Nov 23 2007 at 12:09pm
How did I ever get by without Mac and Linux?
Up until just over a year ago I had really only ever used Windows. I’d encountered Mac in passing but hadn’t actually used it. Why? Pure ambivalence. I didn’t feel the need to try other operating systems. And let’s face it, OSX isn’t exactly easy to acquire for the average PC user. Buy a new computer just to try a diffent OS? Not happening. I had a vague awareness of Linux but I assumed it was just for super-geeks.
Was I ever missing out! I’ve ben using OSX for over a month now at my new job. Although I wouldn’t say I’m enamored with it I do appreciate many differences from Windows. Liam (my husband) encouraged me to swtich to linux at home (when I had my old computer last year) and I haven’t looked back. Just this week I installed Ubuntu on a new laptop at work (and put Windows in virtualization) without much trouble at all. Any problems are always a quick Ubuntu Forums search away. I’ve always been big on customization so Linux is a great choice for me.
As an avid computer user and web professional it’s been a great experience to have a better understanding of how other operating systems work. Can you imagine only ever using Inernet Explorer? Of course not! So why are you satistfied with the default operating system that came with your computer?
I’m finding that OSX + Ubuntu is a great combination for web design. OSX for graphics, multimedia, and Dreamweaver. Ubunutu for file management and development tasks (one of the reasons why I wanted a Linux laptop is because I find the file manager in OSX to be really limiting). Of course, it helps that right now my Mac is hooked up to the nice big monitors 
That may change…
Come think of it, the lack of diversity in operating systems is really kind of sad. I don’t mean that alternatives aren’t available — they are. But the general computer using masses have very little awareness of them. Can you imagine if everyone drove the same kind of car? Or bought the same kind of DVD player? With almost any product used by regular people you can think of a wealth of alternatives. Consumers have choice. With operating systems, they don’t take advantage of the choices available. But you can’t really blame the average consumer, because the choice really isn’t available. Ever try to purchase a PC with no operating system or even an operating system other than windows? Generally not available (unless you know where to look and even then it’s difficult).
Matt November 23rd, 2007 at 2:48 pm
I had to use a Mac for my digital photo class and I really wasn’t impressed. It seems like a fair OS, but I didn’t notice anything that blew me away. I used it for two hours everyday and couldn’t find anything that was significantly better than XP. Where’s the incentive to switch? Plus I can’t build my own computer if I run a Mac OS.
Because I work exclusively on linux web servers, working on a linux machine would really be nice (mounting SCP would be, oh so sweet). But linux (as far as I know) is lacking good software. They have nothing that compares to Dreamweaver (NVU is terrible) and where is a good IDE like UE Studio? GIMP is ok, but not as good as Photoshop. Using WINE for everything isn’t an elegant solution. Linux fans need to stop making clones of third party software, and just get the real stuff to run natively on their platform. I don’t want cheap (free) off brand software. I want the real deal.
Megan November 23rd, 2007 at 3:55 pm
That’s why I think OSX + Linux is a good combination. I can get the nice commercial apps on OSX and still have the flexibility of Linux. Windows is kind of a middle of the road solution IMO. The thing that annoys me most about Windows and Mac is that you can’t do a lot of customization. And the file managers aren’t as good.
To say that Linux doesn’t have “good software” isn’t really true. There are just certain things it doesn’t have which seem like gaping holes for some people. It sort depends on what you value.
I think your last comments would draw a lot of ire from people who believe that software should be Free (as in freedom), but I’d rather not get into that
Liam McDermott November 24th, 2007 at 12:42 pm
But you just mentioned several peices of good software
If you mean GUI tools then yes, there is a way to go, but things are improving all the time. Even GIMP is recieving CMYK support and a UI overhaul! 
Two problems with this:
GIMP isn’t a clone. That’s why people complain about it so much. I’ve noticed two groups of people complaining about GNU/Linux, the one’s who complain becuase it’s too similar to Windows and the one’s who complain because it’s not exactly the same. The customers need to make their minds up. What actually needs to be done is something in-between: Free software needs to be similar enough to be easy to switch to, whilst being innovative with new features.
It’s not up to the Free software community to port commercial, closed apps to GNU/Linux. Nor do we want them, the whole point of the platform is freedom.
This comment indicates that you don’t really ‘get’ GNU/Linux; and since you don’t have a desire to get away from Windows it’s probably not the OS for you.
Eclipse. Netbeans has just had Ruby on Rails support added, so is becoming viable for more Web stuff, it’s still very Java centered however. Real men (and women and small furry creatures from the Crab Nebula) use Vim, of course.
Also, instead of WINE, you can dual-boot, use virtualisation, or a thin client. None of which are ideal, but they work. Regarding a WYSIWYG Web editor: you’re correct Nvu isn’t brilliant and there aren’t many worthwhile alternatives out there. There are several being developed, the problem being a lack of demand from people already on the platform (in my opinion).
Matt November 25th, 2007 at 8:23 pm
Linux has sweet utilities (like SCP, gzip, CHMOD/CHGRP/CHOWN, file managers, and a load of other things) but not full blown software.
> GIMP isn’t a clone.
If you think GIMP is not a clone of PS, that’s cool. It sure comes across as one. I guess if you want to say it is “inspired” by Photoshop, that’s cool too. NVU is not an attempted clone of Dreamweaver either, it’s just “inspired” by it. That’s a nice way to put it
> It’s not up to the Free software community to port commercial, closed apps to GNU/Linux.
It’s not your job to port them (after all, the source code isn’t open), but is your job to advocate bigger software companies to start taking Linux on the desktop seriously so they will port their software. They need to know that linux users are willing to fork out some cash for their software, which doesn’t go along with your next comment.
> Nor do we want them, the whole point of the platform is freedom.
Dang, I guess my dream of using (evil) proprietary software on linux isn’t going to come true. I assumed the whole GNU/Linux platform thing was to provide an alternative operating system to the public, not force its free software ideologies on everyone who uses it. You’re right, I don’t get the whole GNU/Linux thing. I just don’t think because someone charges for their software, it should be shunned.
> VIM
I’ve got no problem with VIM. I use GVIM on Windows to edit large text files (Notepad will cry if it opens a file larger than 5 megs). But when you’re working on a large project with tons of files, with multiple (lazy) people, VIM won’t cut it.
I guess I’ll stick to Windows as a desktop OS, since I’m not a proper candidate for Linux. Windows has done me well for 18 years. And a few of the good utilities on linux are available on Windows too.
Megan November 25th, 2007 at 10:03 pm
Free software isn’t about how much it costs, it’s about having freedom. This is a problem with the english language – the word “free” can refer to both freedom or lack of monetary cost. The real value in Free software is freedom. The fact that it doesn’t cost any money is a bit of a side effect.
Anyway, it wasn’t my intention to start a debate about Free vs. non-Free software, but only to point out that there is value in understanding and using different operating systems, not to say that you have to use Apple or you have to use Linux as your only OS.
Edit: In fact, what I’m trying to point out here is that there is value in making a conscious choice about your operating system rather than ambivalently continuing with whatever came with your computer. You wouldn’t just continue with the same browser that came with it, would you? If you do that research and still choose Windows, then that’s your perogative. Just make the choice.
Andrew January 3rd, 2008 at 2:33 pm
I can’t believe I missed a Linux / Mac post.
I always like reading posts from people that realize that they do have a choice and are not bound by one option.
Matt makes a couple typical comments that is made by a lot of other Windows users. They don’t like Linux because it doesn’t have all the features they have access to on Windows. The common misconception is that GNU/Linux was made to replace Windows. It wasn’t. It was made to replace *Unix*, and it handles that quite well. You can install virtually any Unix app on Linux, because that’s what it was designed to do. If you are looking for a open-source version of Windows, ReactOS may be the best solution, but it’s still under intense development.
I try really hard not to bash other computer users for using Windows, especially if they know better. For example, my brother is quite familiar with Linux, but he prefers programming in .NET. That’s his choice, and I respect that. (except for cracking a couple Windows jokes when his computer crashes)
I am an Ubuntu user because I need more of the Linux functionality between my computer and servers. If I want to browse files on my server, I just mount the remote filesystem (using sshfs), and I can view and manage my server files like it was on my local filesystem. Windows doesn’t have that functionality.
So basically, I agree with Megan. I don’t believe that one OS is better than another for everything, but I do believe that people need to know that there are more options out there and to consider them.
Immeëmosol August 12th, 2008 at 10:23 pm
It’s a good thing Mac OS X can be run on the intel platform by now.
People should always think about what they consume, right?
Isn’t it true for so many things, that people just take it as it comes? Taking decisions is a task that people are mostly unaware of I guess, they just make them if they need to. So with computers, they don’t need to, ’cause they don’t sell a computer and ask what OS you want on them, it just comes with windows.
But probably when you work with media you’re eyes are opened just a bit.
Like when I now see a commercial I’m not intimidated by the product they want to sell, I just watch the add and think;
Why did they do it like this?
Who are there audience?
And I think that in doing so I have become a critical consumer of products, though sometimes you just have to take it as it is, ’cause there are no real good alternatives at hand (like food with way too much packaging).
I hope this will come across… : P (/me is no native english speaker, but dutch, so…)