Windows XP or Mac OS X?

All Things Microsoft > Microsoft Software

<< < (2/4) > >>

voidmain:
I know gump, was just giving him crap for trying to slam my OS when only MS needs to be slammed. The way I look at it, Linux people, OSX people, and any other *NIX people need to stick together as much as possible. No need for OS slamming unless you really do have one that is crippled like MS.

In the later releases of KDE I don't know of much if anything that "must" be done from the command line. Can you name something? But like I said, no matter how graphical you make most of the stuff I will still do it from the command line, and have several reasons for doing so, one mentioned above, two remote administration is just as fast and easy over a dialup modem line using command line as would be if you were local (even though I can graphically do remote administration as well via dialup, it's not as fast). Three, no matter how sophistocated you make the GUI I will still be able to do a lot of things faster on the command line. And more..

I believe OSX has one real advantage over Linux and even more of an advantage since they did the right thing and stuck a real OS under the hood. And that advantage only applies when comparing OSX and Linux as a "Desktop" OS. That advantage is Desktop Applications. That is why I would not mind getting a Mac. I would surely continue to use Linux or unaltered *BSD on servers. I'm sure OSX has more GUI features without a doubt. How long as the Apple GUI been in development, how long as KDE been around? I think it's pretty damn good for a bunch of hacks doing it in their spare time. I appreciate their efforts.

They are also helping OSX now that it has *NIX under the hood you can get all that "great" open source stuff like Apache/PHP, PostgreSQL/MySQL, etc and not have much trouble getting it running.

[ January 27, 2002: Message edited by: VoidMain ]

gump420:
Ahh, gotcha; was worried you were turning away from potentially becoming a new recruit to the cult of Macintosh. (-;

There is something to be said for Mac OS X's power as a server OS, though, since having a nice GUI allows somebody to set up a secure server without needing as much technical ability or patience. However, Linux (or any other free OS, possibly even Darwin) makes for a better server OS due to it's scalability. So I'd rate Mac OS X Server as a better solution than say, WinNT, but it probably falls a little short of *NIX OSes where the GUI is optional (simply because the GUI is more-or-less unnecessary for the server to run, so why waste the clock cycles?).

voidmain:
You can't boot up a new Mac without the GUI? Not having actually touched one, I would be willing to bet that you can, so maybe you are giving away a server point there where you shouldn't.

gump420:
Oh, believe me, I've tried; you can't do it with OS X. If you install Linux, Darwin, or some other OS, then sure you can get a prompt-only screen, but you can't do that with any version of Mac OS (especially not OS 9 or prior, which didn't even have a prompt in any way, shape, or form).

Part of the reason for this is that Macintosh computers do not have a "text mode" for the display in the same way that PCs do; you can display fullscreen text, but it's not just a standard screen mode for the computer.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version