.
Arch Linux is close in performance and you get to be a tad bit more bleeding edge, so it's #2.
OS X would have to come in a tie for 3rd with XP, sorry, but XP is a damn polished OS for the most part now.

It would be better if they unified Linux. I can't stand the amount of distros and GUI environments out there.

In my opinion, Compiz is useless... it has no practical use...
I used Ubuntu a while but I give it up because of lack of applications and drivers. My wifi worked horrible on 7.10 (on 7.04 worked better).
Now I want to try Mac OS X...and I hope that it will not disappoint me...

After all, until now Vista still my favorite OS

I just installed osx on my laptop and I am very impressed with the look and feel. I am running a triple boot of Vista, Ubuntu 7.10 and Leo 10.5.1. Vista is crap compared to Linux or Mac os x. Yes os x is very refined and cleaner look. Linux has come leaps and bounds and is always getting better. If you want to leave the tit of winblows I would say os x. It is alot user friendly compared to Linux. Linux is very flexible and free and there is alot less compatibilty issues if you are installing os x on a non Apple computer. Both are awesome operating systems. Try them both.

Well, I must say that I like a lot of things of both.

I feel more comfortable with Linux (Ubuntu/Mint + compiz fusion) for my daily and work tasks, but with OS X I've access to plenty of GREAT software that's impossible to run under Linux.

The Adobe Suite and Final Cut are the heavyweights Linux doesn't have.

And please, The GIMP is free and great but it can't rival Photoshop.

Now that i'm a Leo user myself I like OS X more.

But linux will always be like an exotic tropical island for me...

Really, I must say that I run Gentoo and Kubuntu, and they both have very strong things going for them. One is great for avoiding compile time, and autodetection, another is great for incredible package management, architecture and processor specific optimization, and learning about how Linux works, and some of how OSs in general work.

For system recovery, I would never use anything besides a Linux livecd--nothing else I've tried works nearly as well. I would never run a server off anything other than linux.

As for those of us with dialup, Linux runs off a few floppies (a single floppy if you don't need graphics)! Vista, and believe it or not, Mac OS X, are both bloated. Installation DVDs? The only time I ever used a full DVD worth of Linux software was when I was using the Knoppix Live DVD: which has a ridiculous amount of software (~3500 software packages many of which include several programs) that runs off the DVD without lag. It has everything from a webserver (Apache, which holds the majority percentage in webservers on the internet), to audio editing to Monopoly to Scientific software. This is on the same amount of space it takes Mac OSX to put a base system on.

One thing I don't like about Macs is that they are so unintuitive to use. Nothing is where I expect it to be. Drivers are a much bigger pain in the butt than in Linux (obviously on non-mac hardware). If you think about it, Linux runs on *everything*. Right now I'm working a project to modify the linux kernel to run debian on a Windows-based smartphone. If you were to randomly slap together parts, from Macbooks to PCs to Sun computers, Linux would run the best. The only reason people think you have to do less configuration for Mac and Vista, is because they (the OSs) were modified to have all the drivers for the system they were preinstalled on--of course the computer manufacturer is going to tweak their OEM version of the OS to work with the computer it is selling (especially, in Mac's case, if the software and hardware come from the same company). I hear those companies who build completely Linux compatible laptops and such have great systems (but of course they charge extra). On any given system, with just the installation CDs for Vista, Mac OSX and a recent Linux distro, you would have the most success with the Linux distro.

Mac's cost is the biggest bother to me. I once bought an old PowerPC, running OS7.x; even then mac was supposed to be "intuitive" and "user friendly". This translated directly to being very limited. I like to do heavy hacking of my system, messing with core parts of an OS. Mac was my first OS, my least favorite, tied with Vista. It cost me ~$4000 at the time. My current laptop cost me $400, and can run Hackintosh, Vista, and Kubuntu. Apple simply does not sell inexpensive things. Sure, their computer are pretty zippy, but usually one can get equivalent specs for a much lower cost--and most of the time, people don't really need a Core 2 Duo (Usually it's the lack of ram and hard disk that is the limiting speed of the system).

Look, I'm sure the following will help you understand both sides of the Linux/osX debate:
Switch to Linux: http://ubergeek.tv/article.php?pid=54
Switch to Mac: http://ubergeek.tv/article.php?pid=55
And just for fun: http://ubergeek.tv/article.php?pid=53


Um... Flash 9 *is* in Linux.
And Gimpshop is free-er. And if you need it, you can run it in WINE--without dealing with the hassles of Windows or the Limiting Interface of OS X.

It depends on how you adapt to your new system...

I myself uses an OS X Leopard, a hacked OSX Tiger, XP, and Ubuntu...

Since I'm most familiar with XP (I've been hanging around with Microsoft OSes since the days of Windows 3.1), it's the system I'm most familiar with, and despite the stupid looking blue screen of death, I still use it for work... But Vista definitely a no - no... All the eye candy stuff, and stupid firewall makes you feel that you are trapped in your own OS...

I had once used a Mac before, in the days of OS 6, 7, and 8.5. They are really easy to use... And now the OS X, either Tiger or Leopard are very simple... But for anyone who had met the Grey Screen of Death of a Mac... Find that this system is hard to troubleshoot... It happened that somehow my iMac's hard drive stopped to work... I lost all my stuff in the disk... No Backup... Hix TT. That day I found out that when a Windows System failed to work, I only need to format, and I formatted and clean my hardware (opening the case) of my Windows drive in a regular interval. But when an OSX(iMac) failed.... I had to go to the apple service center, to change the hard drive. For I can't even open the iMac... No screws... A design that made troubleshooting a system a lot harder in some ways...

I found using the hacked version of Tiger a challenge... I still can't get my Dvd player to work... Nonetheless I really enjoyed using these system... Because I felt that I have full control of my hardware... But sometimes using these kind of OSX is harder than the Ubuntu Linux, since sometimes driver aren't supplied for you...

Ubuntu are also very nice to use... It's driver are well supported and it's kind of fun to use... It's a lot better than the old red hat system. I had once used the red hat 6 and 7. Nevertheless, Linux functionality are quite good... They can do what you wanted them to do...

You see... I really enjoyed learning to use diffrent kind of OSes...
It's really fun to use different kind of OSes, but it's very hard to master one...

I mainly live with my OS X Leopard these days...

Ecrid

QFT on Compiz!

I use macbook, but at desktop I installed ubuntu 7.10

KDE 4 looks really promising! It's gorgeous!

For me, the perfect OS would be the Linux kernel, with Aqua in top of it and DirectX ported to it. Of course all in GPL...
But now stopping dreaming: I have a computer here... It's an old Pentium 100 that my family was wanting to throw away. I've installed Debian on it and I use it as a server. In that case, the best operating system possible is GNU/Linux. Now it's alive and useful again.
Now at my main PC, that I use for work and for play games, the thing is different. Windows is the only option for games right now, and for the close future I doubt this changes. So I use Windows for games only, and tired of viruses and all, I wished for a stable OS, confortable to use for work and to surf the web that was easy to configure. The best option... Mac OS X86 of course.
I think it depends on the use, I would recomend Mac OS X for Desktop, GNU/Linux for servers and Windows for games, the last until game developers starts supporting other OSes or you buy a console, because Windows sucks for everithyng else.

But... I do perform actual work on my Windows system (Vista) and it works fine for the most part, no worse than the niggles I've had in Linux and OS X doesn't run what I require. I don't understand the idea that you can't use Windows for work. Heck, I don't even play games anymore and still prefer Vista than most other systems.

was a Ubuntu user ... now a 100% OS X user.
if I need a linux software, Fink does the job.

ahem. wine.

Windows for work.
Linux for play.
OS X for show.

thats about it for me, i'll use OS X when i'm around lots of other people, show off music library, movies..in windows i show off the money i've spent on software, Adobe CS2, Audition 2 and Audition 3 + Loopology..in OS X i have CS2, but not yet Logic Pro 8, still thinking about it.

as previously said, every OS has its pros and cons.

or windows for play
OS X for work
Linux for learn...
question of taste !

I've being Linux user for 5 years and it's my main OS (Gentoo Linux). I have all on it. it's light, quick, easy, but in my opinion linux hasn't got hmm... cohesion. Different people, developer-teams etc. it's great power of linux, but it's weak too, you know. I've using os x since today (I used several times at father's work), and what i think? it looks great, everythng is in one style, but it's totally different than linux (not totally, but much). mac has terminal, I use it often. I prefer it very often for copy, move, edit system configs etc.

in summary, both systems has great pluses and minuses (mac is heavy, linux is not conhesion), but it's greatest systems in the world i think ;-)

cheers

Hi - new here.

I prefer Linux for several reasons, the most important of which is that I don't have some company telling me I can't install software I paid for just because they didn't also assemble my PC.

I use CentOS but the same can be said for many distributions - the package management in Linux is really vastly superior to the package management in OS X.

With a single command, I can update *everything* on my system.

Linux is also kinder on older hardware.

I'm running the current version of CentOS on an IBM Thinkpad T20 w/ 700MHz cpu and 384 MB of RAM. And it runs quite well.

Fedora 8 was a little problematic on this hardware, Linux does increase cpu / ram requirements as time goes by - but not nearly to the extent that the major proprietary operating systems do, and what does increase cpu / ram requirements often can be easily disabled without crypling the system.

I also have a problem with Apple hardware, and since (according to the eula anyway) OS X is tied to the hardware, the hardware is a consideration.

Remember the Duo Dock? That was a good idea! Now - Apple only makes port replicators for their laptops, there aren't any models that have a proper docking station. You have to go to Lenovo or Dell to get a laptop that has a proper docking station available (pci slot, drive bay, etc.)

Also in the hardware departments - I have owned far too many "all in one" macs to ever buy one again. One part fails out of warranty, and because it is all customized crap - the whole thing is garbage. You can't just go to Fry's and pick up a replacement. You can try your luck on eBay for used parts, or you can spend more than the computer is now worth to get it from Apple. So the "all in one" macs are out of the question for me.

Unfortunately, the Mac Pro is far far far more computer than I need. I can build a damn good Linux box for a third of the cost of a pro tower. Apple really has nothing for people like me, so by default, Linux wins.

Yes - I am planning to build an osx86 box. And that's a shame - I would gladly buy one from Apple if they would just make one - but they've decided my money isn't good enough for them.

Things cannot be asked like this: Linux or Mac OS X? It's not like asking yourself :What am I going to eat now? There's the chocolate cake and creamy cake... hmmm ... which one should I eat?... No, not like this at all.

What you should ask youself is: What operating system do I need for the things that I need to do? And then consider on which is the better one for those specific tasks.

If you come to the same conclusion as I did, don't waste your time building an osx86 machine, as I wanted to do before.
You can get mac pro or macbook pro and run osx 100% and run windows and/or linux aside and you don't even have to use bootcamp. You can virtualize it with parallels and run it without having to reboot the computer.

Example: Lets suppose you're a musician. There not only great applications for mac or just for windows and none for linux. No, there are great applications for three plataforms. So why not making use of virtualization and get the best of the three? And you can even create in one application that only runs on mac os x and then, for example, edit on the best mastering tool which could only be available in the windows plataform.

As I mention before building an osx86 machine is a waste of time specially being a professional (I have seen many people wanting osx86 machines for professional reasons). It is a waste of time because there are some legal procedures when you start a profession and that includes on auditions to what you do and what you use to do it. And things could/will get nasty here.

There's a great alternative to all that. And that lies on Linux. Linux didnt't stay behind in what comes, for example, in the music scene. It has great applications to create, produce, edit and even mastering. More and more producers and musicians are starting to build their studios based upon Linux and open-source software. There are no reasons whatsoever to use illegal software.

This also applies to programs that are an alternative to programs like photoshop and others. You have GIMP. And don't say it sucks unless you have tried it before. As many people often do it. And if you are familiar with one application you won't get lost with the other. And once again if you can use both by making use of virtualization.

Now if not for professional use, then for the fun of it, you can use whatever you want.
My tip for people wanting to build an osx86 machine is: If can build one cheaper than buying a mac with the same specifications, then go for it, otherwise stick with the mac. And if you do not want to virtualize Linux, then you can dual-boot it, just a few workarounds as you would expect when running osx on hackintosh. There are plenty forums (for each distribution) and mailing lists. I am sure that if anyone tries this and gets some problem, someone already had that problem and already has been solved, so therefore you'll get it solved as well. Life ain't funny without fight!

This is my point of view. Hope you won't beat me too much

All the best!

both.

the more the better...

To me OS X is the perfect fusion of Linux and Windows. Linux or Unix in general is the technically most advanced OS out there but brings with it a steep learning curve and lots of geekiness that average users can't be bothered with. OS X is Unix at the core but has a GUI on top of it that has the usability of Windows (and more so arguably). This is the absolute dream-OS.

For professional use, don't even get me started on how lacking Linux is. There are too many apps to mention that don't exist for Linux or are way less advanced, or if they have similiar functionality you can bet that they are esoteric to use like most open source software (made by many unpaid geeks for the rest of the geeks). This is fine, after all the software is free so you can't expect it to be perfected like commercial software for obvious reasons. But out in the industry that won't cut it. One of the best examples here would be Gimp vs. Photoshop. While lots of Gimp users will try and argue that it is up there with Photoshop, it just isn't. Functionality might be there somewhere hidden in a terrible UI, you will find extensions that try to mimic the menus of Photoshop to make a transition easier, but if you worked in Photoshop professionally for any length of time you will be in for a bad suprise when you try the Gimp.