[Nezer]

Quote:

Originally posted by Xander My favorite? Linux.

Out of your list I would have to vote for AIX. Though I do use Linux *everywhere*. Windows to me is nothing more than an easy way to interface with the shells via ssh and still keep compatability with everyone in my company (read Office).

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

Originally posted by morphsci Not necessarily true. Science and statistics also come to mind. In my case I must use a PC since SAS has its best support in terms of updated procedures and support for the PC platform (or Unix). Their support of Mac and Linux is either abyssmal or nonexistent.

That's true, Morph. When I was a SAS programmer I used SAS on an UltraSparc (batch mode, none of that wussy windowed version

). I later tried the Mac version and it stunk.

That's why I'm a big fan of Stata -- simultaneous, identical releases for Windows, UNIX, Linux, Mac, and Mac OS X. Plus I really prefer it to SAS unless I'm working on data sets with tens of millions of records (in which case that UltraSparc with 4GB of RAM isn't bad

) Stata on Mac OS X is currently my favorite statistical and data analysis setup.

But I think we're getting into specialized applications now

 

[eric343]

Quote:

Originally posted by neil Rule 1: Do not use NTFS -- try to stick with FAT32 if possible. Recovering NTFS with a "boot disk"? Bah. [/B]

a) See the last winter edition of 2600 magazine.
b) NTFSDos from Sysinternals.com
c) Regular backups

edit:

In terms of OSes(en?) I think like the following:
Win2k for the desktop
Linux/xBSD for the server

Windows 2000 is IMHO the only reasonable OS Microshaft ever made, including XP. It's got a pretty nice, easy to use interface, compatibility with all my favorite games, and dosen't crash more than three times a month.

Linux is free, relatively secure, dosen't need incredible hardware, and you can run the servers for all my favorite games on it. It's essentially a set-it-and-forget-it OS provided you lock it down and make sure to upgrade the kernel every few years.

If Linux is the jeweled sword for slaying server problems, then xBSD is a Samurai sword. Fast, efficient, security out the wazoo, but ya gotta know what you're doing; you might even have to write your own drivers for obscure equipment. (IIRC there's not been a single remote-root exploit (like the backdoors installed by every Microsoft Virus du jour) on OpenBSD in ~5 years)

 

[Xander]

Quote:

Originally posted by Nezer Out of your list I would have to vote for AIX. Though I do use Linux *everywhere*. Windows to me is nothing more than an easy way to interface with the shells via ssh and still keep compatability with everyone in my company (read Office).

AIX Is a great OS. The reason I choose Linux, isn't because I think it's better then all the others, but because overall it has everything I want in an OS.

Really, no OS is better then the other.. Not yet. And I sertainly don't think average end-users should be removing windows and installing Linux. It's already causing havok on the Linux news groups... It went from good hearty questions, to "why wont my cable modem work, i may have to reinstall windows".

 

[Xander]

Quote:

Originally posted by eric343 a) See the last winter edition of 2600 magazine. b) NTFSDos from Sysinternals.com c) Regular backups edit: In terms of OSes(en?) I think like the following: Win2k for the desktop Linux/xBSD for the server Windows 2000 is IMHO the only reasonable OS Microshaft ever made, including XP. It's got a pretty nice, easy to use interface, compatibility with all my favorite games, and dosen't crash more than three times a month. Linux is free, relatively secure, dosen't need incredible hardware, and you can run the servers for all my favorite games on it. It's essentially a set-it-and-forget-it OS provided you lock it down and make sure to upgrade the kernel every few years. If Linux is the jeweled sword for slaying server problems, then xBSD is a Samurai sword. Fast, efficient, security out the wazoo, but ya gotta know what you're doing; you might even have to write your own drivers for obscure equipment. (IIRC there's not been a single remote-root exploit (like the backdoors installed by every Microsoft Virus du jour) on OpenBSD in ~5 years)

I tottally agree. If you have the time to invest, OpenBSD is the best choice for a networking OS. Not to mention, theres already tons of network hardware supported, so the chances of you having to write your own device drivers are pretty slim.

 

[Nezer]

Quote:

Originally posted by Xander AIX Is a great OS. The reason I choose Linux, isn't because I think it's better then all the others, but because overall it has everything I want in an OS. Really, no OS is better then the other.. Not yet. And I sertainly don't think average end-users should be removing windows and installing Linux. It's already causing havok on the Linux news groups... It went from good hearty questions, to "why wont my cable modem work, i may have to reinstall windows".

Thisis exactly why I stopped hanging out in #linux on Dalnet years ago. I just couldn't take it anymore. It's like no one can friggin read anymore!! Someone asks a question and you point them to the docs and the get all pissed. "Just tell me how to do it man, I know you know, why are you such a dick!?" Jeez, poeple just want stuff handed to them on a silver platter for nothing!!!

GO PICK UP A BOOK YOU ILLITERATE SNOB!!!!

Must... go... breathe... relax... let blood... pressure normalize...

 

[Xander]

Gah, I know! It's horrible. You gotta hang out in the little obscure channels on irc.openprojects.net.

I hate nothing more then the following:

1). People who arent willing to read, to learn how to do something
2). People who advocate Linux like it's the solution for all Microsoft users.
3). People who say WINDOWS SUXXXX0rZ USE LINUX ITS THE BOMB
4). People who say Linux blows because it's so hard to use, has little hardware support, and little game support. THEN DONT F'IN USE IT. Nobody is forcing you (theyre trying, see #3). Thats why theyre so evil.

 

[eric343]

Agreed.