Jump to content

Windows, Linux, Or Mac? (NO FLAMEZ PLZ!)


h3%5kr3w
 Share

Win/Lin/or Mac?  

59 members have voted

  1. 1. Win/Lin/Or MAC?

    • Microsoft Windows
      24
    • Linux
      19
    • MAC OS
      11
    • I roll my own (and r s00pr 1337)
      5


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

yah true, but I just wanted it to be what people primarily use. besides, 99% would be dual booting linux

I don't think 99%, yes the majority, but nearly all Mac users that dual boot will be dual booting Windows with Boot Camp.

Yeah that is true. In any case windows will win hands down due to simplicity and gaming factor.

Not that I have anything against windows other than the sheer price of the O.S.

I would argue that OS X is far simpler than Windows, there is very little system maintenance that you have to do, and many operation are far simpler. For instance the majority of small application you want to run, you simply drag and drop into your applications folder to keep them, once your done, just delete and that's it. Nearly all windows applications require being installed and add crap to the system which can't be removed without a fresh install.

Another example would be UAC on windows is horrible, its slow, its annoying and just generally get in the way, where on Linux and OS X is done right and generally doesn't cause problems.

To say that Windows is a better for the gaming factor is just wrong as well, Mac OS X and Linux run just as many games, with a lot of popular titles being released for those platforms, them you also have projects like CrossOver helping out. The problem with OS X dedicated ports is that they cost a lot of money and they never seem to drop in price. Have a look at the games section on the Apple store, you'll see what I mean.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I can't exactly talk on behalf of apple after all the last mac o.s I used was the classic one in primary school.

lol MAC get games now? shit I am bloody behind the times, I recall many years back when mac got myst and all my mac friends were raving about it.

hey isn't mac based around Unix/linux or some shit like that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dont own a mac personally, but i have tried the hackintosh route... maybe someday they will hack an iso that works with my system......

I know that since OSX has became more popular, more stuff is coming out for it. Yes it is mucho simpler than windows and linux, but if you think about it, thats the beauty and the beast about osx. you can only (supposed to) run it on mac hardware. How many different specs are there for the average later model mac? so everything that you use on it is spec. built for those types of systems, so yes you are going to get a hell of a lot more stability and speed running stuff on a mac, but on the down side, is either A. you spend a boatload of money on a mac, or B. you go southbound with a hacked ver. of osx.

Linux will get there someday. It's gaining popularity by the day, and even though most people it's a touch and go relationship with it (myself included) it is gaining alot of ground, but until they drop the whole command line before gui factor, your never going to see it get as popular or well rounded as mac osx and windows. Real reason for this is because A. it's a pain in the ass to install something that is not from the repositories, and B. because your always going without either this convenience factor or another. but also because everyone wants to jam pack everything you can stand into a distro these days.

You come out with a distro that has mucho support for wifi cards, with a downloadable repository of drivers upon install, and just have the basics and good standard programs (ala. open office, etc) and that's it, then your going to see alot of people jump on the bandwagon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dont own a mac personally, but i have tried the hackintosh route... maybe someday they will hack an iso that works with my system......

I know that since OSX has became more popular, more stuff is coming out for it. Yes it is mucho simpler than windows and linux, but if you think about it, thats the beauty and the beast about osx. you can only (supposed to) run it on mac hardware. How many different specs are there for the average later model mac? so everything that you use on it is spec. built for those types of systems, so yes you are going to get a hell of a lot more stability and speed running stuff on a mac, but on the down side, is either A. you spend a boatload of money on a mac, or B. you go southbound with a hacked ver. of osx.

But that is also a benefit, Mac's are made from quality parts and are generally superior from PC equivalents in my opinion. My MacBook Pro is by far better than any PC laptop that I have seen, yes I had to pay a bit more money for it, but I think that is generally worth it. Also the fact that OS X supports limited amounts of hardware allows Apple the ensure that it runs brilliantly on their hardware, which is my concern over using Linux for a workstation, in know my Mac will always be there and always be working.

BTO from Apple is always overpriced and it helps if your willing to upgrade your system to get the stuff you want, but putting memory in a computer is pretty trivial. Apple are seeing at least there is a market for smaller cheaper computers, they are keeping the white macbook which if I'm not mistaken is the cheapest laptop they have ever produced and hopefully the mac mini will be getting its much needed update soon.

The Mac Pro is incredibly good value for money if you want that type of computer and I think generally its a good thing with Apple trying to differentiate themselves, even if it is without popular opinion to begin with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I would have to admit that how long apple has been the other computer you could buy, they have always stood up to what they believe in, and hell who knows, maybe their stand on their stuff is finally paying off. I wouldnt mind having a mac mini. It's cute.

I just never understood why apple bases everying on glam and glitz first and price second. They could put mac hardware in a standard pc case. It would be way cheaper, and just think about it. How much do you thing the G-series all aluminum tower costs to produce/buy? Hell I would think at least $200 just for them baseline. So I mean they should try to shave off the price for what they can.

Here is an issue though.

The reason why Windows and Linux are so fumbled in one way or another is their broad support and flexibility on systems across the board. As Mac get's more popular, people are going to demand the same type of flexibility sooner or later (even if it is out of mac hardware). So how will Apple handle the issue? It has always had 100% control over everything that goes into Mac's from hardware to software. My issue with apple is that it has always been a monarchy on what THEY want you to have, and being more grown up, I understand their side a lot more, but do not understand how they keep it at bay. They have just recently been giving greenlights for open source, and etc (or more people have been doing open source on it)

But my issue has also always been this:

Mac is a hardware company. OS X is an Apple made custom gui built on top of bsd, which is really unix (no I did NOT say linux, I specified Unix for all you about to start flaming) which is a-kin to linux, and also bsd is freeware, so my question has always been why do people pay for hardware that comes with free software with a pretty gui? I mean dont get me wrong it looks great, and technicly the company basis must work (same goes for the eeepc's success but in the opposite direction.) I mean I am not trying to act like an ass when I say that, I really don't and I think Apple IS a successful company after all these years, but I never understood, after the IBM compatible breakout of the 80's and a platform everyone can agree on building on/for that this company never came around at that time. If they did, hell we could all be using OS X on our amd and intel pc's and probably have left Microsoft in the dust 5 to 10 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that is also a benefit, Mac's are made from quality parts and are generally superior from PC equivalents in my opinion. My MacBook Pro is by far better than any PC laptop that I have seen, yes I had to pay a bit more money for it, but I think that is generally worth it. Also the fact that OS X supports limited amounts of hardware allows Apple the ensure that it runs brilliantly on their hardware, which is my concern over using Linux for a workstation, in know my Mac will always be there and always be working.

BTO from Apple is always overpriced and it helps if your willing to upgrade your system to get the stuff you want, but putting memory in a computer is pretty trivial. Apple are seeing at least there is a market for smaller cheaper computers, they are keeping the white macbook which if I'm not mistaken is the cheapest laptop they have ever produced and hopefully the mac mini will be getting its much needed update soon.

The Mac Pro is incredibly good value for money if you want that type of computer and I think generally its a good thing with Apple trying to differentiate themselves, even if it is without popular opinion to begin with.

More on this, even Microsoft employees, ads and other various demos use MacBook Pros because they are quality hardware. People that get BTO options from Apple are dumb. It used to be a hassle to upgrade Macs. I'm pretty sure it was damned near impossible to upgrade the ram in the Lampshade and CRT iMac varieties. These days, it's almost easier than a Windows computer, especially on the notebooks.

Whenever I tell people I am a computer science student, they always ask if I can fix their computer. I tell them that computer science != best buy geek squad repair lackey, but I offer to take a look anyway. Almost always, they are just frustrated with how horrible their computer runs. It goes something like this:

  • Turn on computer, followed by the obligatory "Oh, it's going to take about eight or nine minutes to boot up." This I'm appalled with.
  • Next, the fan turns on and starts spinning at full speed and doesn't stop.
  • When we're finally able to log in, we have to wait another five minutes for everything to start up.
  • Next they usually try to get online but they can't find the network connector, so they fumble through "network" no wait, "network devices" no..., wait, "network connections?" or wait, is it the "little computers in the right corner?" Eventually, the computer has tried to connect itself and failed, and we have to "diagnose the problem"
  • Annnnnnnd, by now, the battery has died.

It sounds like I'm being the usual "pretentious mac prick," but the only people I've ever seen happy with a Windows machine are people in my compsci classes. Like it or not, getting things done faster and easier is so much better than Windows. Everything is unified beyond belief, 95% of every Mac applications has settings and everything else in the exact same place. It's mindblowingly easy to connect to networks. Macs boot inanely fast, etc etc etc. The only reason anyone, in my mind, should ever come close to Windows is for gaming. 7, will do a world of good, but it's not out yet, and too early to tell.

That being said, there are a TON of retarded Mac users who buy it for the image: dumb rich bitches who get the MacBook Pro because it "runs myspace good." These are the same people who run applciations from disk images because they are too stupid to read the "DRAG THIS TO APPLICATIONS FOLDER" disclaimer that many applications have. The same people that turn the resolution into a square so they have black bars on the left and right sides. The same people who somehow manage to break an operating system that's extremely hard to break. It boggles my mind.

I have nothing to say besides Linux except this: wildly unstable on all the computers I've ever put it on, and I've never been able to get wireless working through a reboot (it uninstalls itself every time I turn off the computer). It definitely has some insanely cool stuff, but I equate it to an unstable OS X (I know that it is extremely no where near OS X) which is unacceptable for daily use. Even still, given a Windows box and the choice to run Windows or Linux, I'd be all over the LINUXXXXXXXX.

*whew*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use Vista, XP, Windows 7, FreeBSD and various linux distros, like Metatron said the right tool for the right job. If you want to work in IT you will need to know Windows however.

Windows 7, btw, is amazing. I've been using it on several machines and it is so much better than Vista, XP or OSX. When its released its going to be serious competition for OSX. It runs very fast (Even on old Pentium-M machines), has good driver support out the box and is a joy to use. The new taskbar kicks the crap out of the OSX dock. Burns ISO's and supports ODF files out the box. I would recommend that people try the beta, especially Linux and OSX fans. This might just be the best OS Microsoft has released. Just stick to x64 though.

I still think linux on the desktop is a dead end for everyone but geeks, its still to complicated and idiosyncratic for 99/100 users. Even Ubuntu. Instead, linux should be concentrating on things like MIDS and appliances where it is perfect for the job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree a whole lot with VaKo, and to some extent with nullArray, but I will say this. Windows is great for people who know how to use it. It's that simple. nullArray, you talked about all the people who frustrate you with their windows problems, let me break these issues down to you: They are all stupid!

1.

* Turn on computer, followed by the obligatory "Oh, it's going to take about eight or nine minutes to boot up." This I'm appalled with.

(this is from too much myspace/porn/b.s. apps/1000 programs running in the task bar)

2.

* Next, the fan turns on and starts spinning at full speed and doesn't stop.

(this is just from shitty hardware and that is that. My laptop is nowhere need 1337 speed, and my fan hardly ever spins up to loud speeds.. also I knocked all the shovelware off of it when I first got it and now it runs 7 fulltime with no issues)

3.

* When we're finally able to log in, we have to wait another five minutes for everything to start up.

* Next they usually try to get online but they can't find the network connector, so they fumble through "network" no wait, "network devices" no..., wait, "network connections?" or wait, is it the "little computers in the right corner?" Eventually, the computer has tried to connect itself and failed, and we have to "diagnose the problem"

(more of the same. Ignorance and cheap ass hardware they paid too much for. it takes forever to connect because it's a crappy ass wifi card, and probably as much software based as possible, and from too much software running in the background)

* Annnnnnnd, by now, the battery has died.

(same thing. Charge your battery...)

And it's all because they 'think' they know about windows. These people have NO idea what kind of potential a computer of ANY type has. They just think it as you said 'runs myspace good' and they probably think that the faster the computer, the faster the internet connection is.

With that said, I will say this: Windows 7 is a force to be reckoned with. It runs smooth as smooth can be. *I do not personally prefer people to do this but* I have been running Windows 7 on my laptop as the only O.S. No dual boot or anything. I have Virtual Box on it, and I have all my Windows Server homework, and labs on it. It has not given me any issue.

The thing about apple, and as you said nullArray is this: Apple is a system that anyone can use, and it's usable to the point that you don't have to think to use it. This is why so many people want an apple. Because they can get on myspace and of course the are not going to get malware/spyware/and viruses. They can try to screw it up all they want but it's a rare chance that they will because the interface is designed that way.

If people would have half a brain to think about that download, or that website, or that email attatchment, then they would not have these problems. Hell I used *get this* Windows ME for a gaming server before, and had NO ISSUES whatsoever with it, because I'm not dumb. I know where to go, what to get, what to and not to look at and what safeguards to use. With that being said, you all wonder what makes it so easy to bruteforce a wifi connection, or usb ophcrack a windows pc, but it's the idiotic people who want to buy shit they dont know how to use! Think about it.

A teenager wants a car, but they don't have their license yet. They have drove a few times, and that's sufficient for just driving the car, but they would freak out and loose their heads if they were in a problem with a flat tire. I balance and rotate my tires @ the proper intervals, and I dont go down roads that are all messed up, so my tires are properly worn and in great shape. I have seen people screw up tires in months from misuse, misalignment, etc. And there's a difference between wanting to know what to do and not giving a shit what to do on anything. You see it all around you everyday, the people who could care less about how they do things, they just dont want to think about it. And they always get screwed in a situation for one reason or another, and it's always poor me cause they cant think for themselves. We can all think for ourselves. We can learn about things on our own. We dont need to see the situation to find the proper solution, and/or think of a way we can avoid having the issue in the first place. And as Apple get's popular, it will get worse. Thank GOD linux isnt the main O.S. or else the world would cower at other's stupidity. "what was that? you thought if you deleted the xorg.conf file, then the icons would get smaller?"

blah. I have rested my case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just never understood why apple bases everying on glam and glitz first and price second. They could put mac hardware in a standard pc case. It would be way cheaper, and just think about it. How much do you thing the G-series all aluminum tower costs to produce/buy? Hell I would think at least $200 just for them baseline. So I mean they should try to shave off the price for what they can.

Here is an issue though.

The reason why Windows and Linux are so fumbled in one way or another is their broad support and flexibility on systems across the board. As Mac get's more popular, people are going to demand the same type of flexibility sooner or later (even if it is out of mac hardware). So how will Apple handle the issue? It has always had 100% control over everything that goes into Mac's from hardware to software. My issue with apple is that it has always been a monarchy on what THEY want you to have, and being more grown up, I understand their side a lot more, but do not understand how they keep it at bay. They have just recently been giving greenlights for open source, and etc (or more people have been doing open source on it)

But my issue has also always been this:

Mac is a hardware company. OS X is an Apple made custom gui built on top of bsd, which is really unix (no I did NOT say linux, I specified Unix for all you about to start flaming) which is a-kin to linux, and also bsd is freeware, so my question has always been why do people pay for hardware that comes with free software with a pretty gui? I mean dont get me wrong it looks great, and technicly the company basis must work (same goes for the eeepc's success but in the opposite direction.) I mean I am not trying to act like an ass when I say that, I really don't and I think Apple IS a successful company after all these years, but I never understood, after the IBM compatible breakout of the 80's and a platform everyone can agree on building on/for that this company never came around at that time. If they did, hell we could all be using OS X on our amd and intel pc's and probably have left Microsoft in the dust 5 to 10 years ago.

If we are going to talk about the Mac Pro then let's provide some figures. It's the best value Mac around and for a reason, Apple can negotiate prices with manufacturers.

Now the base Mac Pro (which is what will consider, upgrading RAM, HDDs etc. can be at the users own cost afterward) is £1,712.00 here in the UK. That gets you 2x 2.8GHz Xeons with 1600Mhz FSB, 2GB of DDRII 800Mhz ECC FB-DIMMs, 320GB SATA HDD and an ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT 256MB. Not to mention the motherboard which uses Intels 5400 Chipset, case, PSU and DVD-RW.

Going for a scratch built machine, first start with the CPUs, they are going to set me back £673.31 each, £68.99 for the 2GB of RAM, £326.16 for an equivalent motherboard with i5400 chipset and another DIMM slots to match or be greater than the Mac Pro and £41.60 for a good 320GB hard drive. Thats totalling £1783.37 already, and I haven't bought a good PSU, CASE, Graphics Card or optical drive. So the Mac Pro is looking pretty tasty at the moment.

So I think, perhaps Dell might be able to beat Apple, given that they go direct to the manufacturer of parts. The Precision T5400 looks the part, starting at £976.35 and has options for dual processors. So lets spec it up to that of a base Mac Pro. Well the first problem is they don't offer the 1600MHz FSB processors, so and I'll even select processors slower than that in the Mac, the 2.66GHz Xeons, before changing anything else, the machine is already now costing me £1921.65.

So I can't find the Apple Tax on the Mac Pro, I'm interested if anyone else can find a base machine the same as the Mac Pro cheaper because I'm looking for something in that area.

People aren't going to want 100% control over the hardware in the Apple computer, Apple already use good, quality and well performing parts, there's not much more to ask for. Apple are regularly trimming the "fat" of their machines, like the lack of Firewire on the new MacBook, I don't see it stopping people buying it, more people are buying it because Apple did it at the right time with a major update, that people wanted. Everything is about timing.

OS X is a lot more than a custom made GUI on top of BSD, it is very different, but shares its parents with UNIX, like Linux does. In fact OS X is fully posix compliant, where as the likes of FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD aren't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A single socket i7 or i7 xeon might give it a run for its money, but your still going to find the base Mac Pro is probally more bang for buck. But, as you have stated before a fully kitted out Dell will be cheaper than a fully kitted out Mac Pro. For example apple want nearly £5K for 32GB of RAM, while dell will do it for £2K. Apple are good value for hardware, I just can't abide most Mac users (i'm talking about the Macbook owning coffee shop crowd with iPhones, iTunes and an iLife).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree a whole lot with VaKo, and to some extent with nullArray, but I will say this. Windows is great for people who know how to use it. It's that simple. nullArray, you talked about all the people who frustrate you with their windows problems, let me break these issues down to you: They are all stupid!

1.

(this is from too much myspace/porn/b.s. apps/1000 programs running in the task bar)

2.

(this is just from shitty hardware and that is that. My laptop is nowhere need 1337 speed, and my fan hardly ever spins up to loud speeds.. also I knocked all the shovelware off of it when I first got it and now it runs 7 fulltime with no issues)

3.

(more of the same. Ignorance and cheap ass hardware they paid too much for. it takes forever to connect because it's a crappy ass wifi card, and probably as much software based as possible, and from too much software running in the background)

(same thing. Charge your battery...)

And it's all because they 'think' they know about windows. These people have NO idea what kind of potential a computer of ANY type has. They just think it as you said 'runs myspace good' and they probably think that the faster the computer, the faster the internet connection is.

But these aren't computer stupid people. These are people that paid good money for machine that's four months old that ran like this from day one. They "think" that this is just how a computer is supposed to work, it's not that they know anything about windows.

Example: I left my MacBook in Minnesota when I came back from winter break. While it was being mailed to me, I rented a brand new laptop from the rental disk. It's one of those..., computers with the frozen states that upon rebooting resets itself. It ran okay, probably half as bad as I described earlier, but it still took me about 8 minutes to get the thing started and online. I closed the lid to watch television and the freaking thing had the fan on (not full bore) the whole time, and died three hours later. In -sleep- mode. I know how to use a computer, Windows too. Ignorance is only part of it..., it can't always be blamed on viruses and shovelware. This happened to my old roommates with their College of Business assigned Dells too.

I mean, the mere fact that you pointed out that it could be 1000 apps that start themselves, that the hardware is shitty, that they get a crappy wifi card, that users are constantly at risk when using the web...., doesn't that mean anything to you? To me, it's an obvious admission that Windows and the hardware they run on is awful.

That rented notebook made me appreciate how great everything works so wonderfully on a Mac.

Speaking of shovelware, is there a way to download the latest adobe reader* WITHOUT getting that fucking adobe air shit? EDIT: For windows*

I just can't abide most Mac users (i'm talking about the Macbook owning coffee shop crowd with iPhones, iTunes and an iLife).

But this is me, are you saying we can't be friends? :o :(

(well, I don't own a coffee shop, but I was a barista for years and bought my own machine)

EDIT:

OS X is a lot more than a custom made GUI on top of BSD, it is very different, but shares its parents with UNIX, like Linux does. In fact OS X is fully posix compliant, where as the likes of FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD aren't.

Thanks, I wrote something like this, but it wasn't as eloquent. It's like, BSD is a the apple core and the rest of the apple is what, well, apple made? Bad analogy, but you all get it, right? It's SO much more than "a pretty gui on top of free software."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Windows xp here.

Did a lot of work on it, it boots in 15-17 seconds and the loading is completely done

While I use ubuntu also, I spend most of my time on windows xp since it boots faster, uses less memory and runs the apps I need and is easier to use

things that can be done in 1 click often take lots of commands in ubuntu.

I see the OS as something to run the applications you want so it needs to be as lightweight as possible

the only thing I use ubuntu for is for a few networking apps, packet sniffers and wireless tools that are not available on windows. (the main message i got from that is ubuntu is annoying when it comes to doing something as simple as to install a program (please don't say the package manager or the add/remove because it doesn't have any of the apps I use, and there only available in the annoying tar.gz )

the main design for windows was simplifying everything into a easy to use GUI in which most users will never even need to touch the command line for any reason (and for the 0.000000001% of tasks that need command line, you can easily write a patch file to do the work instead of telling the user how to do it.

after windows xp microsoft went down hill. vista is more resource intensive (and windows 7 isn't any better in comparison to windows xp) it benchmarks lower in everest, 3dmark and every other app

the Os uses 12 times as much memory at startup even when you do all needed tweaks and disable as many services and startup items as possible, (the extra memory usage causes the OS to be sluggish when you open a large app and close the large app because instead of the os using 60-70MB of memory, vista will use 500-1GB and when you open a large game and play for a while it moves all of that to page file and when you close the game it closes slower as it moves things back to memory and since it doesn't move everything, the os becomes even more sluggish for a while.

a new UI and dx10 shouldn't make a new OS that can easily be included in a service pack

and the new UI sucks, they removed almost all of the tabbed windows from xp and spread each tab to it's own window and put them in their own category so it takes a lot more work to find them since there no longer in 1 place, and to make things worst, they add random graphics and other eye candy to the windows so they take longer to load

and in windows 7 they almost doubled the size of the tack bar while adding no new content that needs that space so the user gets less usable space to actually do work (while they can change it in the options it is a extra step that shouldn't be there to begin with (it should auto detect the user screen and use the standard task bar if they don't have a touch screen and use the windows 7 oversized crap if it detects a touch screen )

the windows vista themes eye candy can be applied t o the windows classic tack bar with out increasing the size but to show off more glass effects and make the eye candy more visible they make task bars and title bars larger

it doesn't matter what someone thinks about the eye candy, it's wow effect will only last probably 10 minutes then the on;y focus of the user is getting work done quickly and efficiently and wasting screenspace will only hinder them and adding fade effects and slide effects which add a .5-1 second delay in order to fully play the animation only slows the user down and makes things feel sluggish because something that could happen instantly is delayed by a 1 second animation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Razor512:

You really don't understand WDDM and why its better than DWM. XP is old and out of date, if you don't want to use newer stuff then fine, but at least understand what your talking about.

nullArray:

Your using a shitty laptop and trying to compare it to a Macbook which is akin to comparing a Kia to a Merc. Windows is a good OS if a: its not loaded up with all the shitty apps in the world and b: running on decent hardware. Apple limit what hardware you can run OSX on specifically for this reason, to ensure that it will deliver the user experience your after. If you loaded up a hacked OSX into the same hardware then you would probally have the same experience.

As for Mac fans, some of you are cool, other would look at a an application that could solve world hunger, cure cancer and AIDs and enable a Ford Festival to do FTL travel... then go "its shit, its not Mac". People like this should be shot (with a designer gun).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slackware Linux, Arch Linux, and Mac OS X are my primary operating systems.

I've ran a few *BSD's, and windows of course, in fact I still have a desktop running FreeBSD, but I don't personally own any computers running anything higher than Windows2000pro.

I chose Linux as my main OS years ago, when I got tired of Windows, and wanted something new.

I used to dual boot for a long time, but I eventually just installed cold turkey one day, and haven't gone back since.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Razor512:

You really don't understand WDDM and why its better than DWM. XP is old and out of date, if you don't want to use newer stuff then fine, but at least understand what your talking about.

nullArray:

Your using a shitty laptop and trying to compare it to a Macbook which is akin to comparing a Kia to a Merc. Windows is a good OS if a: its not loaded up with all the shitty apps in the world and b: running on decent hardware. Apple limit what hardware you can run OSX on specifically for this reason, to ensure that it will deliver the user experience your after. If you loaded up a hacked OSX into the same hardware then you would probally have the same experience.

As for Mac fans, some of you are cool, other would look at a an application that could solve world hunger, cure cancer and AIDs and enable a Ford Festival to do FTL travel... then go "its shit, its not Mac". People like this should be shot (with a designer gun).

(wddm is more suited to adding a extra layer of DRM to content and does nothing to improve performance)

I understand but it doesn't matter much if the OS is lower, and less stable and waste screen space

xp may be out dated but it works well and does everything I need, faster and more reliably

Windows xp has never randomly crashed on me, the only times where it has crashed was when I installed beta drivers that didn't like a game, or when I tried to use files from nvidias drivers on my ati card in hopes of fixing a opengl problem :)

I dual boot windows xp, windows vista, and ubuntu.

the only system that has random crashes once in a while for no reason is vista.

Ubuntu just runs completely stably (while it has a few driver problems with some of my hardware like my sound card (audugy 2 zs) it has never crashed or giving me any random unexplained problems

I have also used the mac os, I found it to be slower than windows and none of the apps I wanted were available for it (while you can dual boot it with windows, why spend twice as much forslower hardware just to run windows when you can build a faster system for like half the price

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...