[300DShooter]

You have to be kidding me..

[nonseq]

MICHAEL6gvz, on 12 April 2012 - 11:08 AM, said:

nonseq, on 12 April 2012 - 09:08 AM, said:

Ridiculous. Give up a cohesive unified system with powerful and secure applications for the hodgepodge of distros and not quite ready for prime time programs?

Linux is great in the back office and on servers. One the desktop it's fragmented and hobbyist friendly without meeting average users needs.

Let the condescension and flaming begin!

I agree this is ridiculous to have them switch, but Linux works well on the desktop.
Its as fragmented as the web can see, but somehow it goes on and on
I have used Windows, Mac and Linux for the past 20 years and Linux works just as well, or just as bad.
Linux really is amazing considering how many different platforms it runs on.
OSX is designed just to run on Apple hardware. Windows works only well with the appropriate drivers. Linux is the most compatible across all hardware.

I'd like to make some rant and flame you, hehe, but thats to be expected.
I imagine you have not used Linux everyday and that is probably where your observation comes.
Really, when you get down to it, Linux works well. I've worked at places where a handful of users use linux, and now hundreds use it on the desktop here.
Windows and OSX work well too. Who really cares what you use?? am I right.

Consider this, I want to see you install OSX on whatever system you have thats not an Apple.... then try the same with a Linux disc.

Which OS would you have to play with and muck around with?



If anyone needs help with Linux I dont flame them, I help.

So if you need any help, let me know.

Thanks for the kind offer. I wouldn't want to install OSX on anything but an Apple device. I have a little more than three decades of experience with a wide variety of OSs etc. I prefer the integrated system and user interface that Apple offers. I predominately use windows in my office. In both cases MS Office, Adobe Creative Suite (video and print), video editing (Final Cut, Avid, Premiere), Quick Books, and other proprietary programs get used daily. None of the software I use is native to Linux and using Wine severely diminishes the performance any software that I use. Even in my property tax consulting business OO.org and LibreOffice do not provide the ease of use and compatibility that I require. In the time that it would take to cobble together a linux environment that almost does what I need but that requires a great deal more of my time in maintaining, I will have expended far more in opportunity cost (a factor of at least 5) than I would have spent on name brand fully supported software for Windows and OSX.

Linux works great on servers but on the desktop it simply is a hobbyist proposition. It doesn't save me a dime when opportunity costs are considered and the programs seem several generations behind. I really wanted to make LibreOffice work for me (I hate MS Ribbon) but it simply doesn't. I'm a user, not a techie.

That's what has been so frustrating in every article from Katherine Noyes when she asserts that Linux offers everything that anyone would want. It's not true and it's never been true. But she keeps banging the drum, raising expectations and setting a large segment of computers up for frustration and money loss. Others will disagree with me and that's OK. I'm glad that their choices work for them.

[RuriHoshino]

nonseq, on 12 April 2012 - 10:46 AM, said:

They shouldn't have to "know how". That, in my opinion, is why linux is great for millions like you but is not ready for primetime on the average user's desktop machine. OO.org and LibreOffice are not equivalent programs to MS Office (unfortunately) and the GIMP stinks on ice, but the bewildering array of distros create a real barrier for universal adoption. The vast majority of us don't want to futz with our computers and learn how to do something that pretty much comes working out of the box on the OSX Windows side of the equation.

For those who love Linux and enjoy working with it on their desktops, more power to you. Linux is simply not for the rest of us and we make up well over 90% of the market.

I never seen a more incorrect post in my life for basic things like well everything on the web and most office stuff linux is just as good if not better then windows.
I've even setup linux machines for friends and family to see if does it work for normal people and the answer is a resounding yes and only difference is it does not get viruses.
GPU drivers are no longer slow if you buy a video card that was made in the last two years in fact for AMD/ATI video cards I've seen even seen greater performance.
As of Open Office and Libre Office they do open most MS office files often better then MS office it's self when you having to deal with people using older versions of office or the castrated MS works.

The only real short coming I see with Linux is games don't always work that's it.
Office apps I found if they're well written they generally work under wine.
As for claims of diminished performance office apps generally require so little in the way of CPU and video card resources compared to games most people will hardly notice it.


If not for games and a couple of cross development tools I would be 100% Microsoft free.

This post has been edited by RuriHoshino: 12 April 2012 - 12:28 PM

[nonseq]

RuriHoshino, on 12 April 2012 - 12:13 PM, said:

nonseq, on 12 April 2012 - 10:46 AM, said:

KenRay, on 12 April 2012 - 10:33 AM, said:

I have been using Ubuntu Linux on my desktop for years. A few years ago there was an issue with finding software to use on Linux. Now there are no issues except when people insist on using MS Office on Linux. I am very happy with the performance of my laptop. Windows usually slows down after a few months on a new install. But my laptop has not slowed down at all. It performs like new 24/7. The biggest reason people don't switch is because they don't know how or just don't know about it at all. MS Office is what keeps businesses from switching. Most apps are on the net now anyway.

They shouldn't have to "know how". That, in my opinion, is why linux is great for millions like you but is not ready for primetime on the average user's desktop machine. OO.org and LibreOffice are not equivalent programs to MS Office (unfortunately) and the GIMP stinks on ice, but the bewildering array of distros create a real barrier for universal adoption. The vast majority of us don't want to futz with our computers and learn how to do something that pretty much comes working out of the box on the OSX Windows side of the equation.

For those who love Linux and enjoy working with it on their desktops, more power to you. Linux is simply not for the rest of us and we make up well over 90% of the market.

I never seen a more incorrect post in my life for basic things like well everything on the web and most office stuff linux is just as good if not better then windows.
I've even setup linux machines for friends and family to see does it work for normal people and the answer is a resounding yes and only difference is it does not get viruses.
GPU drivers are no longer slow if you buy a video card that was made in the last two years in fact for AMD/ATI video cards I've seen even seen greater performance.
As of Open Office and Libre Office they do open most MS office files often better then MS office it's self when you having to deal with people using older version of office or the castrated MS works.

The only real short coming I see with linux is games don't always work that's it.

Obviously you don't have to work with the programs that you install for others. If you did, you would understand that there is a large percentage of us who simply don't find the look, feel, output, and operation of OO.org and LibreOffice to be what we need. Sure they may open files and open files fast but they do not maintain formatting as well and they are not as easy to use. Sorry.

I would respond that your post is no more correct than my own and to assert that Linux is not susceptible to malware is incredibly naive. Thanks for your input

This post has been edited by nonseq: 12 April 2012 - 12:42 PM

[IanBetteridgezwif]

"It's starting to look like Apple's “walled garden” isn't as safe as many thought it was."

Which "walled garden" would that be? The Mac isn't a walled garden, anymore than Linux is.

[linuxrants7xpg]

Wow, that really brought the trolls screaming out from under the bridge. Linux is a great solution for a desktop user that just wants to get work done. Those that think that's not the case probably haven't used Linux, and probably wouldn't even if it came with a free wad of $100 bills. Trolls will troll, and life goes on.

[AnonymousPC]

Nearly all of the OSX users would have been fine had they used anti-virus and not thought they were invulnerable... I agree Linux is more secure, but honestly the applications are far worse than those that reside on OSX; Apple certainly has some great software on their platform.

[RickDobbelmannqbtt]

nonseq, on 12 April 2012 - 09:08 AM, said:

Ridiculous. Give up a cohesive unified system with powerful and secure applications for the hodgepodge of distros and not quite ready for prime time programs?

Linux is great in the back office and on servers. One the desktop it's fragmented and hobbyist friendly without meeting average users needs.

Let the condescension and flaming begin!

Wow You continue to amaze me with your stupidness.

Your beloved MAC OSX is just a simple closed source GUI and a set of apps stacked on top of a 100% free GNU/BSD/*nix operating system called Darwin.

Your beloved closed source security through obscurity is the only reason OSX was infected.

[RickDobbelmannqbtt]

IanBetteridgezwif, on 12 April 2012 - 12:40 PM, said:

"It's starting to look like Apple's “walled garden” isn't as safe as many thought it was."

Which "walled garden" would that be? The Mac isn't a walled garden, anymore than Linux is.

I love the its not ready for the desktop or there are not apps that compare to mac..

Fools!

[RickDobbelmannqbtt]

nonseq, on 12 April 2012 - 12:18 PM, said:

RuriHoshino, on 12 April 2012 - 12:13 PM, said:

nonseq, on 12 April 2012 - 10:46 AM, said:

KenRay, on 12 April 2012 - 10:33 AM, said:

I have been using Ubuntu Linux on my desktop for years. A few years ago there was an issue with finding software to use on Linux. Now there are no issues except when people insist on using MS Office on Linux. I am very happy with the performance of my laptop. Windows usually slows down after a few months on a new install. But my laptop has not slowed down at all. It performs like new 24/7. The biggest reason people don't switch is because they don't know how or just don't know about it at all. MS Office is what keeps businesses from switching. Most apps are on the net now anyway.

They shouldn't have to "know how". That, in my opinion, is why linux is great for millions like you but is not ready for primetime on the average user's desktop machine. OO.org and LibreOffice are not equivalent programs to MS Office (unfortunately) and the GIMP stinks on ice, but the bewildering array of distros create a real barrier for universal adoption. The vast majority of us don't want to futz with our computers and learn how to do something that pretty much comes working out of the box on the OSX Windows side of the equation.

For those who love Linux and enjoy working with it on their desktops, more power to you. Linux is simply not for the rest of us and we make up well over 90% of the market.

I never seen a more incorrect post in my life for basic things like well everything on the web and most office stuff linux is just as good if not better then windows.
I've even setup linux machines for friends and family to see does it work for normal people and the answer is a resounding yes and only difference is it does not get viruses.
GPU drivers are no longer slow if you buy a video card that was made in the last two years in fact for AMD/ATI video cards I've seen even seen greater performance.
As of Open Office and Libre Office they do open most MS office files often better then MS office it's self when you having to deal with people using older version of office or the castrated MS works.

The only real short coming I see with linux is games don't always work that's it.

Obviously you don't have to work with the programs that you install for others. If you did, you would understand that there is a large percentage of us who simply don't find the look, feel, output, and operation of OO.org and LibreOffice to be what we need. Sure they may open files and open files fast but they do not maintain formatting as well and they are not as easy to use. Sorry.

I would respond that your post is no more correct than my own and to assert that Linux is not susceptible to malware is incredibly naive. Thanks for your input

WOW just wow..

[MICHAEL6gvz]

nonseq, on 12 April 2012 - 12:12 PM, said:

That's what has been so frustrating in every article from Katherine Noyes when she asserts that Linux offers everything that anyone would want. It's not true and it's never been true. But she keeps banging the drum, raising expectations and setting a large segment of computers up for frustration and money loss. Others will disagree with me and that's OK. I'm glad that their choices work for them.

Hey there,

Thanks for the details of your system usage and applications. I started with the TI99/4a and simply havent stopped loving computers.
I kind of took the approach back in the Mac 9.0 days "If it doesn't run on my system, I dont need it". So maybe thats why linux works for me. I find LibreOffice to work quite well. Im a fan of the old MS Office 2000, so its closer to that
It is unfortunate that articles such as this one create nothing but arguments. I really know that OSX and Linux are much safer than an Windows desktop, but I can't tell people to switch without letting them know that they will gain some things and lose some things along the way. I'm fairly frugal, so legally free applications that work OK are fine by me. I think you mentioned the Gimp as not being very good compared to PhotoShop. The funny thing is, I feel the opposite I have been using the Gimp so much through the years, I couldn't go back to photoshop. (I know, people will yell here and say "The Gimp is not meant as a photoshop replacement"... which is true, but it does a lot of the same stuff)
In short, OSes and applications take time to get used to. And I suppose I'm a bit more used to the look and feel of my favorite applications ( Audacity, Ardour, Amarok, Inkscape, Gimp, tomboy), so this is what I often compare applications to.
I find myself thinking "Man, this is crap compared to xyz!"
The OS argument is similar to the "Chicago vs NY style pizza". I really never knew there was any other pizza out there until I tasted chicago style. Its good, but not my favorite.


Anyway, keep on making interesting points, maybe it will help people write more complete articles!

Cheers

[nonseq]

RickDobbelmannqbtt, on 12 April 2012 - 01:18 PM, said:

nonseq, on 12 April 2012 - 09:08 AM, said:

Ridiculous. Give up a cohesive unified system with powerful and secure applications for the hodgepodge of distros and not quite ready for prime time programs?

Linux is great in the back office and on servers. One the desktop it's fragmented and hobbyist friendly without meeting average users needs.

Let the condescension and flaming begin!

Wow You continue to amaze me with your stupidness.

Your beloved MAC OSX is just a simple closed source GUI and a set of apps stacked on top of a 100% free GNU/BSD/*nix operating system called Darwin.

Your beloved closed source security through obscurity is the only reason OSX was infected.

Hmm. Thanks for your ever so persuasive personal attack. Yep you've changed my mind by your eloquence. But wait, you really have no real understanding of the antecedents of OSX. But thanks for the ad hominem.

Thanks also for your negative ratings. What a peach

This post has been edited by nonseq: 12 April 2012 - 01:32 PM

[MICHAEL6gvz]

artzy65, on 12 April 2012 - 12:03 PM, said:

OSX Lion installs beautifully via VMWare on any PC. My IT friend did that recently. Put that in your pipe and smoke it ;-)

That is illegal my friend.

And proves my case, you needed your "IT" friend to install it. Why couldnt you purchase lion and do it yourself if its soooo compatible and easy?

[RickDobbelmannqbtt]

nonseq, on 12 April 2012 - 01:27 PM, said:

RickDobbelmannqbtt, on 12 April 2012 - 01:18 PM, said:

nonseq, on 12 April 2012 - 09:08 AM, said:

Ridiculous. Give up a cohesive unified system with powerful and secure applications for the hodgepodge of distros and not quite ready for prime time programs?

Linux is great in the back office and on servers. One the desktop it's fragmented and hobbyist friendly without meeting average users needs.

Let the condescension and flaming begin!

Wow You continue to amaze me with your stupidness.

Your beloved MAC OSX is just a simple closed source GUI and a set of apps stacked on top of a 100% free GNU/BSD/*nix operating system called Darwin.

Your beloved closed source security through obscurity is the only reason OSX was infected.

Hmm. Thanks for your ever so persuasive personal attack. Yep you've changed my mind by your eloquence. But wait, you really have no real understanding of the antecedents of OSX. But thanks for the ad hominem.

Hmm No ad hominem here, pointed out facts pertaining to your original post. Unless you are referring to me being amazed on how stupid your posts are. Well maybe you can say that was ad hominem but the rest wasn't.

The lesson to be learned here is: Don't make stupid posts.

Of course "you really have no real understanding of the antecedents of OSX." in no way could ever be described as a ad hominem argument.

You are not as eloquent as you think you are, sir.

This post has been edited by RickDobbelmannqbtt: 12 April 2012 - 01:35 PM

[RickDobbelmannqbtt]

MICHAEL6gvz, on 12 April 2012 - 01:29 PM, said:

artzy65, on 12 April 2012 - 12:03 PM, said:

OSX Lion installs beautifully via VMWare on any PC. My IT friend did that recently. Put that in your pipe and smoke it ;-)

That is illegal my friend.

And proves my case, you needed your "IT" friend to install it. Why couldnt you purchase lion and do it yourself if its soooo compatible and easy?

It is not Illegal to build and install OSX yourself. APPLE gives you ALL of the tools to build OSX for FREE!!!!! http://opensource.apple.com/

[AnonymousPC]

RickDobbelmannqbtt, on 12 April 2012 - 01:32 PM, said:

nonseq, on 12 April 2012 - 01:27 PM, said:

RickDobbelmannqbtt, on 12 April 2012 - 01:18 PM, said:

nonseq, on 12 April 2012 - 09:08 AM, said:

Ridiculous. Give up a cohesive unified system with powerful and secure applications for the hodgepodge of distros and not quite ready for prime time programs?

Linux is great in the back office and on servers. One the desktop it's fragmented and hobbyist friendly without meeting average users needs.

Let the condescension and flaming begin!

Wow You continue to amaze me with your stupidness.

Your beloved MAC OSX is just a simple closed source GUI and a set of apps stacked on top of a 100% free GNU/BSD/*nix operating system called Darwin.

Your beloved closed source security through obscurity is the only reason OSX was infected.

Hmm. Thanks for your ever so persuasive personal attack. Yep you've changed my mind by your eloquence. But wait, you really have no real understanding of the antecedents of OSX. But thanks for the ad hominem.

Hmm No ad hominem here, pointed out facts pertaining to your original post. Unless you are referring to me being amazed on how stupid your posts are. Well maybe you can say that was ad hominem but the rest wasn't.

The lesson to be learned here is: Don't make stupid posts.

Of course "you really have no real understanding of the antecedents of OSX." in no way could ever be described as a ad hominem argument.

You are not as eloquent as you think you are, sir.

I wouldn't call his posts "stupid" because he is a rather intelligent person and has a lot of experiences (although I certainly have my disagreements with him). Do not let your personal biases lead to make ignorant posts. He disagrees with you, that does not make him stupid, but it makes him different. Learn to tolerate him and make logical arguments rather than merely insulting him.

[RickDobbelmannqbtt]

AnonymousPC, on 12 April 2012 - 01:39 PM, said:

RickDobbelmannqbtt, on 12 April 2012 - 01:32 PM, said:

nonseq, on 12 April 2012 - 01:27 PM, said:

RickDobbelmannqbtt, on 12 April 2012 - 01:18 PM, said:

nonseq, on 12 April 2012 - 09:08 AM, said:

Ridiculous. Give up a cohesive unified system with powerful and secure applications for the hodgepodge of distros and not quite ready for prime time programs?

Linux is great in the back office and on servers. One the desktop it's fragmented and hobbyist friendly without meeting average users needs.

Let the condescension and flaming begin!

Wow You continue to amaze me with your stupidness.

Your beloved MAC OSX is just a simple closed source GUI and a set of apps stacked on top of a 100% free GNU/BSD/*nix operating system called Darwin.

Your beloved closed source security through obscurity is the only reason OSX was infected.

Hmm. Thanks for your ever so persuasive personal attack. Yep you've changed my mind by your eloquence. But wait, you really have no real understanding of the antecedents of OSX. But thanks for the ad hominem.

Hmm No ad hominem here, pointed out facts pertaining to your original post. Unless you are referring to me being amazed on how stupid your posts are. Well maybe you can say that was ad hominem but the rest wasn't.

The lesson to be learned here is: Don't make stupid posts.

Of course "you really have no real understanding of the antecedents of OSX." in no way could ever be described as a ad hominem argument.

You are not as eloquent as you think you are, sir.

I wouldn't call his posts "stupid" because he is a rather intelligent person and has a lot of experiences (although I certainly have my disagreements with him). Do not let your personal biases lead to make ignorant posts. He disagrees with you, that does not make him stupid, but it makes him different. Learn to tolerate him and make logical arguments rather than merely insulting him.

I am not saying he is stupid, I am saying his posts are stupid.. Something must be happening between his brain and fingers. Because his fingers make no sence.

[lawyerfish]

WinTard, on 12 April 2012 - 09:32 AM, said:

Switching is boring. Don't limit yourself. Use them all with equal ease. There is no better or worse. Only different. What have you got to lose?

Time.

[MICHAEL6gvz]

RickDobbelmannqbtt, on 12 April 2012 - 01:35 PM, said:

MICHAEL6gvz, on 12 April 2012 - 01:29 PM, said:

artzy65, on 12 April 2012 - 12:03 PM, said:

OSX Lion installs beautifully via VMWare on any PC. My IT friend did that recently. Put that in your pipe and smoke it ;-)

That is illegal my friend.

And proves my case, you needed your "IT" friend to install it. Why couldnt you purchase lion and do it yourself if its soooo compatible and easy?

It is not Illegal to build and install OSX yourself. APPLE gives you ALL of the tools to build OSX for FREE!!!!! http://opensource.apple.com/

Thanks for the link, but nowhere did I find how to download and build OSX... also Im certain that that guy's friend didnt build the OS. Cocoa is a closed source piece of code and apple does not release that.
If I wanted to build Darwin thats fine. But doesnt this defeat the whole "Mac is easier" mantra?

Also as far as legality... look at the apple licensce agreement for OSX section: "2. Permitted License Uses and Restrictions."
This states that it is restricted to an Apple-Labeled computer.

[useryl5g]

Let me get this right, leave MAC OS for Linux... sure. Has anyone actually looked at the command structure on a MAC, it is Linux in an expensive package! The bad guys are just going after bigger bang for their efforts. They went after Windows simply because the number of installed systems, now they go after the ill informed MAC users for easy pickings. This is not to say Linux is more secure because there almost no way to completely protect everyone from anything. There is always a loose nut on the keyboard.