The Free Talk Live BBS

Free Talk Live => The Polling Pit => Topic started by: Gustav on November 15, 2006, 07:29:06 PM

Title: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Gustav on November 15, 2006, 07:29:06 PM
This is obviously a random post but I'm just wondering what the rest of the libertarian crowd surfs the web on.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Taors on November 15, 2006, 07:34:03 PM
Where's the option for all three?
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Gustav on November 15, 2006, 07:52:43 PM
If you have all three pick your favorite OS.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: AlexLibman on November 15, 2006, 09:17:38 PM
I guess "Linux" is a catch-all category.  Vote "Linux" if:




I fall into this last category: stupid proprietary VPN client doesn't work w/o Windows, and most clients / co-workers are using Microsoft Office.  And, I must admit, the tablet features of my hybrid laptop work better in Windows.  But I still do most of my development for LAMP, using several Linux boxes I ssh into, so I'm voting "Linux".  You can tie the Linux components pretty close to your Windows system, via an X server (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xming) and something like SfpDrive (http://www.sftpdrive.com/).  Most Windows Apps I run locally are available for Linux as well, which will especially be the case once KDE4 (http://wiki.kde.org/tiki-index.php?page=KDE4+Windows+Port) comes out.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith) on November 15, 2006, 10:52:59 PM
This is obviously a random post but I'm just wondering what the rest of the libertarian crowd surfs the web on.
M$ or Linux all the way (I CAN"T STAND APPLES!)
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Brent on November 15, 2006, 11:04:28 PM
All I know is that I have an Apple and my girlfriend runs Windows on her PC.  My computer always works (printing, not freezing, generally doing what I want it to) and hers never does.  Windows seems to involve a constant battle against your machine.  It seems to me that every Windows user I know hates their computer while every Apple user loves theirs.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: BugEyedBeast on November 16, 2006, 07:33:46 AM
Win XP, 5 year old hardware, constantly at 100% CPU use if I don't forget to feed it tasks.  Works fine, but I'll probably go with a linux variant next time I change the operating system.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Brian Wolf on November 16, 2006, 10:39:00 AM
I am using Kubuntu 6.06 on my old G3 PPC
I am using WinXP Pro on my wifes machine (she needs it for work and school)
And Dual Boot WinXP and Ubuntu 6.10 on the Laptop.
I am probably gonna fix up the G3 to dual boot OSX and Kubuntu, believe it or not, 10.3.9 seems to run faster than Kubuntu on it!
Plus I just kida miss OSX.
My next computer will be an Intel Mac, and I am going to tri-boot OSX, WinXP, and Linux.
I will not switch to Vista unless I absoloutly have to.
I am really liking Ubuntu.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: ladyattis on November 16, 2006, 11:06:06 AM
I am using Kubuntu 6.06 on my old G3 PPC
I am using WinXP Pro on my wifes machine (she needs it for work and school)
And Dual Boot WinXP and Ubuntu 6.10 on the Laptop.
I am probably gonna fix up the G3 to dual boot OSX and Kubuntu, believe it or not, 10.3.9 seems to run faster than Kubuntu on it!
Plus I just kida miss OSX.
My next computer will be an Intel Mac, and I am going to tri-boot OSX, WinXP, and Linux.
I will not switch to Vista unless I absoloutly have to.
I am really liking Ubuntu.

It's a good debian derivative distro to be honest. Even the other debian distros are now starting to use ubuntu repos as their base instead of debian proper [sarge, etch and etc]. Also, the greatest thing about it is despite the fact that ubuntu is fairly resource demanding, it still doesn't come close to the usually demands of other OSes for the same feature set.

-- Bridget
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Jason Orr on November 16, 2006, 11:32:55 PM
I'm on an iBook G4.  I chose a Mac because I felt it was a superior product, and I don't regret my choice.  I thoroughly enjoy the OSX software.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: RAnthony on November 16, 2006, 11:46:54 PM
I currently run WinXP, Suse, Red Hat and Ubuntu.  I've not met with the Linux distro that I love, but I will be giving up Windows as soon as they try and force Vista on me.  I have no intention of ever upgrading, and almost regret moving off of W2K. Software authorization is a complete joke (having to ask for permission to run software that was legally purchased, what a rip off) and won't be purchasing any software that uses it from here on out.

I've never been thrilled with Mac's either, price point on the systems has not been competitive until recently.  Now that they run on intel, that barrier will go away.  Even though I've never owned a Mac, I have a version of OSX that will run on a Wintel box.  I need to load that one too...

-RAnthony
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: ladyattis on November 16, 2006, 11:48:57 PM
try KateOS (http://www.kateos.org) if you want a full featured Slackware-like Distro. :)

-- Bridget
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: RAnthony on November 17, 2006, 12:22:45 AM
try KateOS (http://www.kateos.org) if you want a full featured Slackware-like Distro. :)

They all seem to lack the same features.  DVD playing and burning.  Strangely the first distro that I tried, Suse, seems to have the most support for Multimedia; and I considered it seriously flawed in that it left out playability for most DVD's available in the US. 

Yes, I know I can build (and do build) players that will handle protected DVD's, I just want the damn system to handle them out of the box, which is something Windows doesn't do either, BTW.

-RAnthony
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: rollins100 on November 17, 2006, 06:51:34 AM
All I know is that I have an Apple and my girlfriend runs Windows on her PC.  My computer always works (printing, not freezing, generally doing what I want it to) and hers never does.  Windows seems to involve a constant battle against your machine.  It seems to me that every Windows user I know hates their computer while every Apple user loves theirs.

Amen brutha!

I have been using Apple products since I was five, and I'm not about to switch now!  Granted, they are pricey, though.  But I think it is worth it.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: BugEyedBeast on November 17, 2006, 07:36:52 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/t-L-0s-7-Z0

Bummer, can't embed flash here - suppose someone abused that early on.  Link still works.  Just for fun :)
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: rollins100 on November 17, 2006, 09:07:24 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/t-L-0s-7-Z0

Bummer, can't embed flash here - suppose someone abused that early on.  Link still works.  Just for fun :)

 :D  That is good.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: error on November 17, 2006, 06:48:13 PM
They all seem to lack the same features.  DVD playing and burning.  Strangely the first distro that I tried, Suse, seems to have the most support for Multimedia; and I considered it seriously flawed in that it left out playability for most DVD's available in the US. 

Yes, I know I can build (and do build) players that will handle protected DVD's, I just want the damn system to handle them out of the box, which is something Windows doesn't do either, BTW.

-RAnthony

This is because of the MPAA, not because of Linux.

Most Linux distros would LOVE to ship this capability out of the box, and indeed, they could, were it not for the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which prevents you from playing DVDs you legally purchased.

When this came up in front of the courts, unfortunately, the MPAA won and we lost (http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/MPAA_DVD_cases/).
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: RAnthony on November 17, 2006, 07:21:58 PM
This is because of the MPAA, not because of Linux.
Most Linux distros would LOVE to ship this capability out of the box, and indeed, they could, were it not for the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which prevents you from playing DVDs you legally purchased.
When this came up in front of the courts, unfortunately, the MPAA won and we lost (http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/MPAA_DVD_cases/).

Software produced in other countries, like a good many distros are, can freely thumb thier noses at DMCA and the MPAA.  They aren't bound by US law.  There is no real basis for claims concerning decss anymore, even within the US.  But, of course, corporations as creatures of law, kowtow to any law in existence. 

So Linux is crippled from the outset because the average user couldn't compile their way out of a paper bag, and MicroShaft or Apple win the software battle because they are proprietary code?  As if that makes a difference.

-RAnthony
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: ladyattis on November 17, 2006, 08:27:36 PM
./configure, rpm, pacman, emerge, port, and etc are your friends. :lol:

-- Bridget
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: RAnthony on November 17, 2006, 09:06:27 PM
./configure, rpm, pacman, emerge, port, and etc are your friends. :lol:

The command line scares the hell out of the average user.  That's why they abandoned DOS in the first place.  Me, I still have a system with FreeDOS (http://www.freedos.org/) installed on it. (...and the 1.0 version is out.  Too cool)

Now, the average user is going to agree 100% with these guys' insights:
http://www.deadtroll.com/index2.html?/video/ossuckscable.html~content

-RAnthony
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: ladyattis on November 17, 2006, 09:14:17 PM
The average person a century ago was scared of learning how to read and write for common accessibility to resources [jobs, housing, and etc], but here we are, all pretty much reading and writing [maybe not very well, but still...].

The same goes for computers, people have to change to ensure their survival. Live or die, you decide. ;)

-- Bridget
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: RAnthony on November 18, 2006, 12:50:08 AM
The same goes for computers, people have to change to ensure their survival. Live or die, you decide. ;)

I have decided.  Open source or nothing. 

And on one hand I doubt that the average luser will follow suit, which means Linux and open source remain marginal. On the other hand, I'm betting MicroShaft and it's corporate software buddies will start playing hardball (i.e. getting open source outlawed, or void the GPL) when they start seriously loosing marketshare; so I'm doubting that I'll be left with much choice in the long run...

-RAnthony
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: AlexLibman on November 18, 2006, 12:55:36 AM
I strongly prefer Linux, but it's wrong to let your preferences get in the way of profit.  So I have to mix in some Microsoft / Oracle as well.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Brian Wolf on November 18, 2006, 02:06:16 AM
The same goes for computers, people have to change to ensure their survival. Live or die, you decide. ;)

I have decided.  Open source or nothing. 

And on one hand I doubt that the average luser will follow suit, which means Linux and open source remain marginal. On the other hand, I'm betting MicroShaft and it's corporate software buddies will start playing hardball (i.e. getting open source outlawed, or void the GPL) when they start seriously loosing marketshare; so I'm doubting that I'll be left with much choice in the long run...

-RAnthony

Micro$oft is already claiming that Linux uses some of their IP. They wont say which IP(s) exactly, but that is part of what their deal wit Novell was all about. http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id;839593139;fp;16;fpid;1

I think that its possible that the average user may follow suit. Ubuntu is pretty n00b friendly. You could probably never touch the command line if you didn't want to. And it looks pretty good.
I am sure that people 'switching' from Apple or M$ would have a few growing pains, but nothing really radical.
If you were just learning  how to use computers, then it would be no different than learning Windoze or OSX.

I think that the 'average user' is simply unaware that there is a free alternative. We need to get the word out to people.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: bignasty022 on November 18, 2006, 02:49:34 AM
I'll think about getting a mac once they get 2 buttons on their mouse
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: RAnthony on November 18, 2006, 02:53:15 AM
I'll think about getting a mac once they get 2 buttons on their mouse

That's an easy fix.  only the out-of-the-box mice have one button.

-RAnthony
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Ecolitan on November 18, 2006, 02:57:16 AM
I'll think about getting a mac once they get 2 buttons on their mouse

I said that a couple years ago but now that they use a unix OS with Intel Processors what do they have on a PC other than perhaps the percieved prestige of being willing to pay twice as much?
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: rollins100 on November 18, 2006, 04:38:48 AM
I'll think about getting a mac once they get 2 buttons on their mouse

I said that a couple years ago but now that they use a unix OS with Intel Processors what do they have on a PC other than perhaps the percieved prestige of being willing to pay twice as much?

Security?
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: error on November 18, 2006, 04:58:31 AM
Micro$oft is already claiming that Linux uses some of their IP. They wont say which IP(s) exactly, but that is part of what their deal wit Novell was all about. http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id;839593139;fp;16;fpid;1

SCO tried that. It pretty much killed the company.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Ecolitan on November 18, 2006, 05:04:37 AM
I'll think about getting a mac once they get 2 buttons on their mouse

I said that a couple years ago but now that they use a unix OS with Intel Processors what do they have on a PC other than perhaps the percieved prestige of being willing to pay twice as much?

Security?

How so?  It's a unix based OS.  What makes it more secure when run on a mac?  I'll tell you right now...  nothing.  Mac used to have a couple of trivial advantages.  They lost that when they lost the hardware wars.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Brian Wolf on November 18, 2006, 11:25:58 AM
Have you ever even used a Mac?
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: aquabanianskakid on November 18, 2006, 11:29:39 AM
If I had the money I would get a Mac... but my cheap pc was just to tempting. I like the look of OSX and it is fairly user friendly. In all honesty, if Linux ran better on my computer I would have stuck to it. Windows is ok, but not great.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: ladyattis on November 18, 2006, 03:16:20 PM
It's just that Unix based systems are often easier to lock down than Bloze based systems. First, most host server functions in Unix are separate from the kernel in the form of programs called daemons [in reference to Maxwell's Daemon], so if one daemon is found to be buggy you just turn it off and take it off your crond list. Second, memory is managed in what is known as protected mode. Protected mode memory is basically where a block of memory is quartered off for one program for the cycle of the program's time [when it's running] and no other programs can access it [although it can send signals to other programs to parse data them like D-Bus and etc]. So if that program fails it just fails in its addressed memory, preventing the system from crashing. This often works, although this doesn't stop 'kernel' panics, which are system crashes of the kernel when something messes up, usually something to do with memory management and/or hardware interfacing [which is why I don't compile a kernel with hardware support beyond the basics. I got HAL, ALSA, ESD, XFree86, and etc to handle my hardware].  Bloze doesn't have this modularization out of the box or ever. That's why bloze often fails.

-- Bridget
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: FKnight on November 18, 2006, 03:26:42 PM
And on one hand I doubt that the average luser will follow suit, which means Linux and open source remain marginal. On the other hand, I'm betting MicroShaft and it's corporate software buddies will start playing hardball (i.e. getting open source outlawed, or void the GPL) when they start seriously loosing marketshare; so I'm doubting that I'll be left with much choice in the long run...

-RAnthony
Microsoft doesn’t need to do any of that to defeat any other company in market share.  Apple does not seem to be interested in market share, opting to be the “sharper image” of computers, and Distribution Purists who become angered when Ubuntu ships with binary drivers will prevent Linux from going anywhere because they believe that my grandmother should be more interested in hippie software freedom than expecting her camera to work when she plugs it into the computer.  Microsoft wins because they’re the only ones bothering to try to win.

Have you ever even used a Mac?
  • OSX has had the Darwin core since it first came out.
    It is way more secure. There have been a few exploits for the Mac, but not enough to be a problem.
    Its easier to use.
    Its faster.
    Its much nicer looking.
    Now that they have switched to Intel, you can run your Windoze on it.
    Its not twice as much, it is a little more expensive, but the hardware is better quality.
I’m not sure how the hardware quality is better since they are using the same parts that are in many PCs manufactured by other companies which are sold much less expensively. 
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Ecolitan on November 18, 2006, 03:57:54 PM
Have you ever even used a Mac?
  • OSX has had the Darwin core since it first came out.
    It is way more secure. There have been a few exploits for the Mac, but not enough to be a problem.
    Its easier to use.
    Its faster.
    Its much nicer looking.
    Now that they have switched to Intel, you can run your Windoze on it.
    Its not twice as much, it is a little more expensive, but the hardware is better quality.

Yes I've used a Mac. 

1) more secure than what?  All OS's available on any platform?

2) easier to use than what?  + easy is what you know. 

3) faster than what?

4) yeah.... probably prettier but My tower is under the desk.

5) now that they've switched to intel they're just another PC

6)  I build my own...  It's twice as much.  better quality than what?....  My hardware doesn't typically break faster than I replace it for other reasons.  I've had one HD go out after 5 years....  that's understandable, after 5 years it was time for more storage space.... storing massive amounts of audio/video had become practical and cheap in the last 5 years.  and one heavily used 4x CD burner crap out on me.  It was time to get a faster burner anyway.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: aquabanianskakid on November 18, 2006, 04:02:15 PM
Hey Roy, you never responded. Are you taking me out to dinner or what? Now now don't deny that Macs are really nice.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Ecolitan on November 18, 2006, 04:21:24 PM
It's Royce....  I must have missed the dinner post....  and uh... no....  hadn't planned on it... why?

I've never enjoyed my experience w/ Macs.  The spinning beach ball comes no less often than the blue screen.  Now that I'm thinking about it.  I haven't got a blue screen since Win95 on my own machine.

My Dad's Bachelor's is in "the use of computers in education" and when he got that degree Apple was supposed to fill that niche.  He taught in the computer lab at Mizzou in grad school.  I had the run of the place at 5 years old.  I did my first word processing on appleworks.  My training is on MS OS's.  I suppose it's possible that they don't actually DO more but it is true that I can do more with them.


OK OK...  I admit..  those desktop macs are kinda pretty.  But I'm looking at a 21" monitor right now.  That's WAY better than having the side of it look pretty. 
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: aquabanianskakid on November 18, 2006, 04:23:28 PM
Because you're hot? Sorry for hitting on you, while talking on an online bbs. Must be the beer.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: RAnthony on November 18, 2006, 04:35:57 PM
Microsoft wins because they’re the only ones bothering to try to win.

Microsoft wins because it is supplied on a PC system at no significant charge.  It's a lot like payroll deductions.  Most people don't notice the difference between net income and gross income.  They don't do their own taxes, balance a checkbook, etc.  That's why they support things like socialized medicine; it will be free to them because they don't count the costs that come out of their pocket before they even know what they had.  There isn't a cost to them at point of purchase, so they think of it as free.

When you buy a computer system, there is a lump sum fee that you pay.  There is no detailed record of what everything that goes into your computer costs.  There is a software upchage of about a hundred bucks on the average windows system.  I can buy a complete computer system with a Linux OS on it for 150 to 200 bucks.  Windows systems are generally much higher than that.

If people had to pay for the software upfront, this would all be a different story.  Microsoft would not have the marketshare they currently have.  The MPAA and the RIAA would not have been able to advance their agendas because there would be no monolithic software giant to enforce their will.  There wouldn't be the problem that currently exists with viruses and malware, because there wouldn't be a Swiss cheese OS out there that is specifically set up to be hijacked.

[The average windows system is shipped with a default user profile created, and an administrator account invisible on top of it.  None of the accounts are password protected, and the average user doesn't know about the admin account that anyone can log on to.  When you plug the box into the network, it's a simple thing for a cracker to ping it, load his software onto the system through one of a hundred or so open ports, log on to the administrator account remotely, and hijack the system.  It generally takes about 15 minutes for this to occur, according to the last article I read on the subject. Systems set up to be hijacked.]

It is the massive market share (and sweet deals for exclusivity with Microsoft) that has gotten peripheral suppliers (like cameras and scanners)  to program their drivers for Windows only.  There was a time when driver disks had multiple OS options on them.  I almost never see that anymore.  It's not the fault of Linux programmers that peripherals aren't recognized, it is the fault of the manufacturers who don't support anything but Windows; and will in fact build their hardware to rely on Windows (as in the case of some printers) to the exclusion of everybody else.

It's a corporate disease, much like a free-government-provided disease.

-RAnthony
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: error on November 18, 2006, 04:44:47 PM
6)  I build my own...

You build your own laptop?
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: aquabanianskakid on November 18, 2006, 04:47:03 PM
You actually could if you wanted to. But I have yet to find a barebones that was cheap enough to be worth buying.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Ecolitan on November 18, 2006, 04:57:49 PM
I've thought about building a laptop.  I saw in a magazine at a doctor's office that it is something that people do these days.  After seeing that thing about about the keylogger in the dell laptop I know I will seriously look into it when the time comes.  I don't think they are as nice as the cool one's my friends are getting with the articulating keyboards, harmon kardon speakers and all.  That would be a downside.  I really dig those articulating keyboards.

Even if I don't build a laptop I wouldn't be tempted to get a Mac.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: aquabanianskakid on November 18, 2006, 05:02:20 PM
Ohhhh Roy er Royce don't deny your love for me
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: FKnight on November 18, 2006, 05:02:48 PM
I've thought about building a laptop.  I saw in a magazine at a doctor's office that it is something that people do these days.  After seeing that thing about about the keylogger in the dell laptop I know I will seriously look into it when the time comes.  [...]


http://www.snopes.com/computer/internet/dellbug.asp

Quote from:
Although furtive eavesdropping on computer activity is certainly possible, the specific tale presented above is nothing more than an example of "government conspiracy" type hoaxlore. It originally appeared on www.chromance.de (from which it has since been removed, although it remains mirrored elsewhere), a site which carried several other obvious hoaxes. The graphics for the article were lifted from another site's page about commercial keyboard loggers, and the purported letter from the Department of Homeland Security appears to be an altered version of someone else's example of correspondence from the DHS.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Ecolitan on November 18, 2006, 05:06:29 PM
Because you're hot? Sorry for hitting on you, while talking on an online bbs. Must be the beer.

Quite alright.  I've discussed it with my closest advisors and I'm permitted to be flattered without having to buy a pink shirt and change my accent so I think I'm OK with it.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: aquabanianskakid on November 18, 2006, 05:12:09 PM
Haha :P you can say fag, it's a fun word.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: error on November 18, 2006, 05:15:19 PM
After seeing that thing about about the keylogger in the dell laptop I know I will seriously look into it when the time comes.

You mean the Dell keylogger hoax (http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2005/06/17/keylogger-found-in-dell-laptop/)?
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Ecolitan on November 18, 2006, 05:18:12 PM
Ohhhh Roy er Royce don't deny your love for me

If it's that important to you I won't deny it.  I'll just play aloof in the hopes that you'll buy me things.

Haha :P you can say fag, it's a fun word.

I don't think I'm ready for that.  I've just got to where I can use "bitches" in jest without adverse physical reaction. 
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Taors on November 18, 2006, 05:22:56 PM
Haha :P you can say fag, it's a fun word.

Faggy McFagster.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: aquabanianskakid on November 18, 2006, 05:23:17 PM
Gifts for sex?
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: ladyattis on November 18, 2006, 05:23:31 PM
Roy, btw people use to buy apple laptops because there were indeed of great quality. Very robust in their build, and very stable for their lifespan [about ten years for some models]. But anymore they're not the same, and I believe there was a blog that reports the defects in Apple laptops. One the biggest issues is the heat problem they have, apparently their CPUs [despite being intel mobile models] still produce way more heat than the average non Apple laptop. In fact, I think they opened up an Apple laptop and showed that it was improperly handled with regard to the CPU heat paste that is applied onto the CPU before putting on the heatsink [basically the paste was smeared all over the CPU instead of on the top of it, thus making the heat conduct all over the board instead of toward the heatsink].

So, it's not a good idea to buy an Apple laptop, they're just not good anymore. I always suggest to people to buy a laptop based on the reviews that show their robustness more than anything else. You'll be surprised how easily broken a laptop can be made.

-- Bridget
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Ecolitan on November 18, 2006, 05:32:00 PM
Gifts for sex?


No,  gifts are unconditional. 
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: aquabanianskakid on November 18, 2006, 05:34:00 PM
Ok fine what do you want first :P
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Ecolitan on November 18, 2006, 05:37:06 PM
Make sure to use the FTL portal.

http://www.amazon.com/DEWALT-DW708-Double-Bevel-Sliding-Compound/dp/B00002231F
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: aquabanianskakid on November 18, 2006, 05:43:16 PM
So, where do you want to go for dinner? Oh the saw will be there by thursday.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Ecolitan on November 18, 2006, 05:48:54 PM
I totally should have known better than to encourage you.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: aquabanianskakid on November 18, 2006, 05:52:25 PM
:P I'll stop. What distros have you guys used?
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: AlexLibman on November 18, 2006, 06:03:06 PM
Apple used to be like a centrally planned economy, though a good one.  They dictate which hardware and software can work with their system, though the latter has been loosened by the advent of BSD / Linux, and it is being loosened even further by the switch to Intel CPU.  An example of stricter central planning is some video game consoles, which will sue you if you try to publish software for their system without paying them a license fee.

Microsoft is like a mixed economy.  You can choose which company makes your hardware, as long as it's Intel-compatible.  The API's are 90% published, though the unpublished 10% is an annoyance.  There are lots of non-Microsoft products to choose from, but Microsoft obviously has an unfair advantage.  It likes to keep the "commanding heights" of the software market to itself and its partners.

FLOSS is more like anarchy, with BSD being slightly more pro-capitalist than GNU/Linux.  Any component can be easily replaced.  There are no costs involved for most packages only because if you had to pay a few cents a month for some packages, competition would have quickly driven those prices to zero.  On some distros, there's nothing standing in the way of people who want to sell Linux/BSD software for profit.  In high-end markets, like top-notch RDBMS's or high-graphics games, for-profit businesses will probably always have an edge.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Ecolitan on November 18, 2006, 06:18:02 PM
Roy, btw people use to buy apple laptops because there were indeed of great quality. Very robust in their build, and very stable for their lifespan [about ten years for some models]. But anymore they're not the same

That's part of my original point.  I don't pretend to understand whatever it is that apple fans are faithful to but there can't be much left of it. 


I once installed linux on a 486 dx266 just to see.  I don't remember what flavor.  I DO remember that it was a pain in the ass and I required a lot of help from the internet to make it happen and then I had a machine that I really had no use for so I gave it to a friend to play with.  I decided then it wasn't practical for me to run linux.

More recently, as in at this very moment.  I have a friend who is the typical user that has decided to install ubuntu.  It's been a very long week for her and I think she's going to give up on making her video capture card work.  I've been talking with her throughout the process.  It's a good time for that to happen because I've been thinking about giving another OS a shot.  Her experience has convinced me I have little to gain and a lot of time to lose.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: aquabanianskakid on November 18, 2006, 06:23:14 PM
I used Kubuntu, then I realised they were some serious hardware/linux compatability issues. My videocard wouldn't work right and neither would acpi. I still used linux for 6 months before I had just enough and went back to windows. Windows is buggy and flawed... but let's face it, almost any hardware will work with it. Software is also easier to install and obtain.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Brian Wolf on November 18, 2006, 09:00:17 PM
Yes I've used a Mac. 
1) more secure than what?  All OS's available on any platform?
2) easier to use than what?  + easy is what you know. 
3) faster than what?
4) yeah.... probably prettier but My tower is under the desk.
5) now that they've switched to intel they're just another PC
6)  I build my own...  It's twice as much.  better quality than what?....  My hardware doesn't typically break faster than I replace it for other reasons.  I've had one HD go out after 5 years....  that's understandable, after 5 years it was time for more storage space.... storing massive amounts of audio/video had become practical and cheap in the last 5 years.  and one heavily used 4x CD burner crap out on me.  It was time to get a faster burner anyway.

I was going to respond to this, but you are either being deliberately obtuse, or you are just stupid.
Either way this conversation would be wasted on you, I can tell that right now, so Ill just say that you are right dude.
Windows is awesome! You are obviously very wise.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Ecolitan on November 19, 2006, 08:20:05 AM
I was going to respond to this, but you are either being deliberately obtuse, or you are just stupid.
Either way this conversation would be wasted on you, I can tell that right now, so Ill just say that you are right dude.
Windows is awesome! You are obviously very wise.

I never said windows is awesome.  I didn't intend to imply that anything not Mac is windows..  Why would you think that?  I ran OS/2 warp for awhile and liked it fine.  Too bad they got their ass kicked on the price point and no one made software for it.  The whole industry would be better off today for the increased competition.

I'm right about what?  That my tower is under the desk?  How would you know?  That I haven't found the quality of my PC hardware to be insufficient?  How would you know?  That I build my computers for cheap cuz I get all my parts wholesale...  how would you know?

The rest of it was questions....  If you don't have good answers..... fine.  I'll go on thinking extreme mac defenders are crazy cultists who can't give good answers about why macs are better.  More so now that the Macs they say are sooo great have so much in common with the PC's they've been insulting for years.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Brian Wolf on November 19, 2006, 12:32:52 PM

I never said windows is awesome.  I didn't intend to imply that anything not Mac is windows. Why would you think that?

Maybe because I was responding to your post that did imply that you were talking about Windows.
Quote
I said that a couple years ago but now that they use a unix OS with Intel Processors what do they have on a PC other than perhaps the percieved prestige of being willing to pay twice as much?

For years, people have referred to Windows based machines as a PC and Apples Macintosh’s as Mac’s. Now you could claim that you meant ‘personal computers’ when you said ‘PC’ in which case, you would have to include ‘Mac’s’ as a ‘PC’, which would make what you said nonsensical.  So, yeah whether intentional or not, you did imply that you were talking about Windows as compared to Macintoshes.

Quote
I ran OS/2 warp for awhile and liked it fine.  Too bad they got their ass kicked on the price point and no one made software for it.  The whole industry would be better off today for the increased competition.

That’s fine. From everything I hear OS/2 was a good OS. I think that there is plenty of competition for the OS market though. If an OS like Linux which is free, fast and secure, cannot gain market share against Windows, whose ONLY advantage is ‘mind share’ then I doubt OS/2 would fare much better.

Quote
I'm right about what?  That my tower is under the desk?  How would you know?  That I haven't found the quality of my PC hardware to be insufficient?  How would you know?  That I build my computers for cheap cuz I get all my parts wholesale...  how would you know? The rest of it was questions....  If you don't have good answers..... fine

All right, if you really want the answers, here goes.

1) more secure than what?  All OS's available on any platform?
No, just windows

2) easier to use than what?  + easy is what you know. 
Windows. I’ll give you the ‘easy is what you know’ bit.
If you are unwilling to learn how to use a computer, then using a typewriter to type up your documents would be easier. That does not make a typewriter easier for word processing in general, just for that one person.

3) faster than what?
Again, its nice that you are trying to backpedal, but we all know that you were talking about Windows, if you meant something  else, you should have been more clear.

4) yeah.... probably prettier but My tower is under the desk.
I wasn’t referring to the hardware; (although you might have a point there in general) I was referring to how nice OSX looks in comparison to Windows.
Widows Vista’s ‘Arrow Glass’ interface is just a lame attempt to be ape OSX’s GUI, which it has had for years, and runs on much more modest hardware.

5) now that they've switched to intel they're just another PC
Mac’s are not PC’s (see above). But if you mean Personal Computer, then what made them ‘not a PC’ when they were using their Power PC architecture?
It may be ‘just another PC’ but with a higher quality OS.

6)  I build my own... It's twice as much.
So you are comparing a pre-built computer with one you put together?
Okay, I guess maybe you have a point there, but I would challenge you to build one cheaper than you can order the exact same one from Dell.
But, ,to go back to my original point, If you compare a pre-built Windows box with a pre-built Mac, I give you that Mac’s are a little more expensive, but twice as much? I am not so sure.

Quote
better quality than what?....  My hardware doesn't typically break faster than I replace it for other reasons.  I've had one HD go out after 5 years....  that's understandable, after 5 years it was time for more storage space.... storing massive amounts of audio/video had become practical and cheap in the last 5 years.  and one heavily used 4x CD burner crap out on me.  It was time to get a faster burner anyway.

Well, if you want to use personal anecdotes as a way of proving your point, I have a old G3 ‘Power Mac’ that is 7 years old. Everything on it still works perfectly. Including the CD ROM drive.

Quote
I'll go on thinking extreme mac defenders are crazy cultists who can't give good answers about why macs are better.

Think whatever you want, I am by no means an ‘extreme Mac defender’.
If I were to say to you that using a bic lighter to start fires is a better way to start fires than rubbing two sticks together, then I suppose I would be an “extreme bic defender” to you. I just happen to use all 3 OS’s (XP, OSX, and Linux).
I also pay attention. Windows is plagued by spyware, viruses, and a bloated, inefficient and insecure OS.

Quote
More so now that the Macs they say are sooo great have so much in common with the PC's they've been insulting for years.

The only thing that they have in common is the hardware.
I have not been insulting PC’s, I have been honest about them, but I am not a crazy Mac zealot.
But you sound kind of like the crazy windows zealots that I have heard insulting the Mac for years who “can’t give good answers about why” Windows machines are better.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Ecolitan on November 21, 2006, 08:19:43 AM

I never said windows is awesome.  I didn't intend to imply that anything not Mac is windows. Why would you think that?

Maybe because I was responding to your post that did imply that you were talking about Windows.
Quote
I said that a couple years ago but now that they use a unix OS with Intel Processors what do they have on a PC other than perhaps the percieved prestige of being willing to pay twice as much?
I specifically mentioned a Unix OS here.  The "implication" is that similar OS's are available on other platforms and Windows does not fit that description.  I wasn't talking about windows.  What I intended to imply is that a few years ago the lack of convenience of right button functionality was enough to dissuade me from a system that I thought might have several advantages.  Now that Macs use unix and I can get that on a PC if I want it.  Than the old advantages of macs are gone to me.  I totally didn't include windows in the equation.  Not in text nor in my head.

For years, people have referred to Windows based machines as a PC and Apples Macintosh’s as Mac’s. Now you could claim that you meant ‘personal computers’ when you said ‘PC’ in which case, you would have to include ‘Mac’s’ as a ‘PC’, which would make what you said nonsensical.  So, yeah whether intentional or not, you did imply that you were talking about Windows as compared to Macintoshes.

That PC thing has always been a pet peeve of mine.  Macs ARE personal computers and that's why in the course of this conversation I've tried to use "other platforms" and similar phrases.  I don't think I was entirely consistent with that.  Unfortunately I don't know of another term to differentiate "IBM compatible" is no longer accurate.  But again here...  the assumption that "PC's" in the commonly used sense are windows based is your assumption and not mine.  From the beginning my whole point was that unix based OS's are available for "other platforms" and therefore the unix OS available for the Mac is not a selling point for me.


Quote
I'm right about what?  That my tower is under the desk?  How would you know?  That I haven't found the quality of my PC hardware to be insufficient?  How would you know?  That I build my computers for cheap cuz I get all my parts wholesale...  how would you know? The rest of it was questions....  If you don't have good answers..... fine

All right, if you really want the answers, here goes.

1) more secure than what?  All OS's available on any platform?
No, just windows
Quote
My point exactly

Quote
2) easier to use than what?  + easy is what you know. 
Windows. I’ll give you the ‘easy is what you know’ bit.
If you are unwilling to learn how to use a computer, then using a typewriter to type up your documents would be easier. That does not make a typewriter easier for word processing in general, just for that one person.

also my point exactly


Quote
3) faster than what?
Again, its nice that you are trying to backpedal, but we all know that you were talking about Windows, if you meant something  else, you should have been more clear.

uh.... no I wasn't.    I guess my original "now that they use a unix OS with Intel Processors what do they have on a PC" was not enough for you to realize that unix OS's are available for PC's.  I am not under the impression that everything NOT mac is windows based.  In an online community I don't know anyone who is....except you.

Quote
4) yeah.... probably prettier but My tower is under the desk.
I wasn’t referring to the hardware; (although you might have a point there in general) I was referring to how nice OSX looks in comparison to Windows.
Widows Vista’s ‘Arrow Glass’ interface is just a lame attempt to be ape OSX’s GUI, which it has had for years, and runs on much more modest hardware.

That's a non-issue for me anyway. 

Quote
5) now that they've switched to intel they're just another PC
Mac’s are not PC’s (see above). But if you mean Personal Computer, then what made them ‘not a PC’ when they were using their Power PC architecture?
It may be ‘just another PC’ but with a higher quality OS.

let's not revisit the PC argument.  I've been using it in it's commonly accepted form.  The higher quality OS is what we're talking about.  Higher quality than what?  At this point I have to assume that you're comparing everything to windows which I believe is a mistake, one that I did not make.  Which brings us finally to a topic that I DO have some interest in.  What makes the mac OS so great?  Not what makes it better than windows?  But everything else.  I've used OSX and It wsa totally frustrating that it took so much moving around of the mouse and single clicking to do what I'm used to doing with a stationary right click.  I know there are other concerns like stability and security but this particular mac was always giving me the spinning beach ball.  I can't speak to security.  I run my old financial software on an old computer that's NOT connected to the internet.

Quote
6)  I build my own... It's twice as much.
So you are comparing a pre-built computer with one you put together?
Okay, I guess maybe you have a point there, but I would challenge you to build one cheaper than you can order the exact same one from Dell.
But, ,to go back to my original point, If you compare a pre-built Windows box with a pre-built Mac, I give you that Mac’s are a little more expensive, but twice as much? I am not so sure.

Dell is getting competitive and the real savings is in software packages although most of that software I don't need or want so I couldn't put it all in the savings column.  I haven't built one for a few years and I probably couldn't compete if I payed retail for parts but I know a guy.

Quote
Quote
better quality than what?....  My hardware doesn't typically break faster than I replace it for other reasons.  I've had one HD go out after 5 years....  that's understandable, after 5 years it was time for more storage space.... storing massive amounts of audio/video had become practical and cheap in the last 5 years.  and one heavily used 4x CD burner crap out on me.  It was time to get a faster burner anyway.

Well, if you want to use personal anecdotes as a way of proving your point, I have a old G3 ‘Power Mac’ that is 7 years old. Everything on it still works perfectly. Including the CD ROM drive.

And good for you.  I have a pentium pro 200 that's approximately the same age.  I got it free so I don't know when it was built but I know I was supporting them 10 years ago.  My point was that I'm OK with my hardware.  That you are also OK with yours doesn't change things. 


Quote
I'll go on thinking extreme mac defenders are crazy cultists who can't give good answers about why macs are better.

[quoteThink whatever you want, I am by no means an ‘extreme Mac defender’.
If I were to say to you that using a bic lighter to start fires is a better way to start fires than rubbing two sticks together, then I suppose I would be an “extreme bic defender” to you. I just happen to use all 3 OS’s (XP, OSX, and Linux).
I also pay attention. Windows is plagued by spyware, viruses, and a bloated, inefficient and insecure OS.
Quote

what betrays you as an extreme mac defender is your assumption that this conversation is about windows.  That's something YOU brought to this table... not me.  Also that you haven't told me one real aspect whether hardware of software that makes a mac so secure or stable or anything else.  If it's really got something going for it and you know what that is wouldn't be willing to tell me as best you understand it.  Whether it's they way it handles internet traffic or prevents data loss....  anything.

Quote
Quote
More so now that the Macs they say are sooo great have so much in common with the PC's they've been insulting for years.

The only thing that they have in common is the hardware.
I have not been insulting PC’s, I have been honest about them, but I am not a crazy Mac zealot.
But you sound kind of like the crazy windows zealots that I have heard insulting the Mac for years who “can’t give good answers about why” Windows machines are better.



If you want me to agree that windows is bloated, inneffecient, insecure and susceptible to spyware that's a no brainer.  Yes windows is all those things.

But I'm not talking about windows...  never was.  I'm talking about Intel/nvidia and friends and Unix OS's. 

Furthermore, I never made a claim that windows was better.  More like willing to accept the assumption that at one point Macs WERE better but now that they've undergone this drastic overhaul why are they STILL better?  You said the only thing they have in common is the hardware.... well what makes OSX so much better than Fedora Redhat (to pull an OS out of my.....brother's persona)?  There could be something amazing about OSX that easily answers that question.  I don't know what that is.  If you do....  by all means let me know.  But saying that windows sucks does not accomplish that.

So far what I've got is that they're prettier and not quite as much more expensive as I thought.  I'm willing to accept that.  Not enough to convince me to buy one but hey....  It's an answer.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Brian Wolf on November 21, 2006, 09:58:26 AM
Quote
I said that a couple years ago but now that they use a unix OS with Intel Processors what do they have on a PC other than perhaps the percieved prestige of being willing to pay twice as much?

I specifically mentioned a Unix OS here.  The "implication" is that similar OS's are available on other platforms and Windows does not fit that description.  I wasn't talking about windows.  What I intended to imply is that a few years ago the lack of convenience of right button functionality was enough to dissuade me from a system that I thought might have several advantages.  Now that Macs use unix and I can get that on a PC if I want it.  Than the old advantages of macs are gone to me.  I totally didn't include windows in the equation.  Not in text nor in my head.
For years, people have referred to Windows based machines as a PC and Apples Macintosh’s as Mac’s. Now you could claim that you meant ‘personal computers’ when you said ‘PC’ in which case, you would have to include ‘Mac’s’ as a ‘PC’, which would make what you said nonsensical.  So, yeah whether intentional or not, you did imply that you were talking about Windows as compared to Macintoshes.
Quote
That PC thing has always been a pet peeve of mine.  Macs ARE personal computers and that's why in the course of this conversation I've tried to use "other platforms" and similar phrases.  I don't think I was entirely consistent with that.  Unfortunately I don't know of another term to differentiate "IBM compatible" is no longer accurate.  But again here...  the assumption that "PC's" in the commonly used sense are windows based is your assumption and not mine.  From the beginning my whole point was that unix based OS's are available for "other platforms" and therefore the unix OS available for the Mac is not a selling point for me.
Quote
let's not revisit the PC argument.  I've been using it in it's commonly accepted form.
Quote
what betrays you as an extreme mac defender is your assumption that this conversation is about windows.  That's something YOU brought to this table... not me

What I said before still stands.
Now you could claim that you meant ‘personal computers’ when you said ‘PC’ in which case, you would have to include ‘Mac’s’ as a ‘PC’, which would make what you said nonsensical.
because to translate, now that I know that you did mean ALL ‘personal computers’ when you said PC’s, I will restate your original statement.
“ … but now that personal computers use a Unix OS with Intel processors what do personal computers have on personal computers other than perhaps the perceived prestige of being willing to pay twice as much?"
In your original statement,
Quote
“I said that a couple years ago but now that they use a unix OS with Intel Processors what do they have on a PC other than perhaps the percieved prestige of being willing to pay twice as much?”
You were comparing Mac’s to a PC, so you were definitely not including Mac’s as a PC, which is misleading, if you really meant to say “all other OS’s (except windows)”
Regardless of your pet peeve, it is standard among most people to use the term PC to mean a computer with a Microsoft based OS. (Dos/Windows).
Example (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQb_Q8WRL_g)
Personally, I have always thought this was lame myself, but there isn’t much I can do about that.
I don’t like that most people use the term ‘tribalism’ to refer to a pattern of thought that pretends a superiority of your group to all other groups. Personally, I think that is way more a product of ‘civilization’ than actual tribalism. I could invent the word ‘civilizationism’ and use that instead, but no one but me would know what I was talking about. If I did use that term in a conversation, and I did not want people to be confused, I would explain what I meant by that term.

Quote
What makes the mac OS so great?  Not what makes it better than windows?  But everything else.  I've used OSX and It wsa totally frustrating that it took so much moving around of the mouse and single clicking to do what I'm used to doing with a stationary right click.

Mac OS X has featured support for two-button mice since day one. They don’t ship with them (unless you upgrade to a 'mighty mouse' ..yuck) because Steve Jobs is a megalomaniac, but 2 button USB mice are cheap. I am sure that you have one lying around.

Quote
I know there are other concerns like stability and security but this particular mac was always giving me the spinning beach ball.
 
That is odd. I never have problems with mine. All of the Comps that I have available to use at work are old G4 iMac’s. They get used by dozens of students a day and after years of hard work, they all still work just fine.

Quote
I can't speak to security.  I run my old financial software on an old computer that's NOT connected to the internet.

I can, they are more secure (to Windows, which is what I was talking about). That you don’t care about security is cool. Most people would consider ‘security’ a feature.

Quote
You said the only thing they have in common is the hardware.... well what makes OSX so much better than Fedora Redhat (to pull an OS out of my.....brother's persona)?  There could be something amazing about OSX that easily answers that question.  I don't know what that is.

Well, I never made the claim that Mac’s were better than ‘nix systems. But having had experience installing several versions of Linux and FreeBSD I would say that OS X does have a couple of advantages. Not saying that it is better overall.
*It is much easier to install than most ‘nix systems. Even Ubuntu which was the easiest Linux install that I have experienced isn’t nearly as easy as installing OSX.
*It is focused on usability. Most ‘nix systems assume a certain level of knowledge beforehand, I was completely new to OS X when I got my G3, and I never had to crack open a manual or even search online for how to do anything until I started doing more advanced stuff like installing X11 and messing with Darwin. Now this may not matter as much to people who are command line wizards, but for someone who prefers a GUI it really improves productivity.
That’s about it really; I actually prefer Free and Open source software.
Mostly on principle,  but FOSS does have its advantages too.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Ecolitan on November 21, 2006, 10:18:31 AM
Wow, you people should really spend your time doing something productive!  You're just spinning your wheels arguing this minutia...

tell me about it.  Right after my first post I knew I done screwed up getting involved in a battle of the PC's.  Especially when I really don't have any strong opinions either way.  But now I'm here so I might as well run with it.  I have some time off.  If I weren't doing this I'd be playing Rome: Total War
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: aquabanianskakid on November 21, 2006, 10:36:45 AM
Yeah I've also lost interest. Anyone wanna play parcheesi?
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: badinfluence on November 22, 2006, 12:49:33 PM
Linux all the way.

I use SuSe, but might have to rethink that option now - too bad, I like the OS.

I find Apple users are cult victims in a world of PC superiority.  Most people that use them on a regular basis are sheeple.

They either like the way they look, or feel they want a superior computer to surf the web, type a letter or instant message.

There are some people that "need" the apple.  But, my video editing on my XP machine is far superior to my buddies G5 (it was also a lot cheaper to beef up the machine!).

Now, if I had good video editing (there are already some decent audio programs) on linux - then I wouldn't even need XP!

Jonathan
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: aquabanianskakid on November 23, 2006, 08:28:57 PM
Haha great picture. I've seen some made into PCs as well as fish tanks.
Title: Re: Apple, Microsoft, or Linux?
Post by: Zhwazi on November 30, 2006, 06:32:24 AM
Ubuntu Linux.