Okay, I'm officially DONE with the linux!

[segaprophet]

That's unfortunately what you buy into when you buy a Mac. -

Yep the lack of hardware options nowadays is a major bummer - being honest, the primary reason (by far) that I still buy new Macs is because I need an officially supported way to run my working environment of choice.

I'm not saying modern Apple hardware isn't beautiful, powerful or high quality, but the hardware has finally reached a totally Jobsian ideal (not being a platform to interact with so much as a single, monolithic product to consume and discard) - I've always admired the Woznian ideal more, meaning I've always loved to tweak my entire computer experience, so for that reason I find it lacking in recent years.

Thus, now it's all about the OS for me. Everything changes over time, but for most people, you come to a point in your life where you've invested so much cash and most importantly brainspace into getting the most out of a platform that it makes it nigh impossible to ever consider other options, especially if you make your living with your PC.

Edited December 3, 2014 by segaprophet

[lextacy]

Still using Linux and liking it. Its so more stable for KSP. However that doesnt mean I cant rag on Linux for being the incomplete OS that it is.

If you want to install a program on Linux, prepare to continue the coding,kernel fixes, and mass package downloading that the developers took short cuts on. For example, when installing video drivers, you will have to download hundreds of missing dependencies. If your using the Ubuntu software center you can download apps there without the hassle. But most things you want are not in the software center.

KSP performance wise is pretty good. You can have tons of mods and play KSP the way it was meant to be. However that will come at a FPS cost as the Linux version will be slower in the gfx department.

[steve_v]

If you want to install a program on Linux, prepare to continue the coding,kernel fixes, and mass package downloading that the developers took short cuts on.

You clearly weren't around in the 'good old days'... when you had to track down all those dependencies yourself & compile them from source.

Things are miles easier now.

'Tis not 'shortcuts', there are just thousands of packages to manage.

The 'mass package downloading' is just a side effect of the 'bazaar' development model - many components from many developers have to come together & a package manager is pretty much mandatory to keep track of it all. With great freedom comes great confusion

This differs from Window's 'cathedral' model, where there are just a few dependencies and one can reasonably expect them to be installed already or standardised as part of the OS.

Much easier to do when MS provides all the core libraries.

Of course one could roll a distro with every conceivable dependency included, but then people will scream "bloat" and your OS download will be in the tens of GB...

But most things you want are not in the software center.

I'm not sure what's actually in the 'software center' but the full catalogue is available with synaptic.

However that will come at a FPS cost as the Linux version will be slower in the gfx department.

I suspect there's something not quite right about Unitys OpenGL implementation, performance wise. It's slower in OpenGL on Windows too, though my experience is limited to Nvidia cards so YMMV. Edited December 4, 2014 by steve_v

[Arugela]

On 12/2/2014, 10:56:13, segaprophet said:

Using modern Macs, I do sorely miss the hardware customization - for example, I loved the heck out my old B/W Power Mac G3 -

 

 

I've seen several cases over the year where the motherboard side comes out of the case semi similar to that. I wish they would do that with more cases now. It's a very nice thing to have.

Edited December 17, 2015 by Arugela

[Camacha]

On 28/11/2014, 23:34:34, sal_vager said:

I cannot be dealing with virus and malware rubbish anymore

The tell-tale sign of someone that has not been using Windows for a long time Anyone barely knowing his stuff should have no trouble at all. Really, this Windows malware problem is always massively overestimated by non-Windows people.

 

On 03/12/2014, 02:32:27, segaprophet said:

Without resorting to bringing up gaming industry support (or lack thereof), what kind of task can a Linux or Windows box do that a Mac lacks the horsepower or software to do?

Most things I do in daily life: rendering, simulations and gaming. None of those things are well supported and buying the hardware to do it well will require major investments. Apple computers are fine for a lot of intents and purposes. If you are going to use it as a daily driver or moderate use and the OS suits you, you will have a wonderful time. The days that Apple computers were suited for serious production work seem to be over, though. Upgrading or expanding your systems also seems to be a right pain, though the systems do tend to be a little more compact than most PC's.

 

On 03/12/2014, 05:14:50, segaprophet said:

Yep the lack of hardware options nowadays is a major bummer - being honest, the primary reason (by far) that I still buy new Macs is because I need an officially supported way to run my working environment of choice.

It is what I see as the major difference between Windows and OSX. In OSX, you can do things one way, the Jobs way, and do them well. If you want to do it differently, tough luck, unless you are well versed with the console. Under Windows, you can do everything in various, often partially overlapping but not completely similar ways. The result is that you can always do what you want to do, but it quickly gets confusing if you are not willing to explore the options. It never is the most streamlined experience possible, but it gets you where you need to be.

They seem to be two very different schools of thought. Windows could certainly be more consistent, though I fear it would come at a cost. Apple could certainly allow more customisation, though it would likely hurt the simple experience it offers now.

[steve_v]

Interesting, this thread seems to have returned from the dead. So be it.

45 minutes ago, Camacha said:

The tell-tale sign of someone that has not been using Windows for a long time Anyone barely knowing his stuff should have no trouble at all. Really, this Windows malware problem is always massively overestimated by non-Windows people.

Agreed, it's a common argument from those pushing MacOS or *nix as a "better OS"... I prefer GNU/Linux or BSD personally, but malware has very little to do with that choice. There is more malware in the wild for Windows, but avoiding it only requires common sense... unfortunately, popular as it is, Windows tends to see lots of users with none at all.

I do tire of the "every second third party app is trying to dupe you in some way, usually for money or advertising" thing that seems to go on with Windows applications though, I'm not sure if the same is true for OSX.

Then again, maybe I'm just used to open-source everything, vetted by distro maintainers... after all, 'tis pretty hard to sneak malware or adware into something like the Debian repos without someone noticing, and usually kicking up one hell of a stink.

45 minutes ago, Camacha said:

It is what I see as the major difference between Windows and OSX. In OSX, you can do things one way, the Jobs way, and do them well. If you want to do it differently, tough luck, unless you are well versed with the console. Under Windows, you can do everything in various, often partially overlapping but not completely similar ways.

Also true, and even more flexible are the various FOSS Unix derivatives (so much so that it confuses new users no end )- to me, Windows is restrictive in much the same way you describe OSX.
I find this mildly ironic, as OSX borrows much code from open-source unix variants... a testament to how well Apple has hidden this behind all the shiny.

As for the hardware, I've always considered Apple products to be somewhat overpriced, slick  and "trendy", at the expense of flexibility and upgradeability - where white-box type PC hardware is just the opposite. If you know what you're doing, you can build a PC that will leave a comparably priced Mac for dead.

Edited December 17, 2015 by steve_v

[Camacha]

38 minutes ago, steve_v said:

There is more malware in the wild for Windows, but avoiding it only requires common sense... unfortunately, popular as it is, Windows tends to see lots of users with none at all.

Agreed, though judging by looking at comparatively large sample groups, most users tend to do just fine. Windows is everywhere, which means that all the helpless and hopeless people tend to end up using it too.

It also seems Apple is garnering more and more attention from malware makers. Even if some software is inherently safer than others, popularity seems to be much more of a factor when it comes to malware incidence than the OS itself. I think we can all agree that bug free 100% safe software does not exist, especially in consumer grade stuff, so malware makers will always find ways.

 

 

Quote

I do tire of the "every second third party app is trying to dupe you in some way, usually for money or advertising" thing that seems to go on with Windows applications though, I'm not sure if the same is true for OSX.

If I am honest, I do not really recognize this. I use paid, open and free packages, and only rarely I get unwanted behaviour. I only know that iOS applications are sometimes more expensive than the Android counterpart, but that is just a case of adjusting the price point to the public and happens in almost any business.

Edited December 17, 2015 by Camacha

[sal_vager]

1 hour ago, Camacha said:

The tell-tale sign of someone that has not been using Windows for a long time Anyone barely knowing his stuff should have no trouble at all. Really, this Windows malware problem is always massively overestimated by non-Windows people.

I really think you mean "Anyone knowing his stuff should have no trouble at all.", and as the families go-to guy for all computer issues I still have to deal with Windows viruses, malware and similar.

While it's true if you know your stuff you can avoid most things those threats don't disappear, anti-virus software still needs to be kept up to date, it still consumes resources, and keeping on top of other 3rd party applications still needs to be done manually for a great deal of software.

[Camacha]

30 minutes ago, sal_vager said:

I really think you mean "Anyone knowing his stuff should have no trouble at all.", and as the families go-to guy for all computer issues I still have to deal with Windows viruses, malware and similar.

I really meant what I said Having had to deal with somewhat larger sample groups in a professional capacity, I can say I was actually a bit surprised. While I do think the average knowledge on computer safety could be quite a lot better, the actual number of infections and problems is surprisingly small. Not what I expected at all. Even if people mess up, they often know they did so.

 

 

Quote

anti-virus software still needs to be kept up to date

This is true for any OS nowadays. Some people still insist on running without protection, but that is just a waiting game. Sooner or later you will get hurt.

 

Edited December 17, 2015 by Camacha

[steve_v]

1 hour ago, Camacha said:

If I am honest, I do not really recognize this. I use paid, open and free packages, and only rarely I get unwanted behaviour.

I guess this depends on your definition of "unwanted behaviour" - to me this means obnoxious "hunt for the free DL link amongst the ads" websites, "upgrade" nag screens, crippleware free versions, added toolbars, "you can't have the source code" licensing, DRM, ads of any kind etc...
Ok, so I'm probably just used to everything being free.

 

41 minutes ago, Camacha said:

Having had to deal with somewhat larger sample groups in a professional capacity, I can say I was actually a bit surprised. While I do think the average knowledge on computer safety could be quite a lot better, the actual number of infections and problems is surprisingly small.

Having to deal with malware-infested Windows machines in a semi-professional capacity, I see plenty - but perhaps the users I deal with are of a slightly different calibre.
I have yet to see a GNU/Linux box with any malware at all.
OSX I simply ignore.

41 minutes ago, Camacha said:

This is true for any OS nowadays. Some people still insist on running without protection, but that is just a waiting game. Sooner or later you will get hurt.

Well... I think "any OS" might be stretching the point a little, I've yet to see a native virus for NetBSD or Solaris, for example. (not to be confused with attacks targeting specific software, e.g. webservers), or even a virus scanner to update, unless you count those designed to detect Windows malware on email servers.

That said, running any internet-exposed services without some form of intrusion detection is not overly wise.

I don't have any traditional "virus scanner" on any of my non-windows machines, but I do have periodic OS file checksum reporting and alerts for new open ports / unusual processes / logins etc.
Then again, I don't plug random flash drives or download executables from suspect websites either - all installed software tends to be signed by teams I have a reasonable faith in.

Edited December 17, 2015 by steve_v
too many "ee"

[Camacha]

18 minutes ago, steve_v said:

Well... I think "any OS" might be stretching the point a little, I've yet to see a native virus for NetBSD or Solaris

The scope intended was a bit broader than specific distros, but sure

 

Quote

I don't have any traditional "virus scanner" on any of my non-windows machines, but I do have periodic OS file checksum reporting and alerts for new open ports / unusual processes / logins etc.

 

Then again, I don't plug random flash drives or download executables from suspect websites either - all installed software tends to be signed by teams I have a reasonable faith in.

The Stagefright bug has shown that intrusions while only running trusted software is very possible, even on non-Windows machines Like I said, OS popularity seems to be the decisive factor when it comes to malware. No software is water tight, so if the gains are worth it, malware will emerge.

Of course, the behaviours you describe do help a lot to prevent infections.

Edited December 17, 2015 by Camacha

[steve_v]

25 minutes ago, Camacha said:

The scope intended was a bit broader than specific distros, but sure

If I'm to be pedantic, Solaris and BSD aren't exactly 'distros' of Unix any more... I recon they've diverged far enough in the last 20 odd years to be classed as separate OSs. And they're certainly not binary-compatible, so any malware would have to be targeted at and compiled for the platform.

Edited December 17, 2015 by steve_v

[Nibb31]

Linux certainly isn't for everyone. 

For all its problems, Windows just works out of the box and most people know how to use it intuitively. Linux usually doesn't, and many of the programs that most people are used to on Windows aren't available.

Linux is great for a server. I have a home server that runs Debian, and for that purpose I really enjoy it.

But for a desktop/laptop/everyday computer, Windows is perfectly adequate.

PS. I'm not touching anything Apple with 10-foot pole.

Edited December 18, 2015 by Nibb31