or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › Windows vs Mac vs Linux
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Windows vs Mac vs Linux - Page 6

post #76 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by fjf View Post
How many of you (the window$ defenders) have used linux recently?.
Used, administered, and written drivers for (nothing that's in the main kernel, mostly for personal use). I think it's a fantastic server OS, but I dramatically prefer Windows as a desktop environment. I used Gentoo and loved tweaking every last setting back in high school when I had tons of time....nowadays, my time's a lot rarer and more valuable and the fact that everything just works right on install is worth more than I can put a price on.

Also, the misspelling of Windows ceased being original right around 1996 and ceased being funny around 1998.
post #77 of 98
Based on your superior intelect to all the windows users who ARE capable of keeping their system running without problems...

You should have no problems starting with gentoo linux

Also if anything goes wrong with your gentoo build you won't be able to blame anyone else! (although knowing your type you'd probably find a way)
post #78 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arainach View Post
Used, administered, and written drivers for (nothing that's in the main kernel, mostly for personal use). I think it's a fantastic server OS, but I dramatically prefer Windows as a desktop environment. I used Gentoo and loved tweaking every last setting back in high school when I had tons of time....nowadays, my time's a lot rarer and more valuable and the fact that everything just works right on install is worth more than I can put a price on.

Also, the misspelling of Windows ceased being original right around 1996 and ceased being funny around 1998.
If you remember the window$ home server failure, I agree that this is not even funny. And there have been few occasions when a new trojan horse stopped police and other public services -it happened in my country, so I know- because the computer systems were down. That ain't funny either. Maybe 90% of all PCs run window$, but the truth is stubborn. Not funny, but it is there. And I am done here. Goodbye.
post #79 of 98
Having a lot of experience with each, here's my 2 cents.

Windows has the most support for all hardware and it's got foobar to run natively. If you're just playing music and doing other basic things, go with Windows. ASIO is great.

Mac OS X is better if you're doing lots of audio editing and production, but iTunes is disgusting and the only alternative, Cog, is pretty low on the features spectrum. If listening to music is what you plan on doing mostly, OS X is probably the worst of the three. Also, Apples are disgustingly overpriced.

I love Linux but it's not for those who don't have patience or substantial computer knowledge. It's got ALSA and Jack, both of which are great and very well developed, but not all hardware will run right on Linux. Linux has Amarok, Banshee, XMMS, MPD, all of which are excellent and very low-resource. Use Linux if you've got a DAC and your computer is too old to handle Windows and all your music software.

I dualboot Archlinux and Vista on my Thinkpad T61p and homebuilt PC, but I'm on Linux 99% of the time. The PC has a Chaintech AV-710, I've had no problems setting it up with ALSA.
post #80 of 98
I've owned Macs ever since their beginning. I like them. I also like iTunes. Maybe I don't spend enough time on this forum. What makes iTunes "disgusting"?

On usbdacs.com, Gordon Rankin seems to be recommending iTunes, and he is alleged to make some of the finest dacs out there. I've tried cog, Play, and VLC and can't hear a difference, and iTunes has many more features.

So what is so bad about iTunes?
post #81 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by ronfint View Post
What makes iTunes "disgusting"?
It's ubiquitous, and thus evil? I kid...

It's not the most efficient out there, but it's not bad either -- with a resident size of 41MB on my Mac, it hardly dents my 1GB RAM. It doesn't play Vorbis or FLAC by default, but that can be solved through a Quicktime plugin. I have no problem with the quality of its output, which isn't surprising, because quality music playback on the Mac isn't exactly rocket science.

That said, on Windows, the only player I'm less likely to use than iTunes is Windows Media Player
post #82 of 98
I didn't bother reading all nine pages of this post, but if you're still looking for a solid OS Ubuntu, or one of its derivatives, is a very secure choice. Particularly, I'm referring to Linux Mint. Linux Mint is, basically, about 97% Ubuntu, with the last 3% being that they go ahead and include support for a bunch of propriety codecs and whatnot. Basically what this means is that you get the community support of ubuntu without having to do any tinkering to listen to mp3s and watch DVDs etc...

As far as Windows vs. Linux for virus protection, its my understanding that the main security in Linux comes from the fact that about 80% of the market (or greater, I cannot really recall the exact statistic) runs Windows. That being the case, whoever writes a virus would not benefit from writing it for Linux or Mac: they would get the most return on their investment by writing it for Linux.

That is not to say that Linux is not more secure than windows, though. My understanding is that, due to the way that Linux evolved, it is innately more secure than Windows. What I mean by this is that Linux was born and grew over the internet, which is the primary source of threats. That being the case, as it grew, it grew with the proper security necessary to keep it running in an environment which was connected globally over the internet. Windows, on the otherhand, was initially written for personal, local network use. Once the internet started taking off, they realized that they had some huge security flaws, and instead of fixing those flaws (which I'm pretty sure would have meant completly overhauling their code, which is not really feasible) they implemented severall security measures, i.e. Anti-virus software etc..

So, to wrap up, Linux IS more secure than Windows for a couple of different reasons, and, in my experience, it also handles resources (i.e RAM) more efficiently. These are the main reasons I switched to Linux a few years back and haven't looked back. Yea, its kind of a pain sometimes getting one or two things to work, but the payoff is worth it in my eyes.
post #83 of 98
To the last poster: The Windows NT kernel was designed from the get-go as a networked OS. The Win9x kernel was scrapped after WinME; WinXP is based off of the NT kernel. As such, the 'designed for personal use' argument no longer flies.
post #84 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by ezzieyguywuf View Post
I didn't bother reading all nine pages of this post
You missed the OP getting himself banned
Quote:
Originally Posted by ezzieyguywuf View Post
My understanding is that, due to the way that Linux evolved, it is innately more secure than Windows. What I mean by this is that Linux was born and grew over the internet, which is the primary source of threats. That being the case, as it grew, it grew with the proper security necessary to keep it running in an environment which was connected globally over the internet. Windows, on the otherhand, was initially written for personal, local network use. Once the internet started taking off, they realized that they had some huge security flaws, and instead of fixing those flaws (which I'm pretty sure would have meant completly overhauling their code, which is not really feasible) they implemented severall security measures, i.e. Anti-virus software etc..
  1. See Wikipedia's History of Microsoft Windows -- as Arainach said, XP isn't your old 95
  2. Assuming someone bothered to write one, you could have gotten a virus by:
Even if a virus can't touch your system files (but it can -- Xorg runs as root, and Xorg has its own problems), it can still do anything you can do, from emptying out your home directory to e-mailing itself to everyone in your address book. Even if you keep your system up to date, someone knew about these problems before there was a fix, and there will be more found in the future. There's no guarantee the good guys will find them before the bad guys do, either.

In other words, even in Linux, and in spite of your best efforts, you are still vulnerable.
post #85 of 98
I understand and agree with both of your posts. Thanks for pointing out the differences in the NT and 95 kernels, this is something I wasn't aware of. I made my post mainly to try to educate the OP a little, but i guess he got banned (?! maybe i should read the first nine pages, lol). Anyways, thanks for the clarifications guys. I still recommend Linux Mint if you want an easy to use Ubuntu derivative for media streaming.
post #86 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by ezzieyguywuf View Post
I still recommend Linux Mint if you want an easy to use Ubuntu derivative for media streaming.
I'm actually looking for a good distro to replace the Gentoo system I'm running now, but so far I'm coming up short. I should give Linux Mint a good look.

I've also thought about going back to Slackware. Maybe it's not the easiest or most newbie friendly distro, but it has been good to me in the past
post #87 of 98
Well damn, if you can run Slackware, even as a newb, I say go for it. Thats the best route if you want to be completely in control of your OS. With Linux Mint (as in Ubuntu, since like I said, it is a direct derivative of Ubuntu) you get a lot of "user friendliness", so its very newb friendly. The downside to this is that you don't get as much control over your system as you would with, say, slackware. Is there any particular reason you want to replace Gentoo? I hear its a pretty solid disro.
post #88 of 98
MAC
post #89 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by ezzieyguywuf View Post
Is there any particular reason you want to replace Gentoo? I hear its a pretty solid disro.
A combination of having to resolve blockers (sometimes one package being installed will prevent another from upgrading, especially after things have been re-structured) and unbreak my system after updates has made be a touch bitter toward it

That said, it works well enough when I'm not trying to upgrade anything
post #90 of 98
I would suggest ArchLinux. It's at least worth a look. I went from gentoo to slack then settled on Arch. Arch is a rolling release system (much like gentoo). I found it easy to keep up to date and it just stays out of my way. Arch uses Pacman as it's package manager and is very good, IMO.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Computer Audio
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › Windows vs Mac vs Linux