Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

OSX vs Linux

C

ChrisH3677

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
The way I see it, the biggest threat to OSX is Linux not Windows.

The PC world seems pretty obsessed with Linux as a potential saviour from the tyranny of Windows and all its failings.

It's not that they're anti-MS per se, as they seem to think all they need is Office for Linux and the puzzle will be complete. Ha!

Yet, here's OSX, like Linux, Unix based and so is not susceptible to all Windows' problems, especially security. It already has MS Office and many other tier one applications (eg Lotus Notes, Adobe Photoshop et al. Macromedia Flash et al etc etc etc etc). It has many applications that are popular on Linux (eg Apache, Squid etc). And it has a MS owned Windows emulator if you really do need it.

So why do the industry scribes keep harping on about Linux??? Why are they blind to OSX which is way out in front of Linux in terms of being a true desktop alternative?

Although it would upset the Linux community, in the longer term it would benefit them because for developers porting apps from OSX to Linux is significantly easier than from Windows to Linux which means it's much more likely to happen.

I think it's time Apple started promoting OSX as the answer for those waiting for Linux.
 
If Apple were to offer some powerful hardware at a lower price then they would be able to get the business of more people interested in Linux. Reviving liscensing of hardware on a very limited and tightly controlled basis might also please many who are hesitant to rely upon a single company for all of their needs. For example, Apple could allow (and encourage) IBM to sell PPC systems with OSX under the condition that the computers can only be powerful servers with a retail price of greater than $10,000US before adding RAM and extra drives. This would allow Apple to keep rackmount sales but give large businesses the option to buy a big cabinet from IBM. IBM can continue to push Linux but offer OSX (or PPC FreeBSD) as an alternative solution. I think that the marketing of Linux by IBM has a lot to do with the pouplarity of Linux in business circles. They could just as easily promote BSD and even OSX.
 
Speaking as a switcher, coming from Linux to OS X...

Linux has powerful mindshare in terms of the server market; plus there's the almost cowboy-ish appeal of the open source movement. However I know of a lot of people like me - Linux users who have discovered that OS X is really what we'd all hoped Linux would become, someday. I really think OS X is gaining a lot of mindshare in the Linux community, and it's just a matter of time.

There will always be some hardcore Linux fans, and it still makes a heck of a lot of sense as a server OS. But most of us are pragmatic, and want something that "just works". That's OS X in a nutshell. It has pretty much all the benefits of Linux on the desktop, but none of the drawbacks.
 
There are a number of people in the Linux community who are really on a Stallman-esque Free Software trip - they won't use anything that isn't GPLd. They are never going to use OS X on the desktop even if it is better. Most of the rest would use OS X so long as it ran on x86 - and it was cheap (as in free).

I was also a Linux->OS X switcher. I personally was never into that whole militant FSF thing. I just wanted something better than Windows. As Westside guy said - OS X was everything I wanted Linux to be. That the hardware is really well designed is a great plus 😉

Like it or not, windows is going to continue to be the dominant force on the desktop and they will continue to leverage that dominance (legally or not) to gain advantage on the server side.

Whilst being a niche market has it's disadvantages (some hardware support, fewer games etc) for OS X the pluses are that we don't appear on the virus writers radars just yet. I'm pretty certain that OS X is just as likely to be vulnerable to viruses as windows.
 
Caveman and Westside - have you guys poster your stories on Apple's Switcher page? You really should.

And thanks - I will include Linux in my switcher story too (as I tried it in the hope it would be what I wanted).
 
Originally posted by caveman_uk
There are a number of people in the Linux community who are really on a Stallman-esque Free Software trip - they won't use anything that isn't GPLd. They are never going to use OS X on the desktop even if it is better. Most of the rest would use OS X so long as it ran on x86 - and it was cheap (as in free).
Click to expand...

That nails it right there...the bean-counters see Linux as a situation of keeping existing hardware and drastically reducing software costs, where the hard-core geeks see the open-source, GPL mystique and the fact that this means that they can contribute to the development of the OS they want to use. Free as in beer, free as in liberty. That's what Linux is: free Unix.

In contrast, OS X is only everything Linux is trying to be from the usability and interface standpoints. It's a closed system on proprietary hardware, and neither is it cheap. Instead of depending on Microsoft and whatever hardware vendor gives you the best deal, you depend on Apple for everything. That's unthinkable to a lot of Stallman's disciples. I've done the Apple argument with such people.... 🙄

The ascendancy of Microsoft and Linux are both essentially due to the fact that home computing follows business computing, and home users do not determine the future of business computing...which leaves it to the bean-counters and geeks, not the poor people who are stuck using the computers chosen for them every day.
 
Originally posted by rueyeet
That nails it right there...the bean-counters see Linux as a situation of keeping existing hardware and drastically reducing software costs, where the hard-core geeks see the open-source, GPL mystique and the fact that this means that they can contribute to the development of the OS they want to use. Free as in beer, free as in liberty. That's what Linux is: free Unix.

In contrast, OS X is only everything Linux is trying to be from the usability and interface standpoints. It's a closed system on proprietary hardware, and neither is it cheap. Instead of depending on Microsoft and whatever hardware vendor gives you the best deal, you depend on Apple for everything. That's unthinkable to a lot of Stallman's disciples. I've done the Apple argument with such people.... 🙄

The ascendancy of Microsoft and Linux are both essentially due to the fact that home computing follows business computing, and home users do not determine the future of business computing...which leaves it to the bean-counters and geeks, not the poor people who are stuck using the computers chosen for them every day.
Click to expand...
That's the schoolgirl version. In practice, many IT making the switch to Linux are not downloading images from the Internet, burning CD's, and installing the systems on existing hardware. They are buying expensive prepackaged systems. Compare these offerings from Dell to an Xserve.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back