# Review: Ubuntu Gutsy Gibbon takes on Mac OS X Leopard for the OS of the Year



## praka123 (Dec 18, 2007)

Thursday, December 13th, 2007
By Scott Granneman

Today we have a technological cage match involving two operating systems, both _UNIX_- based, both mature, both with passionate detractors and even more passionate defenders, and both released just a week apart. I'm talking, of course, about _Ubuntu_ 7.10 (Gutsy Gibbon), with its final release on October 18, and _Apple_' s _Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard_, which was available for purchase on October 26.
 The stereotype for each OS is well known: Mac OS X is elegant, easy-to-use, and intuitive, while Ubuntu is stable, secure, and getting better all the time. Both have come a long way in a short time, and both make excellent desktops. So we have two great desktop operating systems out at roughly the same time. Let's see how they stack up against each other.


*Hardware Support*
 Ubuntu will run on pretty much any computer with an Intel-compatible or PowerPC CPU. The distro claims that you need a bare minimum of 256MB of RAM, but expect glacial performance. In reality, you'll want at least 512MB of RAM, with 1GB even better. You're told to expect that the OS will take up about 4GB of space on your hard drive, which is nothing in terms of today's ginormous hard drives. My main Kubuntu box has 756MB of RAM, with a Pentium 4 CPU, and while certain tasks can be kind of poky, overall it's quite usable.
 You can install Leopard on any computer made by Dell, HP, Lenovo, or... just kidding! You install Leopard on Apple's boxes, or you buy a new Mac, and it comes with Leopard pre-installed. That's it. According to Apple, you can install Leopard on any Intel-based Mac, as well as any PowerPC G5 or G4 box, as long as it has a 867 MHz or faster CPU. You'll need at least 512MB of RAM, a DVD drive for the installation disc, and 9GB for the OS. My main Mac is a first generation MacBook Pro, with a 2 GHz Core Duo CPU and 2GB of RAM. Leopard screams on it, with the dreaded colored beachballs almost entirely a thing of the past.
 The bottom line: if you have an old PC sitting around, it's gonna run Ubuntu or Windows. No Leopard for you. If you have a Mac made within the last five or six years, you can probably run Leopard on it, as well as Ubuntu.
*Installation*
 Most operating systems have improved their installation routines over the last few years, and this is certainly true for both Leopard and Ubuntu. In fact, both are incredibly easy to install. If you're dual-booting with Windows, the easiest line of attack in the case of Linux is to install Ubuntu after Windows, while the opposite is true for the Mac-- install Windows using Boot Camp after Leopard is completely set up.
 Leopard bests Ubuntu in one area, though: multiple monitor support. It just works like it's supposed to in Leopard, and I shuttle my laptop back and forth between a huge variety of monitors and projectors. I've never had an issue. Contrast that to Ubuntu, which touts its better multiple monitor support. It may be getting better, but it's still not there yet, and I'm just glad I had my trusty _xorg.conf_ file backed up and ready to fall back on. Both Leopard and Ubuntu are excellent when it comes to installation.
click here to continue


----------



## Faun (Dec 18, 2007)

linux is pacing up *farm3.static.flickr.com/2076/2106529395_26c0b427da_o.png


----------



## praka123 (Dec 18, 2007)

...though the author is a little kde centric *farm3.static.flickr.com/2398/2107306002_6240bfbc60_o.png


----------



## x3060 (Dec 18, 2007)

where is my mandriva 08  .


----------



## Tech_Wiz (Dec 18, 2007)

Ubuntu has decent financial / commercial backing so I think it will go long way as a end user OS to Home customers. May be SOHO.

Now all we need is Games to Run on Linux which is I think only  gray area for Linux where Windows have a HUGE advantage.


----------



## x3060 (Dec 18, 2007)

you are right  . we need games , i need 3ds max and photoshop too . . straight out .deb or .rpm install not through wine .


----------



## drgrudge (Dec 18, 2007)

Read what he says under Web browser (2nd page):


> Ubuntu ships with Firefox as the default browser, Kubuntu uses Konqueror, and Leopard has Safari. Of course, you can download and install Firefox on both Kubuntu and Leopard, which is a good thing


WTH? Mac users don't use Safari because it comes with OS X. Myself and DARK LORD use FX, but goobi and Aayush use Safari. Many use IE (while they may be aware of other browsers). It's personal opinion. 

GG comes with FX and OS X 10.5 comes with Safari. So GG is better! 

Some other insane points that I noted:
1. Every Linux distro today comes with built-in support for BitTorrent, but not Leopard. <-- WTH? You d/l gigs of data but can't you spare less than a MB?
2. While Apple takes years to release an OS, Ubuntu happens every six months like clockwork. <--- Apple used to release OS X 10.X every year untill Tiger. The time for 10.5 and 10.51 is less than 45 days. 
3. Many other thing for which it's stupid for me to waste mine and your time. 



Here's a secret. Why I use FX:
- an OSS? <-- eh? 
- secure? <--  IE 7 is better than it's previous editions, so...?
- alternative to some popular software? <-- why would I care? Usability is important than prestige/ego
- add ons? <-- yeah baby! You've hit the nail. it's because of the functionality that I need coming from these extension makes me use FX even with this flaw:- memory usage is insane. 


Here's why for one reason or another, a lot of freelancers use Macs. It may be the raw power, the stability or they may just look rather - cool? Well, both of us know why that really is. It’s the apps! The software that makes the hardware bling. [FreelanceSwitch]

Whatever be the case, OS X rules when you want to for professional purpose, whether you are a writer, designer, coder, musician, movie editor, DJ, you work in TV/Radio stations. Mac wins hands down in multimedia. 


P.S: I'm not saying Leopard is better than GG (which I don't care) but what that person wrote is 75% BS.


----------



## aryayush (Dec 18, 2007)

Umm... I don't think so though. He might be a bit off on some of the points and being a contributer to a Linux centric website, he is a tab biased in its favour, but the write-up is still quite objective, fair and well written.

Just my personal opinion, of course.


----------



## goobimama (Dec 19, 2007)

Yep. He obviously hasn't explored the Mac as much as he has Linux... 

That bittorrent one was absolutely lame.


----------



## praka123 (Dec 19, 2007)

many a mac users are Linux users too


----------



## gxsaurav (Dec 19, 2007)

> The distro claims that you need a bare minimum of 256MB of RAM, but expect glacial performance. In reality, you'll want at least 512MB of RAM, with 1GB even better.


 
Hmm...that reminds me, Windows XP runs fine on computers with 256 MB RAM, while 512 is all u will ever need. 

Ubuntu Linux needs heavier system requirment then Windows XP which dominates the dekstop market share right now, lolz...



> 1. Every Linux distro today comes with built-in support for BitTorrent, but not Leopard. <-- WTH? You d/l gigs of data but can't you spare less than a MB?


 
It's called better out of the box experience. If Torrent were not mostly associated with piracy then Windows would be having utorrent integrated by now.


----------



## drgrudge (Dec 19, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> It's called better out of the box experience. If Torrent were not mostly associated with piracy then Windows would be having utorrent integrated by now.


Windows comes with IE, which IMHO is BS. Can you call that "out of the box experience". I'll install what I need. It's not a big deal considering the browser of my choice will be less than a 20 MB install .DMG.


----------



## infra_red_dude (Dec 19, 2007)

As many haf expressed here, I feel the author is biased towards Linux (mebbe naturally). But he has put up the points in manner which puts us in a dilemma whether to call him biased!



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> Hmm...that reminds me, Windows XP runs fine on computers with 256 MB RAM, while 512 is all u will ever need.
> 
> Ubuntu Linux needs heavier system requirment then Windows XP which dominates the dekstop market share right now, lolz...


If you haf nothing to post, then plz spare the forum database. How can you compare a 6 year old OS with a 2 month old OS???? What logic, pal!!! I bow down!


----------



## x3060 (Dec 19, 2007)

that , "i bow down" line was superb


----------



## The_Devil_Himself (Dec 19, 2007)

so that means I am using the _OS_OF_THE_YEAR_ and that too free of cost.wow!

On a second thought there isn't any competitor at the moment.Vista Sux,I hope sp1 makes it much better otherwise its gone.Leopard\tiger-not for us! can't pay for overpriced hardware just to run these 'elite' OSes.Apple should be forced to release their OS for normal non-mac PCs too.lol.


----------



## aryayush (Dec 19, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> It's called better out of the box experience. If Torrent were not mostly associated with piracy then Windows would be having utorrent integrated by now.


A Windows fanatic like you should be absolutely the last person talking about the "out of the box" experience. You try to defend the honour of an operating system that does not even come with an instant messaging client for goodness sakes, and then you go blaming other operating systems for not giving you a good "out of the box" experience! 

Get you head out of your you-know-where sometimes. It really looks funny in that position!


----------



## Gigacore (Dec 19, 2007)

ok.. i'm not into the OS war anymore.. 

anyway.. gusty rocks.. mac $ucks! *gigasmilies.googlepages.com/19.gif


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Dec 19, 2007)

MacOSX can never suck, because its one of the OSes that is built for its box. The other OSes in this catogary are Mobile Phone OSes, EEE PC Xandros, XO-1 Fedora, etc.

While Windows needs to run on quite a few boxes, Ubuntu needs to run on *anything*(read PS3 and EEE PC along with a 6 year old PC) that can be called a decent computer.

Ubuntu does its job pretty well too, thanks to its highly stable and effitient structure along with its easy to use nature that made people concider it in the first place. Ubuntu is definitely a must install for Computer enthusiasts, programmers and students.

So you can't compare Mac to anything, unless you talk about Solaris on a Sun Workstation. But ofcource, Macs are never workstations, and Sun Computers are never Home Computers. Thats why these two UNIXes never compete against each other, with each catering different customers.

But when you compare Windows to Ubuntu, ubuntu wins hands down by a HUGE margin(I don't need to go over the reasons for the hundredth time, thankyou)

In the end, the winners are every OS mentioned here ecept Windows.(read Solaris, Mac, Ubuntu). But the sad part is, for the average fun loving guy running one of the winners, he is forced to install windows for Games.

Anyway, the only way you can compare Leopard to Ubuntu is if you buy a new box, customise ubuntu for it, add/remove apps, change the theme to look good and match the hardware, compile all programs from source and optimise them for the Hardware.(if you are lucky enough to sneak into a google lab, you might just come across one of these ubuntus. Too bad they are not for PCs though...)


----------



## infra_red_dude (Dec 19, 2007)

MetalheadGautham said:
			
		

> So you can't compare Mac to anything, unless you talk about Solaris on a Sun Workstation. But ofcource, Macs are never workstations, and Sun Computers are never Home Computers. Thats why these two UNIXes never compete against each other, with each catering different customers.


No second thoughts about it 



			
				MetalheadGautham said:
			
		

> But when you compare Windows to Ubuntu, ubuntu wins hands down by a HUGE margin(I don't need to go over the reasons for the hundredth time, thankyou)


You can't say Ubuntu wins in every category. There are many instances where Windows is at advantage.



			
				MetalheadGautham said:
			
		

> In the end, the winners are every OS mentioned here ecept Windows.


I don't agree at all. I use Windows where I absolutely cannot use any other OS. Both haf their pros and cons. Its just that you need to use the right OS at the right place!! 



			
				MetalheadGautham said:
			
		

> Anyway, the only way you can compare Leopard to Ubuntu is if you buy a new box, customise ubuntu for it, add/remove apps, change the theme to look good and match the hardware, compile all programs from source and optimise them for the Hardware.(if you are lucky enough to sneak into a google lab, you might just come across one of these ubuntus. Too bad they are not for PCs though...)


Fully agree to this point


----------



## goobimama (Dec 19, 2007)

> Ubuntu can run on anything


While I would love to agree with you, I have tried to install Ubuntu (7.04 as well as 7.10) on four PCs, all of whom failed to get through the installer (at least within 4 hours).

PC1: Intel P4, 2.4Ghz, Intel Mobo. failed to boot to installer. 
PC2: Intel something something board+CPU (the CPU comes with the mobo). Two of these systems. Ubuntu had problems with the Sis Graphics card.
PC4: Intel P4. 3Ghz presscott. Intel mobo (915 I think). Failed to boot installer.


----------



## gxsaurav (Dec 19, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> You try to defend the honour of an operating system that does not even come with an instant messaging client for goodness sakes,


 
U R wrong, Windows XP & then Vista comes with Windows Messenger (MSN messenger lite)


----------



## aryayush (Dec 19, 2007)

OK. So you want to play hard ball?

Well, can you make Vista read Word files? That's Microsoft's own format, in case you didn't know.

Or, run automated scripts? See the meaning of a word or synonyms for it? Have whatever you type on online forums spell checked for you? Manage your fonts? Have a four-way audio/video chat session with your friends while you share the screen of your cousin in the USA? Or even something as basic as tabbed chats? Can you read PDF documents or view any Adobe formats?

Ha! Ha! Look who's talking about the "out of the box" experience.


----------



## goobimama (Dec 19, 2007)

That's one thing that has evaded me as well. No preview for Word or excel files (out of the box, not sure about plugins). Gx mentioned something about PDF being Adobe's thing so they were creating problems. Agreed. But Doc and xls?


----------



## iMav (Dec 19, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> OK. So you want to play hard ball?
> 
> Well, can you make Vista read Word files? That's Microsoft's own format, in case you didn't know.
> 
> ...


 most OEMs come with 30 day trial of office and if not an only reader is avaialable for dwnld to view words same for xls & ppt


----------



## infra_red_dude (Dec 19, 2007)

iMav said:
			
		

> most OEMs come with 30 day trial of office and if not an only reader is avaialable for dwnld to view words same for xls & ppt


I've never seen any OEM machine with MS Office trial. Never! Yes, Adobe reader is bundled. Thats not a problem, tho


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Dec 19, 2007)

@infra: I told about the stuff that is not propiatary to windows like DirectX. There ARE stuff you can only use windows for, but thats because you are forced to do so.

@goobi: Ubuntu may fail on some PCs, but reasons may be many. Ever saw this?

@saurav: wow, you will never stop defending windows... you are more ignorant than one of my friends Akash, who thinks that an OS is what it is because of eye-candy and that Vi$ta is the world's best OS. He also thinks Ubuntu is Ugly and can never look good. Accorging to him, linux can't even have a start button.  He sounds terribly foolish when he says Linux sucks, but still, I do have quite a few laughs at his remarks.

@arya: Right on target. Vista can't even read its own formats by default.


			
				aryayush said:
			
		

> Or, run automated scripts? See the meaning of a word or synonyms for it? Have whatever you type on online forums spell checked for you? Manage your fonts? Have a four-way audio/video chat session with your friends while you share the screen of your cousin in the USA? Or even something as basic as tabbed chats? Can you read PDF documents or view any Adobe formats?


I think saurav is upset that his darling vista is not in this comparison. He feels neglected and discarded, because in this battle of titans(*nixes), the rat(vista) thinks it can beat all of them effortlessly.

@goobi: Even Ubuntu supports PDFs.

PS: hell, in this war b/w ubuntu and macosx, both started to charge towards vista instead


----------



## kalpik (Dec 19, 2007)

iMav said:
			
		

> most OEMs come with 30 day trial of office and if not an only reader is avaialable for dwnld to view words same for xls & ppt


Lol.. 30 day trial.. Yeah alright.. That can be surely compared to "unrestricted", "unlimited" out of the box support of these formats on almost EVERY other OS (even phones can read doc and xls nowdays out of the box)


----------



## Hitboxx (Dec 19, 2007)

Exactly infra_red_dude. If Windows started to preview them, Microsoft will consider it a bad business practice and users will just use them rather than buying MS Office. My guess is its a deliberate pitfall.


----------



## goobimama (Dec 19, 2007)

I'm sorry I can't load youtube videos (dialup connection). Vista in 2 minutes? What happens then?

Anyway, I hope one day Ubuntu will favour me and get installed on at least one of the PCs. I'm getting a new one, (Intel E23something + 945board). Hope I can get Ubuntu on that one.


----------



## a_k_s_h_a_y (Dec 19, 2007)

goobimama said:
			
		

> While I would love to agree with you, I have tried to install Ubuntu (7.04 as well as 7.10) on four PCs, all of whom failed to get through the installer (at least within 4 hours).
> 
> PC1: Intel P4, 2.4Ghz, Intel Mobo. failed to boot to installer.
> PC2: Intel something something board+CPU (the CPU comes with the mobo). Two of these systems. Ubuntu had problems with the Sis Graphics card.
> PC4: Intel P4. 3Ghz presscott. Intel mobo (915 I think). Failed to boot installer.


what a newb you are .. can't help ...!! 

i installed *Ubuntu 7.10* on my *PIII 1 Ghz 192 MB SD RAM* successfully
since then rarely boot into Windows XP !

Firefox + terminal + Music Player + Pidgin all running fine , the system runs soo smothly .. anything more system goes slow .. remember SD RAM 192 !

@gx

it runs very fine on my friends 256 MB DDR RAM
also about 256 Being Minimum is for v.good experience !! coz its so nice already in 192 MB SD RAM

and its the latest version of Ubuntu !
latest version of windows need 1 GB minimum !! lol

and if i use XFCE instead of GNOME .. then its runs much better then what Windows XP does on my PC

So these are nothing but facts that i present for people in darkness !
so kindful of me .. next time i rather ignore !


----------



## goobimama (Dec 19, 2007)

akshay said:
			
		

> You are a tech newb man .. can't help ...!!


How is popping the disc in and hitting "Enter" on "Install or startup Ubuntu" a tech newb thing? Are you also advocating that Ubuntu is only for uber geeks? Cause last I saw, "Ubuntu: Linux for Human beings" was written at the back of the disc jacket.


----------



## a_k_s_h_a_y (Dec 19, 2007)

Yeah Ubuntu is for humans !! think smartly dude
how can you install ubuntu on your system with live cd .. your systems are too old like mine !

Quite simply you have not given a thought how Live CDs Work !!

aren't geeks humans ?? you sound this way !


----------



## goobimama (Dec 19, 2007)

Oh common! How else am I supposed to install it? On one hand you say I can install it on old hardware. On the other hand you say my hardware is crap. I'm sorry, but a Pentium4 2.4Ghz is not crap according to me. Each of these systems has 512MB of DDR RAM and should be plenty sufficient for an OS. 

And have you heard of a thing called "Figure of speech"? Linux for human beings means that it's finally out of the geek area, and regular ol' people can use it.


----------



## praka123 (Dec 19, 2007)

sis chipsets not supported  it is!.only unsupported(partially supported=2D) is VIA unichrome on linux.

reg,mac,apple is id!ot for trying to "buy" a open source project "CUPS" 
yeah...on topic:mac is idiot friendly,"Linux is user friendly""windows is....heh!neglect that rat


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Dec 19, 2007)

goobimama said:
			
		

> Oh common! How else am I supposed to install it? On one hand you say I can install it on old hardware. On the other hand you say my hardware is crap. I'm sorry, but a Pentium4 2.4Ghz is not crap according to me. Each of these systems has 512MB of DDR RAM and should be plenty sufficient for an OS.
> 
> And have you heard of a thing called "Figure of speech"? Linux for human beings means that it's finally out of the geek area, and regular ol' people can use it.


just use On screen instructions and common sence. Patience is important in case of laggy Live CD. all this worked for me.


----------



## Hitboxx (Dec 19, 2007)

@goobimam, Without beating around the bush, why can't you install Ubuntu on any of your systems? Sorry but i'm a little late to the discussion, but if you've already posted it, please provide its link.


----------



## goobimama (Dec 19, 2007)

No beating around the bush. I popped the disc in. It gave me the boot menu with "install ubuntu from disk" "boot from hard drive" "memory test" and all those, I'm sure you are familiar with those. 

I hit "Install Ubuntu". It gives me some loading screen. Then some messages thrown in for good measure "Grub loading [OK]" and such. By this  time it is already half an hour. But I'm patient. Finally, after 1hour 15mins, it gets to the sort of splash screen with little icons loading in (not the desktop, before that). Finally, I went home, had my dinner, and though okay, when I come back, it will have loaded the desktop at least. Nope. It was stuck there, the CPU was whining so there was something going on, and it had already been like 6-7 hours. Turned it off. 

The second PC, p4, 2.4Ghz again (865mobo I think). It wouldn't get past the "loading slider" thing. Just wouldn't. Waited for hours but it didn't go through.

The other two machines are Intel mobos with CPUs soldered on them. Cost me around 3.7k for it (D102 or something). That loaded the desktop just fine, but the display was totally corrupted. I could hardly figure out the installation, which went through. I hoped that the display issue was only due to the Live CD, but nope, it continued on to the installation as well. I changed the Powersupply, RAM, hard drive, but to no avail. I think the Sis Mirage I think, is not supported or something.

Now I'm not sure where I've posted, but praka and grudge might remember I had posted this in the OSS section...

I swear dude. I don't hate linux. I really want to install it on the PCs in the office but this stuff keeps getting in the way. Now I asked my dealer whether or not the new machine will run Linux. Cause if it's not, I'm returning it and getting something else.


----------



## Hitboxx (Dec 19, 2007)

@goobimama
Ok I assume its Gutsy Gibbon, when you get those [OK] messages, can you post exactly the last message on the screen(the one where it appears stuck for 1hr)? 

And when you see the splash screen, hit ESC or Alt+F1 to check for any error messages and do post them too.


----------



## goobimama (Dec 19, 2007)

Excellent. I'll go to the office today maybe tomorrow and run through the installation. Anyway, the new PC is arriving tomorrow. I'll run through that one first just to make sure everything is okay. 

I've tried both Gutsy and Feisty btw.


----------



## a_k_s_h_a_y (Dec 19, 2007)

WHAT ?? 512 MB RAM ?? it must go soo smooth and must install in 15 minutes !
i don't know what's wrong with your computer .. !

and installing ubuntu is soo easy that girls in my class can do it ! seriously ! they all get their lappy to college and show off ! and share Tips for using ubuntu with us !

even my younger bro found it easy on his laptop .. 12 year old ! just had to take care of partitions .. rest he could do it !

Fix your computer and install

i think you know about Partitions manager and setting things correct in it !


----------



## goobimama (Dec 19, 2007)

-- forget i ever mentioned it --


----------



## The_Devil_Himself (Dec 19, 2007)

^^lol goobi.Just get that new system(e23xx something+946onboard) and then try out gutsy,I have the same mobo.But wait...onboard graphics of 946 are not supported yet! so you won't be able to use compiz fusion,everything else is just cool.



			
				akshay said:
			
		

> *and installing ubuntu is soo easy that girls in my class can do it ! seriously ! they all get their lappy to college and show off ! and share Tips for using ubuntu with us !*


 seriously?


----------



## aku (Dec 19, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> ... You try to defend the honour of an operating system that does not even come with an instant messaging client for goodness sakes, ...



just a little correction Aayush, win xp _does_ come with windows messenger. []

Coming back to the topic, it's really pointless comparing GNU/Linux with Mac OS X.
OS X is way too polished in every sense to be brought into any comparison with GNU/Linux.
Here i speak as a neutral person.


----------



## a_k_s_h_a_y (Dec 19, 2007)

The_Devil_Himself said:
			
		

> seriously?


yo dude

and our UNIX madam is young hot chic .. ( married though)
she has more knowledge then us in UNIX .. and knows about VMware and Virtual Box   !

i helped her write a tutorial for whole class to implement ubuntu using Virtual box and in the process learnt that she had lot of knowledge ! and that she had sidelined the typing work of tutorial to me .. lol !

girls get laptop to college with the reason learn to install linux and share that with friends but actually they get it for show off .. nothing else .. coz my tutorial was enough for them to learn ! lol


----------



## gxsaurav (Dec 19, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> OK. So you want to play hard ball?


 
No,  just clearing your misconceptions.



> Well, can you make Vista read Word files? That's Microsoft's own format, in case you didn't know.


 
Although you can use the free "Word viewer from Microsoft", it cannot be given due to Anti-Trust rules. I know an end user won't care for this, but well.....kya kar sakte hain, when everyone is targetting MS.



> Or, run automated scripts?


 
Yup, Windows Script, JAVA script files,  VB Script files etc. 



> Have whatever you type on online forums spell checked for you?


 
IE 7 Pro



> Manage your fonts?


 
Lolz...there is nothing easier then font management in Vista. 


> Have a four-way audio/video chat session with your friends while you share the screen of your cousin in the USA?


 
Windows Meeting based on Windows Communication foundation.



> Can you read PDF documents or view any Adobe formats?


 
Can't be given integrated due to licensing restriction which is already told.


----------



## infra_red_dude (Dec 19, 2007)

@goobi
I'm sure you can install Linux on your machines. You need some patience, the culprit I'm assuming is unsupported hardware 

@akshay
Don't be rude to goobi 

@gx
Bundling MS Office with Windows would surely drag MS to court, but bundling MS office viewers??   Cut the crap out, dude!


----------



## a_k_s_h_a_y (Dec 19, 2007)

infra_red_dude said:
			
		

> @akshay
> Don't be rude to goobi


yeah right .. i hv been soo rude with him .. !
personal sorry to him .. the mac genius


----------



## goobimama (Dec 19, 2007)

You must understand that I'm a little faint hearted... anything happens and I start crying like a ten year old girl...


----------



## drgrudge (Dec 19, 2007)

It started with GG Vs Leopard and now how did Vista managed to sneak in? Whatever thread I see regarding OSes, somehow these three get mentioned eventually turning out to be an OS war.  


gx_saurav, I'm not a MVP so I can be wrong. But if at all you want to reply, please quote all the things I'm going to list out. Does Windows:-
1. open pdf file?
2. psd files? (you can't see the layers in Preview)
3. open .doc/.xls/.ppt files? (My Mac came with iWork and MS Office 2004 pre installed)
4. QuickTime (without any plugin/codecs installed) plays more format than WMP
5. although I don't use Safari, I can safely say Safari is better than IE. Or atleast most of our users here prefer Safari over IE.
6. photo management software (IMO, iPhoto is the BEST)
7. Now I'm not including Garageband. Why even iLife suite was preinstalled on my Mac. 
8. Chess that comes on a Mac is better than the Cards games. Sure you can run Crysis but we are talking about "out of the box" experience of Windows. 

In short, I was able to work on my Mac right away as I would as if I was working on after 1 month, ie, it just worked. What stuff I connect to the USB, it worked. Some "Made for Windows" hardware didn't work on Windows, but it did on my Mac. _No install hardware instructions. No gay yellow balloons notification._ 

*Mac just works. *This is what, my friend, is called "out of the box" experience. Never used Linux, so can't comment about it, but don't sell me the heap that windows does everything "out of the box".  


P.S: They charged the MBP till 40% so that I would able to use without charging the Mac first!


----------



## infra_red_dude (Dec 19, 2007)

I'm no MVP myself and consider this offtopic post but just posting.



			
				drgrudge said:
			
		

> It started with GG Vs Leopard and now how did Vista managed to sneak in? Whatever thread I see regarding OSes, somehow these three get mentioned eventually turning out to be an OS war.


This is the fate of every OS thread here at digit 



			
				drgrudge said:
			
		

> 1. open pdf file?
> 4. QuickTime (without any plugin/codecs installed) plays more format than WMP
> 6. photo management software (IMO, iPhoto is the BEST)
> 7. Now I'm not including Garageband. Why even iLife suite was preinstalled on my Mac.


Can't due to licensing issues.



			
				drgrudge said:
			
		

> 2. psd files? (you can't see the layers in Preview)
> 3. open .doc/.xls/.ppt files? (My Mac came with iWork and MS Office 2004 pre intalled)
> 8. Chess that comes on a Mac is better than the Cards games. Sure you can run Crysis but we are talking about "out of the box" experience of Windows.


Genuine flaws in Windows OOBE.



			
				drgrudge said:
			
		

> P.S: They charged the MBP till 40% so that I would able to use without charging the Mac first!


Its a standard practise to charge Li-ion/Polymer batteries to 40% for their good health, be it laptop or mobile phone battery.

Lets continue with some on-topic posts


----------



## drgrudge (Dec 19, 2007)

infra_red_dude said:
			
		

> Can't due to licensing issues.


What ever be the case, it's not there in Windows. How can you call "Out of the Box" experience? 

I don't think Windows (leave alone Microsoft) has iPhoto or GarageBand equivalent. 




			
				infra_red_dude said:
			
		

> Its a standard practise to charge Li-ion/Polymer batteries to 40% for their good health, be it laptop or mobile phone battery.


Hmm, I don't so. My Dell Inspiron was not charged. Neither did most of my colleagues/friends lappy back in Dubai. It was 0%. It was mandatory that you charge before you use.

[Edit] Posted in the Mac thread, but for those who might have missed it. 


I'm watching *Transformers* the other day (2nd time and this time in HD  ). Only Regret is I didn't see it in Cinemas. Should have seen in 3D IMAX effect in Dubai. 

Here's the screenshot of the Apple MacBook Pro working when all the others were not working. 


*farm3.static.flickr.com/2321/2114243659_894f81f602.jpg




*farm3.static.flickr.com/2320/2115016610_eacf5fe9c0.jpg


Click ok the Image to see the goodness in (1280 x 544). Enjoy!


----------



## infra_red_dude (Dec 19, 2007)

^^^ Yeah, while it is true that the out of box experience is hampered in case of Windows!! Apple can bundle all the apps coz it has always maintained a closed source approach, Linux distros can bundle them coz most of these apps are by 3rd Party and open source (even if not then distros like Sabayon bundle every app you'll ever need in its DVD), so MS is the only company left behind and it can do nothing about it!

I dunno why those Dell weren't charged, but at 40% Li-ion/Polymer batteries haf the lowest discharge rate when on shelf. It is always recommended to charge it fully before using for the first time. My HP (Compaq) presario, thinkpad r52 laptop, cuz' Dell inspiron 6000, 1520, acer 4710, se walkman phone etc. all came with 40% charge. Its a standard practice. 

Also if you will not be using those batteries for a long time, then its advised that you charge them upto 40% and store them in a cool dry place.

Btw, nope no free alternatives to those two software.

Ontopic: Most of the software available for Mac are available for Linux (except pro software like photoshop, final cut pro etc.). However, the area where Linux lacks is the integration which Mac can anyday boast of.


----------



## drgrudge (Dec 19, 2007)

^^
I feel Mac has more good apps than Linux (not the sheer amount). I'm talking about Quality than Quantity. Of course, IMHO. 

Does Linux has softwares like 
- Coda or CSSEdit? Maybe Xylescope or TextMate? (grow beautiful code)
- QuickSilver (just got started the other day, lessons by goobi  )
- Scrivener, Montage or Avenir (tools for writers)
- Billings, iBiz, BusinessCard Composer (Business/Invoice related)


Linux too good softwares but I think Mac wins hands down in this respect. 

Thanks for the battery tips. I'm a big junkie in those areas. Know those things before itself.


----------



## goobimama (Dec 19, 2007)

I feel sorry for MS actually. They try to do something good, but get smothered with lawsuits. Integrating PDF support among others is something that should go without saying. 

Google's lawsuit was the most stupid one. The one about their Desktop Search vs Vista's Search...


----------



## infra_red_dude (Dec 19, 2007)

drgrudge said:
			
		

> ^^
> I feel Mac has more good apps than Linux (not the sheer amount). I'm talking about Quality than Quantity. Of course, IMHO.
> 
> Does Linux has softwares like
> ...


 Most are OS X specific software so no chance of hafing in Linux. But yes, I agree to the fact that even tho there are less choices when it comes to OS X software (unlike hundreds of software in linux for the same purpose) the ones that are available are just good enuf 

Others you pointed out.. software mebbe there for Linux. Since I don't use it, I dunno about it.



			
				goobimama said:
			
		

> I feel sorry for MS actually. They try to do something good, but get smothered with lawsuits. Integrating PDF support among others is something that should go without saying.
> 
> Google's lawsuit was the most stupid one. The one about their Desktop Search vs Vista's Search...


 Actually its like MS themselves haf created problems, teaching everyone else how and why to file cases etc. and make most of it. If they'd not played dirty tricks before things would've been different.


----------



## aryayush (Dec 19, 2007)

infra_red_dude said:
			
		

> Most of the software available for Mac are available for Linux


Umm... no, man. Mac OS X has an awful lot of awesome third party applications that are completely exclusive to it.


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Dec 19, 2007)

^^but strictly speaking, there ARE apps for linux too. Its just that most of them are not designed keeping pros and end-users in mind, so that they are often a bit raw and un-polished(a feature of OSS developement: Most of the time, you are the main concern for yourself). The customer-manufacturer culture of Apple is the reason behind all their intergration and eye-candy.


----------



## infra_red_dude (Dec 19, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> Umm... no, man. Mac OS X has an awful lot of awesome third party applications that are completely exclusive to it.


No I meant, similar apps. For instance Time Machine for Mac. rsync scripts were always available since ages. What it lacked was a decent interface and there are no second thots that Mac is the king here 

For the same software, there are about 50 alternatives! Thats the problem in the world of Linux.


----------



## drgrudge (Dec 19, 2007)

infra_red_dude said:
			
		

> Most are OS X specific software so no chance of hafing in Linux. But yes, I agree to the fact that even tho there are less choices when it comes to OS X software (unlike hundreds of software in linux for the same purpose) the ones that are available are just good enuf
> 
> Others you pointed out.. software mebbe there for Linux. Since I don't use it, I dunno about it.


That's my whole point. Of course you won't have the same named softwares. Those are Mac only softwares. 

I meant to stress the fact that even though you might have software which offer similar functionality, they might not be the same. For eg, Gimp (Seashore in Mac, without X11) and PhotoShop. I've used Seashore/Gimp and Photoshop in Mac. You can't beat Photoshop.




			
				infra_red_dude said:
			
		

> For the same software, there are about 50 alternatives! Thats the problem in the world of Linux.


So what? There are many browsers around, but Firefox is the best. There are many image editors, but Photoshop pimps them all. There might be many OSes around, but MAc OS X pwns them all.  
ok ok, bias and personal opinion. 




			
				MetalheadGautham said:
			
		

> The customer-manufacturer culture of Apple is the reason behind all their intergration and eye-candy.


My Mac helps me this. The surrounding things are beautiful, well designed hardware, good UI and I'm forced in my actions and products as well. I can't imagine coding CSS in another software than CSSEdit. 

Now I don't feel like sitting in front of my Windows PC. Most of my future PCs are gonna be a Mac.


----------



## infra_red_dude (Dec 19, 2007)

drgrudge said:
			
		

> I've used Seashore/Gimp and Photoshop in Mac. You can't beat Photoshop.


Thats exactly what I said, the Pro software are missing in Linux


----------



## goobimama (Dec 20, 2007)

Yep. Exactly why I'm not allowed to install Linux on two of the PCs in the office. Those are strictly for Adobe apps... The worst thing is, Ubuntu boots just fine on those two machines


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Dec 20, 2007)

goobimama said:
			
		

> Yep. Exactly why I'm not allowed to install Linux on two of the PCs in the office. Those are strictly for Adobe apps... The worst thing is, Ubuntu boots just fine on those two machines


If they have the same config as the others, you might concider using the others for adobe.

But still, Ubuntu can't ever have problems with such PCs. What version do you use? What type of install media are you talking about? Is it DVD, Live CD or Alternate CD? You may also concider the Xubuntu Alternate CD, which has facility for OEM Configurations and is good for mass install in slow office machines.


----------



## Hitboxx (Dec 20, 2007)

*@drgrudge,* so what new are you saying? We all know that! don't forget the target audience, Mac is never meant to be the common man's OS, heck not even Linux has that distinction, only Windows qualifies for that position. Mac is tailor made by a company with the exclusive apps for the same. So how do you expect others to have the same?

* @infra,* Linux doesn't have those pro apps.? And is that Linux's fault? No. The developers don't make apps for Linux.,why! they see no money in Linux or they just don't bother.

In my opinion, it is totally absurd to even compare Linux with Mac or Windows much less be argued upon. The very fact that a community grown OS has managed to upset these so called *big professional OS companies* is in itself a testament to the evergrowing strength of Linux. And the future can only be bright


----------



## infra_red_dude (Dec 20, 2007)

^^^ exactly! The same case with drivers too. But then when someone says Ubuntu takes on Mac OS X for the OS of the Year, there needs to be some ground for comparison!


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Dec 20, 2007)

^^right on target there..., hitbox!



			
				infra_red_dude said:
			
		

> ^^^ exactly! The same case with drivers too. But then when someone says Ubuntu takes on Mac OS X for the OS of the Year, there needs to be some ground for comparison!


For the umpteenth time, thats why you can never have comparison among OSes like Microsoft Windows, Apple Macintosh and Canonical Ubuntu. To have a fair comparison, you need to have only between OSes like Linux Distros, BSD Distros, etc.


----------



## drgrudge (Dec 20, 2007)

Hitboxx said:
			
		

> *@drgrudge,* so what new are you saying? We all know that! don't forget the target audience, Mac is never meant to be the common man's OS, heck not even Linux has that distinction, only Windows qualifies for that position. Mac is tailor made by a company with the exclusive apps for the same. So how do you expect others to have the same?
> 
> In my opinion, it is totally absurd to even compare Linux with Mac or Windows much less be argued upon. The very fact that a community grown OS has managed to upset these so called *big professional OS companies* is in itself a testament to the evergrowing strength of Linux. And the future can only be bright


Yes, true. No wonder Mac is preferred by Freelancers (Coders, Designers, Writers, maybe even Bloggers), DJs, Musicians, people working in studios, etc. If you want to play games or have fun with Viruses, then buy a Windows Box. For normal applications, browsing, chatting, etc.. use *nix. 

I didn't compare OS X with Linux (for most of the time). All I did was clear some misconceptions. 

The future looks bright for Linux and I know it's getting more polished every release. Maybe HH will give other OSes a good run for their money.


----------



## The_Devil_Himself (Dec 20, 2007)

why HH grudgy?GG is dioing some real damage to Vista,lol.And IMO if sp1 fails in even one of the promises then its game over for vista(much like win 2000).But lets hope sp1 is as good as M$ has been telling and keep the competition going.


----------



## praka123 (Dec 20, 2007)

^provided you install blubuntu theme package 8) not all loves the yellow default color  but still in default it shows the beauty of simplicity and clean.


----------

