Never Miss a Beat: Get a snapshot of the issues affecting the IT industry straight to your inbox.
Linux Vs. Mac: Mac Fans RespondLinux Vs. Mac: Mac Fans Respond
Following our recent article comparing Mac OS X with Linux, readers wrote in to slap us on the back, kick us in the shins, or add their two cents.
7 Min Read
We received a lot of good feedback on our recent article Linux Vs. Mac: Which Is The Better Alternative To Microsoft Windows?. You weren't shy about letting us know what you liked and dislike; in addition, you pointed us toward some additional software and resources.
We collected the best responses from Mac users, and present them here. We'll bring you the best responses from Linux users tomorrow.
More Good Applications
Readers had some great recommendations for Mac browsers, Windows emulation, and backup options that I missed.
I wanted to let you know, in case one of us crazy Mac fans haven't already, there are more browsers you can use on the Mac than you listed. There is Flock, Navigator (newest Netscape browser) and Songbird. All built off Mozilla. Flock also has a Photobucket version that is nice. And if you really want a version of Firefox that is fine-tuned for the Mac then you can go here.
Brian Berk
Via e-mail
He's right, and here are links to Flock, Navigator, and Songbird, which is a combined browser and media player.
Regarding Windows interoperability on the Mac, there's another way. Besides Parallels, Fusion and Boot Camp, there is CrossOver Mac from CodeWeavers.
Unlike the others, it doesn't require a Windows license and it runs at native speed because there is no virtualization or emulation; it is a compatibility layer. It also integrates very well with the Mac and is the easiest to use and setup. The only downside is that not all Windows software will work or work perfectly. However, that can be said for Parallels and Fusion too (games and heavy multimedia are still a problem). Still, I use CrossOver to run Blitzin 2.6 and have used it with other Windows programs too. So far, I've had no problems at all. CrossOver is a great solution, but it doesn't get the exposure it deserves.
CrossOver is particularly pertinent given its ties to the WINE project which is meant to give *nix users a way to use Windows software. CrossOver is essentially WINE repackaged with a better interface, commercial support and more polish.
Alex Radu
Via e-mail
I am blown away by the fact that the Mac OS X reviewer failed to mention SuperDuper! and Carbon Copy Cloner on the page about backups. Any idiot can make a clone of their entire system onto any internal or external media. If that media is a FireWire hard drive, the clone will be bootable on any Mac with a FireWire port and the same processor type. PowerPC and Intel can't boot from each other's drives without some hacks.
So if your hard drive dies, you have a bootable backup that works just as well as the internal drive -- if you're using FireWire (USB is a little slow). If the computer dies and you have access to another Mac, you can boot from your backup drive and it will be just as if you were still using your own computer, barring any extreme differences in memory and processor speeds.
RedBear
Via Slashdot
Why Bother To Change?
One reader dismissed the Mac as an upgrade option for Windows users, saying that Linux or Vista allowed the users to preserve their hardware investment.
Why bother to change? Apple is even more proprietary than Windows, and the Linux software library is way too limited to meet my needs.
No, I still haven't seen a reason to leave my not-so-beloved Windows behind. Typically, I buy hardware with Windows installed, and typically don''t ever upgrade. I'll wipe the disk and start over several times and reload, but just don't spend that much time tweaking the OS.
Example: I just bought two laptops for kids going to college. Vista was installed, and worked well. I added OpenOffice and they added their games. No reason for anything else. The software I use is available on Windows, and not necessarily on the other platforms:
OpenOffice (Windows and Linux)
Quicken (Windows only)
PhotoShop (Windows, Mac)
DVD Burning (all)
Legal DVD and MP3 (Windows and Mac)
Games (Not on Linux)Windows provides the largest selection of software, not Mac or Linux.
No, the whole argument is academic as I use a computer because of the applications, not the OS. If Linux had the robust library of high quality apps, I'd be there in a heartbeat. Since that's not the case, Linux is off my radar. As far as Apple, why should I move from MS to an even more tightly controlled environment? No sense to me.
"theoldman59"
Via the information Forums
Re-Installing Mac OS, Missing Sync, Windows-Like Interface, And More
Some readers offered blow-by-blow commentary on several of the points I made.
While yes, Apple does install OS X for you, there is the chance you may need to reinstall for some technical reason, such as liking to tweak experimentally to the point of breaking things, like I am prone to.
I've reinstalled OS X on a wiped system (My Powerbook G4, 12"). I've been doing IT for over 10 years and I have never seen an installation that is SO smooth. Windows has gotten better over the years and Linux is still behind them for ease of installation.
It's as easy as putting in the disk, holding down the "C" button, choosing your volume to install on, selecting a language and clicking "install." When it first boots into OS X, you are presented with the EASIEST setup assistant ANYWHERE.
Missing Sync: Works great. Yes, it will scramble your iCal up a bit if you don't have matching categories on your phone/pda, but it wasn't a critical problem. If you sync with one or the other having nothing in it, it syncs flawlessly.
Interface like Windows: Huh? I never get this one. The menus are totally different. OS X requires the menu bar at the top of your screen, while Windows has the menu bar on every open window and menus from different apps can have options in different places. OS X does not have a "Start" button (Although you can drag your Applications folder to the Dock). OS X's Dock is NOTHING like Window's Task Bar. Plus, OS X existed before XP and Vista is copying OS X's "feel" (albeit horribly). So, it's more accurate to say that Windows is starting to look like OS X.
"MKleinpaste"
Via the information Forums
My answer: OS X and Windows are both Windows-mouse-keyboard interfaces. A user accustomed to one can quickly learn the other. They are similar to each other in the way that Italian and Spanish are similar languages, and both are very different from Cantonese. Keeping Your Existing Hardware
A common comment reiterated something I had already admitted: That Apple's operating system demands that you buy an Apple system.
If I am making a decision on whether to upgrade to Vista or choose another OS, Apple does not enter the equation. I can upgrade to Vista on my current hardware and I can run Linux on my current hardware, but I cannot run OS X on my current hardware. If Apple allowed their OS to be distributed for use on an open platform then maybe I would consider it.
"blizxt"
Via the information Forums
The CPU Is Not The "Big Boxy Thing"
Finally, several readers took me to task on this one. Back when I first learned how to use a PC, in the 80s, I was taught that both the processor and the 'big boxy thing' are called the "CPU," with the meaning clear from context.
Please explain how you can plug a monitor into a CPU and how to plug a CPU into the wall. The only thing a CPU can be plugged into is the motherboard! The "big boxy thing" is NOT the CPU!!!!
"maco"
Via the information Forums
Consulting 27 dictionaries, I see that only one says the CPU can refer to "the big boxy thing." So I guess it's time for me to retire that usage, putting it away in a box with my skinny neckties and Wham! albums.
Which leaves us with the question: What do we call the "big boxy thing," if we're talking to the CEO and want to sound like a grownup?
About the Author
You May Also Like
More Insights
