21 replies to this topic

[The Head Hunter]

Okay, just a simple poll to get this account up and alive. Windows, Linux, Mac, or Other? And an explanation why. I'm pretty sure there were a lot of posts like this that are probably dead and gone by now. So, I am starting a new one. Awesome.. Now.. My turn;

Linux - I choose and use Linux because I find that it runs a lot faster than Windows XP on the computer I have. I also believe there are more advantages to running a Linux distribution instead of a mainstream OS like Windows or Mac. Okay, that's all I have.

--The Head Hunter.

Edited by The Head Hunter, 18 December 2010 - 11:28 AM.

[tekio]

My favorite OS is OS X. IMO, it is a bit more polished than most other Unix Operating Systems. Of course it has a big time limitation on the hardware side, only being able to run on Apple Hardware. True, there are hacked versions of OS X that run on boxes other than apple. But that defeats the beauty of the Mac; an OS that is designed for specific hardware and is very reliable. Anyway, Apple may not use the best, most up to date, and fastest hardware, but the build quality is superb on almost any Mac I've owned. They obviously put a lot more work into R&D to come up with some nice hardware designs. Guess I'm just another iFanboy. lol

Also, since since OS X is built on Unix, most of the necessary security apps have either been ported to OS X, have native OS X builds, or can be compiled on OS X by tweaking the make or configuration files.

[heisenbug]

I follow the funny quote philosophy:

Use the best: Linux for servers, Mac for graphics, and Windows for solitaire.

[nyphonejacks]

I follow the funny quote philosophy:

Use the best: Linux for servers, Mac for graphics, and Windows for solitaire.

meh i prefer either spider solitaire or internet spades... lol

[SynFinAck]

I follow the funny quote philosophy:

Use the best: Linux for servers, Mac for graphics, and Windows for solitaire.

Actually Macs are great for software dev, any server role and audio/video/graphics. The only drawback is that Mac only comes with Chess.

[n3xg3n]

Ehh, I use all three. I use my el-cheapo second hand MacBook for day to day activities (web browsing, Skype, IM, etc.). I use my Linux laptop for any serious work (programming, homework, IRC, etc.) I use my Windows tablet for... watching movies and Windows Journal.

I try to keep my skills up to date with all three because you never know when you might have to apply those skills.

Edited by n3xg3n, 20 December 2010 - 02:59 PM.

[eldiablo]

I am very much a Linux user. I do use Windows from time to time, but my overall preference is Linux. I like being able to make my OS and software work the way I want it to, not the way some software developer in Redmond wants me to.

[zandi]

i mainly use linux myself, but that's because my netbook's running ubuntu and i carry it everywhere with me. still play some games on the windows desktop though.

[Berzerk]

Linux all the way since 2007.
If it can't be done in Linux (and it can) I'm not interested....)

The transition from Windows to Linux is interesting in that you start by multi-booting with 1 or 2 windows installs and 1 Linux install, time passes, one day it occurs to you that you haven't booted into Windows in over a year. Next you upgrade a file storage hard-drive and format and partition it in ext3 and transfer all your beloved files to it.

You end up with a box that has 6+ installs of various Linux distros searching for the perfect O/S.....Yes I'm a Linux junkie.

[lattera]

I tend to use the OS that fits the job best. On my laptop, I run OSX. On my workstation at work, I use Solaris 11 Express. On my vuln-dev lab, I use a mixture of Linux, Windows, and Solaris. I'm more biased towards Solaris because of ZFS, Dtrace, Xen, and Crossbow.

[phaedrus]

Im thinking of going back to sco on x86 hardware. I figure Im going to be sitting pretty as one of the few people who knows enough to migrate all that legacy shit off it onto something decent although it has been a while and I probably forgot all the important weirdness already.

Choice? i dont want to make no stinkeen choice, i want them all, on their native hardware, sat in a rack on a proper kvm/terminal server, and I want a addressable power strip so I can turn on the one of choice for that day...

My desktop's a gentoo linux box though.

[dinscurge]

i would say windows if your going to pay for software. as ofcourse theres alot more software for windows then for mac/linux def, for games, and usually the windows versions are cheaper then the mac verions, besides mac ofcourse costing more for the same hardware atleast the mobo/processor/ram.. sure it has a nice shell on it but im not paying 300-1000$ for like less than 1lb of aluminum, just like intel its only better/faster if the amount of money your willing to pay doesnt matter at all . and besides that why pay more money for mac, like gimp/photoshop/blender dont exist on windows or something. besides you can run gimp/blender on linux also, so id dont see a point in using it for graphics if there are programs that work good enough on other operating systems. for me its mostly the software library lols. windows just has the biggest, and has the most drivers. other wise linux/mac are fine, they work great usually if theres drivers for the hardware, and you can get the programs to do what you need to do. i mean if you play games you probably have a windows install, not that linux/mac cant play them theres just alot less games on them. sure theres more viruses/malware and w.e. but again, theres more software have alot of options for firewalls/av. i just use what works lol. bsd for router, linux/solaris for server, and windows for the regular computer that play games on and w.e. no use for mac because i dont really like the way the hardware looks, besides ofcourse them only having intel, i suppose a powermac might be cool thoe. atleast then the processor is decent .

[tekio]

and besides that why pay more money for mac,

Don't forget resale value. If one is planning to keep the system for about a year or two. The resale value of a Mac, if not totally, comes very close to the price difference. For example one of my friends just got rid of a Gen2 Macbook Air for almost $900.00. It wasn't even a top-line model either. My 2007 Macbook Pro, I've seen them go for over $400.00 on ebay. That's a lot for a used computer over three years old. I think the initial cost was about $1600.00 NIB.

Also, the quality of Macs topples all but some of the higher end Toshibs'a and Sony Vaio's.



that was a gen1 Air, not gen2.

EDIT:

powermac might be cool thoe. atleast then the processor is decent

I really miss the way my old PowerBook G4 would burn my lap after 10minutes of use. I mean it was slower and hotter than Core 2 Duo?

Edited by tekio, 05 January 2011 - 03:46 PM.

[Michaelfox]

I voted windows because its what my alienware uses. I use alienware cuz its fast

[heisenbug]

I voted windows because its what my alienware uses. I use alienware cuz its fast

"Frankenstein never scared me...marsupials do...cuz they're fast."

Are you aware that you can put a Linux distro on an Alienware PC? It will run much faster, especially if you build it for that purpose.

[d3xt3r]

Well , I am starting to use Ubuntu most of my time, lately than Windows (am a newbie) and am fascinated to how much fun is it to learn in Linux....Man documentation is superb and forums like this one are helping me to grasp a lot.



So Cheers to Linux

Edited by d3xt3r, 22 January 2011 - 01:44 AM.

[dinscurge]

Don't forget resale value. If one is planning to keep the system for about a year or two. The resale value of a Mac, if not totally, comes very close to the price difference. For example one of my friends just got rid of a Gen2 Macbook Air for almost $900.00. It wasn't even a top-line model either. My 2007 Macbook Pro, I've seen them go for over $400.00 on ebay. That's a lot for a used computer over three years old. I think the initial cost was about $1600.00 NIB.

I really miss the way my old PowerBook G4 would burn my lap after 10minutes of use. I mean it was slower and hotter than Core 2 Duo?

yeah but thats only becaues your all ready getting old hardware when you first get it XD. nah that ties into the whole "hipster" "artist" stuff.. and bein a "rebel" for not using windows w.e. it probably would be slower thoe atleast for the regular desktop stuff its a risc processor after all and then comparing single core/dual core. macs powerpc's arent that good but its still something different. and then theres the whole "security" that the powermac would be alot more secure than any x86/64 mac. and then theres not really any competition/no real way to compare like.. buying the exact same hardware for like 1000$ more the little piece of aluminum case . its not like.. dual core 1800$ quad core like 700$ and as long as your carefull with your stuff almost any brand will last long enough.. kind of like a bmw, or a rollsroyce or something to me like.. oh wow it looks cool but pretty much every other company has a product that will cost less and outperform them..

[tekio]

Don't forget resale value. If one is planning to keep the system for about a year or two. The resale value of a Mac, if not totally, comes very close to the price difference. For example one of my friends just got rid of a Gen2 Macbook Air for almost $900.00. It wasn't even a top-line model either. My 2007 Macbook Pro, I've seen them go for over $400.00 on ebay. That's a lot for a used computer over three years old. I think the initial cost was about $1600.00 NIB.

I really miss the way my old PowerBook G4 would burn my lap after 10minutes of use. I mean it was slower and hotter than Core 2 Duo?

yeah but thats only becaues your all ready getting old hardware when you first get it XD. nah that ties into the whole "hipster" "artist" stuff.. and bein a "rebel" for not using windows w.e. it probably would be slower thoe atleast for the regular desktop stuff its a risc processor after all and then comparing single core/dual core. macs powerpc's arent that good but its still something different. and then theres the whole "security" that the powermac would be alot more secure than any x86/64 mac. and then theres not really any competition/no real way to compare like.. buying the exact same hardware for like 1000$ more the little piece of aluminum case . its not like.. dual core 1800$ quad core like 700$ and as long as your carefull with your stuff almost any brand will last long enough.. kind of like a bmw, or a rollsroyce or something to me like.. oh wow it looks cool but pretty much every other company has a product that will cost less and outperform them..

Not just pretty, it's called craftsmanship. Plastic hinges start to break after heavy use, aluminum is much more durable (okay so the first MacBook Air hinges were a fail). Plastic cracks with age, just ask me old T-30 Thinkpad. And like I mentioned, craftsmanship equals a higher resale value.

As for PPC being more secure, how? There are probably more known exploits for x86/AMD64, but it has a much larger user base because that's what Windows is designed for. That doesn't make PPC architecture any more secure.

The biggest reason Apple switched to Intel is because the PPC was (at that time) at its limit. They were getting too hot in notebooks, and could not achieve the same speed as Intel's Centrino (w/o getting too hot for a small notebook. I remember my Powerbook got ridiculously hot, after only a short while.

Anyway, a Mac is within $150.00 - $250.00 of a high end Sony Vaio or Toshiba with the exact same specs, and the Mac is going to have a much higher resale value. A top-line Carbon Fiber Sony with an i7 is almost head to head with an equally equipt Mac, except the Vaio has a 512MB more video ram (each has the M330, but the Mac is only 512MB). But the Mac has a better display. Really Toshiba and Sony are the only manufacturers that make quality notebooks anymore. Acer and Dell are mostly plastic budget computers, I guess HP makes a few decent models, but again a high end one is going to be near the cost of a Mac.

http://i467.photobucket.com/albums/rr34/photoducket-2009/Screenshot2011-01-22at55011AM.png
http://i467.photobucket.com/albums/rr34/photoducket-2009/Screenshot2011-01-22at54924AM.png

Edited by tekio, 22 January 2011 - 07:54 AM.

[heisenbug]

I think that it's interesting when people say, "I use Mac for the hardware", or "I just use Windows because my Dell came with it." Isn't this a hacker forum?

I have switched operating system many, many, many times. I find operating systems fascinating, and have delved into the depths of many. Even as far as contributing code to distributions. I use a few different ones, but I have my favorites.

I don't think it matters what came on your box, if people like Mac then they can install a Hackintosh, or if they like Windows they can install that too. I don't think people should keep a closed mindset on operating systems. They should use what they like best. If they like what OS came on the hardware in the first place, then awesome...use that; however, most just use it because they can't fathom that an operating system can be changed.


Hardware != Software

[tekio]

I think that it's interesting when people say, "I use Mac for the hardware", or "I just use Windows because my Dell came with it." Isn't this a hacker forum?

I have switched operating system many, many, many times. I find operating systems fascinating, and have delved into the depths of many. Even as far as contributing code to distributions. I use a few different ones, but I have my favorites.

I don't think it matters what came on your box, if people like Mac then they can install a Hackintosh, or if they like Windows they can install that too. I don't think people should keep a closed mindset on operating systems. They should use what they like best. If they like what OS came on the hardware in the first place, then awesome...use that; however, most just use it because they can't fathom that an operating system can be changed.


Hardware != Software

The problem is not all hardware is supported by Linux or OS X (hackintosh). Alienware now uses nVidia's Optimus, which does not support Linux. Problems range from battery life of about 2hrs to X not working with hardware acceleration enabled (no fix). That could be why Michaelfox is not running Linux on his Alienware.

As far as Hackintosh, I ran it on my old Dell Mini9. The biggest drawback was when critical vulnerabilities were found in OS X, and the update would break the entire install. Which really sucked because at that time, installing Hackintosh was about a two hour ordeal.