Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
switched to OSX 10.6.4 .... so why do i prefer Linux?
- Thread starter stefan1975
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
http://gigapple.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/itunes-10-window-controls.png?w=106&h=106
so how is that consistent with apples own guidelines? itunes is a core app and 1st party, but in all honesty it looks more consistent on M$ windows then in OSX now, they should fire the GUI designer who cam up with that idea.....it looks so out of place now with the controls aligned vertically.
itunes does run smoother on OSX then windows though and on linux i cannot get my ipod touch to sync at all, so that is a big + for OSX. just wish they made it web/cloud enabled.
I agree, Apple exercise a lot of restraint. It's far from the reason I choose a Mac, but it's a nice thing about the system.
The thing I notice about Mac OS X if I come back after working on other platforms is the attention detail paid to the typography, gradients and shadows and other visual elements. I certainly don't have a trained eye, but it stands out to my eyes.
Seems like most folks rooting for Linux are perfectly competent at fiddling with command lines and editing lines of programming that don't quite work.
I began using Ubuntu 8.04 I think and later updated to 9.04 that's when it started to get unwieldy. After two hours trying to download the next update and with Skype downloading perfectly to my daughter's Acer but not to mine (two identical AAO's) I decided it was time to forget Linux. I am too old to learn about distros, kexts, gnomes and KDE and all the other jargon used by Linux folks. I don't want to have to enter lines of programming to get stuff to work. I don't want to have to ask questions on forums that no-one seems to know the answer to or is willing to give out.
Around 9.xx something the instructions for downloading the latest version onto a pendrive were fairly simple and then, yikes I was told to download an ISO image only nowhere seemed to tell you in simple terms exactly how to do it.
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to use Linux if only I didn't have to return to school to know how to.
I want to switch on my computer and for it to do what I want without having to 'reach under the bonnet' to tweak this or that. I don't care if it takes 1 or two minutes to start up cos most of the time it's left running sometimes for days and weeks at an end. So does it really matter if it starts up in 17 seconds if when something goes wrong it can takes days to fix it, when I could be working?
OSX might not be perfect for the folks who know how to program but for the rest of us it is perfect. Even though there's a new version on the horizon.
I began using Ubuntu 8.04 I think and later updated to 9.04 that's when it started to get unwieldy. After two hours trying to download the next update and with Skype downloading perfectly to my daughter's Acer but not to mine (two identical AAO's) I decided it was time to forget Linux. I am too old to learn about distros, kexts, gnomes and KDE and all the other jargon used by Linux folks. I don't want to have to enter lines of programming to get stuff to work. I don't want to have to ask questions on forums that no-one seems to know the answer to or is willing to give out.
Around 9.xx something the instructions for downloading the latest version onto a pendrive were fairly simple and then, yikes I was told to download an ISO image only nowhere seemed to tell you in simple terms exactly how to do it.
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to use Linux if only I didn't have to return to school to know how to.
I want to switch on my computer and for it to do what I want without having to 'reach under the bonnet' to tweak this or that. I don't care if it takes 1 or two minutes to start up cos most of the time it's left running sometimes for days and weeks at an end. So does it really matter if it starts up in 17 seconds if when something goes wrong it can takes days to fix it, when I could be working?
OSX might not be perfect for the folks who know how to program but for the rest of us it is perfect. Even though there's a new version on the horizon.
Can you provide us with some documentation? You can make any operating system ultra secure, it just depends on how much effort you want to expend and how restricted you want the user experience to be.
I'll be a honest, I find it a slightly irritating when I read statements like the one you just made. What you said is pure opinion, not a factual statement.
What I can say, from experience, is that OS 10 possess the best usability to security ratio of any desktop OS out there. I can't tell you how many systems I've secured for the government (my job), and what a pain it is to secure the others and still make them "nice" to the end user.
Sure.
http://gizmodo.com/373779/linux-last-man-standing-in-pwn-2-own-thunderdome
http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/29/linux-becomes-only-os-to-escape-pwn-2-own-unscathed/
http://techrights.org/2009/03/20/pwn2own-2009-and-diebold/
http://www.wired.com/software/coolapps/news/2004/12/66022
Given that you are in the field, take a look at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Security/Features then compare and contrast to the security mitigations of Mac OS X. Specifically, in terms of ASLR and heap protection for 32-bit processes.
I agree that depending on the compatibility of the distro you choose and your hardware that getting Linux to the state of being "nice" to use can be more difficult for the less computer literate. Ubuntu is probably the most user friendly Linux in my opinion. I just install Ubuntu, use Ubuntu Software Center to install the software I want, and I am ready to go.
The curated Ubuntu repository that applications are installed from is a more secure means of getting software in comparison to downloading from the web.
But, I mostly use Mac OS X for my daily computing and only use Ubuntu via virtual machine because I prefer the user experience on a Mac. I like the fact that Mac OS X is specifically made to work with Apple hardware that it is intended to run on.
Bugs, quotes from blogs, and social engineering tricks don't really qualify an OS to be "more secure" than another. I would put stock into your links if they came from somewhere like ISACA or SEI CERT, ya know...real security groups. I don't consider Gizmodo a real security group. Another way of putting it is the links you provided are not professional security sources. I'm not looking to get into a pissing match here, so just keep that in mind. I deal with professional groups and CISSP types, not bloggers with a simple opinion.
In response to Ubuntu being hard to make nice for the less experienced...well, I think it is safe to say that we don't have to deal with that problem here.
In response to Ubuntu and downloading files, sure their repository may be "safer" than downloading random apps off the 'net, but that depends on where you are getting them. It's not like I can't use Ubuntu to download malware off the 'net, I simply have the option of using their convenient (and rather expansive) repository. Is this a nifty feature? Absolutely, however it doesn't make the OS inherently more secure.
Edit: I like links like this:
http://www.isaca.org/Journal/Past-I...ol-in-a-Distributed-Network-Environment1.aspx
However, if we are posting links that really just serve as an ad for a product, I could post this:
http://www.apple.com/macosx/security/
In response for your request for me to compare and contrast Ubuntu vs OS X security features, I do believe the ball is in your court considering you were the one who stated Ubuntu was more secure.
That link to Mac OS X security makes comparisons of Mac OS X to Linux but in no way contrasts the two OSes to show that Mac OS X is more secure.
The compare and contrast was handed to you:
A) Linux has full ASLR and heap protection for 32-bit processes as well as 64-bit processes.
B) Mac OS X has partial ASLR and no heap protection for 32-bit processes. The lack of these features is the means in which Mac OS X is being hacked at PWN2OWN. 64-bit processes are not being hacked because the NX bit is enabled for the heap for 64-bit processes. And, the dyld executable shows that memory can not be mapped with WX flags for 64-bit processes. http://www.shell-storm.org/shellcode/files/shellcode-692.php <- this is from an exploit database.
Last edited:
I'm also a big fan of Fedora Linux. However, I'm back to primarily using OS X (10.5 on my G5 tower). The thing that pushed me back into Mac-land was syncing my smartphones...it's a royal pain in Linux--while iSync spoils me rotten 
With that said, I certainly appreciate the openness/customizability in Linux. My ideal (and current situation) is dual-booting Fedora 13 and Win7 on my laptop (tinkering+Windows only compatability), while sticking to the straightforward stability/ease of use that is OS X. A quote to consider:
With that said, I certainly appreciate the openness/customizability in Linux. My ideal (and current situation) is dual-booting Fedora 13 and Win7 on my laptop (tinkering+Windows only compatability), while sticking to the straightforward stability/ease of use that is OS X. A quote to consider:
This coming from the man who wrote Berkeley UNIX.Bill Joy said:
I never could get into Ubuntu/Linux, not that there's anything wrong with it, but the lack of some quality alternatives to some applications that are available on Windows/OSX is kind of a pain (for me anyway). Then there's the lack of simple things that I didn't think I'd miss - like being able to play games in your MSN client, or being able to sync my phone with something like iTunes that really built up over time.
I think that's why I haven't had any problems using OS X - pretty much every single program and game I had in Windows is available for Mac, so it wasn't a painful switch, though Microsoft still hasn't made it possible to play games on their MSN for Mac client
I think that's why I haven't had any problems using OS X - pretty much every single program and game I had in Windows is available for Mac, so it wasn't a painful switch, though Microsoft still hasn't made it possible to play games on their MSN for Mac client
The problem is I was never trying to compare the two. You are still attempting to put the task of a thorough compare and contrast research assignment on myself (I had enough in undergrad and grad school, thanks) to justify your claim that Ubuntu "pwns" OS X. My thoughts I've shared with you are purely empirical in nature, that is, from my own professional, highly qualified experience.
It is truly impossible to accurately compare two operating systems side by side. They all have negatives and positives. At the end of the day, all three major offerings (Windows, Mac, Linux) are "good" operating systems, it simply depends on what you are using them for and how good your admins are (or what their skill sets are). That was the main point I've been trying to make. As I said before, I refuse to get into a endless loop of "omgz +1 for Apple" or "omg roflcopter I <3 Linux".
Until I see an accurate, reputable (professional or academic), peer reviewed, and widely accepted detailed report (the kind of report professionals rely on) on how Linux is superior to Mac OS 10 security wise, I wouldn't bother trying to convince me. It just isn't what I have experienced in the field.
Thank you. LOL
Empirical = refers to the use of working hypotheses that are testable using observation or experiment.
So, you say your "thoughts" are empirical despite stating that, in your opinion, a comparison (test) is impossible. Field experience is psuedo-scientific as you can not control for confounds hence anything you state is purely your opinion.
Given that you dislike it when individuals post information that may be their opinion, you should refrain from posting your opinions. Practice what you preach.
Hey InfoSecmgr,
I have seen you posting misinformation and using your credentials in replacement of stating anything of substance before in these forums. For example:
You posted that quote as a reply to a non security savvy member of this forum that was inquiring about phishing and in reference to my post directed at that user about learning how to use digital certificates.
To clarify on that example given above, the following is from apple's own documentation.
"Usually, if these three conditions are met, the page can be considered secure:
1) The lock icon appears in the top right corner of the Safari window
2) The page's URL begins with "https"
3) You trust the organization that created the website (if you do not know or trust them, consider submitting information to them via phone instead)."
Users have to view the certificate to verify that the site belongs to the trusted organization, hence it is not a pure software solution. This method presented in apple's documentation requires user knowledge and implementation.
So, knowledge on the part of the user is required to be more safe while browsing the web.
I have seen you posting misinformation and using your credentials in replacement of stating anything of substance before in these forums. For example:
You posted that quote as a reply to a non security savvy member of this forum that was inquiring about phishing and in reference to my post directed at that user about learning how to use digital certificates.
To clarify on that example given above, the following is from apple's own documentation.
"Usually, if these three conditions are met, the page can be considered secure:
1) The lock icon appears in the top right corner of the Safari window
2) The page's URL begins with "https"
3) You trust the organization that created the website (if you do not know or trust them, consider submitting information to them via phone instead)."
Users have to view the certificate to verify that the site belongs to the trusted organization, hence it is not a pure software solution. This method presented in apple's documentation requires user knowledge and implementation.
So, knowledge on the part of the user is required to be more safe while browsing the web.
Just started using Ubuntu 10.10 x64 in VirtualBox. I still like 10.6.4 better overall in terms of UI and stuff (I won't compare performance because Ubuntu has a pretty severe handicap running in a VM), but Ubuntu has some things to like, such as true focus follow mouse across all applications and windows.
I have a decade of Linux (Mandriva/Ubuntu) and Windows (XP/ 7) experience. OS X took a little while to get used to.
A couple of years ago I stopped customising my machines much, all my Windows desktops are set to look like old skool NT.
I took a little while to get used to a couple of things (alt-tab doesnt work within apps, Finder is a useless POS, no cut-paste etc). Installed Rightzoom, learned some of the shortcuts and after a month or two I really enjoy using the Mac. Going back to my Ubunutu installation feels unwieldy, the fonts suck. Spotlight etc work better than Beagle. Preview is a much better PDF viewer than xpdf/ghsotview/Mandacaocatou, or whatever "fun" linux name is thought up for the tools.
I'm reasonably au-fait with Linux - can recompile from source if necessary, but honestly who has the time nowadays to mess around with that kind of BS? Give it a little while to get used to it - unless you really enjoy tinkering around - in that case OS X is not for you.
Utils to get:
Deeper
OnyX
RightZoom
gfxCardStatus
Default Apps
SmartSleep
Startup Sound
Deeper lets you do things like turn off the annoying icon bounce...
A couple of years ago I stopped customising my machines much, all my Windows desktops are set to look like old skool NT.
I took a little while to get used to a couple of things (alt-tab doesnt work within apps, Finder is a useless POS, no cut-paste etc). Installed Rightzoom, learned some of the shortcuts and after a month or two I really enjoy using the Mac. Going back to my Ubunutu installation feels unwieldy, the fonts suck. Spotlight etc work better than Beagle. Preview is a much better PDF viewer than xpdf/ghsotview/Mandacaocatou, or whatever "fun" linux name is thought up for the tools.
I'm reasonably au-fait with Linux - can recompile from source if necessary, but honestly who has the time nowadays to mess around with that kind of BS? Give it a little while to get used to it - unless you really enjoy tinkering around - in that case OS X is not for you.
Utils to get:
Deeper
OnyX
RightZoom
gfxCardStatus
Default Apps
SmartSleep
Startup Sound
Deeper lets you do things like turn off the annoying icon bounce...
I like tiger (10.4) better than all of them. Spotlight and finder worked better then than they do now (no idea how apple let this happen). So little has changed since 10.4 that linux distros and Windows has had heaps of time to catch up. It's a travesty that Apple has let Microsoft catch up by working on their i things.
I mean compare 10.4 to XP
then compare 10.6 to Win7
nuff said.
I hope 10.7 takes OSX to the same level of greatness that 10.4 did.
I mean compare 10.4 to XP
then compare 10.6 to Win7
nuff said.
I hope 10.7 takes OSX to the same level of greatness that 10.4 did.
well i agreed with you until ubuntu10.10. the new ubuntu font they created themselves is actually pretty good imho. I am a fedora/arch guy at heart but since i am kinda short on time these days ubuntu is a nice no-hassle linux alternative, besides it is one of the more polished distros that just-works and looks decent as well.
I mean i could install it on a relatives' pc and am pretty sure they would be able to use it without question. It is kinda like with iOS on iphones, pick up and use. It really isn't behind OSX anymore apart from the fact that it lacks the branded commercial a-tier apps.
perhaps the gtk versus qt difference makes it a little less coherent then OSX right now, but on gnome with chrome you can get away with pretty much GTK only.
that combined with decent nvidia drivers, working flash and the 1/3 boot time make it a viable alternative ... had i not made the investment already and need adobe and M$ apps.
You have way too much time on your hands and have no idea what you are talking about.
Also, your earlier post about phishing, you didn't say anything different from what I said. I suggest you study up before you try to show me how to do my job. I get paid very well for a reason. Go back to your tinker toys.
I agree completely. I think 10.4 was the pinnacle of OSX development. A high level of features/functions without much bloat.
How can you say that? Leopard introduced over 300 new features. I use stacks, quickview, timemachine, spaces, etc on a daily basis. If I had to use a mac running tiger now I would get frustrated with it very quickly.
I'm not trying to start a debate here, you're certainly entitled to your opinion and if you don't like any of the features in 10.5/10.6 that's fine, but I don't see how you can claim those features don't exist.
I forgot to mention how much of a CF KDE was though. I was hopping mad when they made (the horribly unstable) KDE 4.1 the default in Mandriva over the default 3.5.9
Admittedly less of a problem with Gnome, but still. Ubuntu has made some big strides in usability, to the point that I've even seen non- technical users having it on their PC, but in the meantime I've started enjoying the stricter UI guidelines that OS X apps seem to have - Windows is 2nd place. Linux is just a mess with every part-time hacker doing their own thing...
Because volume of features does not directly equate to an OS operating faster/better. Quite the contrary, while some of those features are indeed nice, but leopard is quite bit more bloated then it tiger.
well the default ubuntu setup with just GTK apps from the repos result in a quite decent consistent GUI setup. it just gets dog ugly when mixing QT apps.
I also prefer the OSX consistency, but lately things are changing with apple as well. perhaps for the OSX10.7 lion release with a new concept? I don't know but stuff like those horrible vertical itunes X controls make me shiver.