Operating System Debate

[Ricardo Irving]

OS Debate
Feel free to debate

The contenders:

• Apple (the computers are commonly known as a "Mac", or is Apple just the company name)
• Windows (computers commonly known as "PCs")
• Linux (commonly known as...um, dunno)

First up: Microsoft
- Vista is very buggy...
- Decent interface, but dull. Screenshots of WE in tutorials made by PC owners have terrible borders in stuff such as trigger editor.
- The abomination, called Vista. Windows XP is still alright.
- WTF? MS is making Windows games require yearly payment for online play? Haha .
- Worse updates, slower. Such as Vista and Leopard - Vista took longer to release, and had thousands of bugs, yet Leopard was released earlier with no or almost none.
- Its slowly losing the war.
- Bill Gates is gone, who was charming and also ripped off many companies, and such, so they have taken a blow.
- Java does not come automatically with Windows, anymore. This makes flash-games impossible to play (usually) without downloading it.
- The disgusting monster known as "MS Paint".
+ Get more games and WE tools.

Second up: Apple

- Yawn, less WE tools and games.
- Harder for Trojans, Viruses, etc to get in.
+ Better interface. Bright, tidy and such.
+ More stable.
+ Slowly winning.
+ Includes Java by default.
+ Nice features, such as Universal Access. You can invert the computer colors, make it black and white, zoom in, and such.
+ Better updates, faster (Vista - took longer then Leopard to make: Buggy as hell -- Leopard: No bugs).

Third up: Linux

+ Open source.
- Open source can have its problems.
- Can't play shit. Not even WarCraft III.

 

[xp3r009]

Hmm... I do agree some of your points. Windows is rather popular as it already with the products already there, and it is rather buggy with their correspondence to unknown reasons. However, Windows 7 is releasing with their updates upcoming. The interface doesn't really bother me, as it doesn't look like DOS (and it seems rather informative by me). The games I don't really play for them because they are relatively expensive and that I'm not really interested in them. My family-friend has a Mac, but it doesn't seem fun because not much programs of games which seems entertaining can be found on the Internet, so we switch to Windows on the other hard drive.


Apple seems to be more boring with their products not being as amusing and with less of their products, and I'm not really used to Windows; they should add more programs by their default (otherwise its Windows for me), and it is true that Windows doesn't come with.It does seem possible that Mac can overrule Windows over time, but usually I'm more experienced with Windows and I program with Windows so at the moment its my specialty, and Bill Gates retired? Microsoft Paint is only for the fun, don't bother using it for the public. Rather Paint.NET might be a convenience as a pre-packed program on Windows 7 than MS Paint?

 

[Midnighters]

OS Debate
Feel free to debate

The contenders:

• Apple (the computers are commonly known as a "Mac", or is Apple just the company name)
• Windows (computers commonly known as "PCs")
• Linux (commonly known as...um, dunno)

First up: Microsoft
- Buggy.
- Made by Micro$oft (founded in 06/06/06), a money-grabbing corporation.
- Bad interface, and dull. Screenshots of WE in tutorials made by PC owners have terrible borders in stuff such as trigger editor.
- The abomination, called Vista.
- WTF? MS is making Windows games require yearly payment for online play? Haha .
- Worse updates, slower.
- Its slowly losing the war.
- Bill Gates is gone, so the devils have lost the leader. [Bill sounds and looks alright, actually, but thats called Propaganda]
- Java does not come automatically with Windows, anymore.
- The disgusting monster known as "MS Paint".
+ Get more games and WE tools, in exchange for your soul.

Second up: Apple

- Yawn, less WE tools and games.
+ Better interface.
+ More stable.
+ Slowly winning.
+ Includes Java by default.
+ Lots more pros.

Third up: Linux

Dunno much, but a pro would be its open-source.

You realize that everything you just posted was opinions, because I use Microsoft and I have used Apple, and I prefer MC over Apple, because MC *IS* faster then apple if you have a decent computer. every apple computer I have used sux, I bought one that crashed the first day I had it.

So I prefer MC

 

[Gilles]

Windows has games.
Mac is stable, easy to use, and excellent for media usage.
Linux is stable, open-source, free, and great for programming. At least from what I hear.

You realize that everything you just posted was opinions, because I use Microsoft and I have used Apple, and I prefer MC over Apple, because MC *IS* faster then apple if you have a decent computer. every apple computer I have used sux, I bought one that crashed the first day I had it.

So I prefer MC

What Mac was that? Also remember that this is operating systems, not parts; so you have to compare the operating systems on similar computers. Generally in my experience, and the reviews and tests I've seen, OSX is faster than Vista and XP. Although one review I read, said that Vista running on a Mac is the fastest.

I'd be using OSX if I could, but I'd rather build my PC for less and game on it. Windows it is for me.

 

[xp3r009]

There would be more operating systems then this, but these are rather popular. From what Ricardo has wrote, it seems preconceived to his own point of view. Plus, Windows 7 is coming so probably that will fix the rest.

Many operating systems are under development to their providing the best, so you cannot really see what is the best and what is not unless the scientific proof is there to conceive what has been said. The opinions as such don't make such a debate, rather put as said a argument intentionally by our thoughts. They are always changing, and you can't see what is happening but it depends on people's taste.

But overall, Windows has my taste (Windows XP is fine by me anyway).

 

[Midnighters]

There would be more operating systems then this, but these are rather popular. From what Ricardo has wrote, it seems preconceived to his own point of view. Plus, Windows 7 is coming so probably that will fix the rest.

Many operating systems are under development to their providing the best, so you cannot really see what is the best and what is not unless the scientific proof is there to conceive what has been said. The opinions as such don't make such a debate, rather put as said a argument intentionally by our thoughts. They are always changing, and you can't see what is happening but it depends on people's taste.

But overall, Windows has my taste (Windows XP is fine by me anyway).

Same, I use windows XP also.

 

[Gilles]

There would be more operating systems then this, but these are rather popular. From what Ricardo has wrote, it seems preconceived to his own point of view. Plus, Windows 7 is coming so probably that will fix the rest.

Many operating systems are under development to their providing the best, so you cannot really see what is the best and what is not unless the scientific proof is there to conceive what has been said. The opinions as such don't make such a debate, rather put as said a argument intentionally by our thoughts. They are always changing, and you can't see what is happening but it depends on people's taste.

But overall, Windows has my taste (Windows XP is fine by me anyway).

... what? You need to work on sentence structure, and general communication. I find it hard to understand you.

I don't include Windows 7, since it's still not out. From what I hear it's pretty good, but I really don't think it'll fix everything. Windows will still be the most unstable operating system.

 

[Eleandor]

Buggy

Vista got some bugs, XP not so much. About 90% of the XP bugs I see are driver related, i.e. it's not really windows' fault.

- Made by Micro$oft (founded in 06/06/06), a money-grabbing corporation.

so? How is that a pro or a con? I mean, in the end even Blizzard's main purpose is making money. Does that make them a bad company? As if steve jobs doesn't do it for the money.

- Bad interface, and dull. Screenshots of WE in tutorials made by PC owners have terrible borders in stuff such as trigger editor.

pff... I still use '98 windows look and I think the Mac interface is just "bling bling" for noobs.

- The abomination, called Vista.

Windows is more than vista alone. There's still XP and from what I've heard windows 7 is pretty stable. Bottom line is: there's tons of unix based systems too, and I'm sure some of them are just as buggy as vista.
The thing is: vista still is based on NT technologies for a really large part. It's only the new interface that slows down the operating system a lot. I reverted back to '98 look (like always) and it runs just as smooth as xp. I still like XP more, but I think saying vista sucks balls is a bit exagerated.

- WTF? MS is making Windows games require yearly payment for online play? Haha .

And? This is totally unrelated to the operating systems, and thus not an argument for your debate.

- Worse updates, slower.

no clue what you mean

- Its slowly losing the war.

And? If windows was so bad, it would have never achieved the near-monopoly they have now, wouldn't they? It's not about winning or losing, is it?

- Bill Gates is gone, so the devils have lost the leader. [Bill sounds and looks alright, actually, but thats called Propaganda]

How is this related to the OS debate?

- Java does not come automatically with Windows, anymore.

How is this related to the OS debate?

- The disgusting monster known as "MS Paint".

How is this related to the OS debate? It's not the main priority for an operating system to provide totally irrelevant image editing software. IMO software like windows media player, paint or msn shouldn't even be part of the operating system and be downloaded or bought separately, simply because they're programs, not operating systems. Buy photoshop if you care so much.

+ Better interface.

>> I totally disagree. I Couldn't work in an abonimation like that in my entire life.

+ More stable.

That's only because mac OS only works on a real mac computer, which has been assembled for you. You buy a package, you can't choose your own components.

+ Slowly winning.

irrelevant argument

+ Includes Java by default.

So? Java is software, and does not belong with an operating system package. I'd rather choose my own vm than just pick the one my operating system has on default. Same like software as windows media player: you get rid of it anyway so you use your own and better media player. I mean, really, is there *anyone* who uses windows media player or apple quick time?

+ Lots more pros.

Yeah, this argument obviously beats everything.

Dunno much, but a pro would be its open-source.

How can you open an OS debate if you don't know any unix based system other than the mac os...

Linux is stable, open-source, free, and great for programming. At least from what I hear.

Bah, I still have to see the first reason why that would be. Maybe because most unix systems come with the GNU g++ compiler on default, but really, it's not that much trouble to get yourself a good IDE in windows such as bloodshed dev++ or visual studio, which also comes with a compiler. Maybe it's because most unix systems come with kate and gedit and other syntax highlight programs, but again: there are plenty of free windows IDE's.

Another con for os X is that it only works on macs (unless you go mess a lot and end up with an unstable os x running on a pc). At least pc's can run any operating system. The fact that you have to get a mac if you want to use OSX makes apple more of a money grabbling company than microsoft...

The main part of an operating system is the kernel, with resource management as its main goal. Any blabla about applications that come with an OS on default or blabla about the interface is nothing more than blabla.

IMO windows NT is not such a bad kernel in the end. If your system suddenly becomes unstable, chances are you did something stupid, and you screwed things up, not the OS. I mean, don't worry, it's not hard at all to screw up a mac either.
I prefer windows right now. None of the OS'es stand above any other OS with head and shoulders. Unless a new OS with significant advantages is made, windows is still the best for me, because most programs have been developed with windows in mind.

I'll be the first to switch to a better OS. That is, when a truly better OS is ever made.

 

[Gilles]

If you know what you are doing, Windows is usually fine. However a lot of people don't know how to do jack all, and wind up with a bogged down computer.

Looking from a general consumer, I'd say that Mac is far "better", being that it is practically virus free and generally easier to use. "Easier to use" is obviously opinion, but I'd say a large majority prefer the UI of Macs. I'm actually not sure I can think of one person IRL who didn't like Mac when they tried it (speaking only of your average email/word user).

Personally I don't really have a preference in the interface. I don't like either Windows' Start or OSX's Dock.

 

[Midnighters]

If you know what you are doing, Windows is usually fine. However a lot of people don't know how to do jack all, and wind up with a bogged down computer.

Looking from a general consumer, I'd say that Mac is far "better", being that it is practically virus free and generally easier to use. "Easier to use" is obviously opinion, but I'd say a large majority prefer the UI of Macs. I'm actually not sure I can think of one person IRL who didn't like Mac when they tried it (speaking only of your average email/word user).

Personally I don't really have a preference in the interface. I don't like either Windows' Start or OSX's Dock.

Easier to use = NOOB FRIENDLY. lol

 

[Pyritie]

The first post is incredibly biased.

 

[PurplePoot]

OS X all the way. I'd be willing to bet most of the people voting Windows have not used either of the other options for any significant amount of time (I have used Linux a tad although not too much, and it felt like a hybrid Windows/OS X in terms of its GUI).

The OP's statements mostly suck, but that's a different story.

Eleandor: Marketing, marketing, marketing. You can sell a worse OS for more money and more popularly if you have a good marketing team and a good support base. Bill Gates is a marketing genius, which is the reason that Windows took off. Apple originally had a much better market share until Gates was able to convince people that having one good spreadsheet plus three shitty spreadsheet clones was superior to only having one good spreadsheet (and the same for other programs).

I don't consider software diversity a big factor, for a number of reasons:

• Most stuff has equivalents on either OS these days. Games are an exception, but there are a significant amount of games (like Blizzard ones, for example) which run on OS X, and do you really need to buy a new game every other year?
  
  
• Many of the OS X equivalents are superior in design and execution, such as Microsoft's own Office (ironically) as well as iWork.
  
  
• For the rare cases where you desperately need to use a windows-only program, you can easily run it through a VM or even just bootcamp into windows.

Furthermore, Apple has far superior industrial design to any other company I've seen in terms of both desktops and laptops (and choice is really overrated), which plays a huge factor into what brand you buy into in the first place. In the case of laptops, their touchpads are amazing and integrate beautifully with the OS.

Next, Macs are far more secure, partially due to the lower user base and partially due to Apple actually attempting to fix problems with it.

Next, I find the GUI much more comfortable and customizable, both prettier (XP can often look very bare bones) and more convenient at the same time. For example, as seen in the screenshot below, Exposé allows you to open folders directly from the Dock without need of another window:

Exposé 1

Exposé additionally allows for a much more comfortable alt-tab style system, as demonstrated below, but the standard alt-tab feel (improved to also support mouse interaction) is still available. It also supports a version which only separates windows of a single program.

Exposé 2

Next, files in known formats are loaded automatically into their programs to provide a preview which is relevant to their content, allowing you to quickly identify what items on your desktop (and in other folders) are:

Next, the dock is a very convenient way to sort programs, and is quite customizable to include things such as magnification (so you can have a small dock by default with the area you are mousing over being still visible) and hiding (so you can free up the edge of your screen if you want).

Next, files are significantly customizable for even easier recognition, such as coloured names in a very distinct way:

Customization

Finally, the OS supports a lot more utilities off the bat (like a full development package for C, C++, Objective C, Java, and many other languages which is called XCode), multiple desktops for easier usability (the "GUI" selection screen between them—there are also hotkeys or a menu—is pictured below):

Spaces

Print Screen for not only the full screen but also for sections (The application window edges on the edges of the screen are because I used a command which knocks all windows away until you open a new one or call them back):

Print Screen Section-Based

The list goes on.

Anyhow, this sounded like an Apple sales pitch, but either way, Macs are awesome.

 

[xp3r009]

Same, I use windows XP also.

Go Windows XP man! Though Vista is the latest, I do consider I can hear there are problems about it, that's why I still use Windows XP.

The interface and the security additions don't bother me, I just have to add them myself. Until 2014 or 2015, Microsoft will stop sending updates or support to Windows XP, and it seems that it is recommended that you upgrade. Older operating system versions seem to have ended as well from Microsoft.

... what? You need to work on sentence structure, and general communication. I find it hard to understand you.

I don't include Windows 7, since it's still not out. From what I hear it's pretty good, but I really don't think it'll fix everything. Windows will still be the most unstable operating system.

I'm not quite good with that yet, but I'm still learning a couple of things, same with the communication. I'll try to make it easier to understand, thanks for that comment. My other forum had difficulty understanding the way I wrote my posts too, thanks .

 

[Eleandor]

Eleandor: Marketing, marketing, marketing. You can sell a worse OS for more money and more popularly if you have a good marketing team and a good support base. Bill Gates is a marketing genius, which is the reason that Windows took off. Apple originally had a much better market share until Gates was able to convince people that having one good spreadsheet plus three shitty spreadsheet clones was superior to only having one good spreadsheet (and the same for other programs).

Marketting alone is not the only reason. It wouldn't be fair to windows. Ipods are succesful too, but nobody is talking about them being bad and them selling so good because of the marketting. Itunes sucks too. When it comes to marketting, be fair and don't just point fingers to MS alone.

I don't consider software diversity a big factor, for a number of reasons:

That was more or less what I was saying

Next, Macs are far more secure, partially due to the lower user base and partially due to Apple actually attempting to fix problems with it.

So you better don't advertise if you want to feel save on your mac...

Exposé

You don't need to tell me, I've been there and left as soon as possible. It's useless and ugly.

Next, files in known formats are loaded automatically into their programs to provide a preview which is relevant to their content, allowing you to quickly identify what items on your desktop (and in other folders) are:

It's useless and ugly. I'd gladly say the opposite because this looks like a bunch of different shortcuts, as opposed to all images having the same "image-specific" icon in windows that gives you a clean overview. Besides, if you dump all your images on your desktop, just open a damn explorer window so you can sort all images on your desktop.
Clean interface > chaotic interface. Hell, I'd rather use the commandline than the mac interface.

Next, files are significantly customizable for even easier recognition, such as coloured names in a very distinct way:

Ugly, useless and distracting. Maybe good for unorganised people that got too much time on their hands.
By the way, have I mentioned how the filesystem on unix-based systems is seriously fucked up?

Finally, the OS supports a lot more utilities off the bat (like a full development package for C, C++, Objective C, Java, and many other languages which is called XCode)

It's not the task for an OS to provide utilities, that's your software vendor's task. And seriously: it takes about 1 hour to install a new computer with all your favourite software. And at least you got the software you prefer, rather than a development package you probably replace by your own anyway. I mean, what's the point of having IE installed if you're going to switch to firefox anyway? What's the point of safari, just the same? What's the point of a development package when the biggest fanboys like the OP have never touched C or C++? I'd curse microsoft if visual studio would come with it on default because I don't like using that IDE. Similarly, I curse macs for their abundance of irrelevant or simply not your prefered software.

multiple desktops for easier usability (the "GUI" selection screen between them—there are also hotkeys or a menu—is pictured below):

Really bad picture you chose, cause what's the point of having 4 empty desktops? I think that feature is way overrated, and it would be one of those things I'd turn off anyway if they would add it to windows.

Print Screen for not only the full screen but also for sections (The application window edges on the edges of the screen are because I used a command which knocks all windows away until you open a new one or call them back):

Yeah, I got to buy a mac so I no longer lose 5 seconds on cutting the SS in a more precise way the way I want it. Another item on the "useless features" list for me.

To conclude, let's look at the main points:

1) The kernel. Needless to say, none of the OS'es have a kernel that is visibly better than the others. Bottom line being that the kernel is what makes the OS, not the interface.
2) The interface. To me, as soon as the interface starts getting fancy and "cool", it just slows me down and gets in my way. That's why I switch to '98 look anyway. It's the main reason why I use chrome and not FF or IE. And then I haven't even mentioned how incredibly they slow down older computers. No, not everybody buys a new computer every year.
3) The software package. My opinion: who cares? You're going to download or buy your own software anyway.

I'm definitely not a windows fanboy because they got a whole way ahead of them, but macs simply are no better alternative.

 

[PurplePoot]

Marketting alone is not the only reason. It wouldn't be fair to windows. Ipods are succesful too, but nobody is talking about them being bad and them selling so good because of the marketting. Itunes sucks too. When it comes to marketting, be fair and don't just point fingers to MS alone.

iTunes does its job, but more importantly it is not an operating system.

So you better don't advertise if you want to feel save on your mac...

Not at all. The vast majority of people don't know squat about computers and won't even read such threads let alone understand them.

You don't need to tell me, I've been there and left as soon as possible. It's useless and ugly.

How so?

It's useless and ugly. I'd gladly say the opposite because this looks like a bunch of different shortcuts, as opposed to all images having the same "image-specific" icon in windows that gives you a clean overview. Besides, if you dump all your images on your desktop, just open a damn explorer window so you can sort all images on your desktop.

You can dump stuff in subfolders in OS X too, obviously.

Clean interface > chaotic interface. Hell, I'd rather use the commandline than the mac interface.

That's either an exaggeration or you are very conditioned to the Windows GUI, because I hate the XP GUI (for many things, anyways) and yet would choose it over the lack of any GUI in a heartbeat.

Ugly, useless and distracting. Maybe good for unorganised people that got too much time on their hands.

Define unorganized. You'd be surprised how messy something organized for one person can look to another.

By the way, have I mentioned how the filesystem on unix-based systems is seriously fucked up?

Could I not say the same the other way? It sounds like your entire argument is based on being used to the Windows setup.

It's not the task for an OS to provide utilities, that's your software vendor's task. And seriously: it takes about 1 hour to install a new computer with all your favourite software. And at least you got the software you prefer, rather than a development package you probably replace by your own anyway. I mean, what's the point of having IE installed if you're going to switch to firefox anyway? What's the point of safari, just the same? What's the point of a development package when the biggest fanboys like the OP have never touched C or C++? I'd curse microsoft if visual studio would come with it on default because I don't like using that IDE. Similarly, I curse macs for their abundance of irrelevant or simply not your prefered software.

No one is forcing you to use it.

Really bad picture you chose, cause what's the point of having 4 empty desktops? I think that feature is way overrated, and it would be one of those things I'd turn off anyway if they would add it to windows.

I just have Spaces set to four desktops by default. Seeing as I moved a window over specifically to demonstrate how it looks, I did not bother to fill all four.

Yeah, I got to buy a mac so I no longer lose 5 seconds on cutting the SS in a more precise way the way I want it. Another item on the "useless features" list for me.

It's a handy addition.

1) The kernel. Needless to say, none of the OS'es have a kernel that is visibly better than the others. Bottom line being that the kernel is what makes the OS, not the interface.

They are not astronomically different. I think everyone can agree here.

2) The interface. To me, as soon as the interface starts getting fancy and "cool", it just slows me down and gets in my way. That's why I switch to '98 look anyway. It's the main reason why I use chrome and not FF or IE. And then I haven't even mentioned how incredibly they slow down older computers. No, not everybody buys a new computer every year.

A fancier interface does not necessitate a more difficult interface. Additionally, feel free to run an old OS on an old computer, but this isn't exactly top-demanding.

3) The software package. My opinion: who cares? You're going to download or buy your own software anyway.

Not if you get it packaged with the OS for free.

 

[Eleandor]

iTunes does its job, but more importantly it is not an operating system.

It was a comment on the marketting.

Not at all. The vast majority of people don't know squat about computers and won't even read such threads let alone understand them.

No offence intended, but the OP didn't seem to have much of a clue about computers either...

How so?

Because that's the way I feel? Interfaces like that get in my way more than they help me.

You can dump stuff in subfolders in OS X too, obviously.

Obviously, but it doesn't change the other point I made.

That's either an exaggeration or you are very conditioned to the Windows GUI, because I hate the XP GUI (for many things, anyways) and yet would choose it over the lack of any GUI in a heartbeat.

I don't want to go back to commandline only either. But a GUI should be as minimalistic as possible. No "smooth fading windows with transparency blabla" and all other stuff like exposé (I better be payed damn well if they ever force me to use that) which is even more prominent on macs than on vista. I hate that kind of interfaces, it gets in my way, it slows me down and it is utterly useless.
That being said, I am conditioned to the 98 look, and that's exactly because it's minimalistic and exactly what I am looking for. I'm conditioned to it because I like it, not the other way around.

Define unorganized. You'd be surprised how messy something organized for one person can look to another.

Unorganised is everything that goes against my organisation

It's a handy addition.

It's a useless addition.

No one is forcing you to use it.

They're forcing me to uninstall it.

A fancier interface does not necessitate a more difficult interface. Additionally, feel free to run an old OS on an old computer, but this isn't exactly top-demanding.

It does not necessitate it, but IMO it has resulted in more difficult interfaces anyway, on both windows and macs.

Not if you get it packaged with the OS for free.

You're getting candy that you don't like. I think it's better to get to choose your candy from the start, than to get candy, throw it away because you don't like it and then get to choosing your own anyway. I agree a minor amount of software such as a browser, a text editor and a media player can be useful to get you started, but macs overdo it.

 

[xp3r009]

The first post is incredibly biased.

True; evidence should have been used. I wonder if this was a debate anyway? And what are those extra comments on those three choices of poll.

 

[brayden430]

Windows is very popular do to there is a 2 min learning curve my 4 year old brother can use XP. but vista is a different story vista was the grand epic fail of all operating systems in history took me 10mins to find add and remove programs just cause it had to have its name change. but windows 7 looks promising to be less of a resource hog then vista. btw the mac UI is pretty bad. but most of the windows new operating systems have just been bug fixes and UI changes windows 7 with xp mode virtuallization is pretty new to be that easy to run. the only reason im giving up xp to windows 7 is direct x 11

 

[Eleandor]

Windows is very popular do to there is a 2 min learning curve my 4 year old brother can use XP. but vista is a different story vista was the grand epic fail of all operating systems in history took me 10mins to find add and remove programs just cause it had to have its name change. but windows 7 looks promising to be less of a resource hog then vista. btw the mac UI is pretty bad. but most of the windows new operating systems have just been bug fixes and UI changes windows 7 with xp mode virtuallization is pretty new to be that easy to run. the only reason im giving up xp to windows 7 is direct x 11

Vista isn't as much fail as millenium was...

 

[brayden430]

well ME was shit but vista is right behind it

 

[PurplePoot]

No offence intended, but the OP didn't seem to have much of a clue about computers either...

Hence why I said that at the top of my first post.

I don't want to go back to commandline only either. But a GUI should be as minimalistic as possible. No "smooth fading windows with transparency blabla" and all other stuff like exposé (I better be payed damn well if they ever force me to use that) which is even more prominent on macs than on vista. I hate that kind of interfaces, it gets in my way, it slows me down and it is utterly useless.
That being said, I am conditioned to the 98 look, and that's exactly because it's minimalistic and exactly what I am looking for. I'm conditioned to it because I like it, not the other way around.

GUIs which are not minimalistic do not have to get in your way. I've never found the OS X GUI getting in my way—any effects play fast enough that you are still in the process of moving your mouse.

It's a useless addition.

It saves me those 30 seconds every time I want to do it.

They're forcing me to uninstall it.

No, you actually install that off the disk separately if you want it. Besides, uninstalling on OS X amounts to hitting the delete key, so it's no big deal. Next, it's handy to have the compiler even if you don't use the interface, as many IDEs want external compilers. Finally, it's not as if computers lack hard drive space these days.

It does not necessitate it, but IMO it has resulted in more difficult interfaces anyway, on both windows and macs.

I could argue the same about a minimalistic interface, as they don't tend to give you options. You can still open folders in the traditional view, still alt-tab in the traditional style, etc. These are just alternatives.

You're getting candy that you don't like. I think it's better to get to choose your candy from the start, than to get candy, throw it away because you don't like it and then get to choosing your own anyway. I agree a minor amount of software such as a browser, a text editor and a media player can be useful to get you started, but macs overdo it.

A lot of that extra stuff is stuff you would buy/download anyways on a PC, and beyond that, some of it (as I mentioned above) comes on the disks but is not preinstalled.

 

[xp3r009]

well ME was shit but vista is right behind it

My family friend has a relatively old computer which runs on Windows 95, it shocked me how bad the interface was and what it looked like. Windows XP is a lot better in my screen, I just can't see that again...

 

[Eleandor]

GUIs which are not minimalistic do not have to get in your way. I've never found the OS X GUI getting in my way—any effects play fast enough that you are still in the process of moving your mouse.

I don't really use my mouse that much. Hotkeys for the win, I win so much time not having to click stuff.

No, you actually install that off the disk separately if you want it. Besides, uninstalling on OS X amounts to hitting the delete key, so it's no big deal. Next, it's handy to have the compiler even if you don't use the interface, as many IDEs want external compilers. Finally, it's not as if computers lack hard drive space these days.

That's a good point. Then again, I don't really care that much about spending 5 minutes downloading a compiler. It's something you need to do once, and I don't think it really gives a large value to an operating system. I certainly won't look at the software package that comes with the OS when I buy it, simply because I can always get the software myself.

I could argue the same about a minimalistic interface, as they don't tend to give you options. You can still open folders in the traditional view, still alt-tab in the traditional style, etc. These are just alternatives.

Yes, indeed, but then I ask myself: I don't use those features ANYWAY, so what's the bloody point of using the new OS? And I can't imagine that people really have such an incredible speed increase when windows fade out or are semitransparent or other bs...

A lot of that extra stuff is stuff you would buy/download anyways on a PC, and beyond that, some of it (as I mentioned above) comes on the disks but is not preinstalled.

Exactly, so does it really matter that the OS has this stuff? I got most of my software on a DVD so I don't need to download it. Just plug it in and install. Does it really make the OS much more valueable? Not so much to me.

well ME was shit but vista is right behind it

I disagree. I've had ME and it was just broken. Like, really really broken. At least vista doesn't give me a BSOD every 5 minutes even in safe mode. At least vista recognises wireless networks. Call it poop if you like, but it's still miles away from what ME was...

 

[Midnighters]

... what? You need to work on sentence structure, and general communication. I find it hard to understand you.

I don't include Windows 7, since it's still not out. From what I hear it's pretty good, but I really don't think it'll fix everything. Windows will still be the most unstable operating system.

Pha0001 does a fine job at sentence structure and comunication for being from another country.

well ME was shit but vista is right behind it

Dude, don't dis Windows ME, I use ME on my personal computer, and it's better then most newer comps I use.

I disagree. I've had ME and it was just broken. Like, really really broken. At least vista doesn't give me a BSOD every 5 minutes even in safe mode. At least vista recognises wireless networks. Call it poop if you like, but it's still miles away from what ME was...

I have used Vista, and Vista is horrible, I had a computer with Vista and the Vista program allows nothing that I want to work.... and it crashed the first day I had it....

 

[Gilles]

Dude, don't dis Windows ME, I use ME on my personal computer, and it's better then most newer comps I use.



I have used Vista, and Vista is horrible, I had a computer with Vista and the Vista program allows nothing that I want to work.... and it crashed the first day I had it....

I think it's common knowledge that ME is the worst operating system to date. Hence why 2000 was released.

 

[PurplePoot]

That's a good point. Then again, I don't really care that much about spending 5 minutes downloading a compiler. It's something you need to do once, and I don't think it really gives a large value to an operating system. I certainly won't look at the software package that comes with the OS when I buy it, simply because I can always get the software myself.

Plus bindings, GUI tools, etc. It's the kind of stuff that tends to be much more annoying to find for free for languages such as C++ in my experience. Anyhow, it's just a nice small plus for me.

 

[Ghan_04]

I maintain that there is no objective way to determine whether Microsoft is "better" than Apple. They each have their pluses and minuses - more so than the original poster seems to indicate....

 

[Deathcom3s]

I'm not a big fan of Macs or Apple as a whole. I hate it when people respond "but windows is soo buggy!", seriously. Sure, my computer will freeze occasionally, is it too hard to hit that little restart button?

Me? i could care less that Windows has some bugs here and there. I'm used to it, have used it since i was little, has support for just about everything, and get's the job done. I like the interface, more than i do Macs.

Macs are so simple it's impossible to do anything complex on them because of how much blackboxing they do. Apple has built their entire user base around the fact that their customers can't do simple things like turn their computers on.

If you want more reasons why Macs suck; take a look at what Maddox has to say

 

[Eleandor]

Plus bindings, GUI tools, etc. It's the kind of stuff that tends to be much more annoying to find for free for languages such as C++ in my experience. Anyhow, it's just a nice small plus for me.

wxWidgets? For free, easy to use and I found it in google after 1 minute. In my experience, it's pretty easy to find that kind of stuff.

 

[PurplePoot]

wxWidgets? For free, easy to use and I found it in google after 1 minute. In my experience, it's pretty easy to find that kind of stuff.

And it's generally ugly and looks hacked on.

 

[Eleandor]

how is wxWidges ugly... It rocks compared to anything else.

 

[Pyritie]

how is wxWidges ugly... It rocks compared to anything else.

Qt > wxWidgets

 

[Squiggy]

I have XP and linux running - can't complain about any of them

 

[Eleandor]

Qt > wxWidgets

was about to edit my post and say the opposite...

 

[The World Is Flat]

I'm fine with windows, never had any trouble at all. my computer is a wimpy HP on vista and it plays game well that have requirements X2 what my computer has, never felt any of the slowing down crud i hear about... probably apple propaganda...

 

[oh_snap]

I run Vista, and Mac OS X on my MacBook. Same computer, two different operating systems. Mac OS X is far faster, whether it be logging on, loading photoshop, etc, etc. The interface of the Mac OS X is easier to navigate. The Mac OS just seems more polished overall. I've used XP for years now and made the switch to using a Mac a month ago. Even though I am quite familiar with windows, I find the Mac OS X much more easier to operate. The only thing lacking is the majority of the games are made for Windows. But I've never been much of a PC gamer, so that is not a personal factor for me.

~Snap

 

[Deathcom3s]

Yeah, how much did your Mac cost? One of my biggest beefs with Macs is the outrageous price tag. Honestly, i'm not paying $2000 for something i could get for $1000...

 

[oh_snap]

Yeah, how much did your Mac cost? One of my biggest beefs with Macs is the outrageous price tag. Honestly, i'm not paying $2000 for something i could get for $1000...

Roughly $1,100, also I got a free iPod touch. And that price includes iWork. I have the standard Macbook, no upgrades at all. Even so, 4 GB of Ram is an extra $100. And if you wanted a 500 GB hard drive, it would be an extra $200.

~Snap

 

[The World Is Flat]

Well, whatever... i am very happy with what i have, and you are whith what you have we are all happy lol.

 

[oh_snap]

It's really a matter of personal interest.

~Snap

Edit: I forgot to mention Apple provides a tool that allow you to install Vista or XP on the MacBook. Basically, it does all the work for you, and it took me roughly an hour. Would Mircosoft do that for you? Of course not.

 

[The World Is Flat]

There are plenty of tools that allow you to doo that, and vista supports it as well, have you even looked? i prefer windows, i tried apples OS and i didn't like it... like you said, personal interest... i lke a good computer, and everything is made with windows in mind sooo... eh i don't relly care... I like my windows computer...

 

[Super-Sheep]

Windowss...

We often use Linux on shcool and learn it, its the most confusing and boring os ever. :<

 

[Deathcom3s]

Takes me 30 minutes to install windows, it's seriously not as big of a hassle as everyone makes it out to be...

 

[Gilles]

Yeah, how much did your Mac cost? One of my biggest beefs with Macs is the outrageous price tag. Honestly, i'm not paying $2000 for something i could get for $1000...

That's why I don't own a Mac currently. I'd probably have a Macbook is they weren't so damn expensive.

 

[PurplePoot]

That's why I don't own a Mac currently. I'd probably have a Macbook is they weren't so damn expensive.

1200$ for the 13 inch Pro (less if you want a normal macbook, but they're still made out to be much more expensive than they actually are), and you get an iPod Touch thrown in if you're a student. Besides, you get what you pay for.

 

[The World Is Flat]

Yeah but with others you get more than what you pay for lol.

 

[Draknyte1]

i had to use linux on my pc for about a month...
It was the worst month ever...

i could watch movies, listen to music, play games, run software or do anything...
and if i wanted do to something it would tell me to connect to the internet...
which at the time i couldnt do...

SO I HATE UBUNTU and it looks gay... and KUBUNTU looks better but is slower...

 

[The World Is Flat]

Thats what i heard... it's awful...

 

[Draknyte1]

id rather use DOS for a month...
cause then i can play WARCRAFT I...

 

[The World Is Flat]

lol orcs and humans was an awesome game...