Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Poll: What is your primary operating system

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 472 posts

Re: Poll: What is your primary operating system

#341

Post by antihero »

Osiris wrote: post #25

I've been using Windows pretty much since version 3.1 (though will some time on OS/2 as well) as my primary OS. I have, of course, used Linux, though mostly for servers and not a full-time primary OS. I also have a Chromebook running Chrome OS. Recently, I switched jobs and my team uses Macs so over the last few months my primary work OS is now Mac OS X, while I still use Windows at home. One thing I have discovered…

I've honestly found developing on Windows a much bigger pain in the arse until you spend a lot of time setting it up. It's not that you can't do things on Windows - anyone with skill can do anything on anything, however it just makes it significantly less easy, it just feels like an OS set up for consumption as opposed to creation.

Re: Poll: What is your primary operating system

#342

Post by randallsquared »

thatjoshguy wrote: post #299
randallsquared wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems short sighted to say that some arbitrary and subjective personal belief system about technology makes one system inherently "better" / "superior" to another. It's true that the FSF and those who support them are more concerned with the long-term future of computing availability than about whether they can GSD in the next few days or weeks. I'm assuming that that's what you mean by "short sighted"? Well, that…

Just out of curiosity, what is making you move towards Linux? The huge appeal of OS X to me is, as someone said on here recently, it's basically *BSD with a fancy window manager and 1-to-1 hardware/software integration.

The way OS X is being locked down. In 10.8, signing is optional and even if you tell your system not to allow unsigned, you can bypass it on a case by case basis. In the next OS X, we'll probably move a bit farther in that direction, and at one per year, the OS X of 2016 will probably refuse to run unsigned applications at all, for excellent reasons involving security and malware, etc. I'm sure there will be a way to turn it off, but when it's basically impossible to get more than a few users unless you submit to signing, applications like Bittorrent will either submit or find themselves reduced to developers-only status. If they submit, Apple will be able to remove them at any time (for the vast majority of users, who won't know how or want to "root" their Macs). Even if Apple never chooses to use this maliciously -- and I don't think they would for a long time, if ever -- it's going to be only a matter of time before some group sues them to use it to stop infringement or something.

I don't want to run a system where, by design, the manufacturer can remove my ability to run applications I've installed after the fact. So, even though I'm happier in general with the polish and fit of OS X than current desktop linuxes, that's where I'm headed.

Re: Poll: What is your primary operating system

#343

Post by possibilistic »

tseabrooks wrote: post #208
slowpoke wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would just like to add that there is a valid reason why Linux or the *BSDs are superior to Windows or OS X - they are Free. As in Speech. And I'm sad this doesn't even warrant a mention.

Maybe I'm the only one... But as a professional developer working on everything from device drivers, embedded systems, up to your average LAMP stack and other web frameworks the "Freedom" of the operating system is worth exactly bupkis to me, ziltch, zero, nada. There are a whole host of reasons to use one OS over the other but this "Free as in Speech" is simply not a very good one. I'm far, FAR, more concerned about…

I primarily use Linux, so I'm most productive there, but I understand your sentiment. I would use a nonfree OS if it increased my productivity.

That said, I think Linux and all the other FOSS OSes and software keep costs down. Without Linux, could you imagine what a Windows license would cost? I can't picture that we would have the same price points.

Do you think a similar argument could be applied to Android or any other free/commodity software/platform?

Re: Poll: What is your primary operating system

#344

Post by technomancy »

thatjoshguy wrote: post #299
randallsquared wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems short sighted to say that some arbitrary and subjective personal belief system about technology makes one system inherently "better" / "superior" to another. It's true that the FSF and those who support them are more concerned with the long-term future of computing availability than about whether they can GSD in the next few days or weeks. I'm assuming that that's what you mean by "short sighted"? Well, that…

Just out of curiosity, what is making you move towards Linux? The huge appeal of OS X to me is, as someone said on here recently, it's basically *BSD with a fancy window manager and 1-to-1 hardware/software integration.

OS X has a few things going for it, but even Mac fans will tell you the window manager is not one of them; it's painfully primitive.

Re: Poll: What is your primary operating system

#345

Post by mikegerwitz »

irreverentbits wrote: post #326
richurd wrote: post #143

I was forced to choose "other" since my operating system (GNU) was not listed. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by…

This argument is, and has always been, ridiculous. The GNU user land is no more an operating system than the Linux kernel or the K desktop environment. It's just one component of a larger software system which most refer to by the convenient moniker of "Linux".

It is disappointing to see "GNU/Linux" comments consistently harassed. Consider the history.

The GNU project was conceived in 1983 to create a full free (as in freedom) operating system. This operating system combined many different projects (for example, X), in addition to creating its own components. Before Linux, it had one troubled component - the GNU Hurd, which was its kernel. Torvalds developed Linux (the kernel) in 1990 and released it under the GNU GPLv2 in 1991, which completed the GNU operating system by providing a working, stable kernel. The entire operating system was, and still is (except when GNU is not present, such as Android), GNU. The term GNU/Linux was used to give credit to both Torvalds and the GNU project. The term just as easily could have been "GNU/Linux/X" (and in fact that was used by the Yggdrasil distribution).

Linux, as it was conceived, is a kernel. GNU, as it was conceived, is an operating system. There is an important distinction there.

Fast forward a couple decades. Many people, in an effort to shorten the name "GNU/Linux", simply dropped the GNU portion and referred to the entire Operating System as "Linux". Also combine this with projects such as Android, which use Linux without GNU, and therefore are not GNU/Linux. Everyone has come to know any operating system that uses the Linux kernel simply by the name of "Linux".

Is that correct? Well, that depends on how the term is used. "Linux distribution" is certainly correct --- if your operating system uses the Linux kernel, then yes, distributes Linux. But to consider Linux an operating system is incorrect from both a project and historical standpoint, because it is not --- it is a Linux-based operating system. But to call an entire operating system "Linux" is saying that the entire system that you are using is part of the Linux project. On the other hand, calling your operating system "GNU", as long as it uses GNU, is correct, because GNU was always developed to be an operating system - a collection of components.

So given the history, why is the term "GNU/Linux" ridiculous? Why is the term "Linux" to refer to an entire operating system not ridiculous? Because that is the most popular term to refer to a Linux-based operating system? And given your statement

> The GNU user land is no more an operating system than the Linux kernel or the K desktop environment.

it would seem GNU is just as fitting to be used as Linux. So again, why is such a notion ridiculous?

Re: Poll: What is your primary operating system

#346

Post by technomancy »

brudgers wrote: post #210
mseebach wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One more thing: A terminal as a first class citizen. Definitely not on Windows, and while the OSX one is orders of magnitude better, I seem to recall it's still a bit lacking. What ruins OSX for me isn't the terminal, though, it's that X apps aren't first class.

"terminal as a first class citizen" Because it operates at the object level rather than the files and strings of nix shells, Windows Powershell is more or less "one ring to rule them all."

At the risk of stating the obvious, Powershell is a shell, not a terminal.

Re: Poll: What is your primary operating system

#347

Post by slowpoke »

jsolson wrote: post #149
slowpoke wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would just like to add that there is a valid reason why Linux or the *BSDs are superior to Windows or OS X - they are Free. As in Speech. And I'm sad this doesn't even warrant a mention.

Freedom also carries a cost. At the end of the day, the best OS for any given individual is the one that gives them the largest net increase in utility, for their personal utility function. My experience suggests that a Free OS isn't worth it to me, but it's been about six years since I gave it a go full-time. The last time I gave Linux a good go round (as in using it as my primary OS for everything I did), I still h…

>Freedom also carries a cost.

What cost? You're stating this as a fact, when it certainly isn't. As I've pointed out in another comment, the claim that usability is an orthogonal concept to Freedom is a false dichotomy.

Yes, there are quite some issues at the moment, I'm not going to deny that. The thing is, a lot of those, like missing hardware support, are not the fault of the Free Software community, it's the fault of the very things we're trying to stop: closed/locked hardware, proprietary drivers, non-open file-formats or Freedom-denying practices like DRM or tivoization, and finally plain and simple FUD (named as the single most critical problem GNU/Linux faces in an infographic released by the Linux Foundation last year[1]).

Before someone points out that shifting the blame doesn't make the problems go away, let me add that I'm perfectly aware of this. I just want to make it clear that it's unfair to blame Free Software for a lot of the problems it faces, when in fact we fought and tried to prevent a lot of them for more than two decades.

[1]: http://content.linuxfoundation.org/20th/images/linuxthennowi...

Re: Poll: What is your primary operating system

#349

Post by moystard »

hollerith wrote: post #332
tonyedgecombe wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've just switched back to Windows and its the hardware I miss more than the software. I bought a fairly expensive Dell but it isn't a patch on the old Macbook Pro.

I have been led to believe that Windows runs great on MBPs. Does your experience contradict that?

Windows globally runs great on MBPs. During the early days of SL, I was spending more time under my bootcamp partition than SL as it was buggy and unresponsive.

Re: Poll: What is your primary operating system

#350

Post by evoxed »

OS X for regular day-to-day, Windows for CAD and structures. I used to use gentoo occasionally, so a year ago I started browsing other systems and found Arch Linux. As soon as I get some extra hardware for a desktop workstation I'd love to give it a try.
Post reply on HN