Operating System Choice - What do you use and why?

[at2marty]

I was reading another thread in one of the forums, and saw some comments where people love/hate certain OS's for different reasons, both valid and in-valid (in my opinion).

I was just curious as to what others use for their personal computers and why?

I personally use a combination on my own home LAN.

1.  Machine #1 is my personal desktop machine.  I primarily use Linux (Mint Deb 64 bit) and use VirtualBox to run Windows 7 in a virtual machine for certain Windows based applications that I need mainly for work (though I really like AVRStudio).  I have been using Linux since the late 1990's and am comfortable with installing either via packages or compiling software from source.

2.  Machine #2 is my laptop computer.  I dual boot it between Linux Mint Deb 64 as well as Windows 7 Professional 64 bit, again for the same reasons.  I mostly use this when I travel, or if I run into a situation where a program doesn't work well in a virtual machine on my desktop machine.  I would guess that 95% of the time I boot it up into Linux.

3.  Machine #3 is a Linux machine (Mint Deb 64) that serves as a backup server as well as a media server for my home entertainment system.  The only time that it gets turned on is if a backup is going to happen from my desktop machine (scripted and a cron job) or if we want to watch a movie that I have on it.  Otherwise it stays off.

4.  Machine #4 is a Windows 7 Professional machine (64 bit) that is my wife's desktop machine.  She pretty much uses this for simple tasks such as browsing the internet, checking email or playing one of her games.  Every now and then she needs to use a basic office suite (Office 2010) to do stuff for work, but that isn't very often.

5.  Finally, machine #5 is my wife's laptop computer that runs Windows 7 Professional.  She uses it much like I use my laptop, more-or-less when she is away on travel, and uses it for the same application as described in machine #4.

Besides those computers we also have our tablets (Androids) and phones (Androids) that connect to our home LAN as well as a couple of "smart" tv's.

I'm pretty much a "Linux guy", but some Windows applications that are essential either for my job or my hobby are as follows.

AutoCAD 2010 - (This is getting upgraded soon)
Visual Studio 2013
LTSpice
Adobe Acrobat XI - (There are Linux alternatives, but some methods that I use for my work need Adobe Acrobat)
AVRStudio 6.1
Microsoft Office - (Some work databases are done in Access)   

I have very limited experience with MAC OSX, but with that limited experience it seemed to be a "dumbed down" *nix kind of system.  I don't mean that in a bad way, but to me it was somewhat familiar to me as a Unix/Linux guy, but many of the usual tools were missing and the file system was different.

So what do you use and why?  Let's please keep this from turning into a flamewar.  As far as I am concerned, each OS has it's Pros and Cons.

[free_electron]

Whatever Os is required for  the applications i need to run. nobody uses an operating system. Programs need one to run , access files and drive the screen and handle menuial tasks like poll the keyboard and mouse.

The OS is not important. the software that you want to use is.

I got windows, OSx and linux machines. Windows for technical work (CAD ), Osx to surf web , banking , create website , photos, video etc. Linux on the NAS boxes.

[suicidaleggroll]

I have 3 systems at home:

1) The laptop runs OpenSUSE.  It also has Win 7 Pro in dual-boot in case I need to do some Windows-specific stuff, but I never boot into that side.

2) The home server runs CentOS 6, with Win 7 Pro in a VM for various Windows stuff (Office, and some embedded tools that are Windows-only).  TBH it's not used very often.

3) Wife's laptop is a Mac because she likes Mac.

I prefer Linux for the flexibility and stability.  I simply can't do the vast majority of the things I do on a daily basis if I used Windows as a primary OS, so it's a non-starter.  Cygwin does help out a bit, but even then Windows still gets in the way at every turn.  A lot of embedded tools are Windows only, so I do keep Windows around, but I try to choose devices that don't have that requirement whenever possible, which keeps my Windows usage to a minimum.

It's pretty much the same story at work.  Almost all Linux systems with a few Windows VMs dotted around here or there and one or two actual Windows systems for those few tools that require it.

[Asmyldof]

Shortly I can say I use many!

I have two laptops, geared for Windows development. They both run Windows 7 natively and have a dual boot Grub set up for at least Ubuntu. (Fixing Ubuntu problems caused by Windows with the live disc is just too easy to ignore in my opinion).

Windows is there for the better supported drivers for high-performance gaming, because there's steam that sometimes just needs to go :-), for MS-Visual Studio, for Atmel Studio (if I may flame you a little: Studio hasn't been AVR for a while, since it also supports the SAMs now), for Adobe Creative Cloud stuff.
And of course for the contract work that I do which is often in some way in Windows. It's weird how much people develop Embedded Linux on Windows DevEnvs.

Linux is there because it's just better at some things and in my personal opinion more fun to develop in, because stuff stays consistent much longer than in Windows.
Linux, for example, is as far as I can determine still better at Disc images, internal copy and move, predictable set-up and maintenance (or continuous performance), localised set-ups such as multi-site development-related webhosting and special hardware tools, tricks and integration.

The old laptop grew up to having Debian and a Sort-of-SUN-OS as well over time and quite possibly the new one will as well.

Next to that for different assignments I have a 230GB dropbox folder containing a multitude of virtual machines spanning al kinds of flavours and set-ups, even a pure Microsoft DOS one running at i486 speeds. I should really get one with some sort of Apple OS, never had a use for one up to this point.

EDIT: Didn't really flame you there, did I? Disappointments all round, I suppose.

[Muxr]

Used DOS and Windows in the 90s. I worked for an ISP in the late 90s where I had to administer servers of which 50% were Windows and the other half were FreeBSD. Unix machines were a dream to work with compared to Windows back then, and it's pretty much the reason why I switched and never looked back.

Then Linux desktop (Debian) for about 10 years. Then about 5-6 years ago I switched to OSX.

Still prefer Linux for server (at work we run about 20k of them). But OS X is my favourite desktop.

- Keyboard shortcuts. For someone who does 90% of my work in a terminal window having copy and paste (and other) shortcuts not overlap with ctrl-c (which means something else in a shell) etc.. is a huge plus. OS X got the keyboard shortcuts right and I only wish Linux would have followed this model.

- It's Unix, and it runs all the tools I use natively. Either through brew or ports. FOSS ecosystem etc..

- Software - hardware integration. Sure it sucks that you can't run it on your own hardware (you can hackintosh but that's a pain when it comes to updates), but on the flipside you get some of the best hardware and software integration on a desktop. As a result my small laptop has a 13 hour battery for example. It also helps that Apple hardware is pretty well designed.

- Time machine. Never had to reinstall the OS, even though I have changed 4 computers so far. It's all backed up and getting a new computer setup exactly how I like it only takes the time to restore. No fiddling or hacking to get everything right again. I mean I use a large number of machines for my company and setting and configuration servers is my job, the last thing I want is to have to do the same on my personal computer. If I need to replace my workstation I am up and running in 30 minutes and "Stuff just works" without any fiddling.

I do use Windows in a VM occasionally for things that don't run on OS X, like FPGA IDEs.

[at2marty]

Used DOS and Windows in the 90s. I worked for an ISP in the late 90s where I had to administer servers of which 50% were Windows and the other half were FreeBSD. Unix machines were a dream to work with compared to Windows back then, and it's pretty much the reason why I switched and never looked back.

Then Linux desktop (Debian) for about 10 years. Then about 5-6 years ago I switched to OSX.

Still prefer Linux for server (at work we run about 20k of them). But OS X is my favourite desktop.

- Keyboard shortcuts. For someone who does 90% of my work in a terminal window having copy and paste (and other) shortcuts not overlap with ctrl-c (which means something else in a shell) etc.. is a huge plus. OS X got the keyboard shortcuts right and I only wish Linux would have followed this model.

- It's Unix, and it runs all the tools I use natively. Either through brew or ports. FOSS ecosystem etc..

- Software - hardware integration. Sure it sucks that you can't run it on your own hardware (you can hackintosh but that's a pain when it comes to updates), but on the flipside you get some of the best hardware and software integration on a desktop. As a result my small laptop has a 13 hour battery for example. It also helps that Apple hardware is pretty well designed.

- Time machine. Never had to reinstall the OS, even though I have changed 4 computers so far. It's all backed up and getting a new computer setup exactly how I like it only takes the time to restore. No fiddling or hacking to get everything right again. I mean I use a large number of machines for my company and setting and configuration servers is my job, the last thing I want is to have to do the same on my personal computer. If I need to replace my workstation I am up and running in 30 minutes and "Stuff just works" without any fiddling.

I do use Windows in a VM occasionally for things that don't run on OS X, like FPGA IDEs.

I need to get an OSX machine to explore on.  I've been running my Debian/Mint machines for several years and never had a problem.  I "grew up" on RedHat back in the later 90's and since I learned C and started doing some programming myself, I would never consider a Windows machine.  A Mac might do the job, but honestly for me, it's an "unknown".  If it's UNIX, then I would be right at home.  As long as I can get the "normal" tools required to compile applications, edit stuff, etc. I would probably be alright.

[Asmyldof]

- Keyboard shortcuts. For someone who does 90% of my work in a terminal window having copy and paste (and other) shortcuts not overlap with ctrl-c (which means something else in a shell) etc.. is a huge plus. OS X got the keyboard shortcuts right and I only wish Linux would have followed this model.

Not to detract from your contribution, and definitely not trying to be a wise-ass, but because I find the thing interesting.
I hope you will allow me to post these thoughts as a response in my insomniac hours.
There is a reason they didn't follow the trick in Linux. There are several, but an important one is Linux's promise of trying to stay compatible with all the hardware, where OSX is compatible with its hardware.
For Linux, there was no (guaranteed) MAC/windows key, and there still isn't on many keyboards connected to Linux systems. There was only a guarantee of CTRL, ALT and SHIFT. Often keyboards didn't even make a difference on a communication level between the left ones and the right ones before USB. If there were two to begin with. Sometimes the right alt was named Alt Graph doing completely different things to the ALT key on a BIOS level. Simply the only thing they could do was take up the growingly used CRL-C at some point, because ALT already had its universal meanings and SHIFT-C would just be silly.
There is a work-around though, Gnome, and quite a few others now, allows CTRL-SHIFT-C and -V for the operation in the terminal, which is not a valid *nix terminal control combination and should not be captured as per standard.

[Muxr]

I need to get an OSX machine to explore on.  I've been running my Debian/Mint machines for several years and never had a problem.  I "grew up" on RedHat back in the later 90's and since I learned C and started doing some programming myself, I would never consider a Windows machine.  A Mac might do the job, but honestly for me, it's an "unknown".  If it's UNIX, then I would be right at home.  As long as I can get the "normal" tools required to compile applications, edit stuff, etc. I would probably be alright.

No desktop OS is perfect. OS X has its annoyances too. But so far it has the least amount of annoyances for my usecase. I ran Linux as a desktop for a long time. And I would be fine running it still I am sure, but there was always something I had to tweak on it. Especially with new updates. I know things have gotten much better.

For example I remember when pulseaudio first replaced alsa, it broke my sound for a week.

In the end the keyboard shortcuts is what sold me on OS X the most. I just find my workflow to be less of an effort on OS X, and at the end of the day that's what it's all about.

[Muxr]

- Keyboard shortcuts. For someone who does 90% of my work in a terminal window having copy and paste (and other) shortcuts not overlap with ctrl-c (which means something else in a shell) etc.. is a huge plus. OS X got the keyboard shortcuts right and I only wish Linux would have followed this model.

Not to detract from your contribution, and definitely not trying to be a wise-ass, but because I find the thing interesting.
I hope you will allow me to post these thoughts as a response in my insomniac hours.
There is a reason they didn't follow the trick in Linux. There are several, but an important one is Linux's promise of trying to stay compatible with all the hardware, where OSX is compatible with its hardware.
For Linux, there was no (guaranteed) MAC/windows key, and there still isn't on many keyboards connected to Linux systems. There was only a guarantee of CTRL, ALT and SHIFT. Often keyboards didn't even make a difference on a communication level between the left ones and the right ones before USB. If there were two to begin with. Sometimes the right alt was named Alt Graph doing completely different things to the ALT key on a BIOS level. Simply the only thing they could do was take up the growingly used CRL-C at some point, because ALT already had its universal meanings and SHIFT-C would just be silly.
There is a work-around though, Gnome, and quite a few others now, allows CTRL-SHIFT-C and -V for the operation in the terminal, which is not a valid *nix terminal control combination and should not be captured as per standard.

Yeah I am sure there are good historical reasons for it, but it's still unfortunate as it always felt wrong. I use OS X with a Windows keyboard (I prefer mechanical switch keyboards). Funny enough Windows is my CMD key. So Windows-C is copy, Windows-Tab is Tab..etc It's really convenient because I can hold Windows key, and hit Tab, C, and Tab, V in a short burst and copy a value from one window to the next, and it's not overlapping with Ctrl-C in the terminal. The only modifier I had to hold is the CMD/Windows key.

It just feels more natural than any other scheme I used.

[Asmyldof]

Yeah I am sure there are good historical reasons for it, but it's still unfortunate as it always felt wrong. I use OS X with a Windows keyboard (I prefer mechanical switch keyboards). Funny enough Windows is my CMD key. So Windows-C is copy, Windows-Tab is Tab..etc It's really convenient because I can hold Windows key, and hit Tab, C, and Tab, V in a short burst and copy a value from one window to the next, and it's not overlapping with Ctrl-C in the terminal. The only modifier I had to hold is the CMD/Windows key.

It just feels more natural than any other scheme I used.

They intentionally made the Key-Code the same for those keys. Memory fails me where it came from for sure, but I have a sort of feeling this one is SUN as well.

I can imagine you experience it as a drag Linux didn't just up and said, hey, let's use the special key for that. On the other hand, I cannot impress upon you the ultimate joy I regularly feel in my work that they didn't ;-).
I'm happy working on a Mac with the re-located finger for the commands at customers, that's not the issue, the thing is that some "platforms" (really broadly applied term in this case) have a dedicated keyboard that got inherited in terms of design from way back when. I'd hate myself if I had gotten used to using that key that's very obviously not on there then.

Now that I am thinking about it, I think, actually, secretly, some flavours of Linux do support the Mac behaviour, just also support the IBM way, so not many people are tempted to use the Mac style. I have a small glimmer of recollection of once trying Win-V by accident/hand-spasm and it working.

[Muxr]

Yeah I am sure there are good historical reasons for it, but it's still unfortunate as it always felt wrong. I use OS X with a Windows keyboard (I prefer mechanical switch keyboards). Funny enough Windows is my CMD key. So Windows-C is copy, Windows-Tab is Tab..etc It's really convenient because I can hold Windows key, and hit Tab, C, and Tab, V in a short burst and copy a value from one window to the next, and it's not overlapping with Ctrl-C in the terminal. The only modifier I had to hold is the CMD/Windows key.

It just feels more natural than any other scheme I used.

They intentionally made the Key-Code the same for those keys. Memory fails me where it came from for sure, but I have a sort of feeling this one is SUN as well.

I can imagine you experience it as a drag Linux didn't just up and said, hey, let's use the special key for that. On the other hand, I cannot impress upon you the ultimate joy I regularly feel in my work that they didn't ;-).
I'm happy working on a Mac with the re-located finger for the commands at customers, that's not the issue, the thing is that some "platforms" (really broadly applied term in this case) have a dedicated keyboard that got inherited in terms of design from way back when. I'd hate myself if I had gotten used to using that key that's very obviously not on there then.

Now that I am thinking about it, I think, actually, secretly, some flavours of Linux do support the Mac behaviour, just also support the IBM way, so not many people are tempted to use the Mac style. I have a small glimmer of recollection of once trying Win-V by accident/hand-spasm and it working.

You should give it a try, really. You do use Alt-Tab no? You use your thumb for the alt right? Now imagine using your thumb for all your shortcut modifiers. It's always the same key. I think you would find it much more ergonomically sound than ctrl+...

Also the problem is much bigger than just different keys. The issue is that ctr-c in particular is an often used terminal shortcut that has nothing to do with Copy.

So what this means is that terminal applications in Windows and Linux both have different keyboard contexts depending on the app that's focused. So for instance Windows Putty uses Ins for paste and mouse select for copy. Konsole which I used on linux had something else entirely not honored by the rest of the Desktop. Where as OS X can maintain a consistent keyboard shortcut context across all the apps. ie.

CMD-C is always copy no matter which app you're in.

[magetoo]

I use NetBSD on my desktop and laptop, and have done so for a over a decade.

As for why - at this point it's mostly laziness/convenience, but it's pretty well designed and documented.  It's just a good Unix-like operating system and it "feels right" to me.  The downside is that it is also pretty much a server operating system, so for desktop use things like drivers tend to lag behind.

Might build a Hackintosh at some point.

[Tac Eht Xilef]

Groan. Roll out the fanboys again.

You use an OS because the applications need one. Or because that's what came free with your machine. Or because you could download it free.

I choose Linux on my desktop because I was interested in gaining experience with it. I choose OpenSUSE because an application I wanted to use recommended it and had been tested on it. I stayed with it because I can't be bothered leapfrogging from one distribution to another. I did try Ubuntu because it was the most popular but I preferred the look of SUSE.

Funny - that pretty much describes how I started using OSX and why I keep using it...

Been using / playing with computers since pre-PC days (various systems, + CP/M). Started using PCs when the first clones came out, and followed along with various versions of DOS & Windows (from Windows 1.x up to 2000/XP), as well as Linux since X was ported to it (~0.9x?), with a few sidetracks on the way (e.g. BeOS - which I still reckon was superior to anything I've seen since).

Bought an eMac in the mid-2000's because I was interested in getting some experience with OSX, and some software I wanted to run was Mac OS 9 or OSX only. I stayed with it because I realised I'd gotten sick and tired of (a) the ever-shifting futzing around with Windows just to keep it working properly, and (b) the all the under-the-hood tweaking that Linux required every time you installed something that wasn't part of the base distro (granted, it may be different now - Slackware was a nice base distro, Red Hat always felt like lipstick on a pig, but I actually quite liked Debian in the pre-Ubuntu days before I went mostly Mac). OS X didn't require anywhere near as much of that, and it allowed me to get 99% of my recommended daily allowance of Unix-y goodness without too much pissfarting around.

Currently all the hands-on PCs around here are Macs, + iPhones / iPads. A couple of other small computers are running OpenBSD (which, after using it for gateways/routers/services while doing small-business networking, I much prefer over Linux). And a single RPi 2+, that I bought because I wanted to fiddle with one & to pad an order to get free delivery, running Raspbian that sits next to the Airport Extreme & does some slightly tricky DNS / VPN stuff.

I don't hate any OS; I just can't be arsed chasing around in any of them anymore. For me OS X is a nice sweet spot between software availability & the annoying issues you get with any OS.

Might build a Hackintosh at some point.

Been there, done that, thinking of doing it again. The only real issues are (a) if you're starting from scratch & choosing whatever the currently-recommended hardware for a minimal-effort setup is you're getting perilously close to Apple prices anyway (b) there will always be some hard limitations (e.g. DRM'd iTunes videos won't play), and (c) you need to be careful about applying any updates (e.g. wait until someone else has done it & sorted out any patches needed for your hardware).

[Muxr]

I've ran a Hackintosh for a few months. But updates were scary. I mean with Time Machine is not a huge deal because you can always go back, but it ended up meaning that I was stuck on an older version. Not sure if this has gotten better.

Anyways my desktop is how I make a living (I work from home mostly). And it's kind of an important piece of gear to me.

In the end I just went with a Mac Mini. Speaking of which, it's annoying that Apple decided to remove the quad core option from their latest Mac Mini (I have the SSD based, i7 Quad previous gen). I plopped 16Gb of RAM in it when I got it a few years ago and it's been running really well. I also have an Air for travel.

Mac Pro is too expensive. I guess if I was getting a new Mac today I'd probably pick one of the Macbook Pro laptops and a docking station. My old Macs end up going to family members and they all prefer laptops anyways.

[Stonent]

Main Personal Laptop: Toshiba S55-B5289 - Mainly Windows 8.1 Pro, however I have VHD booting enabled so I have several VHD's I can select from at start up (Windows 10, Server 2012R2 Core, Server2012R2 Standard)  No Linux yet since there's not a real easy way to do VHD booting on it.  The laptop was configured in UEFI mode so changing that would require repartitioning and reimaging.

Living Room Laptop: (For surfing while watching TV) Dell Latitude D630 - Windows 8.1 Pro (it has 3GB of RAM, but runs fine)

Barnes and Noble Nook: Dual boots the Nook Android and Cyanogenmod (runs from SD card but very slow)

Other laptop: Compaq CQ60 Belonged to my wife's Aunt.  The drive died and she opted to buy another.  Last had Windows ThinPC installed.

Galaxy Tab 4: Stock OS (belongs to my wife's school)
HP Chromebook: Stock OS (belongs to my wife's school)

Work Laptop: Dell E6440  - I had the option of Windows 7 Enterprise or Windows 8.1 Enterprise.  I went with 8.1.  The processor is only half the overall speed as my personal laptop, BUT this laptop has a 14" 1080p display and can also drive 2 additional 1080p screens externally.  I'm considering adding VMWare Player to load Kali linux for when I do wireless audits or network related stuff.

Home Server: Dell Optiplex (300 something) minitower. I've done the hardware mod to make it accept a Xeon instead of a Core 2 Duo.  It runs Server 2012R2

Raspberry Pi B: Running RetroPi linux (raspbian with a front end for video games which I never ended up using)

Clone computer:  It has an Athon X2 and several hard drives so I play around.  It has the latest Windows 10 installed but is running Kali linux right now.

Mostly windows since all my work related stuff is windows.  I've been doing a lot more with C# and PowerShell this past year and while you can use those in Linux to some extent, it's not really what I'm trying to do right now.

I think that pretty much sums it all up.

[eas]

OSX on a Mac, because all computers suck, but Macs suck noticeably less, or they used to. Yosemite has been hanging on me, could be a hardware problem, but it passes self tests. The other thing I like about OS X/Mac is that on average, 3rd party Mac software sucks less than on other platforms. Plus, the standard full UN*X command line userland + easy installation of other stuff using homebrew is just f'ing awesome. I shudder thinking of using cygwin again.

Linux on a small headless box that I use as a file server. Its most important duty is as a backup target for our personal machines, and running rsnaptop to do backups of the hosted VPSs I use for web stuff, and the various ARM boxes I used to use as file servers that still run software (an internet speed checker, weather station logging software) I haven't bothered moving to the new server.

Windows 7 Pro on an old refurbished HP Core2 Duo I got for the cost of a windows license which I bought to run instrument control software that doesn't run on a Mac.

I'm in no hurry to use more recent versions of Windows on a desktop or laptop. Linux as a desktop operating system keeps getting better, but life is too short for me to make a serious attempt at using it. I am intrigued by the Surface 3/Surface Pro as a pen-based tablet. I suspect though that the rumored iPad Pro will be more interesting to me.

[smjcuk]

I love the sucks less hypothesis of macs. I've owned a few and had nothing but pain and quality issues. I could start a mile long comment on why I wouldn't trust one again.

The only thing that has consistently worked for me on the desktop is a properly shaved down windows installation on a thinkpad. Currently 8.1 on an X201. And that's a pretty big admission for someone with a very deep commercial Unix and Linux background.

[Tac Eht Xilef]

Having a Mac is like having a tattoo, and the same old joke applies:

Q: What's the difference between people with tattoos and people without tattoos?
A: People with tattoos don't give a shit that other people don't have tattoos.

[amc184]

For my main desktop; Windows 7 64 bit.  Combined with good hardware it has made for a really stable, fast and great PC.  My tablet on the other hand is a Surface 2 with Windows RT.  I guess it's okay for what I do with it, which is just internet and videos when I travel.  The range of apps available was already limited, and with the new Surface 3 being x86 with regular Windows, you can bet that there's not going to be anything more done for RT.

[German_EE]

Linux Mint on my notebook because everything 'just works'.

Dual boot Linux Mint and MS Windows 7 on my workshop / ham radio PC. Normally it runs Linux but the software for my scope and my logic analyzer need MS Windows.

Linux Mint on the media PC and file server, this also provides a DVD player for the main TV

MS Windows 7 on my girlfriend's laptop because she likes the integration between Skype and her Windows Live account.

Yeah, four computers in a 55 sq m apartment, we're just living the geek lifestyle.

[Wilksey]

You don't choose an operating system, an operating system chooses you!

In reality, I am sure with Windows emulation (WINE) you can run almost anything under Linux these days, but the fact is a lot of useful programs are designed to work on Windows alone, it's only been recently that a lot of things have become cross compatible, like MPLABX for example.

I use both Linux and Windows for my day to day tasks, Linux is very useful for embedded systems and small memory footprint devices, Windows 10 might change this, who knows, time will tell!

I used to think Windows was evil, but with XP came better stability, and whilst Vista and 8/8.1 had / have their quirks, Windows XP and now Windows 7, and hopefully Windows 10 are the best versions of Windows I have used, Windows 7 has crashed once in all the time I have used it, cast back to pre XP I had Windows 98 SE which I had to rebuild from an image every couple of months because the registry had become corrupted, in the end I went to Windows 2000 for the NT kernel.

In terms of why you would use something in particular, well, it's the same as CAD tools, use them and see which one works for you, most people will use whatever comes preinstalled with their machine, and most are happy with this.

[Kibi]

Ubuntu for my main desktop. It's just easier to use than Windows.
OSX on a Mac Mini for fun non critical stuff.
I use Windows at work because that is what they provide.
Critical machines at home are FreeBSD based (FreeNAS for server and pfSense for the router). I had the router up for about 1300 days, it only went down because the power supply eventually failed.

[dr.diesel]

 - Fedora 20 primary file server
 - Ubuntu 14.04 security cam server plus mirror of above storage
 - Fedora 21 development box
 - Ubuntu 14.04 home automation controller
 - Two Mint 17 Steam boxes
 - Fedora 20 XBMC box
 - 1/2 dozen or so other Linux laptops and media devices laying around

[EEVblog]

Windows, because linux wasn't really a thing back when Windows 3 was released and I started using it.
An O/S just gets a job done, and Windows did the job and ran all my programs. I've never had a reason to switch.

[cyr]

Linux Mint (Cinnamon) on my desktop and laptop.
OpenELEC (Linux-based) for my HTPC
FreeNAS (FreeBSD-based) for my NAS
pfSense (FreeBSD-based) for router/firewall
Proxmox (Linux based VM host) for my physical server
Various virtual Debian and Ubuntu servers
One virtual Windows 7 for occasional windows-only software.

Why? Laziness and personal preference. I tend to avoid all commercial/proprietary software not so much for cost or ideological reasons, but mostly because I hate dealing with licenses, DRM and all associated BS. Also, I find that I can simply "apt-get install" 99% of the software I ever use which is so much more convenient than the typical windows way.

[Sbampato12]

Whatever Os is required for  the applications i need to run. nobody uses an operating system. Programs need one to run , access files and drive the screen and handle menuial tasks like poll the keyboard and mouse.

The OS is not important. the software that you want to use is.

I got windows, OSx and linux machines. Windows for technical work (CAD ), Osx to surf web , banking , create website , photos, video etc. Linux on the NAS boxes.

The best definitions I've found ever.
I'm with this definition.

I mainly use Win7 on work and home box and laptop. But some times I use linux for some applications and softwares. And 'sometimes' I have to use Win XP to run some softwares that runs only on Xp, or 98 that is used for some equipments (really old ones) on my work.

[Mechanical Menace]

If I think about it mainly Android because that's what's on my most to hand device. I'm pretty certain that most of us use our Android, iOS, or the odd Windows Phone install a lot more than our PCs but just don't think of them when this sort of question comes up.

[Wilksey]

In reality, I am sure with Windows emulation (WINE) you can run almost anything under Linux these days

WINE is not an emulator.

Thank you folks. I'll be here all week.

  not many people pick up on that (clue is in the acronym)

[nctnico]

And Pine is not elm....
I switched to Linux as my primary OS a while ago. This allowed me to replace three PCs with one. I run Windows from virtual machines for what still needs Windows but that is getting less and less.
Some people argue the OS doesn't matter but it does. An OS allows you to be productive or not. Windows just got more and more in my way by being slow, unlogical and erratic. Also a lot of USB hardware and many printers just work out of the box under Linux.

[Muxr]

If I think about it mainly Android because that's what's on my most to hand device. I'm pretty certain that most of us use our Android, iOS, or the odd Windows Phone install a lot more than our PCs but just don't think of them when this sort of question comes up.

If you're using your computer for any sort of creative work chances are you're still very much reliant on a real desktop OS. For consuming media or information iOS/Android is fine though.

I've seen a few people who manage to do all their work from an iPad, but I think it's limited for a vast number of creative disciplines.

[timb]

I used to be a diehard PC person, having started in DOS on a 386. However, in 2001 I picked up an iBook as I wanted *Nix based workstation OS that actually worked. Kept my PC around for most stuff until 2003 when I got a PowerMac desktop. Then my PC was only used for gaming.

In 2006, I got the first Intel Mac Pro. Suddenly I didn't need a PC anymore, even for gaming.

Now I only need a MacBook Air (dual core i7), iPad Mini 3 and iPhone 5S. I had an X201 Tablet for EDA work, but it recently went Tango Uniform on me. I had nothing but problems with it anyway, so good riddance!

My Macs on the other hand, have rarely let me down. The build quality is generally top notch, especially since the unibody construction started.

As for OS X, it's always been leaps and bounds ahead of Windows. The new Handoff feature of Yosemite is amazing and was something I'd been dreaming of for years. If a call comes in on my phone, I can answer it on my Mac or iPad.

All my SMS/iMessage text histories are synced up between all three devices (yes, I can SMS from my Mac), plus all my passwords, settings, mail, bookmarks, photos, music... It all just works. No third-party software needed.

So, choice of OS isn't just about what programs I need, with the ability to run Windows apps in a VM when needed, the days of being locked on to a specific platform are long gone. Now I use the OS that makes me the most productive, which for my money is OS X.

(Pro Tip: "OS X" is pronounced "Oh Ess Ten" *not* "Oh Ess Echs"!

Also, "Mac" is not "MAC"!

Yes, I'm being that guy.)


Sent from my Smartphone

[Fsck]

win 7 desktop
win 7 laptop
win xp laptop
pfsense network appliance
freenas NAS

gotton used to *nix servers and windows desktops. haven't seen any need to change from what works.

[smjcuk]

My Macs on the other hand, have rarely let me down. The build quality is generally top notch, especially since the unibody construction started.

Until you bend it. Alu isn't elastic at all so when it's bent, it's bent. We have three bend unibody machines at work. Oh and they're really badly engineered. It's all about marketing the process, not sound engineering.

I myself had a 2010 MBP unibody and it spontaneously caught fire. Obviously there is no power isolation so rather than watch my house go up in flames I chucked my £1800 investment in the garden and watched it go up in smoke. Good job I had insurance. Apple didn't even respond to my complaint.

I'll take my magnesium chassis and battery I can detach thanks.

[timb]

First, there is power isolation... Second, how the hell did it "catch fire"?! I smell some hyperbole here.

Third, you must have exerted some extreme force to have bent a unibody machine. It's milled from a solid block of aluminum and rather thick all around.

(I once ran over an Air with a 5000lb forklift by accident, aside from a few scrapes it came out unharmed.)


Sent from my Smartphone

[smjcuk]

First, there is power isolation... Second, how the hell did it "catch fire"?! I smell some hyperbole here.

Third, you must have exerted some extreme force to have bent a unibody machine. It's milled from a solid block of aluminum and rather thick all around.

(I once ran over an Air with a 5000lb forklift by accident, aside from a few scrapes it came out unharmed.)


Sent from my Smartphone

what power isolation? The cells are connected directly to the main board which is hidden behind a panel which has to be unscrewed.

I have no idea how it caught fire precisely to be honest. I was sitting there and it made a burning smell and promptly kicked out a ton of smoke. No bumps, knocks or damage.

Hotel bed, fat arse landing on middle of macbook whilst open.

[nctnico]

Apple didn't even respond to my complaint.

That is what puts me off buying Apple products. Apple has no respect for their customers or local regulations at all. It took a lot of legal action and several years to persuade Apple to adhere to the European laws regarding consumer protection and warranty.  And even then they try to cut corners Maybe their products are great but I just don't want them.

[NiHaoMike]

Can't beat Gentoo on my own PCs. Just about everything can be customized.

As for tablets and smartphones, I have rooted/jailbroke each one within a few days of owning them.

[BradC]

I use what works for me (both hardware and OS). I find discussing what I use and why usually results in the most abusive and polarising arguments.

I can honestly suggest try lots of things over lots of time, get exposed to everything you can possibly get exposed to (except possibly syphilis) and settle on something that works well for you. Life is too short to make compromises based on other peoples opinions.

[timb]

Apple didn't even respond to my complaint.

That is what puts me off buying Apple products. Apple has no respect for their customers or local regulations at all. It took a lot of legal action and several years to persuade Apple to adhere to the European laws regarding consumer protection and warranty.  And even then they try to cut corners Maybe their products are great but I just don't want them.

[Citation Needed]


Sent from my Tablet

[NiHaoMike]

What I really don't like about Apple is their unfriendliness to small third party developers.

[smjcuk]

Good point about developers. Plus their frameworks are notoriously API unstable and there is absolutely no support if anything goes wrong, which it does frequently if you've ever dealt with Cocoa/Objective-C. Also XCode is painfully unstable on larger projects. When I say I used a Mac, I don't just poke the UI.

As a comparison point, it's pretty easy to get someone at Microsoft on the phone who works on a product team. I've done this a number of times and actually had stuff rolled out in service packs and hotfixes. If it's their fault, which it invariably is, they don't charge you.

Apple didn't even respond to my complaint.

That is what puts me off buying Apple products. Apple has no respect for their customers or local regulations at all. It took a lot of legal action and several years to persuade Apple to adhere to the European laws regarding consumer protection and warranty.  And even then they try to cut corners Maybe their products are great but I just don't want them.

[Citation Needed]


Sent from my Tablet

http://www.engadget.com/2010/06/24/apple-responds-over-iphone-4-reception-issues-youre-holding-th/

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2012-04/03/apple-eu-warranty

http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/mac/eu-law-forces-apple-highlight-two-year-warranty-3348755/

http://consumerist.com/2009/03/01/apple-cosmetic-damage-keeps-us-from-replacing-your-battery/

They're cretinous. Nothing nice about them at all.

Oh and HFS+ corruption - I've lost a week of work thanks to that and it's rife. HFS+ has no transactional back end or data integrity features. Even the journalling isn't a journal!

Charge a stupid high margin for medium quality kit (not joking, compare kit after 5 years to an X1 carbon or T or X series or something - it'll still be rolling on fine), shirk any problems, low quality software engineering and steamroll anyone who complains. What could go wrong?

My day job is building rather critical software and Apple fails at every aspect of engineering. How they maintain their reputation is merely a marketing facade and legal eagling.

[nctnico]

Apple didn't even respond to my complaint.

That is what puts me off buying Apple products. Apple has no respect for their customers or local regulations at all. It took a lot of legal action and several years to persuade Apple to adhere to the European laws regarding consumer protection and warranty.  And even then they try to cut corners Maybe their products are great but I just don't want them.

[Citation Needed]

Because your Google seems to be broken:
A $1.2 million dollar fine in Italy:http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2398075,00.asp
http://9to5mac.com/2013/01/15/belgian-consumer-group-files-complaint-against-apple-over-applecare-warranty-practices/

[Mechanical Menace]

If you're using your computer for any sort of creative work chances are you're still very much reliant on a real desktop OS. For consuming media or information iOS/Android is fine though.

Oh I agree, but most of the time I'm at a PC I'm also using my phone and/or tablet. Certain jobs are easier in certain OSs, and I am one of those who needs a Linux distro and Windows to get things done, but that doesn't mean they are the most used

[Muxr]

Can't beat Gentoo on my own PCs. Just about everything can be customized.

As for tablets and smartphones, I have rooted/jailbroke each one within a few days of owning them.

I can customize everything with Linux From Scratch, but that doesn't mean I want to. I mean it's great if you want to learn from it. But for me personally time is money and I need an OS that works out of the box and doesn't get in the way.

p.s. I remember putting a Gentoo box together in 2002-3 and it taking 2 days just to compile the windows system (X11 and KDE at the time). Ain't nobody got time for that.

[chibiace]

been using linux since high school, prefer the terminal for basic file operation and programming up to remote file editing and control.
spend the day using google chrome though so could get by with windows if i had to.
i'd probably buy mac os if they unlocked it for use on pc, photoshop > gimp for wacom tablets

[Muxr]

Good point about developers. Plus their frameworks are notoriously API unstable and there is absolutely no support if anything goes wrong, which it does frequently if you've ever dealt with Cocoa/Objective-C. Also XCode is painfully unstable on larger projects. When I say I used a Mac, I don't just poke the UI.

As a comparison point, it's pretty easy to get someone at Microsoft on the phone who works on a product team. I've done this a number of times and actually had stuff rolled out in service packs and hotfixes. If it's their fault, which it invariably is, they don't charge you.

Apple didn't even respond to my complaint.

That is what puts me off buying Apple products. Apple has no respect for their customers or local regulations at all. It took a lot of legal action and several years to persuade Apple to adhere to the European laws regarding consumer protection and warranty.  And even then they try to cut corners Maybe their products are great but I just don't want them.

[Citation Needed]


Sent from my Tablet

http://www.engadget.com/2010/06/24/apple-responds-over-iphone-4-reception-issues-youre-holding-th/

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2012-04/03/apple-eu-warranty

http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/mac/eu-law-forces-apple-highlight-two-year-warranty-3348755/

http://consumerist.com/2009/03/01/apple-cosmetic-damage-keeps-us-from-replacing-your-battery/

They're cretinous. Nothing nice about them at all.

Oh and HFS+ corruption - I've lost a week of work thanks to that and it's rife. HFS+ has no transactional back end or data integrity features. Even the journalling isn't a journal!

Charge a stupid high margin for medium quality kit (not joking, compare kit after 5 years to an X1 carbon or T or X series or something - it'll still be rolling on fine), shirk any problems, low quality software engineering and steamroll anyone who complains. What could go wrong?

My day job is building rather critical software and Apple fails at every aspect of engineering. How they maintain their reputation is merely a marketing facade and legal eagling.

To be fair both NTFS and HFS+ suck. Not sure what you mean about lack of journaling. Since 10.3 all HFS+ partitions have journaling enabled.

At least Apple isn't forcing anyone to use a specific filesystem and you get Time Machine (which is amazing) for free. If you're really concerned about the filesystem you can use ZFS.

Microsoft's reluctance, driven by pure greed, to accept open standards on the other hand has everyone stuck with the abomination that is FAT32 for file sharing. Which is far and away a worse offense than anything you've posted about Apple in my opinion.

Xbox RRoD > Overblown iPhone 4 antenna issue.

Microsoft is a convicted monopolist on multiple continents. > Warranty dispute in Europe and a measly 1.2 Million fine.

Microsoft doesn't really make PCs (other than Surface technically) but if you look at the Windows ecosystem it's just terrible. Every laptop you buy comes with bloatware and adware.. and in some cases like the recent Lenovo fiasco comes with Spyware.

[CatalinaWOW]

I've been toying with the big three for a long time.  Had an original Macintosh 128K, and have had access to various successors since.  Have done most of my work on various Windows machines, but have resisted the jump to 8.0/8.1.  And I have installed versions of Linux since 0.98.  All three have their advantages.  I tend to prefer Windows, and I think the primary reason is the same one that drives most peoples preferences.  It is the one I have spent the most time with, and have the most skills for.  For the majority of things, including much of what is noted above, it comes down to "I am used to how it works".

That said, I find Linux hard to deal with if you don't have a fat pipe to the internet.  It is always out looking for updates, or locating pieces required to run the new software you installed.  When I moved to a location where satellite internet is the best there is, it was burning my data allowance badly.  Support for hardware is mixed, as are apps.  For both hardware and applications Linux has the best there is in some cases, and by far the worst in others.  And while Linux is not the pain to install and support that it was in the 90s, it still requires quite a bit of knowledge to go beyond a basic Ubuntu install.  That is why Linux is a secondary boot on all of my primary machines, and the machines that have Linux as the only OS don't often get turned on.

I try to drop Windows every time Microsoft changes everything and tries to dip into my wallet.  This applies to both the Office side and the OS side.  So far the combination of necessary apps, better support for the hardware I have, far higher likelihood that any toy I buy will have a driver, and my training in the idiosyncrasies has stifled the switch. 

Apple is clearly superior in the graphics arts, though not as far ahead as the proponents would have you believe.  The higher cost of the hardware, and their tendency to change everything every few years are some of the reasons I haven't jumped on the bandwagon wholeheartedly. 

[smjcuk]

Good point about developers. Plus their frameworks are notoriously API unstable and there is absolutely no support if anything goes wrong, which it does frequently if you've ever dealt with Cocoa/Objective-C. Also XCode is painfully unstable on larger projects. When I say I used a Mac, I don't just poke the UI.

As a comparison point, it's pretty easy to get someone at Microsoft on the phone who works on a product team. I've done this a number of times and actually had stuff rolled out in service packs and hotfixes. If it's their fault, which it invariably is, they don't charge you.

Apple didn't even respond to my complaint.

That is what puts me off buying Apple products. Apple has no respect for their customers or local regulations at all. It took a lot of legal action and several years to persuade Apple to adhere to the European laws regarding consumer protection and warranty.  And even then they try to cut corners Maybe their products are great but I just don't want them.

[Citation Needed]


Sent from my Tablet

http://www.engadget.com/2010/06/24/apple-responds-over-iphone-4-reception-issues-youre-holding-th/

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2012-04/03/apple-eu-warranty

http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/mac/eu-law-forces-apple-highlight-two-year-warranty-3348755/

http://consumerist.com/2009/03/01/apple-cosmetic-damage-keeps-us-from-replacing-your-battery/

They're cretinous. Nothing nice about them at all.

Oh and HFS+ corruption - I've lost a week of work thanks to that and it's rife. HFS+ has no transactional back end or data integrity features. Even the journalling isn't a journal!

Charge a stupid high margin for medium quality kit (not joking, compare kit after 5 years to an X1 carbon or T or X series or something - it'll still be rolling on fine), shirk any problems, low quality software engineering and steamroll anyone who complains. What could go wrong?

My day job is building rather critical software and Apple fails at every aspect of engineering. How they maintain their reputation is merely a marketing facade and legal eagling.

To be fair both NTFS and HFS+ suck. Not sure what you mean about lack of journaling. Since 10.3 all HFS+ partitions have journaling enabled.

At least Apple isn't forcing anyone to use a specific filesystem and you get Time Machine (which is amazing) for free. If you're really concerned about the filesystem you can use ZFS.

Microsoft's reluctance, driven by pure greed, to accept open standards on the other hand has everyone stuck with the abomination that is FAT32 for file sharing. Which is far and away a worse offense than anything you've posted about Apple in my opinion.

Xbox RRoD > Overblown iPhone 4 antenna issue.

Microsoft is a convicted monopolist on multiple continents. > Warranty dispute in Europe and a measly 1.2 Million fine.

Microsoft doesn't really make PCs (other than Surface technically) but if you look at the Windows ecosystem it's just terrible. Every laptop you buy comes with bloatware and adware.. and in some cases like the recent Lenovo fiasco comes with Spyware.

It's not transactional journalling i.e. the journal can be corrupted and then subsequently replayed to disk causing corruption. This is a big problem with cheap SSDs which don't necessarily write to disk when they are told and have no capacitor banks to flush writes after power failure.

Agree about NTFS sucking; it still suffers from MFT fragmentation issues on small files.

You do realise that you get shadow copies, windows backup, system imaging, system restore, file rollback, transactional filesystem on windows? Time machine is based on creating a shit ton of static filesystem links, nothing more, entirely in userspace with no snapshot capability. A case in point is if you save an iWork file whilst it is being written to time machine, the directory entry gets corrupted. Good luck opening that file ever again after you do a rstore.  Even DMGs are present in the form of virtual disks and VHDX files on Windows 8+.

I do use ZFS, on FreeBSD. We have about 40TiB on it and it rocks.

Microsoft not open? https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecifications/default ... about 200,000 pages of open specifications. https://github.com/Microsoft/ ... 8 pages of github projects for major bits of software. That's bigger than Apple's commitment to any documentation or open source effort.

Xbox RRoD resulted in a new hardware revision, eating an entire stock line and throwing it away and issuing free replacements to everyone. It cost a huge amount of money and they ate it. Apple: err sorry chaps, you're holding it wrong. Oh and let us not forget: http://timecapsuledead.org/

Yes they were indeed a monopoly in the EU in 2001. 14 years ago. Before the rise of smartphones, consumer device etc. The other choice on the table was commercial unix which was £10k+ a seat (I know I fished out for a Sun Ultra 60) or an immature open source operating system (Linux) propped up by Sun's office suite at the time which was flakey. Their selling practices were pretty bad however but you want to see what Apple are pulling in the education sector at the moment - no better but they don't have the market share to get their arses sued.

New Lenovo X1 carbon and Surface 3 here under test. No bloatware. Buy subsidised crap for low price, get crapware...

[Muxr]

Good point about developers. Plus their frameworks are notoriously API unstable and there is absolutely no support if anything goes wrong, which it does frequently if you've ever dealt with Cocoa/Objective-C. Also XCode is painfully unstable on larger projects. When I say I used a Mac, I don't just poke the UI.

As a comparison point, it's pretty easy to get someone at Microsoft on the phone who works on a product team. I've done this a number of times and actually had stuff rolled out in service packs and hotfixes. If it's their fault, which it invariably is, they don't charge you.

Apple didn't even respond to my complaint.

That is what puts me off buying Apple products. Apple has no respect for their customers or local regulations at all. It took a lot of legal action and several years to persuade Apple to adhere to the European laws regarding consumer protection and warranty.  And even then they try to cut corners Maybe their products are great but I just don't want them.

[Citation Needed]


Sent from my Tablet

http://www.engadget.com/2010/06/24/apple-responds-over-iphone-4-reception-issues-youre-holding-th/

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2012-04/03/apple-eu-warranty

http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/mac/eu-law-forces-apple-highlight-two-year-warranty-3348755/

http://consumerist.com/2009/03/01/apple-cosmetic-damage-keeps-us-from-replacing-your-battery/

They're cretinous. Nothing nice about them at all.

Oh and HFS+ corruption - I've lost a week of work thanks to that and it's rife. HFS+ has no transactional back end or data integrity features. Even the journalling isn't a journal!

Charge a stupid high margin for medium quality kit (not joking, compare kit after 5 years to an X1 carbon or T or X series or something - it'll still be rolling on fine), shirk any problems, low quality software engineering and steamroll anyone who complains. What could go wrong?

My day job is building rather critical software and Apple fails at every aspect of engineering. How they maintain their reputation is merely a marketing facade and legal eagling.

To be fair both NTFS and HFS+ suck. Not sure what you mean about lack of journaling. Since 10.3 all HFS+ partitions have journaling enabled.

At least Apple isn't forcing anyone to use a specific filesystem and you get Time Machine (which is amazing) for free. If you're really concerned about the filesystem you can use ZFS.

Microsoft's reluctance, driven by pure greed, to accept open standards on the other hand has everyone stuck with the abomination that is FAT32 for file sharing. Which is far and away a worse offense than anything you've posted about Apple in my opinion.

Xbox RRoD > Overblown iPhone 4 antenna issue.

Microsoft is a convicted monopolist on multiple continents. > Warranty dispute in Europe and a measly 1.2 Million fine.

Microsoft doesn't really make PCs (other than Surface technically) but if you look at the Windows ecosystem it's just terrible. Every laptop you buy comes with bloatware and adware.. and in some cases like the recent Lenovo fiasco comes with Spyware.

It's not transactional journalling i.e. the journal can be corrupted and then subsequently replayed to disk causing corruption. This is a big problem with cheap SSDs which don't necessarily write to disk when they are told and have no capacitor banks to flush writes after power failure.

Agree about NTFS sucking; it still suffers from MFT fragmentation issues on small files.

You do realise that you get shadow copies, windows backup, system imaging, system restore, file rollback, transactional filesystem on windows? Time machine is based on creating a shit ton of static filesystem links, nothing more, entirely in userspace with no snapshot capability. A case in point is if you save an iWork file whilst it is being written to time machine, the directory entry gets corrupted. Good luck opening that file ever again after you do a rstore.  Even DMGs are present in the form of virtual disks and VHDX files on Windows 8+.

I do use ZFS, on FreeBSD. We have about 40TiB on it and it rocks.

Microsoft not open? https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecifications/default ... about 200,000 pages of open specifications. https://github.com/Microsoft/ ... 8 pages of github projects for major bits of software. That's bigger than Apple's commitment to any documentation or open source effort.

Xbox RRoD resulted in a new hardware revision, eating an entire stock line and throwing it away and issuing free replacements to everyone. It cost a huge amount of money and they ate it. Apple: err sorry chaps, you're holding it wrong. Oh and let us not forget: http://timecapsuledead.org/

Yes they were indeed a monopoly in the EU in 2001. 14 years ago. Before the rise of smartphones, consumer device etc. The other choice on the table was commercial unix which was £10k+ a seat (I know I fished out for a Sun Ultra 60) or an immature open source operating system (Linux) propped up by Sun's office suite at the time which was flakey. Their selling practices were pretty bad however but you want to see what Apple are pulling in the education sector at the moment - no better but they don't have the market share to get their arses sued.

New Lenovo X1 carbon and Surface 3 here under test. No bloatware. Buy subsidised crap for low price, get crapware...

Journaling is transactional by definition, I am not following, sorry. Corruption is entirely possible on NTFS as well as it only journals metadata not the actual file contents.

As for Time Machine not supporting snapshots goes. That's by design. It is not supposed to provide snapshots, snapshots would be intrusive (would require locking). I have had Time Machine run its every hour for 3 years now on multiple computers and trust me I edit tons of files and never once have I experienced a corruption you seem to describe being inevitable just by editing a simple iWork file.

In fact I work with about 30 other engineers of whom most use Time Machine and I have never heard of this seemingly easily reproducible design flaw.

My sister's MacBook had two hard drive failures (not sure how she treats the poor things), and each time upon replacing the HD for her, her Time Machine restored her to exactly the place she was at. All her spreadsheets intact.

Microsoft is under pressure from the FOSS community to open source their development ecosystem. Their monopoly is slipping.. the server is dominated by Linux, Mobile is dominated by Android/iOS. It's an act of desperation to stay relevant.

But where they do still have a monopoly they haven't changed. ActiveSync, DirectX, FAT32 are all examples of Vendor Lock-in.

Apple has always used open standards where it makes sense on the other hand. I mean many criticized them for not allowing Flash, everyone cried Walled Garden! But in the end their decision to stick by HTML5 is what gave HTML5 the boost it needed. And everyone including Android benefited.

[Mechanical Menace]

New Lenovo X1 carbon and Surface 3 here under test. No bloatware. Buy subsidised crap for low price, get crapware...

...use that saved money to justify the hour to download 8.1 or 7, wipe the drive and do a clean install of the OS. The downloads are even less hassle if you have an MSDN license.

[Asmyldof]

Aaaahhh.
The expected arguments are kicking off!

Now the hard choice whether to click notify for entertainment value or not to because of the cost.

I think the people paying me would prefer the latter >.<

[Mechanical Menace]

Aaaahhh.
The expected arguments are kicking off!

https://youtu.be/ACga3t6O1KQ

But when can you expect when you start a topic about religion on a forum...

[Asmyldof]

Aaaahhh.
The expected arguments are kicking off!

https://youtu.be/ACga3t6O1KQ

But when can you expect when you start a topic about religion on a forum...

I was absolutely exactly thinking of this series of sketches when I clicked "post".

Next meta-post I make I'll try to sneakily reference the RAF pilots.

[nctnico]

Xbox RRoD resulted in a new hardware revision, eating an entire stock line and throwing it away and issuing free replacements to everyone. It cost a huge amount of money and they ate it.

But only after a LOT of pressure!

[at2marty]

Shortly I can say I use many!

I have two laptops, geared for Windows development. They both run Windows 7 natively and have a dual boot Grub set up for at least Ubuntu. (Fixing Ubuntu problems caused by Windows with the live disc is just too easy to ignore in my opinion).

Windows is there for the better supported drivers for high-performance gaming, because there's steam that sometimes just needs to go :-), for MS-Visual Studio, for Atmel Studio (if I may flame you a little: Studio hasn't been AVR for a while, since it also supports the SAMs now), for Adobe Creative Cloud stuff.
And of course for the contract work that I do which is often in some way in Windows. It's weird how much people develop Embedded Linux on Windows DevEnvs.

Linux is there because it's just better at some things and in my personal opinion more fun to develop in, because stuff stays consistent much longer than in Windows.
Linux, for example, is as far as I can determine still better at Disc images, internal copy and move, predictable set-up and maintenance (or continuous performance), localised set-ups such as multi-site development-related webhosting and special hardware tools, tricks and integration.

The old laptop grew up to having Debian and a Sort-of-SUN-OS as well over time and quite possibly the new one will as well.

Next to that for different assignments I have a 230GB dropbox folder containing a multitude of virtual machines spanning al kinds of flavours and set-ups, even a pure Microsoft DOS one running at i486 speeds. I should really get one with some sort of Apple OS, never had a use for one up to this point.

EDIT: Didn't really flame you there, did I? Disappointments all round, I suppose.

Not a flame at all.  You are correct, it is actually AtmelStudio.  Old habits die hard sometimes. 

[Sigmoid]

But where they do still have a monopoly they haven't changed. ActiveSync, DirectX, FAT32 are all examples of Vendor Lock-in.

How exactly is FAT32 Vendor Lock-in, as the single most widely implemented and supported file system EVER?! FAT32 is the opposite of vendor lock-in.

Yes, DirectX true, but there are open reimplementations in various stages of readiness.

WTF is ActiveSync? (I just googled it, and it was discontinued more than 15 years ago. You know what else was vendor lock-in? The Commodore 64 architecture for example.)

MS is doing nothing that others aren't doing.

Apple has always used open standards where it makes sense on the other hand. I mean many criticized them for not allowing Flash, everyone cried Walled Garden! But in the end their decision to stick by HTML5 is what gave HTML5 the boost it needed. And everyone including Android benefited.

Haha!

Hahahahaha!


BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Really now... have you tried to port a Cocoa application to Linux? Or, well, just run it on Linux? Newsflash: you can't. And not due to lack of interest.

As for HTML5, I hate Flash like the plague, but HTML5 is like something designed by a committee (most likely because it was designed by a committee). It's a TEXT DOCUMENT format (hyperTEXT markup language) adapted so it can do 3d games. It's like an office desk that had wings, jet engines and missiles added so it can function as a fighter airplane. It's a sad joke.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

EDIT: Anyway I'm an Apple user at home, and I have an older machine with Windows 7 for the Windows-only audio stuff. I started off loving Apple, and now I'm patently fed up with them.

I use Linux for special requirements like embedded and security-critical stuff, for example in my ARM home file server / private cloud box. If Apple gets on my nerves any further, I'll move to Arch Linux as my desktop OS.

[smjcuk]

ActiveSync is Microsoft Exchange's synchronisation protocol. It isn't discontinued. It's also a fully open specification and thoroughly documented as well: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc425499%28v=exchg.80%29.aspx .... There are many implementations of clients and servers for it.

FAT32 is a nice filesystem for devices that are expensive to write i.e. through wear or throughput which is why it is used universally.

Also people don't realise there are several versions of FAT and only exFAT is subject to patent rights now as it's not even really FAT. As EFI specifies FAT32, it is by inference open for free implementation.

HTML5 is a turd. When you watch your web design guy smoke a whole pack in about 10 mins flat whilst swearing repeatedly, you get the idea.

A lot of public opinion isn't based around facts these days....

[at2marty]

Wow, I didn't expect this to run this long.  I for one will not "bad-mouth" any OS.  They all have their pros and cons.

[Sigmoid]

Also people don't realise there are several versions of FAT and only exFAT is subject to patent rights now as it's not even really FAT. As EFI specifies FAT32, it is by inference open for free implementation.

Wow, exFAT... For a filesystem purportedly designed for portable storage, it sure has the worst reliability of all file systems ever. Even the first FAT had 2 FATs for recovery. ExFAT cannot recover. It wasn't designed so it could recover from catastrophic failure, you just lose EVERYTHING on the drive.

MS has an extension that adds recovery, but it's ONLY implemented in Windows Phone, and NOT in any other version of Windows. I wonder if this changes with Win10.

[smjcuk]

Yes it's horrible. I use ext2 for portable storage, even on windows ( https://www.paragon-software.com/home/extfs-windows/ ). Superblock backups FTW.

Windows 10 and Windows Phone 10 have exactly the same codebase so you're probably right. Most MS stuff turns up as closed source and then gets fixed before they release it. Look at ReFS which is showing some crazy good improvements in Windows 10 server.

Also before we slate Microsoft, don't forget they were responsible for ISO9660 as well.

[G0HZU]

Windows at work (compulsory) and here on my desktop (Win 7) because it allows me to run similar CAD stuff here at home. So the software apps dictate the OS for me here.

Win7 Starter on my little netbook on my workbench. It actually seems to work really well and I use it mostly as a controller or data dumper to/from test gear.
It can also run some fairly powerful CAD SW reasonably well.

Win98SE (laptop) for my T-Tech 7000S milling machines.

Various dual boot laptops with Ubuntu and XP or Win2000.

I don't do much with Linux apart from web browsing with the laptops plus it is useful for doing the odd bit of disk formatting/management.

[Muxr]

ActiveSync is Microsoft Exchange's synchronisation protocol. It isn't discontinued. It's also a fully open specification and thoroughly documented as well: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc425499%28v=exchg.80%29.aspx .... There are many implementations of clients and servers for it.

FAT32 is a nice filesystem for devices that are expensive to write i.e. through wear or throughput which is why it is used universally.

Also people don't realise there are several versions of FAT and only exFAT is subject to patent rights now as it's not even really FAT. As EFI specifies FAT32, it is by inference open for free implementation.

HTML5 is a turd. When you watch your web design guy smoke a whole pack in about 10 mins flat whilst swearing repeatedly, you get the idea.

A lot of public opinion isn't based around facts these days....

Try writing an ActiveSync client for a desktop. And you will get DMCA-ed so fast it's not even funny. In fact I challenge you to find me an ActiveSync client that runs on Linux or OS X. I know because I scoured the earth to find one. And all I could find is dead projects that were taken over by MS.

[Muxr]

But where they do still have a monopoly they haven't changed. ActiveSync, DirectX, FAT32 are all examples of Vendor Lock-in.

How exactly is FAT32 Vendor Lock-in, as the single most widely implemented and supported file system EVER?! FAT32 is the opposite of vendor lock-in.

Yes, DirectX true, but there are open reimplementations in various stages of readiness.

WTF is ActiveSync? (I just googled it, and it was discontinued more than 15 years ago. You know what else was vendor lock-in? The Commodore 64 architecture for example.)

MS is doing nothing that others aren't doing.

Apple has always used open standards where it makes sense on the other hand. I mean many criticized them for not allowing Flash, everyone cried Walled Garden! But in the end their decision to stick by HTML5 is what gave HTML5 the boost it needed. And everyone including Android benefited.

Haha!

Hahahahaha!


BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Really now... have you tried to port a Cocoa application to Linux? Or, well, just run it on Linux? Newsflash: you can't. And not due to lack of interest.

As for HTML5, I hate Flash like the plague, but HTML5 is like something designed by a committee (most likely because it was designed by a committee). It's a TEXT DOCUMENT format (hyperTEXT markup language) adapted so it can do 3d games. It's like an office desk that had wings, jet engines and missiles added so it can function as a fighter airplane. It's a sad joke.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

EDIT: Anyway I'm an Apple user at home, and I have an older machine with Windows 7 for the Windows-only audio stuff. I started off loving Apple, and now I'm patently fed up with them.

I use Linux for special requirements like embedded and security-critical stuff, for example in my ARM home file server / private cloud box. If Apple gets on my nerves any further, I'll move to Arch Linux as my desktop OS.

There is an open source version of Cocoa called GNUStep, which predates most Linux Desktop APIs. There is also a wine like emulator called Darling, but it's pretty rudimentary and I suspect it's exactly for the lack of interest. I can't think of many OSX exclusive apps people would want to port that don't have at least working alternatives.

Listen Apple isn't perfect, they piss me off as well with some decisions. I hate iTunes for instance, but when it comes to Vendor lock-in, they can't hold a candle to Microsoft.

Maybe I am a bitter old vet because I've been around a block for a long time. I've started in the 80s, on your ZX-Spectrums and C-64s, and have worked in the industry for the last 30 years. So I've been plenty impacted by Microsoft's BS over the years.

[timb]

Plus, it's not like Apple picked Cocoa as some evil scheme to prevent cross-platform development... They picked it because it's what OpenStep used, which is, you know, what OS X is based on.

Cocoa is just a set of APIs for interacting with the system. The main language, Objective-C, can be compiled on pretty much any platform. There are also Cocoa bindings for AppleScript, Swift, Python, Ruby, C++ and at one point, Java! (In fact, in early versions of OS X, Apple supported native Java Cocoa apps, trying to make them first party alternatives to ObjC, but that was thrown out around 10.5 due to Sun not pulling their heads out of their asses.)

I can compile C# code on OS X or Linux, but not anything using .NET specific APIs. Why aren't you bitching at Microsoft about that? It's exactly the same scenario.

As for Xcode, it has really come into its own in the last 5 years. I know developers managing applications with hundreds of thousands of lines of code that have zero stability issues.

Your point about being able to call Microsoft for developer support, but not Apple, proves you have no idea what you're talking about, as Apple provides phone support for ADC Select members, and has for at least the last 15 years.

Finally, I've run HFS+ on my daily use Macs since 2003 and have never had a single corrupt file. Ever. Not once. Neither has any family or friends that I support. (Can't say the same about Windows machines, though I've always been able to recover the files, at least.)

If you have a real issue (and Macs do have some issues), that's one thing, but all you're doing is spewing BS. That's why I asked for citations in my previous post.



Sent from my Tablet

[grumpydoc]

And Pine is not elm....

And, in fact neither GNU nor Xinu are unix

I used to be a Unix/Linux zealot - still am a bit but generally now find that all OSes suck, just in different ways. At least with open source you have a chance of fixing problems which affect you although I think a lot of the Linux distributions are getting too complex for casual hacking.

My servers run Scientific Linux (ultimately a RHEL spin), I do day-to-day stuff at home on Scientific or Fedora - the Fedora machine dual boots Windows 7 for when I need to run M$ Office or Photoshop. My Wife's machine runs W7 for Office, my son's runs W7 mostly for games but for Office if he needs to do a project for school. However he's about to move up schools and the new place is heavily into Macs and iOs so I might be plunged (kicking and screaming, I afraid) into that world.

What would I choose to run - Fedora or Scientific, as long as the apps I need are supported.

Wine is OK but ultimately too painful

The various virtual machines have their uses but most of the time the emulated hardware is crap which has, in practice, stopped me using them every time I thought they might be the solution to a problem that I had.

[Sigmoid]

I can compile C# code on OS X or Linux, but not anything using .NET specific APIs. Why aren't you bitching at Microsoft about that? It's exactly the same scenario.

There's Mono...
Actually, .NET is a lot more open than a lot of what Apple is doing. Now the whole thing is open source, too.

As for Xcode, it has really come into its own in the last 5 years. I know developers managing applications with hundreds of thousands of lines of code that have zero stability issues.

Have you worked with Visual Studio? It's the definition of awesome.
I'm not saying that Microsoft is some kind of magical fairie unicorn, just that they aren't worse than any other big player - and sometimes they are better.

Finally, I've run HFS+ on my daily use Macs since 2003 and have never had a single corrupt file. Ever. Not once. Neither has any family or friends that I support. (Can't say the same about Windows machines, though I've always been able to recover the files, at least.)

Good for you, I did have. HFS+ is a badly engineered file system that has been outdated for about as long as FAT32. "I've never had any issues" is really not a valid argument.

[GreyWoolfe]

I started with Windows 3.11 and have been there ever since.  When you do something long enough, you get comfortable with it.  It's like being married for years, you love your spouse, grow comfortable together and get used to their idiosyncrasies.  My work environment is Windows-Win 7 Enterprise and Server 2008 R2.  My 2 work computers here at home are Win 7, my 2 computers are Win 7 and SWMBO and stepdaughter are Win 8.1, plus Android tablets, smart phones and a Nook HD+.  I prefer 7 to 8.1 as it is just easier for me to navigate for maintenance tasks.  Mixed feelings with Win 10.  I might upgrade my laptop as I don't keep anything important on it, but I am seeing too many minuses starting to pop up to upgrade my main/ham computer.  I am also starting to look at a Raspberry Pi for a low cost/low power simple NAS but I still need to do a lot more reading on the topic before I commit.

[Muxr]

Good for you, I did have. HFS+ is a badly engineered file system that has been outdated for about as long as FAT32. "I've never had any issues" is really not a valid argument.

You can't be seriously comparing HFS+ to FAT32. For all HFS+'s deficiencies it is lightyears ahead of FAT32.

Microsoft's reluctance to adopt an open standard is precisely the reason why everyone is stuck on a file system that can't support a file larger than 4Gb.

In fact did you know that every time you buy an SD card, external HD or a thumb drive you are paying the FAT32 tax to Microsoft. Even if you never intend to use a FAT32 on it you still pay for it.

On December 3, 2003 Microsoft announced[63] that it would be offering licenses for use of its FAT specification and "associated intellectual property", at the cost of a US$0.25 royalty per unit sold, with a $250,000 maximum royalty per license agreement.[64]

Yes, that's right you're paying $.25 per device for the privilege of using that horrible filesystem. Whether you're a Windows user or not.

Not to mention all the ridiculous limitations of FAT32 the world is stuck having to workaround because one company has the monopoly to dictate and force a use of an antiquated filesystem.

No company comes close to the shittiness Microsoft has managed to pull in the computer industry.

edit: FAT32 is just one example, but there are tons more, IE6 is another big one.

[Mechanical Menace]

No company comes close to the shittiness Microsoft has managed to pull in the computer industry.

*cough cough* Atari

As much as I loved the company they single handedly almost destroyed the games industry, a sector which has pushed consumer computing forward more than many realise. Then there was the Amiga and ST days when for most they were the only real option for a computer outside of workplace. Commodore and Atari both tried to make interoperability and porting as hard as possible. Yeah some of that was legitimate design choices but a lot of it was along the lines of "Y is brilliant, we've got to use it. Damn the other side is already on it, best use X instead..." In the eight bit era it was more dependent on where you were but things were only better due to simpler machines.

Microsoft are twats, they either try and buy and close down everything or come up with a competing "standard." Apple are tossers, they manage to patent rounded rectangles and have never invented anything, push standards then ignore them themselves, license software, reimplement their own version, then sue the people they licensed it from. Neither do anything first or better, only bigger.

Really if you think companies were better in the past you need to take of those rose tinted glasses, if you think they're better now you're deluded, and if you think they'll get better in the future you're insane.

[Muxr]

No company comes close to the shittiness Microsoft has managed to pull in the computer industry.

*cough cough* Atari

As much as I loved the company they single handedly almost destroyed the games industry, a sector which has pushed consumer computing forward more than many realise. Then there was the Amiga and ST days when for most they were the only real option for a computer outside of workplace. Commodore and Atari both tried to make interoperability and porting as hard as possible. Yeah some of that was legitimate design choices but a lot of it was along the lines of "Y is brilliant, we've got to use it. Damn the other side is already on it, best use X instead..." In the eight bit era it was more dependent on where you were but things were only better due to simpler machines.

Microsoft are twats, they either try and buy and close down everything or come up with a competing "standard." Apple are tossers, they manage to patent rounded rectangles and have never invented anything, push standards then ignore them themselves, license software, reimplement their own version, then sue the people they licensed it from. Neither do anything first or better, only bigger.

Really if you think companies were better in the past you need to take of those rose tinted glasses, if you think they're better now you're deluded, and if you think they'll get better in the future you're insane.

I agree with this. I guess the only reason I am especially pissed at Microsoft is because I can't escape their BS. Even if I am not their customer, I am forced to deal with it.

Microsoft's use of proprietary protocols and systems, wherever they have a monopoly to vendor lock you in:

- Corporate email monopoly (Exchange): Can't use ActiveSync on OS X or Linux.

- Desktop monopoly: FAT32, can't share files larger than 4GB. Also having to pay the license for products I make that (have to) use it.

- IE6, having to spend hours and hours to make the web app I am working on work in this pile of shit of a browser (luckly this is less and less true by day)

- DirectX, my favourite games are hard to port to anything other than Win.

the list goes on, and even though I have abandoned Windows 15 years ago I still can't escape their bullshit.

[Mechanical Menace]

I agree with this. I guess the only reason I am especially pissed at Microsoft is because I can't escape their BS. Even if I am not their customer, I am forced to deal with it.

I managed to not do for years, and when I had to start worrying about anything that isn't Linux or Solaris MS sorted themselves out a bit and Apple had gone mad with power lol. Luckily I mainly have the option of ignoring OSX though so I'm not as biassed as I would be if I'd had to buy a Mac^*.

- Desktop monopoly: FAT32, can't share files larger than 4GB. Also having to pay the license for products I make that (have to) use it.

You don't have to pay a license for FAT32 or vFAT, it's exFAT you need a license for, hence why a lot of things only support FAT32.



^*I've a typical Yorkshireman's view on that, why pay twice as much for a lower specced machine? I sort of get it but the style of the case isn't that important to me when it comes to computers.

[timofonic]

I use Linux because:

- Requires a lot less maintaining. No virus problems too.
-  Easier to upgrade.
- Works better on slower machines.

There's lots stuff I dislike about Linux, but I still have no clue of programming and this sucks less than everything else for me.

I wish to have some powerful software such as Altium, AutoCAD and some other electronics stuff.

Interoperability sucks, even some of my classmates bullied me because using Linux and Libreoffice ( Fuck them!). EDA format is full of vendor lock-in with these shitty different file firmats. LibreOffice struggles to reverse enginer filebformats and solve tons of bugs in the internal conversion.

Fortunately,  things are improving.
-KiCad is progressing, but needs more fullbtime devs and  LibreOffice is starting to get usable (but they forget about math stuff...) and there's nice tools such as Sigrok. The big problem is they're very underfunded,  but they do more with less and I hope the Open Source communities get even more organized and be able to get more financing.

[Muxr]

I quite like KiCAD. It is terrible at first but it keeps getting better the longer you use it. Like a lot of GUI open source software the UI has some major flaws and poor design decisions. (Like it took me an hour to figure out how to make a new footprint library) But you learn to work around them, also the keyboard shortcuts are well thought out.

But what I love the most about KiCAD is the file formats it uses. You can script pretty much anything in KiCad.

[Muxr]

Not to mention all the ridiculous limitations of FAT32 the world is stuck having to workaround because one company has the monopoly to dictate and force a use of an antiquated filesystem.

No company comes close to the shittiness Microsoft has managed to pull in the computer industry.

Why not mention them? It is hard to know whether you are making a convincing argument otherwise. As opposed to throwing opinion around.
Antiquated may be true in computer industry time but that is because it is old. Not always a bad thing. There was a time when 4GB file size limits didn't seem to be a ridiculous limitation. Particularly when disks were smaller than this. The FAT file system was introduced when floppy disks ruled, and a 10MB hard disk could cost several thousand dollars. Linux didn't exist and neither did MACs. It was a product of its time and the limitations of available machines which includes RAM measured in KB and CPU clocks in single digit MHz.  What seems ridiculous now wasn't so, then.

Now it mostly serves as a useful means to exchange data. If you could connect a floppy drive to your present day computer Windows could still read the disk even from 30+ years ago.

FAT32 limitations are well known, but I did mention the major one. The 4Gb file size did I not? How is that an acceptable limitation in 2015?

[suicidaleggroll]

FAT32 limitations are well known, but I did mention the major one. The 4Gb file size did I not? How is that an acceptable limitation in 2015?

Plus:
* No journaling
* No support for permissions
* 2 TB max partition size


FAT32 is a terrible filesystem by modern standards (hell, it's terrible by 10 year old standards).  Keeping support built into the OS for it for backwards compatibility is fine, forcing its continued use on all portable devices because MS refuses to support anything else is unacceptable.

[Muxr]

FAT32 limitations are well known, but I did mention the major one. The 4Gb file size did I not? How is that an acceptable limitation in 2015?

Well it isn't acceptable in 2015 where disks and file sizes are commonly much larger. What of it? It is an old file system that reached, after several iterations, its architectural limit. All file systems have architectural limits which mostly seem as reasonable now as the FAT limitations did then.

MS does support the exFAT filesystem on portable devices. It just needs to be licensed. Whether or not you want to object to MS operating as a commercial venture is another matter. Most people using devices like higher capacity SD cards will be oblivious and indifferent.

It's bullshit though. It's a filesystem meant for interchange. It is supposed to be an open standard, free of licensing. Could you imagine if Cisco or some other company required everyone to license the TCP stack? It's a vendor lock-in strategy that poisons the ecosystem.

This is why so many video cameras record only 20 minute long files for example. And why so many people hit the 4Gb limitation when they try to backup their work to an external drive.

I have no problem with an OS being commercial. I have a problem when the OS uses the market monopoly to impose artificial limitations on everyone else, even those who are not using the said OS.

[John Coloccia]

Well, I spent a career developing embedded and system software on every from bare bones chips, to Windows/Unix operating systems, to proprietary operating systems with whacky architectures for robotics and multiprocessor DSP.  I'm not going to say I've seen it all, but I've seen a lot.

Hands down, Windows wins for BY FAR the absolute best development environment EVER.  Visual Studio, even Visual Studio 2013 with it's ridiculous Disney style interface, is incredible.  The Windows API is amazingly well thought out. Aside from just how easy it easy to create a GUI, the thread synchronization and data sharing architecture/primitives are just unmatched.  It's a programmer's paradise. Personally, though, I dislike the interface itself, more and as it progresses forward. It's kind of bulky, especially with the new ribbon paradigm they're cramming down everyone's throat.  Very bulky and cartoonish.  Ditto for a lot of other interfaces too that seem to have decided on a flat look...what can I click on?  What can I interact with?  What will it do when I click?  WHERE do I click?  Your guess is as good as mine. I don't get it, and I guess it's just en vogue.  I'm glad so many companies have resisted and have kept a sensible interface despite Microsoft's best efforts to screw everything up.

Everyone else is just...well...everyone else when it comes to development, and usually lacking when it comes to available software.

I mostly run Windows for the simple reason that all of my most important applications are Windows based.  Of the applications I have that I can choose between Windows or Mac/Linux, the interface is far better on Windows with the possible exception of Adobe's suite.  The rest are notably inferior on Mac/Linux, and even if they look somewhat similar, always seem to behave worse.  I can only assume this is a result of how easy and well thought out Visual Studio and the Windows API are.

I don't watch television, at all actually, but I have a computer hooked up to a television so we can watch movies and things like that.  That's a Mac Mini.  Perfect little box for this kind of thing.  I also have an older Macbook Pro.  These days, that's relegated to web surfing and movie watching, but until I started needing a CAD system, I did mostly everything on it.  Serious lack of applications...it is what it is.  My father's computer is a Mac.  The thing all these Macs have in common is that they just work.  I turn them on, and they work, and not only that but they run as well and as fast as they did the very first day I turned them on.  These days, if someone just needs a computer for web access and some general messing around (i.e., can you deal with OpenOffice and things like that), I would recommend a Mac.  Totally headache free.

I've gone through many Linux boxes, and I've spent a lot of time in Unix style operating systems.  I like them for systems and back-end software because it's so easy to get a system configured, and to keep it like that.  It's very simple to deploy software that you know is going to work without having to worry about drivers, or an update killing everything, or stupid things like that.  You can do similar things with Windows, but it's trivial and simple with Unix.  I'd rather gouge my own eyes out than have to develop any sort of serious user interface using X or anything built on X.  IMHO, it's not that great for multi-threading either...a world apart from Windows.

Everything has it's place.

edit:
Incidentally, I believe NTFS has a larger filesize limit than ext4.  There's nothing particularly stopping anyone from using NTFS on their memory sticks other than all the devices that don't read NTFS.  It's not really Microsoft's fault at this point...not that I know of, at any rate.

[nctnico]

I want to smoke what you have been smoking 

[miguelvp]

Just wait until you deal with Win 8 :p Microsoft is really pushing the use of .Net which is not a bad thing specially for multicore cpus, so as long as you are well versed in COM it's going to affect performance.

As for the SDKs they were easy to use and everything well documented, VS2013 is awesome, long gone are the pre visual studio 6 which for some reason it stayed there forever.

Not sure about the managed C (C#) push that I've been perceiving from them.

[Muxr]

I have no problem with an OS being commercial. I have a problem when the OS uses the market monopoly to impose artificial limitations on everyone else, even those who are not using the said OS.

Everything hinges on the precise meaning of "artificial".  Does it simply mean something you don't agree with, would prefer were it not so? Or does it encompass technical, commercial, and legal considerations?

Now that Microsoft is huge I am not overly concerned by someone ignoring their legal rights and just taking their "stuff". But it is a double edged sword if you believe that innovations, as the FAT filesystem was originally, are developed by new smaller nimble companies which some may consider have a greater need to the full commercial exploitation of their work to continue to grow. Maybe into the size Microsoft is now.  There are risks inherent in every commercial venture and artifical additional ones may have the effect of tilting the balance against such innovation.

It's artificial because Microsoft refuses to add Windows support for one of the open standard file systems. Whether I agree or disagree with it is irrelevant. The facts are obvious.

Microsoft is the 800 pound gorilla who's using its weight to force everyone to either use the limitation ridden, draconian FAT32 or pay the license and use the exFAT. This is the abuse of monopoly. The very thing they got convicted of on multiple continents.

We're talking about removable media here, all sorts of devices need a common way to save and share data. Which like the internet should be using open standards. But since MS has the monopoly they can dictate which file system everyone uses. Because if you were to use anything else it would not work on 90% of the desktop computers in the world (Windows won't support it).

Majority of the internet runs on some form of Unix. Imagine if all the websites decided to switch to a protocol which limited your downloads to some number and didn't support https for example. And in order to access the better protocol you either needed to be on Linux or you and the site needed to pay a license (and because most websites wouldn't pay the license, everyone would be stuck using the shitty protocol). Can you imagine how much that would suck? Well that's what Microsoft is doing with the FAT32.

And this is why open standards are important. It is not just my preference, it's a big deal. And Microsoft is the worst offender of using proprietary protocols to maintain their monopoly and their vendor lock-in.

[NiHaoMike]

What about UDF? Last time I checked, Windows supported it just fine.

[timofonic]

I have no problem with an OS being commercial. I have a problem when the OS uses the market monopoly to impose artificial limitations on everyone else, even those who are not using the said OS.

Everything hinges on the precise meaning of "artificial".  Does it simply mean something you don't agree with, would prefer were it not so? Or does it encompass technical, commercial, and legal considerations?

Now that Microsoft is huge I am not overly concerned by someone ignoring their legal rights and just taking their "stuff". But it is a double edged sword if you believe that innovations, as the FAT filesystem was originally, are developed by new smaller nimble companies which some may consider have a greater need to the full commercial exploitation of their work to continue to grow. Maybe into the size Microsoft is now.  There are risks inherent in every commercial venture and artifical additional ones may have the effect of tilting the balance against such innovation.

It's artificial because Microsoft refuses to add Windows support for one of the open standard file systems. Whether I agree or disagree with it is irrelevant. The facts are obvious.

Microsoft is the 800 pound gorilla who's using its weight to force everyone to either use the limitation ridden, draconian FAT32 or pay the license and use the exFAT. This is the abuse of monopoly. The very thing they got convicted of on multiple continents.

We're talking about removable media here, all sorts of devices need a common way to save and share data. Which like the internet should be using open standards. But since MS has the monopoly they can dictate which file system everyone uses. Because if you were to use anything else it would not work on 90% of the desktop computers in the world (Windows won't support it).

Majority of the internet runs on some form of Unix. Imagine if all the websites decided to switch to a protocol which limited your downloads to some number and didn't support https for example. And in order to access the better protocol you either needed to be on Linux or you and the site needed to pay a license (and because most websites wouldn't pay the license, everyone would be stuck using the shitty protocol). Can you imagine how much that would suck? Well that's what Microsoft is doing with the FAT32.

And this is why open standards are important. It is not just my preference, it's a big deal. And Microsoft is the worst offender of using proprietary protocols to maintain their monopoly and their vendor lock-in.

Reality is even worse.

They get paid by tons of patents, Android is becoming a very important source of revenue. They also get paid by FAT32 and NTFS patents too.

Every big boy wants a greater piece of cake than others, they will do WHATEVER to get it. Small companies want to grow to become like them most of the time.

That's why I prefer FOSS. Despite there are lobbies that force things in shitty ways to get more profit ( Red Hat, Canonical..), it's possible to compete and custom your software.

I agree GUIs suck in FOSS most of the time, but these suck in most software too. Big software gets refined after years and often have a thousand paid employees, but they even do shit like Microsoft's ribbon interface.

I'm amazed how FOSS can do so much with just 1% of the big guys resources.

But it's a shame the lack of invest, some software could surpass quality of big guys with a relatively small investment to pay a bunch of skilled developers. Just look at EDA software
- DipTrace: They are like 7-10 developers and able to do an okay job. Some stuff is better than Eagle
- Eagle: 11-50 Developers?
- Altium Designer: 100? They probably share a large codebase.
Allegro: ?

[John Coloccia]

But to get back to file systems I do agree that it would be nice if I could plug my EXT4 disk into Windows but I would still get problems with Windows not understanding invalid (in Windows) characters in filenames and case sensitivity.

There are a some programs kicking around that actually allow you to read ext4. Incidentally, Mac doesn't have ext4 support either, which is somewhat surprising.  When you think about it, WHY would Mac or Windows support ext4?  The desktop Linux user base is practically non-exsistent.  The idea that Microsoft is somehow bullying anyone because they're not interested in spending resources to make 5 Linux users happy is ridiculous.

Anyhow, filesystems were never designed for transferring files between different operating systems. That's what FTP is for.

[poorchava]

My main workstation is Win7 64bit. I use it mainly for CAD work. I've had Win7 from early beta and I like it very much,  mainly because of its stability and usability.

On my fiance's netbook we have a Win7 and some build of Ubuntu for occasional network hacking job.

Third machine is a CNC controller and it runs Windows 7 with Mach3 and also LinuxCNC in dual boot.

[Mechanical Menace]

  When you think about it, WHY would Mac or Windows support ext4?  The desktop Linux user base is practically non-exsistent.

Outside of the US it's larger than Mac, that's why more software is available for Windows and Linux but not Mac nowadays. And TBH any open standard would be better than what we've got.

[nctnico]

The desktop Linux user base is practically non-exsistent.

According to an earlier poll about 30% of the EEVblog users uses Linux as their primary/preferred OS. I wouldn't call that non-existent. Actually if there is multi platform support then Linux comes second where Mac is third. An increasing amount of electronics related software is available as a Linux version as well.

[timb]

I can compile C# code on OS X or Linux, but not anything using .NET specific APIs. Why aren't you bitching at Microsoft about that? It's exactly the same scenario.

There's Mono...
Actually, .NET is a lot more open than a lot of what Apple is doing. Now the whole thing is open source, too.

As for Xcode, it has really come into its own in the last 5 years. I know developers managing applications with hundreds of thousands of lines of code that have zero stability issues.

Have you worked with Visual Studio? It's the definition of awesome.
I'm not saying that Microsoft is some kind of magical fairie unicorn, just that they aren't worse than any other big player - and sometimes they are better.

Finally, I've run HFS+ on my daily use Macs since 2003 and have never had a single corrupt file. Ever. Not once. Neither has any family or friends that I support. (Can't say the same about Windows machines, though I've always been able to recover the files, at least.)

Good for you, I did have. HFS+ is a badly engineered file system that has been outdated for about as long as FAT32. "I've never had any issues" is really not a valid argument.

Mono is a C# compiler. It's not the underlying Apis that make .NET apps work.

Microsoft is open sourcing the previous C# compiler, but not the next generation one. The .NET Apis aren't being open sourced either. So it's not like you'll be able to cross compile a Windows GUI app on Linux or OS X...

As for open source, you do realize Apple contributes to a shit ton of Open Source projects, right? Far more than MS...

In fact, you can thank Apple for Chrome. Instead of starting from scratch, Apple worked with a small team of developers of the KHTML engine, turning it into WebKit, all while pushing improvements back into the KHTML code base. Albeit, there were some communications problems here and there (a huge corporation works on a different timescale than a small FOSS team), but in the end it benefitted many.

WebKit became the basis for Palm's WebOS, Chrome, Safari and is the defacto browser engine on mobile platforms (iOS, Android, Symbian, Playstation 3 and BlackBerry).

Finally, the original HFS might be akin to FAT32 but not HFS+ w/ Journaling. Yes, my experience is anecdotal, but I'm talking about 100+ people over 10 years that have never lost a file. This leads me to believe you've either got really bad luck or were doing something wrong.


Sent from my Tablet

[Mechanical Menace]

Mono is a C# compiler. It's not the underlying Apis that make .NET apps work.

Microsoft is open sourcing the previous C# compiler, but not the next generation one. The .NET Apis aren't being open sourced either. So it's not like you'll be able to cross compile a Windows GUI app on Linux or OS X...

Most do fine actually and have from early on. The few times I've had to use a .net program it's worked fine in Mono. http://www.mono-project.com/docs/about-mono/compatibility/

As for open source, you do realize Apple contributes to a shit ton of Open Source projects, right? Far more than MS...

You sure about that? MS contributes to bugger loads, it's supported the Mono team since they started and even the Linux kernel. And Apple don't seem to have an equivalent of http://www.codeplex.com/

In fact, you can thank Apple for Chrome. Instead of starting from scratch, Apple worked with a small team of developers of the KHTML engine, turning it into WebKit, all while pushing improvements back into the KHTML code base. Albeit, there were some communications problems here and there (a huge corporation works on a different timescale than a small FOSS team), but in the end it benefitted many.

Which everybody that used KHTML before Apple came along to it and has with Webkit since. Chrome fixed an enormous amount of issues in Webkit when it first came out, ones which KHTML didn't have...

Honestly neither of them are better than the other, both are just trying to look more like Google on this matter but without actually walking the walk.

[timofonic]

The desktop Linux user base is practically non-exsistent.

According to an earlier poll about 30% of the EEVblog users uses Linux as their primary/preferred OS. I wouldn't call that non-existent. Actually if there is multi platform support then Linux comes second where Mac is third. An increasing amount of electronics related software is available as a Linux version as well.

EEVBlog users are not a representative sample of the wider community. In the general populace Linux commands about 1 to 2% of desktops. It might not be non-existent but practically non-existent? Yeah, I'd agree with that.

Linux is my primary desktop OS but I still have a Windows laptop.

As long as Linux offers such a diverse choice of distributions and software options it will continue to struggle to gain a larger foothold. Until you can recommend it to your grandmother it will remain a niche option. It is principally an OS for tech-heads.

Most computers are used to do useless shit, they are more like TVs than a workstation. There's tons of funcional computer illiterates that barely are able to use a computer in a half efficient way, they mostly use it for Facebook and other ways of distraction.

But more serious work is being done in Linux machines, for many reasons. You can have a usable system in a 10 year computer with Linux, but Windows is a different beast. The environment is more customizable and robust, despite it's shortcomings. You can spend the money of OS on everything else, I prefer to donate to FOSS to help alternatives improve but I understand people want to have something usable right now than wait.

For me, it's quite sunstantial there's 30% geeks here using Linux, that's a very interesting evidence.

[firewalker]

I use on all of my systems (one laptop, two desktops) GNU/Linux. I just started with GNU/Linux. It tried to switch to Windows but wasn't comfortable for me. I use Windows 7 on VirtualBox for compatibility with some of my coworkers.

Alexander.

[smjcuk]

Most computers are used to do useless shit, they are more like TVs than a workstation. There's tons of funcional computer illiterates that barely are able to use a computer in a half efficient way, they mostly use it for Facebook and other ways of distraction.

I think it is the responsibility of engineers to make computer use efficient for "illiterates". Not the other way around. It wasn't computer illiterates that developed Facebook. Or the other distractions.

You have to meet all machines in the middle. Literacy and good engineering are prerequisites for anything like that.

[Mechanical Menace]

EEVBlog users are not a representative sample of the wider community. In the general populace Linux commands about 1 to 2% of desktops.

Depends which polls you go by, many put OSX at about the same, the highest stats I've seen for Macs is 5 percent and they also rank Linux more popular than 2%. And TBH relying on the user agent supplied by the browser isn't reliable at all. I still have to change user agent to use my online banking for example...

There're also many a computer that will never touch the select few sites that the data comes from. I know of almost a thousand seat Linux user where none of the machines ever touch a public web server, I know Windows houses the same. I know plenty of people who use Windows, tens of normal folk who use Ubuntu on netbooks and a few not normal people who use desktop Linux elsewhere, and I've seen 1 Mac IRL since they moved over to x86, and that was dual booting Windows and Linux...

[timofonic]

Most computers are used to do useless shit, they are more like TVs than a workstation. There's tons of funcional computer illiterates that barely are able to use a computer in a half efficient way, they mostly use it for Facebook and other ways of distraction.

I think it is the responsibility of engineers to make computer use efficient for "illiterates". Not the other way around. It wasn't computer illiterates that developed Facebook. Or the other distractions.

The same responsability many engineers have when developing gambling machines, military stuff to kill people massively or producing drugs such as metaamphetamime. They can be excellent professionals, but they are producing shit for the humanity.

Facebook doesn't kill people, but wastes resources and is another way to centralize information and controlling people.

Very useful talents are wasted on bullshit that must disappear to make humanity progress, but our society is very perverse and many smart people lack personality and are often manipulated by economic means. Often times the greedy, full of ego and perverse ones dominates the really intelligent people.

After all, we are humans...

[Halcyon]

For what it's worth, I'm a Windows person. Have been since version 3.1. I'm currently running Windows 7 Ultimate on my main desktop machine, Windows Server 2003/2008 on my NAS/server machines although I swear by pfSense on my router/firewall.

Why? Because it's stable. Windows on the right hardware is rock solid.

[nctnico]

The desktop Linux user base is practically non-exsistent.

According to an earlier poll about 30% of the EEVblog users uses Linux as their primary/preferred OS. I wouldn't call that non-existent. Actually if there is multi platform support then Linux comes second where Mac is third. An increasing amount of electronics related software is available as a Linux version as well.

EEVBlog users are not a representative sample of the wider community.

Why not? It shows that people who actually USE their computers have a tendency of choosing Linux over Windows. EDA software makers should be aware of that because it means they can increase their market coverage by 30% by offering a Linux version. If they go by the generic 1 or 2% overall number and decide not to make a Linux version they are losing 30% of their potential business.

[smjcuk]

People who *use* their computers start with the client software and work back.

[c4757p]

People who *use* their computers start with the client software and work back.

Depends on what they use it for. Sure, there's a lot of software that's only available for Windows, but there are enough alternatives that I've never really felt limited by my choice to use Linux instead, and I spend enough time interacting with the OS proper that the choice matters to me.

Now, if you need to do high-end EDA work, where you need the 'big boys', or mechanical work (AFAIK there's fuck all for mechanical CAD on Linux), you'll need Windows. I keep it in a VM for that sort of occasion, which doesn't come too often.

[nctnico]

People who *use* their computers start with the client software and work back.

Not true. At some point the OS just sits in the way. For example: compiling a large software project takes minutes on Windows versus tens of seconds on Linux. It is the difference between taking a coffee break and just resting your hands on the desk. It has everything to do with task switching overhead. Also Linux has a far superior memory management compared to Windows. Windows tries to keep as much memory free as possible which means using swap space as soon as you turn the computer on and Windows uses a relatively small disk cache. It makes switching between programs a magnitude slower than on Linux (which doesn't use the swap unless it is completely out of memory and uses all the free memory as a disk cache). If you are used to Windows' slugginess and don't know any better everything seems fine but once you are used to the snappiness of Linux then using Windows suddenly feels like wading through thick mud. I'm using Linux because it makes me more productive not because it is cool or something like that.

[smjcuk]

I use and understand both very well. NT context switches are less expensive than Linux by 1.5-2.0x on x86-84 for reference (I measured it) so I'm not sure where you are getting these figures from.

There is simply a platform design difference. Windows favors larger container files, small amounts of syscalls and composition via an object request broker. Linux favors small files in text, huge amounts of syscalls and composition via streams.

If you stick within those constraints and don't push either the other way then they are equivalent.

Memory management is the same from an API perspective. Mapping is much cheaper on NT due to how DLLs are handled compared to DSOs on Linux. In fact NT offers lots more guarantees than Linux and glibc which will randomly mmap a file rather than use streams.

The problems you see with windows are pretty easily fixed by doing two things:

1. More RAM. I have 16Gb on this laptop. It cost bugger all. There is no swap.
2. Tune NTFS. NTFS's main cost is doing small fragmented writes as they stress the MFT. You can tune this out with fsutil in 2 seconds flat. Also buy an SSD. Samsung 840 Pro here.

These aren't usually the initial case because (1) adds baseline cost to the computer you're buying and (2) wastes disk space and people moan about losing that.

I can't say I can tell the difference compilation-wise and we're compiling a 2MLoC project on both platforms.

The only outlier I've seen is FreeBSD with LLVM/clang. Now there's a 20-30% boost there over NT and Linux!

[c4757p]

1. More RAM. I have 16Gb on this laptop. It cost bugger all. There is no swap.

16 GB cost bugger all? What, did you steal it?

[smjcuk]

Yep. £86 on http://uk.crucial.com/gbr/en/ct2c8g3s160bmceu

That's $133 in funny money for ref.

[nctnico]

I use and understand both very well. NT context switches are less expensive than Linux by 1.5-2.0x on x86-84 for reference (I measured it) so I'm not sure where you are getting these figures from.

I got the numbers from sitting behind my computer and clicking compile for the exact same code.

[NiHaoMike]

I remember when 16GB of DDR3 1600 was only $80. But that was for a 4x4GB kit on sale.

[nctnico]

I don't recommend going for the ultra cheap memory (note: Crucial is Micron which is a good brand). It is very hard to detect and find a broken memory module. If you are doing serious work with your computer and need lots of memory I'd buy a computer which uses ECC (error correction) memory.

[Mechanical Menace]

What on earth are you doing that needs 16gig of ram? If you need that to get something to compile you're doing something wrong.

[suicidaleggroll]

What on earth are you doing that needs 16gig of ram?

What is this, 2002?  16G is commonplace, and there are a LOT of reasons why it might be required.  Hell, Google Chrome can eat up to 4 GB all by itself if you leave it open for a while.  Add another couple GB for your mail program, another couple for your OS, maybe a VM or two and you're at 16 GB without even really trying.

I consider 16 GB on workstations and 8 GB on laptops to be the bare minimum these days.  Windows 7 can't even run a web browser for any reasonable length of time without running out of RAM on <4 GB in my experience.

[Mechanical Menace]

...

That's not just working on text files and compiling something though.

And I don't believe some of your claims. A couple of gig for your OS and 4 for Chrome? Really? I can be running Chrome with 20 tabs plus and in the background be compiling large projects on a machine with 2 gig and the latest *buntu release with no problems. If Windows 7 needs 16 gig just to compile a project without taking ages to start each process that's a problem.

I'm not arguing that having more ram isn't good, but you shouldn't need that just to edit source and compile something.

[c4757p]

Windows 7 can't even run a web browser for any reasonable length of time without running out of RAM on <4 GB in my experience.

Arch Linux running Chrome with eight tabs, KiCad with a full layout open, and a smattering of random terminals, 1.9 GB available out of 4 GB.... little bit off in swap, but certainly not much as I don't have any lag when switching between processes

[nctnico]

Open a few VMs and memory goes away fast. I'm thinking about upgrading my Linux box to 24GB for that reason.

[c4757p]

Yeah, of course, carving off chunks eats it up. I wish I could fit 24GB in my box.

[suicidaleggroll]

That's not just working on text files and compiling something though.

Who ever said it was?

And I don't believe some of your claims. A couple of gig for your OS and 4 for Chrome? Really?

Sure.  Chrome is eating over 2 GB on my CentOS 7 machine right now, and I barely have anything open (1 window with 12 tabs, 1 window with 1 tab, one window with 2 tabs).  It'll run over 4 GB at least once a week on my machine.  I have 8 GB and at least a few times a month I need to shut down my VM (3 GB allocated) because the host starts digging into swap, usually due to Chrome.  Before you claim there's something wrong with my system, it did the same thing on Fedora and CentOS 6, and I have other systems running OpenSUSE and Debian that behave the same way.

My experience with Windows is very similar as well.  I have a Win 7 32-bit system at home with the RAM maxed (3.2ish GB), if I leave it on for more than a few days and try to browse the web and do anything else at the same time it runs out of RAM.

Firefox isn't any better either.

[Mechanical Menace]

Open a few VMs and memory goes away fast. I'm thinking about upgrading my Linux box to 24GB for that reason.

That's why I have 1 machine with 32. It's a convenient way of simulating a network. The rest of the time it's my gaming rig but haven't needed anywhere near that much for gaming on Windows or Linux yet.

EDIT: Sorry, didn't notice your reply.

That's not just working on text files and compiling something though.

Who ever said it was?

Who I was replying to.

...that behave the same way.

..My experience with Windows is very similar as well....

My experience is similar across the board too tbh. Got to wonder what the difference is tbh.

[TiN]

My OS setups:
Main workstation (home): Windows 2008 Server R2 (up and running 24/7)
Main workstation (work): Windows 2008 Server R2
Scopes: Windows 2000Pro
TLA: Windows 2000Pro
Main server: FreeBSD 7.1 i386, moving now to FreeBSD 10.1 x64
Secondary server: FreeBSD 8.2 x64
Test systems: Windows 8.1Pro, 7x64Pro, 10, Ubuntu 14.something
Embedded: Some debians on Raspberry Pi's

[Sigmoid]

In fact did you know that every time you buy an SD card, external HD or a thumb drive you are paying the FAT32 tax to Microsoft. Even if you never intend to use a FAT32 on it you still pay for it.

Well they did license it, and have only gone after large players... Once again, they aren't any worse than anyone else.

Yes, that's right you're paying $.25 per device for the privilege of using that horrible filesystem. Whether you're a Windows user or not.

Well, good for them. It really can't rile me up too much at all.

Not to mention all the ridiculous limitations of FAT32 the world is stuck having to workaround because one company has the monopoly to dictate and force a use of an antiquated filesystem.

You are perfectly free to use whatever filesystem you want. Most even have a driver for Windows. Since not long ago, you can also use NTFS, as a reliable write-enabled implementation is now available for pretty much all OSes out there.

No company comes close to the shittiness Microsoft has managed to pull in the computer industry.

No company comes close to the widespread adoption Microsoft has managed to pull in the computer industry. If Apple or Commodore* had done the same, you'd be hating their guts instead for comparable reasons.
* besides, Jack Tramiel was a gigantic, Gordon Gecko-class asshole. Bill Gates never even came close.

Where engineering happens, concessions and compromises are made. Some are going to irk some (or most) people. If a product of engineering becomes so widely adopted so as to become an "ad-hoc standard", it will invite hate regardless of its real quality.

Also, open standards are famous for being ridiculously over-engineered, slow to be accepted, and generally, suffering from "committee sickness". Compare OpenGL to Direct3D for example. Direct3D might be an "evil ploy" to lock game developers into the MS ecosystem, but it wouldn't have worked so well if OpenGL hadn't continued to suck after 3.0.

[Mechanical Menace]

Also, open standards are famous for being ridiculously over-engineered, slow to be accepted, and generally, suffering from "committee sickness". Compare OpenGL to Direct3D for example. Direct3D might be an "evil ploy" to lock game developers into the MS ecosystem, but it wouldn't have worked so well if OpenGL hadn't continued to suck after 3.0.

But yet when not on Windows or the XBoxes (and the Dreamcast once upon a time) everyone uses OpenGL or GL inspired APIs instead of Direct3D. You know why? Because they're both equally capable and it's the drivers that effect these API's abilities and performance. They both take slightly different approaches, one may be better or easier to use in one case, in others vice versa, and it seems to even out. Sometimes D3D lags behind, sometimes it's GL...

[Sigmoid]

But yet when not on Windows or the XBoxes (and the Dreamcast once upon a time) everyone uses OpenGL or GL inspired APIs instead of Direct3D. You know why? Because they're both equally capable and it's the drivers that effect these API's abilities and performance. They both take slightly different approaches, one may be better or easier to use in one case, in others vice versa, and it seems to even out. Sometimes D3D lags behind, sometimes it's GL...

Wrong analysis. They use it because they do not have a choice.

OpenGL is a pain in the ass. It's not about capabilities, it's about usability (from a programmer's standpoint). No sane person would use it if given the choice to use Direct3D instead. It's a giant pain for hardware vendors too due to the ridiculously over-engineered and over-flexible object model.

Why do you think so many games are Windows only?
"I enjoy working in Direct3D, and the additional market reach I'd get by using OpenGL isn't worth the pain." - That's why.

EDIT: Heck, a lot of Mac and Linux enabled games I've seen on Steam use Transgaming's Direct3D API reimplementation... Let that sink in for a while... xD

[Mechanical Menace]

But yet when not on Windows or the XBoxes (and the Dreamcast once upon a time) everyone uses OpenGL or GL inspired APIs instead of Direct3D. You know why? Because they're both equally capable and it's the drivers that effect these API's abilities and performance. They both take slightly different approaches, one may be better or easier to use in one case, in others vice versa, and it seems to even out. Sometimes D3D lags behind, sometimes it's GL...

Wrong analysis. They use it because they do not have a choice.

Who don't have a choice? Sony, Apple, Google, Nintendo? nVidia (or AMD, or someone else, or the whole lot get together) couldn't push something else that was more like D3D on their embedded offerings? TBH I bet they could just do D3D capable drivers on those other platforms and have no problem from MS. They haven't tried to stop Wine, Transgaming, Valve etc...

I can also bring up unattributed quotes from people who have the same preference or religious fervour for GL too.

And TBH for the PC it's only just becoming apparent that a platform rather than Windows also attracts gamers. Wait until the new engines start coming out...

[Sigmoid]

Who don't have a choice? Sony, Apple, Google, Nintendo? nVidia (or AMD, or someone else, or the whole lot get together) couldn't push something else that was more like D3D on their embedded offerings?

They could, but they don't. The people who don't have a choice are the game developers.

Also note how OpenGL is present on Windows too! It was always possible to create cross-platform games... and yet the sudden flood of non-Windows games coincides with (or follows, rather) the appearance of game development frameworks like Unity, that mostly hide OpenGL from the programmer.

And when Long Peaks was cancelled, there seemed to be full agreement that something awesome had just died, in favor of something below mediocre.

I know there are people who think OpenGL is the bee's knees, but my perception is that this love is aimed simply at OpenGL being an open standard, and not at its design. The love for Direct3D is aimed at its design, and not at it being a closed ecosystem designed by the most hated software company of all time, available only on the most hated OS of all time.

[miguelvp]

Wont comment because most likely is against company policy but let's just say that it's no better nor worse and this argument is a bit silly, but by all means keep on going, it's entertaining! 

Edit: (don't blame me for the PC port, nothing to do with it)

[Mechanical Menace]

Wont comment because most likely is against company policy but let's just say that it's no better nor worse and this argument is a bit silly, but by all means keep on going, it's entertaining! 

Edit: (don't blame me for the PC port, nothing to do with it)

Pretty much my point lol.

Who don't have a choice? Sony, Apple, Google, Nintendo? nVidia (or AMD, or someone else, or the whole lot get together) couldn't push something else that was more like D3D on their embedded offerings?

They could, but they don't. The people who don't have a choice are the game developers.

You earlier claimed the hardware vendors hate it :/

and yet the sudden flood of non-Windows games coincides with (or follows, rather) the appearance of game development frameworks like Unity, that mostly hide OpenGL from the programmer.

Because cross games engines that hide the underlying API and have multiple backends is new...

And it also hides D3D from the programmer. Oh and it's been around since 2005, it's hardly just appeared.

And when Long Peaks was cancelled, there seemed to be full agreement that something awesome had just died

And how long ago was that?

Honestly at this point the differences are down to what you prefer.

I know there are people who think OpenGL is the bee's knees, but my perception is that this love is aimed simply at OpenGL being an open standard, and not at its design. The love for Direct3D is aimed at its design, and not at it being a closed ecosystem designed by the most hated software company of all time, available only on the most hated OS of all time.

Again I can find people who would claim people love GL because of it's design and those who love D3D are rabid fanboys...

And they're hardly the most hated company of all time and most hated OS? Are you kidding me?

[timb]

Who don't have a choice? Sony, Apple, Google, Nintendo? nVidia (or AMD, or someone else, or the whole lot get together) couldn't push something else that was more like D3D on their embedded offerings?

They could, but they don't. The people who don't have a choice are the game developers.

Apple now has Metal for iOS, so, yes they are.


Sent from my Tablet

[Mechanical Menace]

That's more like a replacement for GleES, like Vulkan is a replacement for current GL and D3D12 is a replacement for current D3D.

They all owe a lot to Mantle, and I think the way the hardware vendors seem to be behind the lot says they all have their place. All of them seem to be vast improvements on the.current/last gen lot. Valve seem to love Vulkan and I'm guessing there will be plenty of people who love D3D12.

EDIT:Just noticed the missing words :/

[timofonic]

That's more like a replacement for GleES, like Vulkan is a replacement for current  and D3D12 is a replacement for current D3D.

They all owe a lot to Mantle, and I think the way the hardware vendors seem to be behind the lot says they all have their place. All of them seem to be vast improvements on the.current/last gen lot. Valve seem to love  and I'm guessing there will be plenty of people who love D3D12.

Is Vulkan a gaming oriented API? What about CAD?

[Mechanical Menace]

Is Vulkan a gaming oriented API? What about CAD?

Like the lot of the new/upcoming APIs it's a "using the GPU for whatever the GPU can do" API, graphics and GPGPU stuff. It's not limited to graphics at all and there's no fixed pipeline so if it's any good for a CAD system depends on the programmers.

I think it will make it easier for devs to work out how to offload work to the GPU where possible, seems to me to make it more obvious that what you've got to play with is a massive array of vector processors with all the advantages and disadvantages that brings.

But it wouldn't surprise me if someone implements a fixed pipeline GLalike running on top of Vulkan or D3D12 for legacy apps or newer apps that don't need any more.