The difference between Mac users and Linux users

[dontwalkhand]

This is the main difference I have noticed between Mac users, and Linux users.

Mac users generally are able to depend on their OS for everything. Yes, I do realize my Macs have Windows installed on them, but they are only there for games. My MacBook doesn't have any version of Windows installed on it whatsoever, however. All work, and other activities are done inside of OS X, and it is a great work/business/school/internet/*insert whatever here* OS. And the reason I do not have to install Windows on my Macbook is frankly, because I do not need it. Having an older generation MacBook means that I can't play games on it anyway, I have an iMac for that.

Now, Linux users, they always rub into my face their $250 netbooks, and how they can run Linux, and it is more stable than Mac blah blah blah. Now here is the main difference. Every Linux user I have encountered, has Windows installed on their machines. They do not ever seem to use Ubuntu or anything of that sort as their main OS. They instead seems to always have Windows started up and say "Oh, but I have Ubuntu installed" or "Oh I have *insert other linux distro here* installed." They always claim they need Windows somehow, and it isn't even for games, it is for some work related thing. So why is it that Linux is so highly regarded as a consumer Operating System, when it seems that people can't ever seem to depend on it for work? Why do they need to boot back to Windows? Why do I never need to boot to Windows unless I do want to play a game, but Linux users seem to have to depend on Windows.

Servers and proprietary equipment aside, and No offense to anybody, but to me, Linux on a consumer computer is just an OS for .... Internet access. What most of these users are implying is that I can't depend on Linux for any real work, just as a platform to run a web browser.

I am not here to start a fight, flame war, or anything. I just want an explanation, and some information, of why Linux users have to still depend on Windows ,but us Mac users can be fine and dandy with Windows nowhere in sight unless one wants to play a PC game or two?

 

[Doju]

I agree. While I do prefer Linux to Windows, Linux is a much less... complete operating system versus Mac, and despite my using of Linux occasionally, I've encountered better stability in OS X, as well as a much more user friendly and refined, polished experience.

 

[Queso]

I know two people who use Linux for just about everything, neither use Ubuntu though (One uses Debian, the other Gentoo). When not using Linux they're using UNIX. Neither has any time for Windows.

 

[elmancho]

I have to agree with you too.

 

[Cabbit]

I know two people who use Linux for just about everything, neither use Ubuntu though (One uses Debian, the other Gentoo). When not using Linux they're using UNIX. Neither has any time for Windows.

Most people familiar with Linux would never touch Ubuntu, it is a horrid mess of a distro with very little support other than from Ubuntu's own forums.

 

[elmancho]

Most people familiar with Linux would never touch Ubuntu, it is a horrid mess of a distro with very little support other than from Ubuntu's own forums.

I use ubuntu form time to time and I think its pretty sleek, theres quite a big community imo.

OS X is just an uber augmented in aewsomeness version of linux tbh ...

 

[Queso]

OS X is just an uber augmented in aewsomeness version of linux tbh ...

Except OSX is more an enhanced version of FreeBSD


(And yeah, I know that's not technically correct, but it's closer than calling it GNU/Linux)

 

[Zombie Acorn]

There are a few key companies that I need software from before I could switch to a full time linux distribution. I also don't like eclipse as well as xcode or VS2k8

 

[Signal-11]

Most people familiar with Linux would never touch Ubuntu, it is a horrid mess of a distro with very little support other than from Ubuntu's own forums.

Horsepuckey.

I've been using Linux since the mid 90s and have gone through every major distro from way back in the day of version 2 of Slackware. Hell, at one point, I rolled my own from scratch.

I like Ubuntu and that's what I run on a couple machines for a couple different purposes. It doesn't do everything extremely well but it doesn't have to because I don't have to noodle around with it too much. I'm past the point where I feel I have to compile all of my binaries from source to prove my geekhood. Don't have the time or energy for that jazz anymore.

 

[ravenvii]

I use ubuntu form time to time and I think its pretty sleek, theres quite a big community imo.

OS X is just an uber augmented in aewsomeness version of linux tbh ...

To be honest, I agree with the above - Ubuntu has became a mess.

The only thing they truly got right was the boot process - they've made it as smooth as I've ever seen a Linux distro done.

Well, and their NetBook Remix is excellent, but that's more of a different distro based on Debian and elements from Ubuntu, than truly Ubuntu.

But once you arrive at the desktop, though, ugh. You want sleek? Check out the latest Fedora or OpenSUSE - now that's a nice GUI.

 

[0098386]

I don't depend on OSX at all. I use my Windows XP partition more than Snow Leopard.

 

[dontwalkhand]

I agree. While I do prefer Linux to Windows, Linux is a much less... complete operating system versus Mac, and despite my using of Linux occasionally, I've encountered better stability in OS X, as well as a much more user friendly and refined, polished experience.

You are spot on! Any Linux distro for consumer computers doesn't seem to be complete, because if it were, one would not need Windows at all (games aside).

 

[Nermal]

I played around with Linux a bit in 2001/2002, but as mentioned above it wasn't really "complete". I ended up switching to OS X because of the wide range of software available.

 

[dmr727]

Before finally plopping down for proper OS X hardware, I ran Ubuntu for a couple of years exclusively (2006-2007). It was fine, but it certainly wasn't turn key, and I wouldn't have recommended it to anyone that isn't comfortable digging under the hood a little bit. Also, it's difficult to integrate with the Windows world when you can't run Office and the various Adobe tools. OpenOffice comes close, but you still end up messing around with the formatting quite a bit if you have to exchange files with someone.

That said, there were some things that I really liked. Once everything got set up, it ran fine without trouble. It was also pretty quick on my average hardware - a 2GHz AMD box. At the time I was pretty stoked to be eschewing both Windows *and* Intel.

 

[Ttownbeast]

I used Debian from time to time it wasn't bad on my old hardware but when installing the things I needed but the package dependencies were a bitch sometimes so I pretty much stick to OSX now--I don't have the time to go on a wild goose chase finding parts to make apps work its nice when they just work.