-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Windows vs. Mac OS X vs. Linux
- Thread starter JBC
- Start date
MikeDawg
Banned deucer.
Windows gets lots of flack for being inconsistent and complicated, but that's just because of how much old code is built in. I'm talking even from the 1990ss in some cases.
Apple wrote osx (maybe os9? Idk) from scratch.They had the luxury of starting over because of their lack of market share.
If windows were to do that, then all of the enterprise applications and all of the company systems and all of the personal applications would break. It has held such a large market share that it cannot afford to rapidly expand and clean up legacy code. The best they can do is slowly phase out decade-old iterations (like windows xp recently).
Cleaning up event relatively old code is nigh impossible. Expand that to a couple decades, and yikes. It is impressive that they have been able to take such huge steps via Windows 10 (and 8) while still maintaining legacy functionality.
Of course, this excuse doesn't actually help windows' case. However, windows 10 in sexy.
Apple wrote osx (maybe os9? Idk) from scratch.They had the luxury of starting over because of their lack of market share.
If windows were to do that, then all of the enterprise applications and all of the company systems and all of the personal applications would break. It has held such a large market share that it cannot afford to rapidly expand and clean up legacy code. The best they can do is slowly phase out decade-old iterations (like windows xp recently).
Cleaning up event relatively old code is nigh impossible. Expand that to a couple decades, and yikes. It is impressive that they have been able to take such huge steps via Windows 10 (and 8) while still maintaining legacy functionality.
Of course, this excuse doesn't actually help windows' case. However, windows 10 in sexy.
The Kitty Cat
Banned deucer.
Cygwin ain't sexy, bitch. You're sexy. That Windows shit ain't, nigga.
The Kitty Cat
Banned deucer.
“Visca Catalunya.” — rms?
I'd say nationalism is diametrically opposed to freedom.
Anyway, fuck Windows spying on you. No idea to which degree MacOS does that, though.
The Kitty Cat
Banned deucer.
Ubuntu is spyware, too. Let's start a Linux distro war.
How about fully free Debian or xubuntu? :]
The Kitty Cat
Banned deucer.
Real free men use Ututo XS.
I feel this is more of a competition between macs/windows. There's no reason for anyone to be using linux unless theyre a programmer. Most of the features that make linux great are probably not understood by your average user, and it has the least compatibility/support for software out of the 3 by far.
The Kitty Cat
Banned deucer.
Which part of freedom don't you understand?
I feel the same. I'm hoping to be switch to FreeBSD shortly enough, after I scrounge together a better system (in regards to hardware compatibility). My only issue is how soon Vulkan would be supported when it's eventually released... I'm also a bit wary of how well Nvidia supports FreeBSD and how long they will continue to do so.
My largest issue with Windows is it very possibly becoming a subscription-based software in the future. Microsoft seems to be moving in that direction, with perpetual updates for Windows 10. Obviously that's not business savvy, so that's why other sources of revenue are being tested already; there's already ads integrated into various facets of the operating system. I'm not fond of the data collection, either, though I wouldn't call it "spying" yet, because it is claimed to be anonymous, but since the data can't be audited, there's always an issue of trust...
I'm also not fond of how uncustomizable Windows is, from the perspective of a programmer (or even power user). I've recently had the whimsical idea of having 3D scenes as a desktop background, but that's incredibly difficult to implement and involves a lot of reverse engineering and a lot of unsupported API usage. And whatever works today could break catastrophically with a Windows update. Not to mention poor theming support for anything but the default style...
As far as Linux distributions, I'm primarily opposed to licensing model. Although I find knowledge as a commodity morally wrong (i.e., patents and copyrights), I also feel forcing such a perspective in a largely capitalistic world at this time is extreme and unfeasible. As well, BSD licenses allow more freedom to the developer, for better or worse. As it stands, you get commercial entities that abuse dual-licensing the GPL with a propriety license, which perverts the purpose of the GPL...
I'm also not fond of the Linux distribution model. Linux is just a kernel, not an operating system; each installation is its own separate monster, composed of customized patches, different version of said kernel, and a different userspace. It's just not cohesive, which detracts from the user experience. Each distribution also has varying documentation quality... From an outsider, FreeBSD (and other BSDs, as well) has immense documentation, and it feels much more coherent as far as configuring various aspects of the system (especially networking bits) and using the system itself, while Linux necessitates referring to the community (either by asking of searching discussion forums).
I do very much prefer the keyboard-centric configuration/usage methods in BSD and Linux compared to Windows. The shells are superior, as well (I use Msys2 on Windows when I need to use a shell [largely because I don't like PowerShell's syntax and Bash has better support in open-source software]; still, it's built on the Windows command prompt, which introduces plenty of quirks). Most GUI software is poorly designed on all platforms due to appealing to the lowest common denominator (an average user), especially configuration software... So you either get simplified UIs on Windows or poor UIs on open source software.
In the end, still not being a FreeBSD user, I prefer FreeBSD's native software, especially the choice of clang instead of gcc. I also find FreeBSD's jails feature amazing (I genuinely wish Windows had a similar feature), though I suppose it won't be that useful for a desktop user as it would be on Windows. FreeBSD's memory management is better, in my opinion (deny memory allocations rather than kill applications when the system approaches memory exhaustion). And most importantly, the documentation and coherent structure of the operating system, compared to Linux distributions and perhaps even Windows.
I can't comment on OS X, having never used it. I used Mac OS 9 in Middle School and thought it was neat, I suppose; but that's a completely different platform than OS X. I'm also amazed how Mac OS 9 was essentially built on assembly and some Pascal... Truly bizarre compared to most any other popular operating systems in comparison.
The Kitty Cat
Banned deucer.
Without the intention to start a debate that would inevitably reduce to an argument of deontology versus consequentialism, I'd like to point of that much of the knowledge you want freely accessible wouldn't without intellectual property rights simply because there is an economic cost to producing knowledge with the cost exceeding the market value of production in a free market -- look at the pharmaceutical industry as a classic example. The idea that commodification of knowledge is morally wrong then requires that one believe is it is better for knowledge to not exist than be restricted. Software licensing specifically is a more complicated issue. If you want to see some concerning shit, then check out what Google has issued patents for.
Last edited:
I'm aware incentives are necessary for discovery/research. Currently, that tends to be wealth. Simply because patents and copyrights are currently the only viable option for progress doesn't make them any less immoral (see the common dilemma of "lesser of two evils"). I even said so in my post. I often don't deal in absolutes, so while I hold it's immoral to commodify knowledge, it is also immoral to hold to a strict ideal view that prevents discovery (ergo, is it not required for me to believe that inadvertently suppressing or preventing the discovery of knowledge by eliminating patents is a moral consequence). Not much in life can be deconstructed into two distinct options; it's very naive to do so. Also, that statement was only relevant in its tiny context and is irrelevant in the general/larger context of this thread.
Last edited:
The Kitty Cat
Banned deucer.
If you don't deal in absolutes, then don't deal in them in your long posts.
This makes no sense. It's approaching an absurd amount of pedantry while also being wrong. I made a statement about the GPL, the license Linux and much of its userspace software is licensed under, noting that it is aligned with my idealistic moral view that commodified knowledge is immoral. However, I also noted that its idealistic qualities are simply out of place and unfeasible due to current popular economic/social/political platforms. As a result, it is therefore counterproductive. The only absolute was that patents/copyrights are ideally immoral--but I did not indicate (much to the contrary) that this idealism should be implemented absolutely. In conclusion, I did not act (i.e., deal) on an absolute, and therefore, you're wrong; there was little ambiguity in my statement, you simply misread or misunderstood it.
I thought this was a discussion about opinions on operating systems, after all. So I supplied my opinion about various operating systems, elaborating on major aspects of the distinct choices that led to my final opinion (i.e., preferred operating system). In my case, this is a flavor of BSD, and in particular I've settled on FreeBSD.
Do you want me to reply with extremely concise legalese to eliminate as much ambiguity as necessary? Or should I just have posted something like "Windows is boring and untrustworthy, Linux is amateurish and messy, never used Mac OS X, I will soon submit to the BSD master race!" instead? I like making substantive posts (as you very well noted, even if it was meant to be antagonistic), because otherwise there is no point in a discussion when posts boil down to vague, useless, and even irrelevant statements.
Unrelated to this silly back-and-forth, I'm disappointed that there's no integrated GUI automation scripting features for Qt/GTK/Windows. I'm aware of AppleScript, still available and seemingly well-integrated into OS X and Cocoa, but I don't use OS X. I suppose in the case of Linux/BSD, it'd mostly be unnecessary since the bulk of exclusive GUI applications wouldn't be a target for automation, while shell solutions are more powerful. Still, Windows has nothing comparable, and many tasks depend on GUIs rather than a shell. Considering the move away from legacy APIs (i.e., Win32), Microsoft should have had the foresight (even Amiga had an equivalent implementation for their GUI toolkit), but seems not...
Last edited:
The Kitty Cat
Banned deucer.
No, you simply copyright and patents are morally wrong.
Working in IT means I'm forced to set aside any bias I have towards a particular OS but if I had to rank them:
Linux (openSUSE) > Windows > Mac OSX
I don't hate OSX but a lot of small features make it a nuisance to me. I work in a very Mac oriented environment though so I'm forced to deal with it.
Linux (openSUSE) > Windows > Mac OSX
I don't hate OSX but a lot of small features make it a nuisance to me. I work in a very Mac oriented environment though so I'm forced to deal with it.
seriously though, i'm an os x user. i really dislike windows a) because i like my posix compliance without needing to rely on hacks like cygwin or using a git bash shell, and b) because i dislike the windows philosophy of non-free software being automatically superior to free software. that said, i strongly dislike the gpl and prefer not to use linux. i use freebsd on servers where i can, but i'll use centos if i need to. i used to run freebsd on my desktop until i slightly fried it. my main os at the moment is os x as it is literally a unix and is close enough to a real bsd that it's comfortable to use. i don't like its window management and i dislike the system integrity protection that got rolled out with el capitan, but it's the least dislikeable of the current viable options. it's a shame that it's non-free though -- i'd run openbsd if software i need can be built for it, but it's not so i use os x. it's close enough i guess.
I've never come across this "philosophy" you speak of in over 10+ years as a windows user. On the contrary if you want a free alternative to a paid software functionality you'd probably have the easiest time finding a replacement in the windows ecosystem due to the large userbase and a proportionately large coderbase coding away for it. Over the years I've used a lot of free software instead of their paid brethren and not missed any functionality - the champions in this regard being GIMP, Audacity, Nitro etc. Of course you can argue that most hardcore pros probably won't want to use that, but that's OK and stands true for any OS platform.
In fact if anything this applies to OSX due to the highly monopolized market place. I remember the time I tried to find a garageband alternative ffs.
except that gimp is part of the gnu project and is by no means windows specific.
audacity was written under the gnu philosophy as well. from the audacity website:
i don't know what you mean by nitro, but from a google search of "nitro software free", it looks like the only hit is the pdf reader, which is distinctly non-free. the amount of windows-specific software written under an open licence seems, anecdotally of course, to be much lower than on competing platforms.
the entire userland (user-facing applications) on most linux and bsd distributions is free at the source code level for any user to rebuild or distribute as desired (apart from the gpl vs bsd licences etc). the only non-free applications i have installed on my mac at the moment are spotify and the binary blob components of chrome, barring the factory-default apps which i scarcely use. my browser, text editor, email client, torrent client, etc. are all free. not free as in free trial, or free as in restricted features, but completely free.
Eh ya... so? I never said Windows is the best, or I hate linux so I really don't see where you are going with this. My objective was to show that considerable and completely usable freeware options on windows... GNU is a very good movement enabling that. The fact that many of its programs cross over to Windows native support is a happy thing that should, and IS encouraged. Relatively speaking mac doesn't have that same comfort for a large portion of applications. It's a struggle to extract the same level of utility without paying. Note I'm talking about standard OS use for the power user here.
Nitro's my bad (snagged it for free in some download sale) but there are simply TONS of free software I use on a regular basis (many non-GNU) for things small to large, that are essential and do just as well as paid stuff, right from power use functions (Autohotkey, CCleaner, Teracopy, F.lux, 7-zip, Launchy, Speccy, foobar... it's a huge list) to productivity and work. My everyday computing experience doesn't suffer in any way whatsoever because I didn't spend money. period.
And for that matter platform agnosticism (or cloud based services) is something that only bolsters my argument, there hardly any (read:probably no) free mac exclusive app that won't be matched/outdone by some platform agnostic service, again rendering that "philosophy" patently false in this other front.
I am sorry but I really do not see where you are going with this angle.
Nitro's my bad (snagged it for free in some download sale) but there are simply TONS of free software I use on a regular basis (many non-GNU) for things small to large, that are essential and do just as well as paid stuff, right from power use functions (Autohotkey, CCleaner, Teracopy, F.lux, 7-zip, Launchy, Speccy, foobar... it's a huge list) to productivity and work. My everyday computing experience doesn't suffer in any way whatsoever because I didn't spend money. period.
And for that matter platform agnosticism (or cloud based services) is something that only bolsters my argument, there hardly any (read:probably no) free mac exclusive app that won't be matched/outdone by some platform agnostic service, again rendering that "philosophy" patently false in this other front.
So are mine? Chrome, Libre (though Google docs renders any desktop text editor near-superfluous in any platform) and Notepad++, Thunderbird, uTorrent et all. In all cases they offer equivalent if not far more robust features than what you'd get on OSX for free.
I am sorry but I really do not see where you are going with this angle.
Last edited:
He means free software as in licensed libre software, not freeware. You're not talking about the same thing at all or coming from the same philosophical standpoint. michael values absolute liberty with usage, editing, distribution, reverse engineering, control etc. made explicit and mostly/totally unconditional via software licence. Most of if not all of the software you mentioned doesn't fall under this. It has a number of benefits philosophically and in terms of security, though most users aren't skilled enough to evaluate this, but has downsides in what you value: cross-compatibility in professional fields, software diversity, immediate feature availability, etc. To software freedom proponents, this isn't the same thing as open-source, which is some of the software you mentioned definitely is at least partially, but usually comes in tandem in practice—what you are entitled to with the source and compiled build matters as much.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratis_versus_libre
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html
ps I use Windows with quite a lot of proprietary software. It's less important to me but I understand why people like michael choose what they do and appreciate it, and the philosophy behind software freedom I respect for my own political reasons as much as computing practices, mainly because of my opinions about property.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratis_versus_libre
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html
ps I use Windows with quite a lot of proprietary software. It's less important to me but I understand why people like michael choose what they do and appreciate it, and the philosophy behind software freedom I respect for my own political reasons as much as computing practices, mainly because of my opinions about property.
Last edited: