Poll: What is the better?
Windows
Linux
Mac
Other
[Show Results]
 
 
Windows VS Linux VS Mac
#31
I prefer Windows and what is this thing about mac, You can't get virus's ? I don't believe it.
I also hate the fact no programs are out for Mac (old ones) meaning i'm drawn towards Windows.
Reply
#32
(12-09-2010, 05:38 AM)pixelpro Wrote:  I prefer Windows and what is this thing about mac, You can't get virus's ? I don't believe it.
I also hate the fact no programs are out for Mac (old ones) meaning i'm drawn towards Windows.

You can get virus on Mac and Linux as well, but as there are much less virus for Mac and Linux than for Windows, it is unlikely that you can get infected using Mac or Linux. This is because less people use these operating systems, and hackers focus more on Windows because it's what everyone uses.

And I don't think there is no new software for Mac. At least, Apple should continue delivering new versions of their software to users, can anyone confirm this?
Reply
#33
My opinion is Windows for me ,its easy to use and I think is the best OS ever ,its fast ,stylish and great for games ,multimedia most people uses Windows, the games 70-90% are for windows and other things it why windows is really good Big Grin
Reply
#34
(08-09-2010, 09:35 PM)gbl08ma Wrote:  Linux does not run Windows apps by default. It's a completely different system.
There's WINE which pretends to create a simulation/emulation layer between linux and Windows applications so Windows applications can run on Linux. However, performance is not the same and there are many things unsupported on that compatibility layer.

About games on linux, well I have little knowledge in this since I don't like playing games on the PC, but I know that game studios dont develop for linux. What usually happens is that people run Windows games on Linux through WINE, but as I said things are not perfect and some games simply don't run.

Not true at all wine do not simulate/emulate windows. Wine loads windows executable format over linux version of win32 API implementation. Think of it like this: win32API is a virtual machine (like java, not a processor emulator) with two versions - one for windows and one for linux. they can be both equaly fast. Wine is incomplete that is true. But you can easily polish it and make programs run as they do in windows. As for performance..... that's a matter of library implementation rather than wine concept design.
(12-12-2010, 01:25 AM)gbl08ma Wrote:  You can get virus on Mac and Linux as well, but as there are much less virus for Mac and Linux than for Windows, it is unlikely that you can get infected using Mac or Linux. This is because less people use these operating systems, and hackers focus more on Windows because it's what everyone uses.

And I don't think there is no new software for Mac. At least, Apple should continue delivering new versions of their software to users, can anyone confirm this?

Well actualy on linux a virus can not do much harm because it needs root rights to do so. Every esential changes in linux require superuser privileges. That's why using a non-root user is a safe practice because it does not allow the mallware code to autoexecute with superuser privileges. And about the "hackers" (you mean crackers - hacker is a word for "the good geek") they would be more motivated to attack server systems as server damage leads to production losses, and linux is verry used into the server market
Reply
#35
You are correct about Wine, but its much easier to just tell people it emulates Windows. It is basically software emulation after all and Windows is software Tongue. I wouldn't say Wine is like a virtual machine though, at least not in its truest sense, its just a compatibility layer.

I'm fairly certain that gbl08ma is correct to use hacker. You are thinking of white hat hackers, a sub genre of hackers. Also, its not that they are less motivated to hack Linux, its just that viruses generally don't get onto servers. Usually, there is not a person using the server to surf the web or download malicious attachments, etc. To hack servers you usually have to go down the hard route and hack into it manually by bruteforce or finding a hole.
Reply
#36
windows all the way Smile thats what i say.
free vps ftw!
Reply
#37
Linux beats any OS to any of the following:

- Integrated Development Environments
- Package Management and Automatic Updates
- Flexibility by it's open-source nature (this includes it's capacity of embracing the latest technologies)
- Clustering
- Stability
- Client/Server framework
- Libraries database
- Performance (monolithic kernel, extreme tweaking camabilities, kernel management and optimization)
- Virtual machines and hardware virtualization
- Debugging (maybe I should have put this first)
- Security policy
- Modularity
- Documentation
- Friendly user interfaces and ease of use (this strongly depends on the distribution you choose)

.. and I'm sure i forgot some other aspects.... but it should be enough Smile
(03-08-2011, 09:26 AM)f8ll Wrote:  You are correct about Wine, but its much easier to just tell people it emulates Windows. It is basically software emulation after all and Windows is software Tongue. I wouldn't say Wine is like a virtual machine though, at least not in its truest sense, its just a compatibility layer.
With the risk of going offtopic:

Telling people that wine emulates windows is somehow easier to understand, but they may think wine is some kind of "small windows inside Linux". I do not want to elaborate but for those who are still confused I recommend http://wiki.winehq.org/Debunking_Wine_Myths
Reply
#38
Even that wiki says its a type of emulator Tongue just not the kind most people think of.

To argue some of you points:

- Pretty much every OS has an IDE
- Not every distro has Package managment and automatic updates, other OSs do have package managment and automatic updates (ie. FreeBSD), windows has automatic updates but each aplication has to support it themeselves
- Linux is not the only OSS OS
- Again Linux is not the only OS that can do clustering, even Windows can do it
- Stability is somewhat a YMMV subject. Some people have great stability with windows, some people don't. More people tend to find Linux more stable, but not all. Anyway, I'd say OpenBSD or NetBSD to be more stable than Linux
- Not sure what you mean about Client/Server framework. That has nothing to do with an OS.
- same as above about Libraries database
- I'll give you this one. Generally Linux has the best performance, YMMV again though. A monolithic kernel isn't a plus imo. Hybrid's the way to go these days. Also, Linux isn't the only OS that allows for tweaking and optimization.
- Virtual Machines and hardware virtualization has nothing to do with an OS. Linux does tend to have more than other OSs but that only because its more popular.
- EVERY os has some kind of debugging utility. Linux doesn't even have the best one imo, dtrace. Well it does, but its incomplete last I checked.
- Not sure what you mean by security policy. If you mean something like PAM, that's in a TON of OSs
- Linux is fairly moodular, more than most. I'll give you this one, but I'd argue that NetBSD is more modular.
- I wouldn't say Linux has amazing documentation. Its fairly good, but does not compare to FreeBSD's documentation imo.
- X has no relation to Linux other than it runs on it. Xorg will run many different OSs. Hell, You can run gnome on Windows if you wanted to.

You seem to think the GNU userland is confined to Linux. It is not. The original goal of the GNU userland was to run on GNU Hurd (who knows when that will be finished), but the applications run on pretty much any *nix or *nix like (Linux) OS.
Reply
#39
I don't like Mac, i like Linux and Windows
Sorry for my bad English, i'm dutch.
Reply
#40
(03-11-2011, 05:52 AM)f8ll Wrote:  To argue some of you points:

- Pretty much every OS has an IDE
- Not every distro has Package managment and automatic updates, other OSs do have package managment and automatic updates (ie. FreeBSD), windows has automatic updates but each aplication has to support it themeselves
- Linux is not the only OSS OS
- Again Linux is not the only OS that can do clustering, even Windows can do it
- Stability is somewhat a YMMV subject. Some people have great stability with windows, some people don't. More people tend to find Linux more stable, but not all. Anyway, I'd say OpenBSD or NetBSD to be more stable than Linux
- Not sure what you mean about Client/Server framework. That has nothing to do with an OS.
- same as above about Libraries database
- I'll give you this one. Generally Linux has the best performance, YMMV again though. A monolithic kernel isn't a plus imo. Hybrid's the way to go these days. Also, Linux isn't the only OS that allows for tweaking and optimization.
- Virtual Machines and hardware virtualization has nothing to do with an OS. Linux does tend to have more than other OSs but that only because its more popular.
- EVERY os has some kind of debugging utility. Linux doesn't even have the best one imo, dtrace. Well it does, but its incomplete last I checked.
- Not sure what you mean by security policy. If you mean something like PAM, that's in a TON of OSs
- Linux is fairly moodular, more than most. I'll give you this one, but I'd argue that NetBSD is more modular.
- I wouldn't say Linux has amazing documentation. Its fairly good, but does not compare to FreeBSD's documentation imo.
- X has no relation to Linux other than it runs on it. Xorg will run many different OSs. Hell, You can run gnome on Windows if you wanted to.


You seem to think the GNU userland is confined to Linux. It is not. The original goal of the GNU userland was to run on GNU Hurd (who knows when that will be finished), but the applications run on pretty much any *nix or *nix like (Linux) OS.

First of all I want to make myself clear... I thought it was about OS not about kernels... so "GNU/Linux" should replace "Linux"

On IDE part yeah you may be right as many OS IDE ar crossplatform... and the clustering part. linux is not the only OSS OS but it's the most developed one. For stability well Linux and BSD are stable... you can have years of uptime with latest stable software including the kernel.. as for windows ... windows http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Windows#Security GNU/Linux has an X server and an X client. Sound servers and sound clients... Libraries are well known. If i have 2 games in Windows that use same DLL i'll have 2 copies of one DLL unless i register it. Virtual machines rely on the host OS or hypervisor. PAM is available only for UNIX-like OSs. You can run Desktop environments from linux in windows if you rebuild the source but you have to use cygwin. And there is no Enlightenment E17 for windows.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)