What is Digg?145 Comments
- SlvrEagle23, on 10/12/2007, -4/+128This ad implies Linux sleeps around.
I like an OS that isn't afraid to experiment a little with her platform...maybe I could talk her into a triple-boot... ;) - coollettuce, on 10/12/2007, -8/+92I wish there was a place on digg for videos.
- TehDoctor, on 10/12/2007, -10/+68@ ElectricSoup
Would you mind explaining how a Linux distro is "inferior" software compared to Apple's? Because I don't think there is any actual evidence to support that, just opinion. You can't define better. Maybe I think better is being able to tinker deep down in the very code of my system and have easily swappable alternatives to the apps that come by default. Apple may make "complete solutions," but maybe I want a different one. Linux offers that. It also can't be beat for performance.
In the end, Apple, Linux, and Windows are just *different* Stop trying to pass off your "holier-than-thou" attitude as a logical, unbiased point. You bitch about Linux fanboys, but you seem to be an Apple one yourself, I don't care if you did post your comment from a Linux box. - cvp1, on 10/12/2007, -10/+66(And, actually, "Linux" is not an OS: it is just a kernel and unusable without a userland, a window manager, a desktop environment, and so forth. Moreover, much of the software that typically comes with "Linux" will run equally happily on other OSes, much as that might surprise digg.com users.)
Try branding that to your average user. It isn't about specific details, it's about the message. That message is far easier to convey (and in effect have more conversions to open source software) if you simply brand it "Linux". - moman, on 10/12/2007, -19/+46Before people bury me, please have the curtousy of reading my opinion (thats all what this is, an opinion) and not the first few words.
"(But why run Linux on a Mac? All Linux apps work already...)"
You're absolutely correct. But I'm going to take it one step further (even though I know I am going to get dugg down doing so). Why buy a Mac period? Obviously if you are a gamer, you are not going to buy a Mac (even if it has WoW and a few other games, the amount pales when compared to Windows). So what are you buying? A BSD kernel, with a "oooh how pretty" interface. Want nice eye candy? Buy a cheap PC / Laptop, do a little homework before you buy it (which you should do anyways no matter what kind of computer your buying, there are systems out there which you can install Linux on and have ALL the hardware work right out of the box, no config required), install Linux, and Compiz / Beryl and whala, you got a great graphical ui. What else does Mac have? "Easy to use" apps? Thats a matter of opinion, and if a person has used Windows their entire life, switching to Mac will just be as hard as switching to Linux. "No configuration" setup? Once again, you can buy a system with Linux preinstalled, or goto linux-laptops.net or a similar site and find systems which Linux will work on, 100% out of the box with no configuration required.
Macs are better for you than Windows, but Linux is better for you than Macs. And please stop with "oh but Linux is just a kernel, not an entire OS". No one cares, and while you are splitting hairs, I'm going to be using the superior operating system.
But thats just my 2 cents. - mi2ca, on 10/12/2007, -4/+31I didn't know Linux had boobs. I love you, Linux!
- strabes, on 10/12/2007, -5/+29Too bad the latter is the one who will be successful in life.
- archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+24"Watch as my comment gets buried by a ton of people, who at 45 have "Mom" still cooking their meals."
Did you think that maybe you get modded down because you mindlessly repeat outdated stereotypes? I use Linux daily, and I left home at the age of 17.
"I had this exact decision. WINE sucks... not even an argument."
It depends for what. MS Office and Photoshop run really nicely using Codeweaver's Crossover. Oh, right, I forgot for a second that you don't really have an argument, but are indulging in good ol' fashioned FUD spreading.
"GIMP is a joke... so as a graphics professional, what am I supposed to do my work on in Linux?"
I doubt you are really a graphics professional. Myself, I use Photoshop daily as part of my job, and you know what? I don't have a problem using Gimp when I'm at home.
Stop your idiotic fanboyism, thanks. - gameforge, on 10/12/2007, -3/+23Well according to Linux,
$ whatis JerryleeCooper
JerryleeCooper: nothing appropriate. - tizz66, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17I think you're the first person I've seen who has described Windows a *nix based...
- Ratteler, on 10/12/2007, -3/+20I was always more attracted to the nerdy girls anyway. They do more and are more grateful for the attention. The "Cheerleaders" were always unobtainable and a little bitchy. Even when the cheerleaders were nice they acted like they were doing you a favor.
- DarkSunlight, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17Linux is a woman, HOT o/
Let's talk about that, much more fun than bashing... - chubbstar, on 10/12/2007, -6/+21you obviously havent used linux lately
- TehDoctor, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17OSX is posix compliant. I have a hard time bitching about it because of that... it is a *nix system, which appeals to a programmer or sysadmin. But there are things about the way the frontend works on Mac that really piss me off; the way the bar and dock work, and the way it tries to keep configuration overly simple to name a couple.
I've always said that there is no big "be all and end all" reason to switch to Linux. But there a lot of little things about it that make you realize it is a good switch when you've used it for a while, some of them being: the way kicker works (if you run KDE), the ease of software installation/upgrade with a package manager, the ease of customization, projects like compiz and beryl, and performance on garbage hardware. - kraniac, on 10/12/2007, -4/+18I think the implications of casting Linux as a woman are fairly accurate. Occasionally difficult to work with or illogical, but always worth the investment of time. :)
- tvashtar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13@gameforge
oh yeah well:
$%blow
-bash: fg: %blow: no such job - chubbstar, on 10/12/2007, -5/+18moreover, install a few linux distros and get a full out boot-orgy goin on.
- gameforge, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15What? :) If you Dugg me down because it's stupid, fine, it really was. But I didn't make it up; that's the output of whatis when there's no man page...
Nevermind, Digg it down, it was really stupid. - StealthTomato, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14Explain, then, why I had to boot into Linux to download the Windows drivers for my wireless card.
- foolfromhell, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14How'd he get Excel on Linux? Except for Wine... Shouldnt he say OpenOffice instead?
- championchap, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12"Please give me your definition of being successful in life?"
Earning enough money through doing something you love that you can live comfortably and support a family sounds about right to me.
Down the cheerleader route its more likely that you will sleep with lots of football players with an IQ lower than your average glass of water, come out of it with several STIs and a couple of kids by the age of 20.
Nobody cares that you were once a cheerleader after you leave high school. - arcanimus, on 10/12/2007, -5/+16@ElectricSoup
Okay.. I have never wanted to stab someone in the face because of a digg comment so far, and I always assumed someone would step in and correct most of the morons without me having to actually register for digg and do it myself, but in this case I just had to.
"You misunderstand the situation. "Apple" is not an alternative to Windows or "Linux"." - Apple's Mac OS is an alternative to Microsoft's Windows OS.
"Apple offers complete solutions (and primarily makes its money on the hardware)." - What about iTunes? What about all the Mac software that's out there? What about the fact that they invest heavily into the development of OS X?
"If someone really wants to buy, say, a MacBook Pro, wipe it, and put inferior software on it in the form of a Linux distro" - I'll stop you right there. I'm sorry but... Inferior software? I hate to break it to you, but OS X and Linux are based, ultimately, on the same operating system. Please explain why Microsoft is trying desperately to extinguish an "inferior operating system" (http://www.microsoft.com/getthefacts) or why companies like IBM, the 'founders' of the personal computer if you will, are investing heavily into research and development of Linux? Why are companies like Google and HP funding the development of the Linux kernel?
"then why should Apple care?" - Because it means that the person won't buy more apple ***** for their macbook? If someone installs Linux on it, clearly they are not going to want to purchase apple's extensive warranties, and other *****.
"They are not simply a software company like Microsoft or "Linux" (i.e., the many Linux vendors)." - Hate to break it to you bucko, but Microsoft makes a bunch of hardware. In fact, my USB mouse clearly says "Microsoft" on it. Also, you're comparing Linux and Microsoft as if Linux is a company. It's not. Please get the facts straight.
"(And, actually, "Linux" is not an OS: it is just a kernel and unusable without a userland, a window manager, a desktop environment, and so forth."
You see, there's a bit of a problem here. If you would've ever bothered to get your head out of your ass and actually look up the definition of "Operating System" (OS) then you would see anywhere that this is the definition:
"An operating system (OS) is a set of computer programs that manage the hardware and software resources of a computer. An operating system rationally processes electronic devices in response to approved commands. At the foundation of all system software, an operating system performs basic tasks such as controlling and allocating memory, prioritizing system requests, controlling input and output devices, facilitating networking, and managing file systems. Most operating systems have a command line interpreter as a basic user interface, but they may also provide a graphical user interface (GUI) for ease of operation. The operating system forms a platform for other system software and for application software." - Wikipedia
Now given that "Wikipedia is not a credible source" you can look it up anywhere you want and you will see the same definiton. But anyways, you see... Let's do a little check list here:
Manage hardware resources: [X] Linux kernel [X] Windows
Manage memory allocation (software): [X] Linux kernel [X] Windows
Foundation for all the software that's running on it: [X] Linux kernel [X] Windows
Controls input and output devices: [X] Linux kernel [X] Windows
etc. [X] Linux kernel [X] Windows
(Optional) GUI: [X] Linux (as a system) [X] Forced microsoft gui
In fact, I hope you realize that given your argument, that since the Linux kernel is not an OS (which I have just disproved) then the Windows kernel is not an OS either. The windows kernel itself doesn't have a GUI. Try deleting C:WINDOWSSYSTEM32kernel32.dll (or kernel64.dll if you're on a 64-bit machine) and see how your Windows machine is running after that. Here's a hint: it won't start.
Most window managers and desktop environments for Linux are part of the GNU Free software foundation, and as such, their official operating system is LINUX. The fact that the software runs on other operating systems like UNIX and occasionally OS X and Windows just proves how nice the Linux community is to users of other operating systems that they actually provide the same, well made software for their use.
"Posted from my Sony, which is running Kubuntu. But, these days, I sometimes regret using it." - Well then go dish out $300 for Vista or buy yourself a Mac. I am a Linux user, and I find I can get more done on the Linux command line, and faster, than I could through the millions of Windows ***** menus. For example, if I wanted to change my IP address and Subnet mask for a network interface in Windows I would have to literally go through at least 20 dialogs to get to the textbox that allows me to do it. In linux i'd open up a console (one keystroke) and type in one line on the command line. Done.
In short, Please get your facts straight before trying to challenge the "tiresome Linux fanboys, who can't abide the thought that anyone uses anything else." Jerkwad. - koweja, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10It's called a parody. Look it up.
- boybunny, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12SlvrEagle23
Actually I want to see hot Linux and Solaris action on the same platform... as any red blooded male would! - mrsteveman1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10wilhoitm: not blowing the manager of mcdonalds to pay rent
- joshpar, on 10/12/2007, -6/+15If JerryleeCooper is listening... If I run Linux on my Mac, is it still running Windows underneath??
- TeacherOfHeroes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9I'd go from OSX to linux. I've used both Linux and OSX, and while OSX is nice, and I can see why it appeals to a lot or people, I was put off by how little it allows you to configure and customize it.
I like tinkering and getting things just the way I like them, adding packages as needed and customizing everything, and while the default OSX configuration is nice, there are still a few things that bothered me. I tried to change settings to get it working the way I liked it, but it seemed like the most drastic change you seem to be able to make is where you want the dock, and do you want graphite or blue? - gameforge, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9@arcanimus
Welcome to Digg. You'll get buried to hell because of your enormous comment; that's normal. Sounds like you read Digg, so maybe you're already aware. Happens to me regularly.
You have your first Digg friend; great post.
BTW, everyone: Linux can refer to the kernel, yes; it's also short for GNU/Linux which is the official name of the operating system regardless of which distribution you're using. In fact, each time we call it simply "Linux", Richard M. Stallman loses one hair from the afro on his chin. Of course, each time someone installs gcc, it grows back...
:)=~
Now bury me for talking about friends & being a dufus. - mercurysquad, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7It's a holy war. Like Tabs vs Spaces, or Emacs vs Vi.
- nismerf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Hmm. I am not knocking Mac (as I am typing on mine) or Linux well maybe I will knock on windows... Anyway people need to realize you use what you want, what works best for you. Mac OS X is a great OS, Linux is an awesome ideal, Windows takes a lot of money to do anything of any relevance in the business world, and it does it poorly. Hell I run ALL THREE on my mac. Many different reasons for doing so. That kernel that everyone bums about above my list is the most advanced, and has hooks to do things that MAC does not. Mac's user interface and underlying *nix infrastructure (Next) is very well done, and Windows is used by lots of people around the world so it needs to be dealt with (very sneeky lets put it on machines even if you dont want it). Anyway, use what you like, as soon as you start to beat on other people for other choices looking for an idiot, all you need is a mirror.
- springfield, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Oh dear....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2GrCg7iVjE - TehDoctor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Ostensibly you've never used Linux. It's rare that you have to "fiddle" to get things to work right anymore.
The only problems I've had with "fiddling" wasn't on my computer. Somone had an ATI card. I changed one ***** word in the xorg.conf: replace "ATI" with "vesa." The only other thing I've seen is wireless problems. Big deal. The two people I know with wireless trouble use ndiswrapper, which was easy to set up. et viola! they now connect to a WLAN as easily as I do.
Yesterday I was talking to my friend, who has a nice new laptop with Vista. I asked him what he was doing. He replied "reinstalling windows" Gee, that sucks, doesn't it? The scary thing is, he thought it wasn't that bad to sit around for 3 hours reinstalling his entire ***** OS. Windows is an unstable piece of software whose development ideas frighten me sometimes.... Defrag your hard drive lately? Scan for spyware? Update your firewall? Have to check if your copy of windows was "genuine"?
Well I haven't. So yes, I *would* pay for Linux. - mercurysquad, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Well even that 90% works with ndiswrapper. A great achievement considering most of the drivers in the linux kernel are reverse-engineered.
- GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7You can configure OSX but ironically you have to text edit plists. You can of course spend huge sums of money on 3rd party config tools for it. Think I'll stick with my Linux TBH though. Might buy a Mini if I decide to do some dev work for OSX.
- arcanimus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Some people prefer the PowerPC architecture to an Intel processor as the command-set is smaller and thus the processor is often more efficient. Some people want to see this efficiency on Linux instead of OS X. As for the Intel Mac notebooks... well... I only know a few people who have them and almost all of them bought it "because it looked cute" - not because they thought Apple was so great. So maybe some people just want a 'cute' looking physical machine but they still want to run Linux.
- standalonematt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I did.
- celerate, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8It's not going to get dugg down because it's a pro-Windows post, it's going to be dugg down because you're trying to paint a black and white picture out of it.
Plus there's never a healthy balance, no matter what OS you're talking about. - twtmc, on 10/12/2007, -8/+13Not only is Linux not a threat to mac, they are actually pretty similar. I would like to see apple and a few linux distributions team up for a marketing campaign. I think it could really be powerful. Mac is the higher end computer with a very pretty and usable operating system, while Linux can run on virtually any hardware, is cost effective, and very customizable. And windows is.......windows. But let's face it, we don't need no stinking windows.
- mozzep, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5yea, I would too. I like OS X, but there are just some things I really miss about linux, namely just tinkering around with everything, or I see some cool program I really want to try: amarok, beagle, beryl, etc. I think about installing gentoo all the time, but never get to it.
- TehDoctor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5NT is only barely compliant, and most every other version of Windows requires Unix Services for Windows to be so.
NT gets away with passing posix tests in a shady way, because the Posix tests allow it to cheat a little by providing certain functions that just return a "not implemented" code. The only reason Windows tries to be Posix compliant is to get government jobs that require it, whereas Linus actually *wanted* his OS to be compliant, and did the best he could without having the actual standards available to him at the time. If Windows actually did meet Posix standards wholeheartedly, why did Cygnus need to make an entire Posix emulation environment for win32 systems? - darkamster07, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I don't really get it, I thought mac and pc closed thier laptops when linux came cause' they were looking at p0rn, after all mac said he was in a photo app.
- arcanimus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@benitojuarez
I don't know the details, nor do I care. I don't prefer PowerPC and I have only used an Apple-built machine like... twice in my life. This is why I said that some people DO prefer it. My professor prefers PowerPC and several of my friends prefer it as well. These are all Engineering/Computer Science majors, so I would hope that their opinions on a matter such as this would have some sort of truth to it.
Apple could've decided to use Intel for many reasons other than efficiency. Have you ever considered that many specialized applications only run on the x86 architecture? Please do your homework before posting comments - honestly, it helps. - Zaggynl, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Dug because of 'chick' in underwear.
- thunderer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5*Gets out marshmallows to roast over the flame-fest*
- cecil_t, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@mercurysquad
Tabs FTW! - corrosive, on 10/12/2007, -10/+14how about 90% of wireless cards?
- chubbstar, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6so by mentioning that linux exists to windows/mac users who may not know it exists is ... what... useless?
i fail to see your point. - keyboardduder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@ electricsoup
I'm a windows user because I'm a gamer and i like to upgrade often. I think that fits the bill for my tastes. But isnt any operating system nothing but a series of applications running simutaneously, exporting and importing providing data internally and externally to get a job done (and to help the human talk to software to talk to hardware)? Does linux fit this or no? What is Windows without its DOS roots? It seems like you have taken apart linux and made it into a series of unstable pieces. Isnt windows nothing without it's GUI interface (or a lnux window manager as you have said). Isnt mac(after X) nothing without it's UNIX archetecture as well? If i am completley wrong, please correct me and tell me why, I would like to know. - tehmoth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4yeah, windows is not at all unix based (no firm foundation of unix code there). At its core its more like VMS than any Unix.
- mrsteveman1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Windows XP is about the only OS that deserves 100% of the flames, Microsoft has spent years being totally incompetent, breaking laws to ensure they are the monopoly supplier of OS software, while simultaneously doing almost everything WRONG, with the rest of the world and network security suffering as a result.
Microsoft operates by the policy that "we should make people need what we have", and they have tried very hard to make sure everyone is dependant on them. This would not be such a problem if they weren't incompetent. They repeatedly screw up the most basic things, for instance updating internet explorer 3 times in a row because your programmers were so stupid they introduced 2 more security holes just in the process of patching the first one. -
Show 51 - 100 of 139 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is