[PCWorld]

Post your comments for The Difference Between Vista, XP, Linux and Mac OS Explained here

[JaywalkerExtraordinaire]

It appears Mr. Shapiro hasn't a clue what the differences between the different OS's are, either.

[number6]

Well, Linux didn't really get mentioned. Kind of odd way of putting.

[Ryan22158]

It gave a pretty good idea of what the philosophy of Apple is.

[JaywalkerExtraordinaire]

{quote}It gave a pretty good idea of what the philosophy of Apple is.{quote}

It might seem so to someone who doesn't understand Apple's philosophy and only listens to the anti-Apple FUD found on so many PC forums. The reality is the author's comments were inaccurate and merely spread more FUD to a youth who wanted to learn the differences between various operating systems.

[linuxlsrjd]

That analysis is right on. Sure angered a lot of fan boys though. I've been using my own pail for 2 years now =)

[chuckchuck]

LOL! Great analogy, Shapiro - and "JaywalkerExtraordinaire" stop whining - just cause you have an Apple and bow down to Steve Jobs . . . Jobs is a control freak and Apple will never grown until he dies or passes the torch to someone willing to let someone else make hardware and software for Apple.

Apple users are elitists who think their PCs are infallible and that their farts don't stink!

[Lonewaffle]

It's funny to watch PC guys argue against something they don't understand. Apple is a computer company, like Dell. The OS is just one of their perks. In my opinion, it's the greatest perk of all, but you do get some nicely designed products too. Now stop being angry/jealous that you can't run it on your el cheapo computer.

[SamCal]

Idiot.

[iindie]

i totally agree with Lonewaffle , that part set aside , i have to take good hard looks at linux and IMHO the user interface of gnome does not even come close to Aqua in term of coherence.
The best UI i found on linux so far is the spartan OpenBox at least you know from the top you' ll have to do all customization via terminal. (Which every linux user uses all the time even though they do not say it).
At true OS comparision would be to take XP Vista Mac os X and Linux (Ubuntu for example) and see how much actual work you can achieve without resorting to Terminal. Is that worth the fabled $40 ???? In my humble opinion it is. Ho and in matters of DRM XP and Vista bowed to the film industry to get blu-ray ... Hence the crippling of Vista in terms of performance .
But of course let's sweep the carcasses under the rug , even the brontonsaur ones. XP and Vista in terms of DRM really have something to reproach to Mac os X in that Department (where is my Product ID and my WGA activation ???)

[rccoffee]

I am sure that Mr. Shapiro's article is too technical for me. I know some elementary students who could have written a better article, though.
chuckchuck..."..let someone else make hardware and software for Apple". You have got to be kidding! Who? Sony? HP? DELL? Not a snowball's chance in hell!
A Macfan who is a recovering Microsoftie.

[TechieXP]

The real convo -

Kid - What is the difference bewteen Windows, Mac OS and Linux?

Linux - I am a pretty good stable OS. I offer many like applications that offer nothing more then basic coputing experience. I am perfect for you because my applications will be more fun to use unless you need a serious application. Also I am free and can be downloaded at anytime...but I dont work fully with all hardware but I am getting better. I offer several confusing distro's each with their own look and design. Oh and yes I can run Windows inside myself to help you in case you need better.

Mac OS - I am a very robust OS with 100's of very good appz. Most are taylored to music and video authoring. I a not good for do much else if you need serious computing. I do play some games, but most are to childish for me. I have no idea what kids really like, because I didn't want to spend time with my own Kids. Lisa wasn't my idea and see how bad I fathered them? But My Macs offer blazing speeds and now that we use PC hardware we are even better. Problem is we don't have much to offer in programs. Oh but we do unlike linux have a full blown version of Microsoft Office. But not much else. And as far as customzing? Well upgradig hardware is getting better, but you still can't upgrade any of teh components unless you have a college degree. Our PC's work better if you own perpherals like iPhone and iPod. We have good wireless too. The OS? well it comes standard as is. If you install to much you might break it. And since Macs are so expenisve to fix and you can only go to the Apple Repair Center I rather not let you be able to customize much.

Windows - Wow fella looks like you have to compromize so much. Well I offer compatibility with more applications and I have over 200000 to choose from. And customizing is a breeze. Don't like branded names? I offer the ability to build your own. And yet I still work. And upgrading is as easy as 1 2 3. I offer an interface that is easy to learn no matter how young you are as long as you can read simple english. I offer productivity tools for kids and adults alike. And entertainment? I can author music and video too. In fact me an mac have similar friends like Adobe. But my version are way less confusing then Linux and you don't need to know wany programming language. But you can also find me in other places so that teh ease of use is transferred. I am on phones too, and I also have a media player. Sure it isn't as fancy as iphone, but it does teh job very well. in fact they copied some of our ideas. Like on Zune we had an application that lets you tag a song you dont know and find out who sings it and where to buy. Apple version listens to it first. Thats just takes to long. Oh and sure you can skin teh OS to look like anything you want including MACS. But looks are everything. We can be repaired by any certified technician so you save money bec you can choose who fixes it. Upgrading is also at a low cost and Windows works with ore of them. And I have so many games that i make consoles look bad...and i work seemlessly with XBox even wirelessly.

And sure my OS costs a bit more, but look at all the options you get. I do everything and they do a little. But you save with lower cost hardware and best of all you get lots of choice. I controls teh market i dont ontrol you.

Kid wow so many choices. Looks like Windows is teh best simply because it has everything. But i heard you ahve problems. W

Windows...well we all do on some level. But the other guys want you to believe they have so much less problems. Well they do sometimes...but they offer less to.

Fact is son if you practice safe conputing and don't look at porn and run good appz I am the best in teh class.

Wow thats enough for me...Windows it is.

[Lonewaffle]

TechieXP,

I think I like your overview better than the actual one that we're commenting about. I do, however, disagree on a few things. It's pretty obvious you've never really relied on a mac as your daily computer. I come from over a decade of using Windows versions of every sort almost exclusively and have gathered a very large amount of apps for the many various things I do. I've had no trouble finding a mac version or equivalent for everyone of them. In fact, I've never been unable to find an app to do what I've needed on my mac. Other than games, can you name one single thing you can do in windows that you can't do on a mac? I bet if you come up with something, I could quickly find a suitable app to shoot you down with. What's better is that there aren't a bunch of amateur apps that are released unfinished in the mac world as with windows.

[rccoffee]

I agree with you Lonewaffle. I was a long time user of Microsoft's Windows until I needed to replacre my Win XP and dreaded the manufacturer'r lack of quality and I looked at Vista and decided to switch to Mac.

I could never give up Mac, Leopard, Apple Care and going to the Apple Store where people...really....know...Macs....and give great customer service. Imagine going into a computer store to buy a compuer and the salespeople actually know what they are talking about. The Genius Bar is really great and no Windows computer has anything like this.

[TechieXP]

I was being somewhat sarcastic. We have Macs in our office and I am aware of what they can do. Desktop Macs can't be upgraded like PC's can. However upgrading OEM PC's have some limitations, but not like Mac. Price is also an issue. Before you say it, yes you can get a macs for the cost of many pc based systems. But in many cases I can get better options for same price. For example teh Macbook with 13 inch screen for 1299, I can get a Dell with 15 inch with highest resolution 3GB of ram twice the hard disk space for $10 less. Trade off...the mac is using ddr3 ram vs ddr2 and the nividia card was 9400 vs 8400. But I don't want to start a mac vs pc debate. Hoever I did just read today, Mac OSX just got 21 OS level updates including the same issue with malicious code riding on the back od Adobe Flasher Player. Looks like IE isn't the only browser and Windows isnt the only OS that can be a victim. Proof postive that Mac OSX can and will have the same issues we have. It not about more or less, it just means if someone can take teh time to do it...it can be done. And macs are virus proof...and saying they are is just bad.

[TechieXP]

oh is this another unfair pc vs mac comparison? Apple store - Apple makes on computer in 2 flavors laptop and destop. PC's also comes in 2 flavors desktop and laptop yet there are different ppl selling those 2 flavors and each adds there own twice. Places like Best Buy and Circuit City and other places that sell computers on a retail level can't tell you nothing much about teh product. Goes teh same for buying a Mac from same said retailer. Hoever if you go to a real PC salsperson that is certfied and knows his stuff he can give you all teh same fancy info about them. Why? Because he to will be dealing with one product. Mac gans are so funny always finding teh need to address teh differences. When it is marginal. And indivdual trained to know about a spefic product is supposet to know. Howver, I live in Chicago and we have an Apple store on Michigan Ave. And I listen very closely at how they try to talk about Mac OSX vs Windows Vista. Its funny I hgear teh exact same things we say accept its applied to Mac. Why? Because Macs are simply a PC with a different OS. When they talk they don't talk about teh hardware they talk about teh OS. All they say how much better Mac OSX is over Vista. I heard one spend the fact Mac OSX doesn't have teh virus issues as PC's? Really? So why is there a Norton for Macs? And Spyware for Macs?

Am I mistaken or is Apple the first to teh market with a cool compuetr featuring a user friendly GUI? And then here comes this little itty bitty company called Micro-Soft who stole their thuder by offer a computer that offered more for 1/2 teh cost and the story ends.

[budworth]

I get the subtle hint that it's so easy a middle schooler can understand it. Only problem I see is that there isn't a lot of middle schooler traffic in the business center section of PC worlds online ezine. You're not clever so please stop trying to be and write to the level of understanding of your audience. Honestly, I'm not really sure what the heck you're statement is trying to say. Thanks for contributing. Next time please think about us, the reader.
I'm not looking for controversy (Mac vs. PC), just straight talk which is obviously in short supply these days.

[taustin1382]

that is a very poorly thought out article... very poorly executed as well....
I don't care who is better at what, linux works for me. but I would like to chime in on the virus debate. can linux and mac get viruses?, yes.
if mac and linux were at the desktop popularity level windows is it is completely expected that people will start writing viruses for these os's that target the home users ignorance, however for a virus to be successful it has to do many things well.



















# 1.it has to install itself undetected
#2. it has to populate faster than it is killed off.
#3. it has to retrieve some sort of data or cause some sort of mayhem to be worth while.


















issues with mac and linux pertaining to viruses







to install anything on linux you have to accept the request for installation and provide it the root password. at this point what ever is being installed is assigned permissions based on predefined criteria (these permissions can be no higher than user level). when an application is run it runs in its own space and cannot make changes to anything other than the current profile. if it tries to make any changes to the system you will be prompted to enter the root account's access level.







so what we have is at the worst case scenario the application (virus)cannot make any changes with out giving it self away. it cannot install via drive by it has to be explicitly installed and at that point can only mess with things at the user level (think guest account in windows). your best case scenario as a virus writer is you get some data off the machine but it cannot auto populate to other machines and it cannot do anything automated unless the user accepts it and provides root level access.







































so for the home user it is entirely valid that someone does just like they do in windows, install some new game or something like that and provide all the proper credentials to proceed and screw them selves. however it will only infect that machine at worst. at that point since linux is strictly file based, you restore the previous files and you are all set excluding any data that might have been sent back to the host.







in a business environment though where the users do not have the root password there is no way for the virus to install it self. some IT person would have to ssh to the machine and actually install the virus and after that give it permission to do what it is trying to do. this is the advantage on linux over windows. mac is unix based as well so this would apply to them as well. the only instance that has been noted that would be a major catastrophe is if a virus was planted on an update repository and just slid right in with the rest of the updates. but it would still have to prompt to make any changes to the system after installation.







so there you have it. feel free to be completely pissed off and start yelling but please do a little research before you start throwing stones.





















also there have been many claims that no one writes linux and unix viruses because no one uses it. let me go on record saying that EVERY bank system I have seen is running linux, UNIX or Solaris (unix based) (edit: I take that back I have seen 1 VMS based system in a bank). also over 50% of web servers that are available to the public. we are talking major financial and personal data such as credit card and bank sites, us government sites, foreign government sites, all kinds of online file storage data, etc etc etc. Linux has approx 85%-90% of the super computer market. again we are talking about DOD, NASA, huge corporations and such. Never mind database servers, I know the nuclear plant and local state investigations bureau uses linux for thier databases (Local FBI office) I would imagine that is standard accross the board. there is a huge wealth of knowledge and money to be had by infiltrating these systems. yet no one writes for it because its not used enough..... the desktop market does not hold a candle to what could be had by getting in to one of these servers. again feel free to throw stones but please do your homework.









Also note that any one can view the source code and they know exactly how these systems operate!

















oh and a mac version norton antivirus exists for the same reason gas additives that double your gas mileage exist... because they hope some one will buy them.





I have also been told from friends who are administrators as well that most medical databases and servers are predominantly linux/unix.



Point is the return on investment for the attacker is there its just not an easy target.

Message was edited by: taustin1382

[TechieXP]

First off Linux is used on the server side more then in a desktop environmrnent. In most of those same places you mentioned if you go to a users desk they are using either Windows, or Citrix running on top of Linux. I work at Citibank and at the besktop we were running Citrix which crashed often...and way work then Windows every did for me and this is on a buisness level.

I don;t think it matters about viruses for Linux because it isn't desktop friendly enough for everyday usage. Some distros like Ubuntu are very close. And as you said...i watch Windows users just say yes to everything. Which means they would do teh same on any other system, that is why they are being written at this level. The biggest vulverable espect to a computer will be the user as it is the most open door. And MS has learn to insure to fix level of security in Vista, so you are less likely to get a virus. I don't even run virus software in Vista and I have yet to be infected. Not saying I am perfect but I am aware of what I click.

People hate Vista's UAC because it pops up for everything. This happen in linux will only piss off the user and they will simply say yes so as not to be disturbed. This would be the same on the MAC level.

What ypu said was true and expect in certain enviroments. But be practical as linux isn't big in desktop area. And someone did hack Visa server and got Bill Gates Credit Card number remember that? and it was a kid. It can happen if someone is willing to take out teh time. All I have a home network and I did get an infection when running XP, but the virus did populate on every pc I had setup. It got in through an open port on 1 system and I had it locked on the others.

Forget market share - If Linux and Mac OS ran as manny appz as Windows, worked with as much hardware as Windows does, then there would be reason to expolit it. There is lots of truth in teh marketshare comments. More usage means more ppl you can screw over. If MS wasnt who they were they would be having this problem that is a fact. and it isn't so easily dismissed by your explaination. But it was very 100% good and correct.

MS needs to work on security and geez how many times do we need to be reminded of it. They took great steps in working out many flaws in XP with Vista and fix XP with SP2/3.

If Linux was where MS was now and MS was where Lunix was the conversation would be the same, providing they went about being in that spot with the same measures MS used to get there. The problem with MS isn't there marketshare, but how they attained. We all know the stories I don't need to rehash them. If they simply bec number one just by doing good business they wouldn't have the problems or least not at this level. So they brought alot of it on themselves. Which is why since they know they are a target they need to protect themselves better so that we would be protected too.

[chipbennett]

Oh Linux, how do they FUD thee? Let me count the ways:

{quote:title=iindie wrote:}...you' ll have to do all customization via terminal. (Which every linux user uses all the time even though they do not say it)...At (sic) true OS comparision would be to take XP Vista Mac os X and Linux (Ubuntu for example) and see how much actual work you can achieve without resorting to Terminal.{quote}

I'm a Linux user. I haven't opened a terminal for months. I use it when it's convenient; it is almost never required. I have no dual-boot setup with a Windows safety net. I do all my work - and get it all done - in (Kubuntu) Linux.

{quote:title=TechieXP wrote:}Linux - I am a pretty good stable OS. I offer many like applications that offer nothing more then basic coputing (sic) experience. I am perfect for you because my applications will be more fun to use unless you need a serious application. Also I am free and can be downloaded at anytime...but I dont (sic) work fully with all hardware but I am getting better. I offer several confusing distro's each with their own look and design. Oh and yes I can run Windows inside myself to help you in case you need better... (continues on with Windows fanboy rant){quote}

I use many full-featured applications under Linux, most importantly (for me): KDE-PIM, Firefox, Kopete, kFlicker, DigiCam, Amarok, kAudioCreator, etc. These applications (and many others) are "serious" applications that match or exceed Windows counterparts with respect to functionality.

{quote:title=TechieXP wrote:}I don;t (sic) think it matters about viruses for Linux because it isn't desktop friendly enough for everyday usage.{quote}

And yet here I am, replying to your Linux FUD from a Kubuntu Linux desktop - the same desktop Linux I use every day - for over a year now, in fact.

{quote:title=TechieXP wrote:}People hate Vista's UAC because it pops up for everything. This happen in linux will only piss off the user and they will simply say yes so as not to be disturbed.{quote}

Except that in Linux, the application first has to find an exploit vector through which to install/run locally. Good luck with that. Further, root access requires more than clicking "Yes" in a dialogue; the user has to enter the root password - which makes bypassing nearly impossible, and social engineering (i.e. mindless click-through) much more difficult.

And bonus points for fanboy condescension:

{quote:title=Lonewaffle wrote:} Now stop being angry/jealous that you can't run (Apple software) on your el cheapo computer.{quote}

(Needs no further commentary.)