…but Linux’s the best!!

In these ranking costs don’t matter, meaning this ranking is independent of money. For example, suppose you equally pay $500 for Linux, or Vista, or Mac, or whatever.

1.-All Linux distro’s.*
2.-HURD (for keeping up until now, finally seeing the light of day)
3.-OpenBSD.
4.-FreeBSD.
5.-NetBSD.
6.-UNIX (for making me feel young)
7.-HP-UX (for the funny name).
8.-Darwin (Darwin IS Mac OS X naked, but FREEDOM beats the Aqua GUI)
9.-Mac OS X (If Mac gets _free_ and _customizable_, it will rank 2nd)
10.-HairOS (the system than runs in my hair comb)
11.-Windoze.

*Except Lindows. What’s the case trying to imitate the worst when you really are the best?

Notes to keep:

-Mac OS needs to get more free if it wants a chance in the OS Wars. See Darwin’s ranking for example.

-BSD system are ranking for their values and orientiation. My (very pleasurable) experience is limited in the three BSD systems, so please forgive my rudeness.

-Redmond’s products are the only ones that didn’t rank in the top ten. If you have the wonderful Mac OS X, but with Microsoft office, you fall to eleventh place, while Windows falls another place (the tenth place gets to be vacant).

“Try everything you can, then stick to the best in YOUR opinion”

–My advice.

I’m not saying Mac OS X is a bad operating system… just a bad UNIX.

Though if I were to tout it as an alternative to Windows, I’d also say its not a good alternative, mosly for legal/monetary/philosophical reasons:

1. Macs are overpriced commodity-based machines. That’s right! You could build a PC with the same exact hardware for less money!

2. Mac OS X itself is not free, and is only licensed to be installed on Macs! This is bad for a disgruntled Windos user wanting to switch simply because to stay legal they’ll have to junk their existing hardware and spend more cash just for an alternative operating system.

3. Mac OS X is restricted. Just like in #2, you can only install Mac OS X where Apple wants you to. This is what we hackers call a Bad Thing.

Linux makes a much better Windows alternative because it solves those three obstacles to Mac adoption:

1. Linux can be run on existing hardware. Linux, unlike Mac and Windows, has an INCREDIBLY wide hardware support. Not just processors either, but also peripherals and internal hardware! With it being truly free, it can be easily adapted for just about ANY use. Can’t say the same for Mac OS X.

2. Linux can actually REDUCE the cost of a new machine. Most of the cost of a new PC actually comes from overpriced Windows licenses. Either building your own Linux based machine or buying an OEM machine with Linux pre-installed has shown to be much cheaper!

3. Linux can be installed on both a Mac and a PC, or it could be put on a SPARC, clustered into a supercomputer, embedded onto a Palm, Xbox, or even an iPod, the options are endless.

1. Mac OS X is not as high quality as Linux.

2. Mac OS X *hardly* actually uses its UNIX features, and even in its earlier versions, those things that even made it a UNIX were optional. You may as well have put in a WINDOWS kernel for all the good the BSD-based Darwin is actually doing Mac OS X.

3. Mac OS X is proprietary, actually, with maybe a few smatterings of open source components dashed in there.

4. Mac OS X is locked down onto the hardware Apple decides you want to run. Trying to run Mac OS X on a PC is illegal. Not so with Linux, which is available for over 200 different processor architectures legitimately, and is genuinely free software.

5. Mac OS X doesn’t half near the level of power Linux or a “real” UNIX actually has. Despite introduction of BASH and those aforementioned rarely used UNIX features in Mac OS X, if you were to ask a veteran Linux or UNIX user how Mac OS X actually ranks in the UNIX world, you’d be disappointed to hear either outright laughter or a description of how, aside from SCO’s UnixWare and OpenServer, Mac OS X is near the bottom of the UNIX heap.

I am relieved, however, that you didn’t claim that Mac OS X was based off of Linux, which is false. It is based off of BSD.

There’s also the users of Mac OS X. UNIX features are actually wasted on their stereotype. These are people coming from a purely GUI-driven, non-CLI, non-technical OS culture. UNIX is not really for them.

I’m not saying Mac OS X is bad or anything, just from the perspective of a long time UNIX user who knows what UNIX is and how it is used, Mac OS X makes a lousy Linux, but a good home operating system.

Of course, as an operating system itself, Mac OS X has its problems, not the least of which is its not legally feasible for a PC user to switch and retain their old hardware. It is not cheap to switch to Mac OS X on a whim like it is for Linux.

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=4687102#post4687102
I installed everything correctly so that my system dual boots with xp and ubuntu, the latest (not the beta), and when I try and start from the dual boot screen, I get everything perfect, the bar indicating that ubuntu is loading, etc…after the bar completes, i get 5 command lines checking whether something is ok, and after that my screen goes black, it is still on, but it is as if the nothing is on…the live CD works fine, so it cannot be my configuration, at least I don’t think so…PLEASE HELP ME!

a user just sent me this reply though…

Boot your Live CD and post>
sudo fdisk -lu

There are no two computer systems alike unless you are comparing two identical models, so finding a distro that works for you may be time consuming unless someone else previously had complete success with the identical distro and system. I had at my disposal about 15 different distros when I first played at installing linux. I was curious about install interface, default selected applications included in the distro, the overall look and feel of the distro and most importatnly, how well the distro found and installed all the needed drivers for my particular computer. Some never got to the end of the install, some never made it to the install screen at all. Others got installed and was hit or miss with some hardware drivers.
I found the best distro of those I’ve tried on “my computer” was Mepis (Debien based)…. but that is just me.

At least with Linux, you have the choice to find “The One” that will work best for you.

” By comparison OS X 10 just works, until linux gets to same level or better it won’t make in roads.”

Actually, the reason OS X just works is because it was configured for the hardware it was installed on. By comparison, Linux also “just works” on computers that it has been pre-installed on by Dell, Green PC, Lenovo, Asus and others.

Try installing OS X on a random Intel PC and you’ll find you’ll have the same pitfalls if not more, than Linux.

Dan
TheRealDizzy

Yes, I know that my parents, aunts/uncles and the 30 cpus we saved from the scrap heap for people atthe retirement home all feel right at home with UNIX.
Not.

If you have used UNIX, then you know enough about computers that you dont need this blog.
If you never used UNIX but heard of it, this could scare the hell out of you.
I just read an article this week which talks about Linux and line commands. BS.
I dont ask my mom to alter her Win registry, and I dont ask her to sudo things.

I’ve put Windows users on PCLinuxOS, kUbuntu and xUbuntu and made it look as close to their old OS as possible because KDE can do that. It can even add the top bar just like Mac so you dont even have to look at GNOME (I spit on Miguel) and their locked down ways..

- – - – - – -

When I give live distros to people to choose from I always give them a little primer on what GUI differences there are and that even though you might have a KDE environment on two distros, there are also changes made by the distros themselves. You dont even have to be technical about it. For example, for the less experiences you compare the Linux kernel part as the motor and the GUI and software as the body, the interior finishings and so on.

People are so used to the proprietary way where Windows or Mac is both the ‘brains’ and also finishing touches of the car.
I dont push the info on the people that dont care but whenever I use an XCFE based distro on some old machine, I feel the need to explain/show on my laptop where Im running 3 different Gnu/Linux using the 3 main GUIs.

I think you could add a paragraph explaining ‘about the look’ in the article.

PS: I have also made dual boots for people who need WinXP for some reason (Wine is still not for everyone) and especially games and installing Windows is much longer and harder than Gnu/Linux is. And that’s not counting the time I need to install the anti-virus, firewall and spyware stuff. Windows users are stunned when they see this because they also heard how hard Linux was. Creating a dual boot with PCLinuxOS is truly a breeze.

Anyways if any one wants Mac Like Global Menus for Ubuntu, here you go:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/global_menu

Just follow the procedures there to install it.

How much memory? Under 512MB, I wouldn’t use Ubuntu. Xubuntu is the lighterweight one.

The government of China are working hard on developing their own version of Linux, mainly for security reasons-MS could build in code to get info. of their computers.(I don’t think they are unreasonable it that assumption).

I have no desire to carry on using MSOS , and when Ubuntu 08.4 comes out I will be installing it.
Have had a go at a couple of earlier editions, learned a lot and I understand that 08.4 will be very good.

Must go and have a nap now.
Viva la Linux
Peace and Joy to you all

Bruce