Do you prefer Windows XP or Vista or Mac OS or Linux?

I like Vista over XP in most aspect. The only problem with Vista, which unfortunately to me is a major issue, I can't get 100% cleartype free scheme unless I choose the ugly "Windows Standard/Classic" which looks more like Windows 95/98.

No cleartype to me trumps everything so I have to either fallback to XP or fall back to 95/98 appearance of Vista.

So I would say XP is still an overall better OS, Vista is so "incomplete" even though it has many nice features.

Mac OS X ? That is for those who have money to burn. Computer is just a tool for me, not fashion.

Linux ? using it everyday in the form of colinux under either Vista or XP.

 

vista x64 with super fetch + 4GB of ram + cpu with 2 cores = very very fast computer

 

i would like to see this post done in a unbiased forum, this is the windows os section.

 

????????????????????

 

Well, there isn't really an 'unbiased' board that would be suitable for this poll... sorry you feel that way, though.

Matt

 

I have Microsoft, and i love 'em. I love to hate 'em, and hate to love 'em. They make OS's that everyone uses, and it's easy. Never used Mac, or Linux in my life. Will try and dual-boot Ubuntu when i get my computer but otherwise...i like windows because of compatibility, and what not. I don't know how i'm gonna get games like CS, to play on vista but i'll find a way. So i guess...Vista FTW...

 

Ummm...

Windows Vista
Windows XP

I mean, we could move this thread over to the Apple section...but I don't think that'd help much. Here, we get the people who post on the Windows forum.

 

While this is true, I believe there is a fundamental difference(at least in Linux vs Windows) which makes Windows less secure.

Linux coming from a multi-user OS background has an environment which discourage super user access. Thus, most apps are written with this in mind. This limits the damage an ordinary user can have on the system.

Windows since NT actually has a more advanced security framework than linux but having its root from DOS, that is mostly effectively disabled as if you run as a "limited" user(which is fine for most office scenario), there are many things that cannot be done(i.e., most apps including standard microsoft ones don't give a thought about security). A ridiculous example, a limited user cannot change the power plan(at least not in XP) when you are at the desktop.

That is why there is UAC(my number 1 userless feature) in Vista. It is a patch work to the "everyone running Vista is super user but not necessary know what they are doing", UAC is "super super user". I turned it off after 15 minutes as changing many standard behaviour in Vista have it kicks up.

This IMO is a design flaw.

In linux on the contrary, we see apps that gets enhanced overtime to run as non-root(even for many popular daemon tasks).

Microsoft has wasted the wonderful framework Dave Cutler brings to NT from VMS.

 

hey i voted for windows vista and i am an adamant windows user, just i dont see the point as much doing this kind of post in a windows forum, although the difference between vista and xp is useful.

 

At the moment I prefer being booted on Ubuntu(linux) while also using Windows XP on VMware. It's my solution to using Office 2007, Syncing my phone, and using some other apps. while on Linux. This setup is what I do the most.

I don't know anything about Mac/OSX, but my next notebook will be a Mac. May be I'll like that better. Looking at the Leopard preview, it's a good chance I might.

 

Windows Vista's security feature in my opinion is designed with "security flexibility" in mind. If you are sure of how safe your computing environment is, then turn off the overhead of the UAC, thereby, most people (like me) will surely turn this feature on always because "i'm paranoid enough since I'm using Windows" - the most hacked system in the computing world.. It is true what they say, security often times is a user-neglected operation and often times, security breach is always encountered... either any OSs there. hmmm... it is still virtue at hand.

 

I beg to differ, only on/off on a per machine basis(and requires reboot to take effect) is anything but flexible. It is a very ugly patch up. I am sure how safe I can work with it, but not necessary other users using the same system.

At the very least, it should be a per user setting(and at most should be reset on login/logout not reboot) but it is not. The reason is quite obvious, it is a patch up work so those long running background task cannot cope with this kind of change on a per session basis.

NT actually has a very flexible role based security model, the UAC is so ugly comparing with that lovely model.

 

hmmm... perhaps you have a point on the flexibility of on/off of the machine.. but, is it just safer to reboot so that the system will be able to release the entire system from being captivated by the UAC. just my opinion... of course, Microsoft security engineers know better. but let's see if this behavior will change...

 

I personally prefer the stability and usability of Linux. It's open nature allows me to learn a lot about the system and get my hands dirty. I always feel like Windows is trying to hold me back on a lot of things, especially customization. I also prefer the security of Linux; despite what people say or try to make themselves believe, I still believe that UNIX is an inherently more secure system (and more logical if you ask me). In that vein, I also have my eye on a Mac for my next system. While I do believe in open source software and support wherever I can, I think diversity is the best solution for the consumer. If both Linux and Mac became more popular, viable solutions, it would be better for everyone. It would help force them all into abiding more by set standards, as well as spread out usage, which will then increase overall security. Just my opinion though. Of course, I am typing this from Windows XP right now.

 

Prefer Vista for the wide 64bit driver support in most modern devices. If not i will be using XP x64. Haven't tried a Mac OS, and i found Linux a bit too difficult to use.

 

Mac OS is the best for laptops. Suspend / Resume is instantaneous and unlike Windows, it actually works. (try suspend/resume 50 times on a Windows laptop and see if it doesn't crash) Plus the Wireless support is easier and more robust on Mac, easier to roam to different hotspots. The hardware is more durable, the OS is less prone to viruses as you're connecting to different networks.

Linux is best for general desktop or workstation, particularly if you're doing audio / video editing or 3D CAD work. Very robust, never crashes, no reboots, no viruses. Takes a computer-savy person to set it up though - computer newbies might have a hard time getting it setup - however the amount of HOWTO's on the internet is staggering, there's usually an easy-to-follow HOWTO document for anything you could possibly want to setup. Besides, Linux has the best 3D desktop effects - beats the hell out of Vista 'Aero' and Mac OSX: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4Fbk52Mk1w

Windows XP is best if you are a gam3r. All the latest games are available on Windows platform. Just be ready to deal with all the spyware, viruses, blue screen crashes, etc that are just part of the Windows experience these days.

Window Vista is good for...? Nothing? Wasting people's time and money? It doesn't support SLI so not a gam3r's OS. It's dog slow so not a business OS. What is it then? It's crap is what it is.

 

as much as I am shocked to see myself type this.. I actually like Vista HP 64bit version quite a lot! I came from a very stable XP Pro installation and since I upgraded my cpu to a dual core 64bit chip I thought I may as well make use of it. I was a bit nervous having read some bad previews & reviews of Vista but I've been plesantly surprised. Can't fault it really, it runs fast, smooth with no lag or slow down and I've had no problems with running 32bit software on it at all.
I'm quite amazed I really thought it would go horribly wrong and I'd end up going back to XP Pro lol

 

"vista x64 with super fetch + 4GB of ram + cpu with 2 cores = very very fast computer"

Any other modern OS besides Solaris + 4GB of RAM + dual-core CPU = even faster, yet cheaper, computer.

I rest my case.

 

I have been using suspend/resume with XP for 8 years and the longest between reboot is over 180 days(sleep/suspend/resume multiple times everyday). Never experience a crash.

The only time I see my machine crash is not because of XP but P4(overheat), during this period.

And while I never play games, I do over stretch the system in terms of RAM and HDD in the sense that I have a commited memory 2x over the physical memory I have which means it swap like hell at times.

 

very true.. and when Adobe start making Linux versions of their software I'll switch!

 

My suspend/resume works flawlessly on my Vista and XP machines. Never had a problem with it. My wireless support is as good or better than a Mac. Again, never had a problem with it. Mac hardware being more durable is laughable, you actually think that because Apple forces you to run the hardware that they charge a premium price on it is somehow more durable?

Linux 3D cad software is a joke. It nowhere near competes with the software available for Windows. I've used Beryl, it's ok looking, but really has very few practical uses. Aero looks better and is more practical than Beryl, not to mention the fact that Beryl has been in beta for what, 2 years now? Linux requires the user to enter verbatim code in order to do the most basic of tasks, such as updating a driver. That alone is enough for me not to use Linux.

SLI works just fine with Vista, and as drivers mature Vista will only get better. On my desktop I have XP side-by-side with Vista, and in every benchmark I can get my hands on to test them Vista runs within 4% of XP in almost every test. Vista is a great gaming OS, and has yet to crash on any of my computers.

 

Mkay, mind that all the aerodynamic calculation work is done on LINUX (yes, tat includes top range manufacturer like BMW, Audi, Mercedes, heck even F1, Nascar,Indi cars dynamics is simulated on Linux based programs) rather on Windows machine. So CAD work on LINUX is not a joke as you think. But for normal day uses, i ll stick on XP for now... i luv games

 

Please define specifically how Windows wireless support is 'better than a Mac'. I couldn't even get my Compaq nc6000 business notebook to join my linksys wireless-G for over a year, it just refused to. Then Microsoft provided 'updated' wireless drivers and boom, it worked right away. It only took Microsoft a year to provide me wireless drivers that actually work.

Your right, the magnesium frame and polycarbonate outer shell on my ibook are just for fun, nothing durable there compared to the chintzy plastic frames of most PC laptops that flex if you pick it up by one side, instantly causing a blue screen. And the slot loading DVD and lack of any exterior hinges, panels, disc tray etc. to break off, that's not practical or durable either.

As far as Linux CAD and 3D, many MANY major corporations are using it. In fact, try to find a movie released in the past few years where the effects were NOT produced on Linux. You'll be searching for a long time.

Go back to sleep zarono.

 

Recently I gave Linux a shot to see how well it compared to our windows aps for our CAD applications. None of the CAD software for Linux that I tried was usuable for us. In fact it was not even close to what a professional ap should be. If a giant manufacturer uses something I hardly see how that has anything to do with me. I have a small budget, and very little time to devote to getting my professional aps running. They need to work, and work now. And that has been exactly what Vista has done for me: it works great, looks great, and I never have to do any research to get it working.

 

Well, you need to pay a hefty amount of money for a good CAD program, this applies to LINUX as well. For home user, i can't deny that CAD for windows is the better choice now. But when it comes to calculation, better stick with 64bit linux with 64bit cpu. It just gets the job done 2x faster than windows. Anyway, i think i m talking about a different type of usage. CAD and simulations are not the same thou they are linked.

 

If you couldn't get wireless to work for you under windows I don't know what to say to that. I guess a Mac is right for you. It is kind of like when a manufacturer designs a hammer: for 99.9% of the population it is a safe and reliable tool, but there is still that .1% that will strike themselves in the head with it and hurt themselves.....

I have nothing against OsX, Linux, or any other OS. If they work for you: great. Go use your OS and be happy then and stop coming here and telling manufactured stories and blatent misinformation.

So that brings me to you personally. You started a thread about how you just bought a windows machine and complained about how "slow" it is. Yet here you state you use a Mac. Just how many laptops do you have? And if that Mac was working so well why did you go buy a Vista machine as you stated in your other thread? I don't buy it.

[H]ardocp just did an interesting review of how great OsX is:
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTM0OCwxMywsaGVudGh1c2lhc3Q=


Here's a quote from their article:
"And here’s the really crazy part of the hardware issue: Apple designed the hardware and the software, and still, somehow, the Mac Mini was a mess. If the company has sole province over how the OS should run on a limited set of hardware, you’d think that it would know when 512MB of RAM isn’t enough....."

 

Nothing I've said has been manufactured or misinformation. I'm speaking about my own personal experiences with my own computers. Nothing more than that. If you're so insecure that you can't bear to hear about Vista causing problems for people, you might want to cancel your internet service.

I have several, an hp dv9500t (which I just bought last week), it's my desktop replacement that doesn't leave the desk at home. An hp nc6000 business notebook that belongs to my employer (I frequently work from home or remotely). An iBook G4 (about 2.5 years old) that I use when I want to surf the web from Starbucks, from my couch, or from anywhere besides my desk. Would you like me to put them all next to each other and take a photo for you? I also have a Panasonic Toughbook that I use for automotive diagnostic applications.

There's a lot you apparently don't understand.

 

The Mac mini is their lowest-end discount model. It's for grandmothers and 5 year-olds. Putting it through the wringer is like buying a $199 wal-mart PC and benchmarking it and then laughing at how much it sucks. Pathetic.

And with your selective reading, you apparently left out this part from their Mac 'review':

" It should come as no surprise that the user interface is intuitive and easy to use, as well as aesthetically pleasing. It also should come as no surprise that the system is very stable."

Hmmm so even the lowest-end crap Mac is easy to use, pleasing, and very stable. That's more than I can say about a discount PC running Windows. But judging by your defensiveness, you knew that already.

 

My Gateway MT3707 is about as inexpensive as they come, cheaper than most Wal-Mart notebooks. It is definitly low-end. Yet it performs so well that I am amazed at what it can do. It runs Vista Aero smooth as ice and even does some 3D games quite well. I didn't buy it with any expectations other than doing basic wordprocessing, email, etc, yet while it isn't a graphics powerhouse it does amazingly well at everything I have thrown at it. The point of that statement is that while the Mac mini may be a low-end system, it is still an Apple product and as such should be expected to run their own OS.

I hardly selectivly read the article, I read the entire thing and there is not one thing in there that would make me want to buy an overpriced, underperforming Mac. For half the price of any Mac I could get a better performing PC.

And, you still have dodged the question yet again: If you love OS X so much why buy a windows PC???

 

Then don't buy one! No one is forcing you! Relax! I would never buy a Mac Mini either if that makes you feel better. No one ever claimed a Mac was cheaper to buy than a PC. If you compare raw system performance vs. price, a PC will always beat a Mac - but for many people, myself included, there are other factors besides price and raw performance that matter just as much if not more.

People buy new Ferrari 360's even though the Porsche 911 gives identical track performance for $50,000 less. People buy BMW 525's even though the 330 is cheaper and faster. For most people, raw speed is not the only criteria for buying a car and it's not the only criteria for buying a computer. Same with price - is one of the factors, but it's not the only factor.

The reason I bought the dv9500t was to replace my desktop PC. I decided I wanted a "desktop replacement" type of laptop instead of a bulky tower PC on my desk. Desktop-replacement laptops are much smaller than a tower PC and consume much less power while giving similar performance. (My kill-a-watt shows my old PC consuming 260 watts while the new dv9500t eats only 65 watts).

The reason I chose a PC laptop instead of the Apple Powerbook is two fold. First and foremost, I wanted a laptop that has two internal hard disks so I can RAID them together. None of the Apple laptops offer two hard disks, not even the 17" model. Second reason is that I was able to get a hefty discount on my dv9500t at less than $1500 shipped. A comparably equipped Powerbook with only a single hard drive is $1200 more than that, which puts it above my budget. I am willing to pay more for a comparably equipped Powerbook, but not $1200 more.

That said, I do prefer OSX over Windows. But for the 2nd hard drive and large price difference, I was willing to give PC+Vista a try. (I'm not exactly a Mac Fanboy you know - heck I don't even own an iPod!! My 2.5 year old iBook is the only Apple product I've ever owned).

So now you know the back story, and why I bought the dv9500t.

 

No idea how durable magnesium or polycarbonate are though my elcheapo Dell Inspiron 2500 with its chintzy plastic frames have lasted for 8 years and counting.

 

I enjoy the look of OSX, but until it runs natively on non-Apple hardware, I'll stick with Windows or Linux OSs.

 

I prefer XP since I am a gamer, but I like Vista and Mac OS as well. I use Vista on my cousin's laptop and Mac on my friends MacBook.

 

"Who needs these fancy computer machines anyhow?! My trusty typewriter has served me well for many years, and does everything I need!!"

Sorry, but sticking your head in the sand only makes you look foolish.

 

I believe you need to attend a class or two in order to sharpen your debating skill.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

 

chimpanzee, please stop editing your posts! Each time you do, the thread is pushed back to the top of the forum, and I click it to see new comments, and there *are* no new comments, since the last comment was made by you 13 hours ago.

 

which one are you referring to ? I may very occasionally edit my posts but that is usually within a few minutes of the initial post and I have never repeatedly edit any post.

I believe you may be seeing the effect of the poll where no one post but only enter data in the poll.

 

Correct. Voting in the poll pushes the thread back to the top.

 

I'm sorry, you are quite correct. That must be why the thread keeps bumping up. My apologies.