FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


World leading OS





Flakky
I decided to write an article about what will happen if Mac or Linux gets more marketshare and about some other topics.

As you all know Windows is currently the leader and many are dreaming every night that either Linux or Mac will take over. But what if Windows is on 1/3 of all computers, Mac is on 1/3 and Linux is on 1/3, They are all well known, everyone has acces to all of the three OSs (in a sense of I have a Mac, my neighbor has a Windows, let's ask if I can use my neighbors computer for 10 minutes to check it out) and everyone can pick their favorite OS.

Now let's see this from a developers point of view. 3 different OSs means that the product needs to comply with all or lose 1/3 of valuable customers. Windows will probably not be working together with Linux and Mac because they keep everything closed source, Mac will not work together with Linux because if they do that, Windows could borrow code from open source Linux, meaning that Windows will be the best OS without compatibility problems.

Also this scenario will slow down game developement, more money needs to be spend on compatibility and prices of games will rise. Alas, more OSs means that hardware manufacturers need to work on compatibility as well. If they do not work on compatibility, then only 1/3 of all hardware products end up on the market. If they do work on compatibility, all hardware ends up, with a higher price.

Please discuss this, say why this is correct or why it's totally wrong. The main reason for this article is to start a discussion and maybe open up the narrow minded.

Now also including a different topic. Windows Vista and it's system requirements. Many people complain about this and scare off people who have a genuine interest in looking into Vista. If you are a happy Linux user which scares off people, why are you doing that? That person might be happy with Vista so why do you discourage the other person to be happy? Same thing vise versa. It's true that Vista uses more RAM, CPU, GPU and whatever I forgot more. The reason that Microsoft built this high-end OS is because hardware prices are dropping, even of high end hardware.

As an example for this I will be using my grandma's computer and my own. My grandma has a Windows XP running on a 2 ghz core, 512 mb ram, intel extreme graphics card, 1024x768 monitor with an anti virus pre-installed. My grandma bought it a couple of years ago for ~1300. I myself have a Windows Vista computer, running on a quad core 2.44 ghz, 4gb ram, nvidia gtx280, a 750 gb hdd, quality case, extra fans, extra coolers and a 1680x1050 monitor for... ~1300.

So what does this mean? Many people don't buy a PC every year but maybe once in 5 years. When Windows Vista came out there weren't build for standard home PCs but for the future. Support will end for XP in 2014 I believe and that's the moment that people will no longer buy a XP but a Vista.

Second thing open for discussion. Again, post your remarks, opinions and get the discussions open Smile
[FuN]goku
Flakky wrote:

Now also including a different topic. Windows Vista and it's system requirements. Many people complain about this and scare off people who have a genuine interest in looking into Vista. If you are a happy Linux user which scares off people, why are you doing that? That person might be happy with Vista so why do you discourage the other person to be happy? Same thing vise versa. It's true that Vista uses more RAM, CPU, GPU and whatever I forgot more. The reason that Microsoft built this high-end OS is because hardware prices are dropping, even of high end hardware.

As an example for this I will be using my grandma's computer and my own. My grandma has a Windows XP running on a 2 ghz core, 512 mb ram, intel extreme graphics card, 1024x768 monitor with an anti virus pre-installed. My grandma bought it a couple of years ago for ~1300. I myself have a Windows Vista computer, running on a quad core 2.44 ghz, 4gb ram, nvidia gtx280, a 750 gb hdd, quality case, extra fans, extra coolers and a 1680x1050 monitor for... ~1300.


Yes hardware prices are dropping somewhat, but, think about this: Suppose someone has a computer they've had for a while because they simply cannot afford to buy another pc or parts and a friend gives them a copy of vista or... their company supplies it.. , OR they go to some place and buy a second hand comp with vista pre-installed with low-end minimum vista requirements. The persons pc is probably going to run quite slow Razz (i know from experience of vista on laptop that's "Vista Compatible") So that being said, hardware prices may be dropping , but not everyone is willing to buy better hardware, especially if they dont need high end hardware for their system. Maybe they use their pc to simply browse, and type up documents. In this case, i would say vista is a waste of time to have.

Flakky wrote:

So what does this mean? Many people don't buy a PC every year but maybe once in 5 years. When Windows Vista came out there weren't build for standard home PCs but for the future. Support will end for XP in 2014 I believe and that's the moment that people will no longer buy a XP but a Vista.

Second thing open for discussion. Again, post your remarks, opinions and get the discussions open Smile


Mh, the average user wont buy a computer or parts often, I myself though, buy new parts every 6 - 12 months. But by 2014, MS will have probably released a new OS anyways and everyone will probly stop using vista lol (maybe) but i say this because http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_7
it says that the next version of Windows (Codename Vienna) is 'expected' to be released in 2010.

I'll still be on XP when it comes out, and i'll try out vienna just to see if its any better than vista, if not.... then i'll probably just go full out linux. By 2010, they might have better windows emulation on linux too anyways so.

But vista isn't too bad if you have the required specs as you said above. Theres some good things, some bad. But hey, whatever floats your boat. Wink
leontius
Code:
Now let's see this from a developers point of view. 3 different OSs means that the product needs to comply with all or lose 1/3 of valuable customers. Windows will probably not be working together with Linux and Mac because they keep everything closed source, Mac will not work together with Linux because if they do that, Windows could borrow code from open source Linux, meaning that Windows will be the best OS without compatibility problems.


So open source libraries will be much more cross-platform out of necessity. Even now, cross-platform is not something impossible - e.g. most Java programs nowadays can run in any OS without much effort. One (or two) window manager / toolkit is going to dominate. The others are going to look for ways to interoperate with each other (e.g. ability to use the same theme across toolkits). Isn't that good?

Code:
Also this scenario will slow down game developement, more money needs to be spend on compatibility and prices of games will rise. Alas, more OSs means that hardware manufacturers need to work on compatibility as well. If they do not work on compatibility, then only 1/3 of all hardware products end up on the market. If they do work on compatibility, all hardware ends up, with a higher price.


IMO, hardware companies have money for that kind of thing. Also if there is really demand for it, they will work together to form a kind of hardware abstraction layer that works cross-platform, to minimize cost for OS and driver developers (and customers!). Hardware makers will be especially interested in this kind of thing. Isn't that good? (players like MS probably won't like it...)

Quote:
Now also including a different topic. Windows Vista and it's system requirements. Many people complain about this and scare off people who have a genuine interest in looking into Vista. If you are a happy Linux user which scares off people, why are you doing that? That person might be happy with Vista so why do you discourage the other person to be happy? Same thing vise versa. It's true that Vista uses more RAM, CPU, GPU and whatever I forgot more. The reason that Microsoft built this high-end OS is because hardware prices are dropping, even of high end hardware.


You totally forgot the fact that there are people having less money than you! Very Happy I personally always consider lower end hardware for my own needs. If there is choice for OS, and I can do the same thing on low end laptop + linux vs. higher end laptop + windows, I will definitely choose Linux. And average laymen do not need Windows, really. Only professionals do because they need AutoCAD, Photoshop or whatever to work. What do average laymen do everyday with PCs? Only surfing, checking emails, listening to music, typing assignments, watching videos, chatting.

Also if that person can also be happy with Linux then it is also your fault for not giving that person a chance to try Linux right?
Flakky
Quote:
You totally forgot the fact that there are people having less money than you! Very Happy
I used to have a laptop with less cpu and double the ram as my grandma and it ran fine, unless I wanted to play games, Intel shouldn't make gfx cards. I saved, I saved, I saved and I (guess what) saved money till it was my turn to have a better computer than my spoiled friend :3 (btw, he decided to buy a new motherboard and two nvidia gtx280's, just to get a high benchmark...)

I read an article about OSs and the writer talked about a OS recommendation for someone who was only checking her mail and surfing on the internet. He recommended Linux basically because it's capable of doing so and is free. No need to toss in extra money. Indeed Vista is something you need to pay more but you get more. I can't understand why people who don't want the extra's should complain about: the extra's.

Quote:
Also if that person can also be happy with Linux then it is also your fault for not giving that person a chance to try Linux right?

True, but what I meant was that people often highlight Vista's failures instead of Linux's pros Razz Which is basically a weird variant of advertising Razz

PS: I use Photoshop, C4D, 3DS, TM, MZ and other apps which are Windows only, plus almost all the games I play are Windows only. I would never want to throw that away just because I have a firewall or some other function I don't need Razz
leontius
Flakky wrote:
Quote:
You totally forgot the fact that there are people having less money than you! Very Happy
I used to have a laptop with less cpu and double the ram as my grandma and it ran fine, unless I wanted to play games, Intel shouldn't make gfx cards. I saved, I saved, I saved and I (guess what) saved money till it was my turn to have a better computer than my spoiled friend :3 (btw, he decided to buy a new motherboard and two nvidia gtx280's, just to get a high benchmark...)


Hmm for people having less money, I meant those poor people in developing countries, not your friend...

Quote:
True, but what I meant was that people often highlight Vista's failures instead of Linux's pros Razz Which is basically a weird variant of advertising Razz


It's not weird at all, it is much easier to see others' weakness rather than your own Smile

Quote:
PS: I use Photoshop, C4D, 3DS, TM, MZ and other apps which are Windows only, plus almost all the games I play are Windows only. I would never want to throw that away just because I have a firewall or some other function I don't need Razz


Oh no I forgot about games! Lets just pray that wine will continue to grow...
[FuN]goku
Quote:
I read an article about OSs and the writer talked about a OS recommendation for someone who was only checking her mail and surfing on the internet. He recommended Linux basically because it's capable of doing so and is free. No need to toss in extra money. Indeed Vista is something you need to pay more but you get more. I can't understand why people who don't want the extra's should complain about: the extra's.


Extra's is something that isn't Needed. Vista's installation is quite large. Some people prefer portability over, heavy packed things. I myself like portable things, which is why i love linux, the installation is relatively small. Like, theres alot of things in vista i'd never use. So why pay for something i'm not going to use anyways?

Quote:

PS: I use Photoshop, C4D, 3DS, TM, MZ and other apps which are Windows only, plus almost all the games I play are Windows only. I would never want to throw that away just because I have a firewall or some other function I don't need Razz


Those apps may be windows only, but, i myself as a photoshop and c4d user, well.... C4D, you can use a linux alternative and get Blender. As for photoshop... well i prefer photoshop over ANY image editor. I simply refuse to use GIMP, but i can run PS with wine if i have to so, it's not too too big of problem. Or i can run a Virtual machine inside linux. As for windows games, get Cedega for linux, it's for windows game emulation. It works quite well. It runs most games.

Oh , almost forgot, Photoshop ISN'T 'Windows Only', it's also for mac.
LostOverThere
Game development wouldn't slow down if Each operating system had one-third share. Game Developers would just use a little something called OpenGL...hopefully.
Flakky
LostOverThere wrote:
Game development wouldn't slow down if Each operating system had one-third share. Game Developers would just use a little something called OpenGL...hopefully.
Don't forget that most of the dev's prefer dx over ogl. Although this discussion isn't about ogl vs. dx, there are many more discussions like this on every crowded software/hardware related forum.

Quote:
Extra's is something that isn't Needed. Vista's installation is quite large. Some people prefer portability over, heavy packed things. I myself like portable things, which is why i love linux, the installation is relatively small. Like, theres alot of things in vista i'd never use. So why pay for something i'm not going to use anyways?

Could you explain how you do that? I have one computer and I almost never install an OS only when I screwed things up. Furthermore I don't have permission to install OSs on school computers, friends computers or any other computer I have acces to Razz .

Quote:
Those apps may be windows only, but, i myself as a photoshop and c4d user, well.... C4D, you can use a linux alternative and get Blender. As for photoshop... well i prefer photoshop over ANY image editor. I simply refuse to use GIMP, but i can run PS with wine if i have to so, it's not too too big of problem. Or i can run a Virtual machine inside linux. As for windows games, get Cedega for linux, it's for windows game emulation. It works quite well. It runs most games.

Oh , almost forgot, Photoshop ISN'T 'Windows Only', it's also for mac.
True, I didn't check what programs are compatible or not. Does Cedega enables directx? If so which versions?

Quote:
Hmm for people having less money, I meant those poor people in developing countries, not your friend...
Developing countries probably don't have money to buy any version of Windows, with extreme luck a second hand computer with a pre-installed OS. I've heard that Microsoft was taking care of it by giving people XP. This could be seen as something good that Microsoft is doing but think of it this way. There is no chance that Microsoft will earn money by selling XP to those people, so they give it for free, hoping that some time in the future someone will become rich and buys Windows.

Quote:
It's not weird at all, it is much easier to see others' weakness rather than your own Smile
It sure is annoying though. Mostly I picture those guys as single geeks with a penguin on their tshirt fapping on the web Razz

Quote:
Oh no I forgot about games! Lets just pray that wine will continue to grow...
Suddenly all arguments disappear when talking about games Razz


Let me ask you guys, you have more knowledge in Linux than I do. I've tried it once and it took me 3 days to completely make it unbootable, per accident Razz . What things make Linux better than Windows, I am not talking about sys requirements, but what features are better than Windows or don't exist in Windows?

PS: I just realised, if the market is divided in 3, viruses will get compatible as well Razz Linux will need a firewall, which will shock a lot of people I think Razz
mehulved
Flakky wrote:

Let me ask you guys, you have more knowledge in Linux than I do. I've tried it once and it took me 3 days to completely make it unbootable, per accident Razz . What things make Linux better than Windows, I am not talking about sys requirements, but what features are better than Windows or don't exist in Windows?

First stop sounding like a stupid fanboy, so rational people can have discussion.
It's about being comfortable with your OS, these days. When it comes to basic desktop usage all the popular OS's are equally good, but PEBKAC.
Flakky wrote:

PS: I just realised, if the market is divided in 3, viruses will get compatible as well Razz Linux will need a firewall, which will shock a lot of people I think Razz

This part really makes me laugh. Any idiot who thinks they're safe without a firewall needs to disconnect from internet :p and well afterall firewall is another application running with extra priviledges, so firewall itself can be a weak point in some cases Very Happy
About viruses, I'd rather disagree on that part. But that's for some other time.
[FuN]goku
Flakky wrote:

True, I didn't check what programs are compatible or not. Does Cedega enables directx? If so which versions?

I'm pretty sure it does support directx, i'm not sure which versions in particular, but i'm sure it supports 9.0c. And i think for windows games that use OpenGL, the emulation is alot faster , i could be wrong on that but i'm sure i read it somewhere.

Flakky wrote:

PS: I just realised, if the market is divided in 3, viruses will get compatible as well Razz Linux will need a firewall, which will shock a lot of people I think Razz

I'm sure there already is linux firewalls. But as for virus' this is a common mistake people make
"Oh look at me i got linux i can't get virus's" , That is kind of false, it's 'LESS LIKELY' to get a virus on linux... not entirely impossible. You're right in some sense, there probably will be in increase in linux virus development, i think right now the reason is because the main focus is on windows so alot of people who develop virus's aren't interested in hassling other linux users, cuz alot of them aren't stupid.
But going back to what i said first, there are virus's for linux, in fact there are even anti-virus's for linux.
Clam AV is one, and i think theres a freeware version of Avast for linux. But if someone knows what they're doing they could code their own virus and slip it to a friend/enemy or something.
Related topics
Creating a new Operating System
The Whole "GOD" Thing
Internet Explorer Bug
PS3 Fails
Ubuntu 6.06 LTS Released
Mac vs. PC
What's great about your country?
BMW - K1200 R
Momento Nostalgia
latex compiler for scientific workplace
Work at Almost Anything
The best new operating system
Which is better: windows 7 or ubuntu9.10 ?
Will the battle field for OS be moved into the mobile world?
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Computers -> Operating Systems

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.