-
Website
http://theappslab.com/ -
Original page
http://theappslab.com/2008/07/29/os-x-ubuntu-and-other-fun-stuff/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
innov8ion
15 comments · 2 points
-
jpiwowar
52 comments · 2 points
-
ontarioemperor
34 comments · 31 points
-
flopflips
12 comments · 1 points
-
noelportugal
19 comments · 2 points
-
-
Popular Threads
-
Meet Brizzly, My New Twitter Client
5 days ago · 42 comments
-
Feeds: Dead to You or Still Kicking?
4 days ago · 15 comments
-
Why Gaming is the Future of Everything
2 days ago · 7 comments
-
More Fun with Twitter Lists
3 days ago · 6 comments
-
Miscellaneous Debris
1 week ago · 8 comments
-
Meet Brizzly, My New Twitter Client
I hope to one day purchase an Apple Mac, I kinda like the idea of the Mini or maybe the entry level MacBook, but I agree with Mr Shuttleworth that the Linux community should be emulating Apple's approach rather than Redmond's.
A friend of mine is planning to buy a new Mini and hook it to his 1080p 50" LCD TV as a monitor. Should be awesome. I'm very happy with my 2nd generation Macbook, the white one. I upgraded the memory aftermarket, paying a quarter of what they wanted installed by Apple. It does everything I need, with a few exceptions.
I've switched between Linux and Windows several times on my laptop. A few days ago I switched back to Vista. I don't like it, but it does more of the things I need, with less hassle.
I switched from CentOS5 to Ubuntu on my PC. I'm coming to the end of my love affair with Ubuntu. I think I'm going to switch back to CentOS5. It's more solid and that machine is more of a server, so it's a better match.
As I've said before, stick to VMs and your transitions between OSes are very easy. :)
Cheers
Tim...
I use OS X, Windows and Ubuntu and I find that I spend similar amounts of time tweaking Windows & Ubuntu but none on OS X. Apple's hardware restrictions mean that I buy far fewer hardware upgrades so that has a big effect.
That said, I've found that any Windows install seems to "rot" over time. Taking longer to boot, using more and more memory and gaining conflicting DLLs. This just doesn't happen with Ubuntu.
My Dell is way faster running VMs on Ubuntu than it was running them on XP.
Good point about h/w, supporting more kinds does mean exponentially more driver work.
After the latest move, I'm trying to stay more cloud/backup/VM centric to ensure that I can lose the box and still be fine.
Cheers
Tim...
I have been amazed at how good it is. Sure there are loads of stupid things that linux distributions should just standardize (like the dozens of window managers), but things were really easy for me overall.
I think part of the reason is that I am running it on a MacBookPro, which is a known configuration that Ubuntu seems to have gone out of its way to support well. Pretty much everything, including the function keys "just worked".
I was the most blown away when I plugged in my ipod and a media play popped up, downloaded a bunch of codecs and just started playing.
I am no linux guru by any stretch, but this has been good fun.
As for AWN, I installed it in all of 15 minutes, but ended up just using the built in Gnome panels.. I like having a few buttons, etc on there.
Glad to hear you're liking Ubuntu. I'm with Rich on spreading the love. It's a very solid an human, as the tagline says, distro.
I also have a known configuration, Dell laptop from the 2006 vintage. Pity I have the old Intel video drivers though, so I can't enjoy the eye candy that Compiz and AWN provide.
Isn't it awesome that even proprietary h/w can be freed though? You managed to dodge the support cost, but it's too bad you had to pay for the s/w.
Heron doesn't seem to know my iPhone, which makes sense. I plugged it in to charge, and it notified me that it detected a camera. Nothing more or less. Heh.
Compiz was rock solid a year ago, it took Apple a year to get Spaces right, and even that pales in comparison to Compiz. (Not to mention Apple got the whole app-centric approach wrong) On the other hand, no more tinkering with X configs, no more randomly crashing X (and with it every open app), no more rebooting before plugging to projector.
Network Manager lets you manage WiFi, VPN and dial-up (EVDO) from one place. Apple has misplaced these features in different parts of their UI, and didn't even get around to implementing some of the stuff (like WiFi signal strength, OpenVPN support).
On the other hand, no more rebooting because the WiFi driver gets lost after suspend/resume, or NW decides it can't see it. No more editing dial-up scripts because the EVDO card sometimes gets owner by the wrong device.
I can't run Compiz on my hardware, but even so, I can bork up my xorg.conf just trying to set screen resolution. Plus, it does seem odd that things don't show up or stop working sometimes for no apparent reason, e.g. my panel icons are constantly shuffling.
And VPN forces me to restart X pretty frequently.
This is why I keep multiple machines around and current.
I think OSX has the hardest job. Apple can't ensure that the number or quality of third-party apps will always be better than MS/Linux. It controls the OS, but as it evolves, it may lose appeal and if it doesn't then the opposition is more likely to catch up to it or duplicate it.
MS have a market share advantage - any 'killer' software has to run on Windows. Something would have to be 'really' big before it could convince enough people to throw away their existing hardware and buy Macs (assuming Apple could provide the hardware). Though if Apple ever start selling an OSX built to run on Dell/Acer... laptops, the whole game changes.
I've got hardy Ubuntu running on my Acer laptop (purchased in March 2006) and Compiz works great on that. I'd need to be convinced before deciding to pay for another OS, though if I bought a new machine with the OS bundled, I may not switch it to Linux.
So, again we launch into the what's best for enterprise discussion. Personally, I think OS X and Linux are good enough to compete with Microsoft, but there will always be room for multiple O/S flavors.
Further adding to the argument that VMs rule and everyone should have multiple O/S installed, if only to see what could be. If everyone used each flavor (one Linux distro for the sake of debate), we'd pull out what we liked and disliked and push our primary/favorite O/S to do better, also pushing the others to do better.
Competition is good.
I wish my Dell from 2006 would run Compiz. The Intel drivers don't want to cooperate.
So, I do have to reinstall it every time I do a kernel update. Bummer.
That being said, it is true that Ubuntu is getting closer and closer to the point where you don't need to mess about too much. but it still has a long way to go.
Just one small example - external monitors. I can plug my mbp into an external monitor, and after a moment my desktop automatically grows to include the new monitor, and I can continue working. it almost always guesses the right resolution, and it's easy to tell it the orientation, and it remembers the orientation and resolution if I connect to a similar monitor later.
With Linux (Ubuntu 7.10 at least), the only approach I've found that works is to edit the Xorg.conf file to have configurations and layouts for all my monitors - and then I have to kill my X session and start a new X session manually with the correct layout. Not my idea of 'usable'.
Even now, it's a bit cranky about changing resolutions.
OS X, no problems at all with the laptop screen plus a monitor, even better than XP, which always reset itself when I rebooted, probably a DVI/VGA thing.
So, some things are very frustrating, while others just work. I hadn't used Linux since Red Hat in 99 so this was a huge improvement for me. I love Ubuntu.
But then some updates would break sound, or resume (other updates would break suspend), or the fn keys would stop working, something would go wrong and only get fixed a few releases later.
So while things get fixed really quick, they also get broken again (and again) that overall I think I was worse off than waiting longer on a non-regressing release cycle.
Overall, I like the shorter release cycle for core stuff. You can also build a system and keep it the same forever, no annoying critical update warnings. XP and OS X seem to have a lot of those, and you always wonder how important they really are.
Stuff that has worked for a while (i.e. for older models, I have a couple at home delegate to server) never broke. It's only recent models I had problem with, and with the less common or recently introduced components.
Suspend/resume was on again, off again, on again, off again, probably because the new Intel chipset. So while the cycles were very quick, over the course of a year you get the same down time as Vista.
It was definitely worse than OS X, which just works, but Apple doesn't give you much of choice in hardware, and I did exercise that right when picking a PC to run Linux.
Of course, that's possibly a user error thing on my part too.
When I got mine however, it had a broadcom chipset, so I had months of futzing with it before I could get wireless working reliably. Fortunately Broadcom support has improved a lot since then.
The problem is that unless you roll your own hardware, you generally have no idea what mobo, chipset, video, etc you are going to get if you go with a big name box...
IMO that's one of the advantages of Apple - they don't just shove whatever's cheapest that week in the box, you get very consistent hardware from machine to machine...