dunno, mac OS is unix, just really refined, but it is unix at its heart. I prefer linux/unix over windows anyday, but I am forced to use windows for 90% of my apps and gaming. But I still like linux/unix better and use it when at all possible.
dunno, mac OS is unix, just really refined, but it is unix at its heart. I prefer linux/unix over windows anyday, but I am forced to use windows for 90% of my apps and gaming. But I still like linux/unix better and use it when at all possible.
"Refined" wouldn't be the term I'd use, more... "labotomised"...
Do you think switching from PC to Mac is as hard as switching to Linux from Windows?
I would say no, though it does depend on what you want to do on your computer (or what you don't want to do, as the case may be). If all you do is surf, Mac isn't so bad. If the software you want to use is only available on one platform then you don't have a whole lot of options.
Setting up and installing Linux is an order of magnitude more difficult than Mac OS X. Keep in mind that very, very few Mac users have ever installed Mac OS since it comes pre-installed on any machine that has it. That said, if I were to describe my MacOS experience in a single word, it would be 'limited'. However, I'll be the first to admit that I have very unique needs in an OS that aren't easily served.
dunno, mac OS is unix, just really refined, but it is unix at its heart.
I honestly don't understand how Mac OS Classic is put together. It's wierd and doesn't handle multitasking well at all. Assuming you're talking about Mac OS X and if by UNIX you mean BSD, then yes. Darwin (the core of Mac OS X) is a derivative of BSD that uses the Mach microkernel. Mach operates somewhat differently than a standard Linux kernel but software is easily portable between the two, at least on the same arch (lots of code doesn't port well to PPC from x86 but that's more the fault of the x86 coder being lazy than any fault of the arch itself).
The only part of Mac OS X I would call refined is the GUI. Mac OS X runs a slick OpenGL-based user interface (Aqua) on top of a fairly standard BSDish system. Make no mistake: Aqua is pretty and it should be since Darwin is Open Source so the rest of the cost of the OS goes to marketing and paying the Aqua developers. Though Aqua is a decent GUI, I would've been more pleased if Apple had just made Aqua a freedesktop.org-compliant window manager running on top of X. This would make porting GPL software a breeze instead of having to re-code how the software talks to the desktop on a per-application basis. Apple thoughtfully included X with the developer tools though so if you don't mind running your software in a virtual desktop a la Classic you can still use applications that haven't yet been ported to Aqua. Of course, this is only important if you're like me and the vast majority of the software you use is GPL.
Have any of you partitioned your computers to use both Linux and Windows? Wouldn't that be having the best of two worlds?
I have on multiple occasions and no it isn't the best of the two worlds. Actually getting both OS's installed without causing bootloader problems is challenging, both OS's take a long time to load, and you can't use software from the other OS without rebooting your PC. Working with files from the other OS is a royal pain since MS has not seen fit to release the specs for NTFS so Linux's NTFS driver is read-only and refuses to include drivers for common non-MS filesystems. Maintaining separate storage for both Windows and Linux is a waste of hard drive space.
That being said, dual-booting is likely the best you're going to get. The best of both worlds would be if all your Windows software ran full speed in WINE or Cedega or if you're a better hacker than I am and all your Linux software ran full speed under Ming or Cygwin. Or, if nothing you do needs to be 3D-accelerated you could run VMware and run both on virtual machines simultaneously.
I would say no, though it does depend on what you want to do on your computer (or what you don't want to do, as the case may be). If all you do is surf, Mac isn't so bad. If the software you want to use is only available on one platform then you don't have a whole lot of options.
Setting up and installing Linux is an order of magnitude more difficult than Mac OS X. Keep in mind that very, very few Mac users have ever installed Mac OS since it comes pre-installed on any machine that has it. That said, if I were to describe my MacOS experience in a single word, it would be 'limited'. However, I'll be the first to admit that I have very unique needs in an OS that aren't easily served.
I honestly don't understand how Mac OS Classic is put together. It's wierd and doesn't handle multitasking well at all. Assuming you're talking about Mac OS X and if by UNIX you mean BSD, then yes. Darwin (the core of Mac OS X) is a derivative of BSD that uses the Mach microkernel. Mach operates somewhat differently than a standard Linux kernel but software is easily portable between the two, at least on the same arch (lots of code doesn't port well to PPC from x86 but that's more the fault of the x86 coder being lazy than any fault of the arch itself).
The only part of Mac OS X I would call refined is the GUI. Mac OS X runs a slick OpenGL-based user interface (Aqua) on top of a fairly standard BSDish system. Make no mistake: Aqua is pretty and it should be since Darwin is Open Source so the rest of the cost of the OS goes to marketing and paying the Aqua developers. Though Aqua is a decent GUI, I would've been more pleased if Apple had just made Aqua a freedesktop.org-compliant window manager running on top of X. This would make porting GPL software a breeze instead of having to re-code how the software talks to the desktop on a per-application basis. Apple thoughtfully included X with the developer tools though so if you don't mind running your software in a virtual desktop a la Classic you can still use applications that haven't yet been ported to Aqua. Of course, this is only important if you're like me and the vast majority of the software you use is GPL.
I have on multiple occasions and no it isn't the best of the two worlds. Actually getting both OS's installed without causing bootloader problems is challenging, both OS's take a long time to load, and you can't use software from the other OS without rebooting your PC. Working with files from the other OS is a royal pain since MS has not seen fit to release the specs for NTFS so Linux's NTFS driver is read-only and refuses to include drivers for common non-MS filesystems. Maintaining separate storage for both Windows and Linux is a waste of hard drive space.
That being said, dual-booting is likely the best you're going to get. The best of both worlds would be if all your Windows software ran full speed in WINE or Cedega or if you're a better hacker than I am and all your Linux software ran full speed under Ming or Cygwin. Or, if nothing you do needs to be 3D-accelerated you could run VMware and run both on virtual machines simultaneously.
-drasnor
I am really hoping that in the next 5 or so years, virtualization tech will become so mainstream, that you will be able to switch os's with a hotkey. I I could do that, without rebooting, or any other crap.
I am really hoping that in the next 5 or so years, virtualization tech will become so mainstream, that you will be able to switch os's with a hotkey. I I could do that, without rebooting, or any other crap.
Fat chance. In 5 years every computer will have a trusted platform module and there will only be one OS, one office suite, one DRM-protected music format, and one IM client/protocol because it will be illegal for there to be otherwise, at least in the US anyway.
Fat chance. In 5 years every computer will have a trusted platform module and there will only be one OS, one office suite, one DRM-protected music format, and one IM client/protocol because it will be illegal for there to be otherwise, at least in the US anyway.
-drasnor
Which is why, as soon as I graduate from college, I really want to find a job in europe. Always wanted to see it, and I like it. And I think I have it figured out over there too. Because I dont think I would have to forfeit my citizenship to live there, so I would still have a valid us drivers license, and then, I am hoping since I already had a us license, that I wouldnt have to take a test or anything, I just walk in, say I need to renew it, and they hand me a new license, because from all of the horror stories on here about uk licenses.
Yeh, the us is screwing up computers and the internet for the rest of us. Has that legislation actually passed? I also know that they are trying to make private key encryption illegal also.:sad2:
Alternatively, Airborn, you could write your senators, as a big telecommunications bill without Net Neutrality just passed the house. We need the senators to put Net Neutrality in their bill and get the house to add it to theirs during negotiations. There are large bi-partisan grassroots organizations trying to make a difference.
Then, maybe, you won't have to move to Europe and try to find a way to get a work permit.
dont we have an agreement with at least the uk as far as work goes? I'm sure it cant be that hard to get one, but I've wrote my senators/congressman many times. The problem is, are senators arent educated in the subjects. We need to lobby and educate the senators so that they know what they are doing.
There was a thread a long time ago with Shorty & Prime talking about how hard it is to get work permits in UK and US. I believe that in both countries the employer needs to show to the gov't that they couldn't find a suitable candidate in the country to fill the position (for long-term jobs).
...I believe that in both countries the employer needs to show to the gov't that they couldn't find a suitable candidate in the country to fill the position (for long-term jobs).
I guess Madonna's presence indicates a dearth of sleazy women in the UK.
OT: I'd always wanted to move to another country (preferably colder) but I had been looking into immigration of places lately and it looks like it's impossible to actually move and stay in another country unless you fill one of a certain amount of criteria, which most people don't. No wonder there are so many illegal immigrants in this country.
Yeh, its hard to get citizenship to the us. I just want to go work in europe and see the sights. (and the women:D) I think if I could work there for even just 1 year that would be awesome, but I would like to stary there for 5 or more i think.
Yeh, its hard to get citizenship to the us. I just want to go work in europe and see the sights. (and the women:D) I think if I could work there for even just 1 year that would be awesome, but I would like to stary there for 5 or more i think.
Just do a semester or year abroad in college. Student visas are easy to get, and I was told at OU that very few classes you take there can transfer back as letter-graded. Meaning, you just have to pass them. Gives you some more freedom to see the sights and relax a bit.
Comments
"Refined" wouldn't be the term I'd use, more... "labotomised"...
Have any of you partitioned your computers to use both Linux and Windows?
Wouldn't that be having the best of two worlds? [Given you have enough memore for it]
Setting up and installing Linux is an order of magnitude more difficult than Mac OS X. Keep in mind that very, very few Mac users have ever installed Mac OS since it comes pre-installed on any machine that has it. That said, if I were to describe my MacOS experience in a single word, it would be 'limited'. However, I'll be the first to admit that I have very unique needs in an OS that aren't easily served.
I honestly don't understand how Mac OS Classic is put together. It's wierd and doesn't handle multitasking well at all. Assuming you're talking about Mac OS X and if by UNIX you mean BSD, then yes. Darwin (the core of Mac OS X) is a derivative of BSD that uses the Mach microkernel. Mach operates somewhat differently than a standard Linux kernel but software is easily portable between the two, at least on the same arch (lots of code doesn't port well to PPC from x86 but that's more the fault of the x86 coder being lazy than any fault of the arch itself).
The only part of Mac OS X I would call refined is the GUI. Mac OS X runs a slick OpenGL-based user interface (Aqua) on top of a fairly standard BSDish system. Make no mistake: Aqua is pretty and it should be since Darwin is Open Source so the rest of the cost of the OS goes to marketing and paying the Aqua developers. Though Aqua is a decent GUI, I would've been more pleased if Apple had just made Aqua a freedesktop.org-compliant window manager running on top of X. This would make porting GPL software a breeze instead of having to re-code how the software talks to the desktop on a per-application basis. Apple thoughtfully included X with the developer tools though so if you don't mind running your software in a virtual desktop a la Classic you can still use applications that haven't yet been ported to Aqua. Of course, this is only important if you're like me and the vast majority of the software you use is GPL.
I have on multiple occasions and no it isn't the best of the two worlds. Actually getting both OS's installed without causing bootloader problems is challenging, both OS's take a long time to load, and you can't use software from the other OS without rebooting your PC. Working with files from the other OS is a royal pain since MS has not seen fit to release the specs for NTFS so Linux's NTFS driver is read-only and refuses to include drivers for common non-MS filesystems. Maintaining separate storage for both Windows and Linux is a waste of hard drive space.
That being said, dual-booting is likely the best you're going to get. The best of both worlds would be if all your Windows software ran full speed in WINE or Cedega or if you're a better hacker than I am and all your Linux software ran full speed under Ming or Cygwin. Or, if nothing you do needs to be 3D-accelerated you could run VMware and run both on virtual machines simultaneously.
-drasnor
I am really hoping that in the next 5 or so years, virtualization tech will become so mainstream, that you will be able to switch os's with a hotkey.
-drasnor
Which is why, as soon as I graduate from college, I really want to find a job in europe. Always wanted to see it, and I like it. And I think I have it figured out over there too. Because I dont think I would have to forfeit my citizenship to live there, so I would still have a valid us drivers license, and then, I am hoping since I already had a us license, that I wouldnt have to take a test or anything, I just walk in, say I need to renew it, and they hand me a new license, because from all of the horror stories on here about uk licenses
Yeh, the us is screwing up computers and the internet for the rest of us. Has that legislation actually passed? I also know that they are trying to make private key encryption illegal also.:sad2:
Then, maybe, you won't have to move to Europe and try to find a way to get a work permit.
But... how does that explain Hugh Grant?
/me gets the memo.
HE'S A MAN?!