Advantages of Ubuntu over OS X

I don't mean for this to be provocative, but I have been an Apple PPC user for many years and have installed various Linux distros over this period and have yet to find a compelling advantage of any distro over OS X (except for cost, of course). I suppose if I had an Intel Mac, things would work better in Linux, but I have no intention of buying a new computer (particularly an Intel Mac).

I recently installed intrepid on an iBook G4 800 Mhz. I was pleased to see that there was some rudimentary 2D graphics acceleration (which didn't exist in YDL 6.1, my former installation on this machine). However, everything is slower than on OS X - apps take longer to launch and scrolling is embarrassingly sluggish (reminds me of my old 68040 machine). Even simple things in OS X were difficult to get working in Ubuntu - with some effort I got wireless working but I have yet to be able to get a DVD to play correctly. Apparently there is some library which has not been built for PPC and which the codecs depend on. Also, Flash is not available for PPC linux computers and the alternative is not very satisfactory.

I would very much like to see a compelling advantage of Linux in addition to the somewhat abstract one of using open software (which I agree with). I should mention that the hardware is very closed (particularly in the GPU area and with the WIFI hardware) and this conflicts somewhat with the spirit of open source. Of course, much of this is moot with x86 (where at least Flash and GPU drivers are available) but I am not interested in that architecture.

Thanks for listening.

Warren Nagourney

Moved to Recurring Discussions, since, well, it is. :)

Imho, one of Apple's biggest advantages is their integration of the OS with the hardware. You really can't beat that for performance.

There are no shortages of differences; whether any of those constitutes an advantage is a question of your priorities, needs, and tastes.

One difference which might be pertinent to your situation is the ability to scale back the software selection to fit the hardware. A lighter desktop environment might suit that machine better. That's the sort of change you can make on Linux that you can't do on OSX.

Other than that, if you just like the Linux environment, well... you got it. I tend to like it better than anything else I've tried.

I think you answered this one yourself. ;)

wnagourney said: except for cost, of course

customizable. Ubuntu/Linux is way more customizable.

I think that without getting technical, the main advantage of OSX over any other OS out there is about the quality of their applications. From built-in utils like Finder to the Adobe Suite, almost everything is beautiful engineered. Linux and Mac being both *nix OS's share many technologies, and its a great opportunity for Linux to stop trying to port Windows apps and start to build a solid base to Mac apps to kick in. The main advantaje of Linux is that at software level is capable to become a OSS OSX alternative.

druellan said: I think that without getting technical, the main advantage of OSX over any other OS out there is about the quality of their applications. From built-in utils like Finder to the Adobe Suite, almost everything is beautiful engineered.

Linux and Mac being both *nix OS's share many technologies, and its a great opportunity for Linux to stop trying to port Windows apps and start to build a solid base to Mac apps to kick in. The main advantaje of Linux is that at software level is capable to become a OSS OSX alternative.

I disagree. Finder is more useless than... MS Paint. :popcorn:

I think OS X has much better apps available, but Ubuntu has the freedom of choice in everything you could possibly want to do with it.

damis648 said: I disagree. Finder is more useless than... MS Paint. :popcorn:

Maybe. They can keep the cover flow thingy, but I will love to have a cascading three column mode on Nautilus :). Again, the advantage of Linux is that I actually have the tools and the permission to do it myself *or* I can encourage/extortion the programmers :P

What is "cascading three column mode" in Nautilus? I just launched the browser and it looks like the old Mac OS file window with a sidebar attached. I really like the hierarchical view from the NeXTstep-style browser in OS X and I haven't found anything like it that works well (fsviewer crashes).

Again, my chief complaint in Linux is the speed - it is glacial on older Macs (even GHz machines). The processor is not the reason - it is lack of support for this architecture in Linux. This is all odd, since most people find Linux much faster than commercial operating systems.

cheers

wn

wnagourney said: I would very much like to see a compelling advantage of Linux in addition to the somewhat abstract one of using open software (which I agree with).

About Ubuntu being slower than OSX, try Arch Linux, or Debian Lenny on a pc, and compare that with Ubuntu.

And you were probably focusing on the desktop, I'm a long time Linux user (since 1995) and I've also used FreeBSD since more than about 5 years now. I've worked a little bit with MacOSX on clients, I've looked at the O'Reilly MacOSX bible, and i'm a little sad about what Apple has done concerning the different command line tools in OSX.

For the moment I'm sticking to Linux and FreeBSD, and try to improve my knowledge wherever I (might) need it for work and fun.

But OSX and also OpenSolaris (Where I find OpenSolaris much more interesting than OSX) have both different commands and different paths, which is right now too much of a challenge to also learn that..

wnagourney said: I don't mean for this to be provocative, but I have been an Apple PPC user for many years and have installed various Linux distros over this period and have yet to find a compelling advantage of any distro over OS X (except for cost, of course). I suppose if I had an Intel Mac, things would work better in Linux, but I have no intention of buying a new computer (particularly an Intel Mac).

I recently installed intrepid on an iBook G4 800 Mhz. I was pleased to see that there was some rudimentary 2D graphics acceleration (which didn't exist in YDL 6.1, my former installation on this machine). However, everything is slower than on OS X - apps take longer to launch and scrolling is embarrassingly sluggish (reminds me of my old 68040 machine). Even simple things in OS X were difficult to get working in Ubuntu - with some effort I got wireless working but I have yet to be able to get a DVD to play correctly. Apparently there is some library which has not been built for PPC and which the codecs depend on. Also, Flash is not available for PPC linux computers and the alternative is not very satisfactory.

I would very much like to see a compelling advantage of Linux in addition to the somewhat abstract one of using open software (which I agree with). I should mention that the hardware is very closed (particularly in the GPU area and with the WIFI hardware) and this conflicts somewhat with the spirit of open source. Of course, much of this is moot with x86 (where at least Flash and GPU drivers are available) but I am not interested in that architecture.

Thanks for listening.

Warren Nagourney

From what I read if your using a PowerPC Fedora is the best choice as they are currently putting the most development into it. This is what Linus Torvalds uses on his PowerPC.

Its going to be slower without video acceleration so you will have to live with that.

Well, I use both daily, and often simultaneously.

For me, OS X is 'unix done right' and I feel that the reason it is so good is that is built on open-source technology, but one group of people have built a proprietary desktop on top of it, using custom libraries.

I see this are being necessary for the calibre of product that we have as OS X, and so I see it having a certain advantage over linux in that way.

Why, when I have OS X, do I still choose to install and virtualize Linux?

For me, Linux offers thousands of programs that work beautifully and easily. Sure, I can download and install most of them on my mac, but it's much harder to get them running and keeping them updated.

Did you know on Ubuntu, if you've installed fonts through synaptic, they stay current? OS X doesn't do that for me. I know when I use Ubuntu that I'm using a stable, efficient environment and it takes the hassle out of using open-source software.

Now, what I think we need to see: instead of virtualizing Linux on a mac, why not recompile all linux software for mac, and have it run in an X-server window in your mack desktop, but running natively on your mac. And then maybe find a way to execute and run the mac desktop on your linux operating system as you use it instead, so it's native.

The only way Ubuntu will beat OS X in the next few years is if Canonical takes development, closes it more (and still published source at the end) and really starts working with developers, offering security and protection for their product and helping to get big names like Adobe to port their product to Ubuntu. I'd love to see some Apple/Ubuntu collaboration going on, but that's probably like suggesting incest to most of the people on this board.

Bottom line: both are great, and they both serve slightly different purposes. I see the advantages of both, and use each where it is most advantageous. And 2 for the price of 1 can't be beat, so why not throw Ubuntu into your toolbox for free?

everyone has their own situation and needs, so my reasons probably won't apply :)

1. I like variety! I like the distrowatch.com motto - Making Computing Fun Again! I use linux, osx, and windows, though mostly linux, and that way I can always enjoy the things that make each one special and fun.

1. you covered Free in both senses, which are both compelling to me.

1. a corollary to Freedom: reliability.

I don't mean that a linux system will never crash and die. What I mean is, if I want to install Linux on something, I just do it. I don't have to deal with special magic install discs, licenses, validation keys, serial numbers, hardware locks, any of that. Ok, some of that is a poke at Windows, but for example I picked up a lovely old beige G3 tower with the AV card; the drive was all corrupted, and it took me weeks and weeks of digging around on the web, closets at work, back alleys, everywhere to try and find the precise install media that it needed. Same issue goes for applications, of course. There's something comforting in the knowledge that when the worst, or even when you just need to set up a new machine, all your applications are just an apt-get away.

I used to compulsively horde installer discs. I have these stacks and stacks of CD's with exotic OS9 apps that nobody will ever use again, and they're all probably rotted by now anyway. Ubuntu's package management has made my life so much easier.

1. I just like the KDE desktop better than the OSX desktop. File management is a little more powerful than in Finder.

1. I like Amarok better than iTunes.

1. I do a lot of coding and I use the terminal a lot.

1. I do a lot of work with interactive 3D, visualization and simulation, and there are more options in Linux than in OSX.

1. That smug kid in the Apple ads makes me feel bad about the fact that I even own a Mac.

So I installed linux on it and now I feel better!

I used a powerbook for 3 months.. Was impressed with the ease of use, however I found that the applications on the thing were all a bit tightening, in the sense that I couldn't really play around. The "it just works" thing put me in a position where I lost room to experiment, and that's something I really like to do.

Linux gives me more of a playground.

I like the cli a lot...

On top of that, I really hate the idea that most if not all my stuff originates in one company, but that's merely a psychological thingie.

innovati said: for me, os x is 'unix done right' and i feel that the reason it is so good is that is built on open-source technology, but one group of people have built a proprietary desktop on top of it, using custom libraries

+1

I think that much of my problem with Linux is that I am running it on an architecture which is very poorly supported (PPC). In the old days when graphics cards were primitive, linux did run much faster and smoother. But now, lack of GPU support results in linux being very annoying to use compared to commercial operating systems. I recall installing SUSE on a surplus Powermac 7600 (200 MHz 604E) and it ran much faster than Mac OS (my graduate student thought Mozilla was 5 times as fast as the OS 9 web browser).

I am retired and am not willing to invest in a new computer (I have three old Apple laptops and a PS3 running Ubuntu rather badly and that is enough computers). i guess I will stick with OS X. When I boot back into OS X after using Linux for a while I feel that I am back in real space - OS X seems so much smoother and natural to me. Most of this is my familiarity with OS X but a large part is the poor support of PPC chips (particularly video).

cheers,

wn

+1 for customizability. love the fact that pretty much everything can be changed

What are the advantages of tapioca pudding over chocolate?

cardinals_fan said: What are the advantages of tapioca pudding over chocolate?

Chocolate is quite a bit more popular than tapioca (cf google trends), and tends to be preferred, at least in the US. It is, however, essentially useless apart from being a dessert.

Tapioca, while not as favored as a sweet treat, is actually a very useful item in the kitchen; apart from being a pudding, it can be used as a thickening agent in stews, sauces, and fruit pies where one might use corn starch or flour. It also has numerous applications apart from food (cf. teh wiki).

Perhaps an apt comparison between OSX and Linux, in many ways.

damis648 said: I disagree. Finder is more useless than... MS Paint. :popcorn:

I use mspaint all the time. I love it. It's super useful. All I ever do is overlay screenshots, for which it's perfect.

lykwydchykyn said: Chocolate is quite a bit more popular than tapioca (cf google trends), and tends to be preferred, at least in the US. It is, however, essentially useless apart from being a dessert.

Tapioca, while not as favored as a sweet treat, is actually a very useful item in the kitchen; apart from being a pudding, it can be used as a thickening agent in stews, sauces, and fruit pies where one might use corn starch or flour. It also has numerous applications apart from food (cf. teh wiki).

Perhaps an apt comparison between OSX and Linux, in many ways. I would thank you if that function were working.

I use both Ubuntu and OS X on a daily basis (with the same keyboard/mouse using synergy in fact). The one thing that I really miss when going over to Ubuntu is Spotlight and Quicklook. There's a few "seach" apps for Linux, but Spotlight seems much faster and seems to have a much cleaner interface. Plus, you can do math right in the search bar :)

The one thing that I do miss when hopping over to OS X though is apt. MacPorts works ok, but it doesn't have nearly the amount of software available.

y@w said: I use both Ubuntu and OS X on a daily basis (with the same keyboard/mouse using synergy in fact). The one thing that I really miss when going over to Ubuntu is Spotlight and Quicklook. There's a few "seach" apps for Linux, but Spotlight seems much faster and seems to have a much cleaner interface. Plus, you can do math right in the search bar :).

Did you tried Gnome's Deskbar Applet? It's pretty similar, and includes a math plugin.

[IMG]http://lifehacker.com/assets/resources/2006/08/deskbar-applet.png[/IMG]

how do you install that thats one of the things i miss from vista is a more accurate search.

mamamia88 said: how do you install that thats one of the things i miss from vista is a more accurate search.

Right-click the panel. There should be some sort of 'add' option.

cool thanks i tried that it's not as good as the vista search in my opinion. are there any other programs that are maybe better?

druellan said: Did you tried Gnome's Deskbar Applet? It's pretty similar, and includes a math plugin.

[IMG]http://lifehacker.com/assets/resources/2006/08/deskbar-applet.png[/IMG]

Wow... that's awesome. The version with 8.10 even came with a plugin to post to your Twitter account from the search bar.. You just ruined any and all productivity that could have happened this afternoon :) I didn't even pay attention to the plugins options for the search before.

well i just thought of one. for most tasks that the average user can think of they can easily find software in a matter of minutes through the software channel of ubuntu. but on the other hand if you use osx who knows how long you will be surfing the web trying to find software and you might have to pay for it in the end

you know, there are no advantages whatsoever in using Ubuntu over MacosX. Stick to MacosX for it is perfect and beautiful in every way and ubuntu is only Brown. I think in your posts you already stated that you are not going to change your views on this, or your hardware. So you won't ever get the max out of Ubuntu or linux for that matter. I just want to know, why start this thread if you are not open to the answer anyway? Why waste my precious time that way, when I could have been helping some poor sap with his wireless?

wnagourney said: I think that much of my problem with Linux is that I am running it on an architecture which is very poorly supported (PPC).

You pretty much nailed it in one with that statement.

I am retired and am not willing to invest in a new computer (I have three old Apple laptops and a PS3 running Ubuntu rather badly and that is enough computers).

Well, then there you have it. Best of luck to you, and best wishes.

I suppose it is inevitable on computer forums that discussions eventually turn into flame wars. The poster who complained about having his time wasted should note that this is in the recurring discussion thread and he voluntarily chose to read (and respond to) my original post. The question was originally in the Apple section and was correctly moved to the "recurrent discussion' section. Recurrent discussions usually have nothing to do with support over some technical issue.

I did have a legitimate question (though I also expressed a strong opinion of what I thought the answer was): what is the compelling reason to use linux instead of OS X on PPC hardware? I haven't found one, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

To the other posters, thank you very much. I will keep an open mind about the two OSes (though I probably won't change my hardware anytime soon for financial reasons) and you have raised some interesting points. In particular,

1. Apt-get is an excellent software distribution system - something I agree with (and my reason for choosing a Debian distro over Fedora with its YUM).

1. OS X is much better integrated with the hardware, particularly when compared to PPC linux and accounts for the better performance of OS X on an iBook G4.

1. Linux is cheaper and much more capable of being customized. Linux is open source, with less tangible (but important) advantages.

1. Some people prefer the "look and feel" of linux (I prefer OS X in that regard).

1. Finally, Linus Torvalds uses (or did use) a G5, though he is probably less interested in the "usability" issues I have focused on. One can draw whatever conclusions one wants from this.

Cheers,

Warren Nagourney

The issue here is really one of developer priorities.

Fundamentally, there's no reason we can't have a first class video production app (or suite, if that's the better approach), image organizer, image editor, web site creation app, media app, and so on and so forth.

Let's face it: there's nothing like iLife for Linux.

There's also nothing like Premiere, Pro Tools, Soundbooth, Dreamweaver or iTunes for Linux. That doesn't make Linux a "horrible platform". It just makes it one that's less appropriate for the "non-tinkerer" home user who isn't otherwise fascinated with Linux.

But why are we looking on such things as "fightin' words"? These are simply opportunities for Linux to advance. And what makes Apple such a bad role model for Linux when it comes to the direction for software development? Clearly it'll be the better option, fundamentally, because of both the GPL and the peer-review nature of F/OSS source.

One of the problems of linux competing with OS X is that the latter is a quickly moving target. I just installed OS X 10.5 on my 800 MHz iBook and the improvement in support for this architecture is astounding. This will probably be the last PPC OS from Apple, but my bottom end machine is much smoother and zippier than it was with the previous OS (10.4.11). I thought (in my paranoid moments) that Apple would deliberately cripple the later releases to "encourage" people to buy x86 machines but I was wrong.

Linux, on the other hand, has little support for this architecture since it is a tiny niche of a small niche. The same problem might also exist to a smaller extent with x86 - I understand that there are gaps in the support for AMD 64 processors. Unfortunately, despite linux being open source, the hardware is not.

Cheers, wn

wnagourney said: I did have a legitimate question (though I also expressed a strong opinion of what I thought the answer was): what is the compelling reason to use linux instead of OS X on PPC hardware?

Frankly, short of it being either a case of one's own personal mores or an individual already being "up and running" on a PPC port and not being inconvenienced by those things which either do not exist or do not work well (sound, wifi support and 3D acceleration all come to mind) I can't think of a reason why a sane person *would* want to run Linux on a PPC Mac.

Oh, and for the record, Mr. Torvalds was given the Mac as a gift. It's not like he went down to the corner Apple Store and bought it himself.