Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Ryan Peter, Nov 26, 2001.
What's the verdict? Which of these two OSes is better?
While I am not a Mac sort of guy, I would say QS-X without a doubt, if only because it's been on the market long enough to have ironed out the kinks. I would wait for at least the next release of XP, if not the third.
Currently I am using Win 98 SE and it runs very well. If only MS would $(*%&$%(& stop bringing out a new OS every two seconds and make one they support until it works, then I would be happy.
I believe OS-X is based on UNIX/Linux, in which case it would pretty much be guaranteed to rock.
Define 'better' though.
Since the hardware requirements of both are mutually exclusive it's a moot point. It comes down to whether you want to buy a PC or a Mac.
I'm very very happy with OS X, but I'm a Mac and Unix guy. For the times that I have to use Windows (DVD Profiller, mostly), I prefer to use Windows 2000 Professional over the Windows 95/98/ME series of OSes. I haven't had a chance to use Windows XP yet.
Oh. I thought that, Rob, but the question made me assume I was wrong. Also the building of OSX on Unix made me think it was possible to buy it and install it on any platform.
In that case I'd say a stable operating system isn't worth paying over the odds for every piece of software and hardware you ever own. But there you go.
Piece of mind is piece of mind, after all.
I haven't used XP yet at all, but I've been running OS X since the Public Beta was released on two Macs, run Win2kPro on my PC, and have Win95 on my work PC (not my choice...).
Admittedly, I've been a mac fan for years, but I'll take OS X over any version of Windows to date - and from what I've seen so far, I'd include XP in that blanket statement.
I like the look of the OS X interface much better than either standard Windows or the new XP interface, from what I've seen of it. The UNIX underpinnings of OS X are wonderful - if you won't want to muck with them, you don't need to, but if you want to 'geek out' and play with a command line, it's there at your beck and call. The stability of the system is amazing - my Macs uptime can be measured in weeks (and would be months, were it not for the occasional system update that prompts me to reboot the machine), while my PC's uptime is often measured in hours.
In essence, and with the disclaimer that, while bilingual, I'm more of a Mac person than a Wintel person - OS X is the way to go.
However, to be completely honest, a lot of that also depends on what you are aiming to do with the machine, and where your aspirations lie, as each platform has its respective strengths. Caveat emptor.
Sorry I meant slightly more stable OS. I still find Win98 incredibly stable. The last time I had a BSOD was down to a problem with the drivers for my scanner. A reinstall corrected that.
Getting all my components running together is the hardest thing on installing the OS. However, this isn't MS's fault, but due to my having the graphics card I want combined with the motherboard and the soundcard. If I wasn't so anal about it I could have got three that would have worked fine together.
I wasn't stating that anyone should go with my feelings but I refuse to succumb to the anti-Gates Mafia. My experience of all PCs is that they will run fine if you know what you're doing and do not fail to examine the details surrounding the drivers you are about to install.
I have also frequently noted the large price hikes afforded to Apple Mac components. Personally, if you know what you're doing you can be fine with the cheaper and wide selection of a PC. Your PC crashes all the time? I suggest you need to look at how you've installed your OS. You might well argue that you shouldn't have to but this is pretty much a moot point.
Stability is not the only reason for choosing an OS - software and hardware and use of PC should be your reason. If Ryan is going to try graphic design, etc. I would think he should unquestioningly choose a Mac, as I believe it still holds all the aces in that department.
I think both OSes are so good that you can't really go wrong with either. It all boils down to whether you want a Mac or a PC.
I am a PC user predominantly, and I've been using Windows XP since the Release Candidate stage. Quite frankly, I think it's a dream OS. It simply does not crash. In about five months of operation, it's crashed maybe once or twice. And I have it going for days or even weeks at a time. One day I will push it to see just how long it will keep ticking, but for now I've got a 15-day uptime record. If I do restart it is because a)the power went out, b)a software or driver installation or c)I booted into Windows 98 to 'twiddle'.
It is also the easiest PC OS ever. While it is not as elegant as the Mac, it makes up for it by placing everything you need right in front of you in plain english. In this way, it actually becomes extremely efficient - much moreso than Mac OS X (based on limited use in a store).
The downside is the Product Activation. It is not as intrusive as it sounds - for most retail buyers, a two-minute wizard will take care of it for the life of your PC. But it is there, and you will be conscious of it.
I haven't used Mac OS X much, but it seems to me that it is extremely elegant to use and look at, but not quite as efficient. Of course, it's rock-solid stable, thanks to it's BSD underpinnings. But then there's the woeful software compatibility issue to think about... it's so bad that Apple ships OS 9.2 with it, and it is set up to boot to OS 9.2 by default. Many users may never even see OS X, even though they have it. Other than that, there's not much to complain about OS X.
OS X.1.1 is my fave. I am using this on my iBook, but I have Win2000 Pro on my desktop. (I've only briefly played with XP, but IMO it looks cheap.)
Both have their plusses and minuses.
OTOH, how about running both at the same time, along with Unix?
Blimey man, that's one fat post!
Actually when I talk about expensive Mac stuff I am thinking (a) of new systems, (b) of a lower choice level when buying components (though I guess this has changed recently) and (c) of UK prices. We are one of the most expensive countries in the world so I guess you notice it far more over here.