Hi. I'm thinking of buying an iMac, but I'd like to know some stuff first, like how Mac OS X feels compared to Ubuntu and Windows ;)
Also, any advice is welcome.
Thanks in advance.
Printable View
Hi. I'm thinking of buying an iMac, but I'd like to know some stuff first, like how Mac OS X feels compared to Ubuntu and Windows ;)
Also, any advice is welcome.
Thanks in advance.
can't speak to OSX, as I've used it for a grand total of 30 minutes
but there's nothing stopping you putting Ubuntu on an iMac
(it's just hardware, after all)
Yeah, I figured that. But wouldn't that void the warranty?
no ideaQuote:
Originally Posted by ThreeLetterSyndrom
Who cares? How often does hardware break? Anyway' personally, I'm not a fan of os x. It feels weird. It's like touching a cold' solid block of steel, where Ubuntu is like a block of Jello.
I guess it's more a matter of personal preference. One of the things I really like about iMacs is that they're just what they need to be, and nothing more. No zillion cable mess and stuff like that. I figured I could have Mac OSX behave the same way ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by [SomeGuy]
You could always dual boot!
Guys, I found a KDE theme like LCARS (Linux Can Also Run Star Ships...:)). Installing Kubuntu now.
Macs are overpriced, don't bother.
Virtually all preassembled computers are overpriced. It's not like the iMac is more expensive than some other computer that has the same specs, size, all-in-one form, look, etc. Apple products used to be more expensive than competitors, though. Anyway, if you want a "good deal" then buy the parts yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Demon Parasite
That being said, I don't love Mac OS X. It's certainly a step up from Windows in the security department, but the GUI is equally inflexible. I myself use Arch Linux with a keyboard-controlled window manager (stumpwm), but lxde, xfce, and even kde4 are probably faster than Mac OS X's Aqua. If you care about choice and want to get an iMac, feel free to run Linux on it.
This statement is about a decade out of date. It's almost as out of date as "Macs have a one button mouse."Quote:
Originally Posted by Demon Parasite
If you've used iTunes, then you pretty much know how OSX works. Unlike Windows, everything in OSX acts the exact same way as everything else. OSX has better memory management and multicore processing than either Windows or Linux. In terms of security, it's not quite Linux, but light years ahead of Windows.
As for software, Apple software is far better than the Windows equivalent. Windows has Office, OSX has iWork, Windows has Paint, OSX has GIMP, Windows has Windows Movie Maker and Windows Media Player OSX has iLife and iTunes.
Unlike the Windows of Quicktime, the OSX version is stable, faster, and can play any type of media.
Best of all, the average lifespan of a PC is just over two years, where as the average lifespan of a Mac is 6 years.
The only downside to the iMac hardware is that Apple only uses the old-fashion DVD players. It won't do bluray :(
No, putting Ubuntu on it will not void the warranty. You should dual or parallel boot anyway, Linux is good, but it doesn't have the programs that OSX and Windows have. (Windows programs will run natively on OSX using Darwine, including games. In fact, OpenGL Windows games will run better on a Mac using darwine than on Winodws because it manages multithreading and memory better.)
Both Ubuntu and OSX have very powerful disk utilities for repartitioning and verifing. Adding a second operating system is very easy using either one.
hmmm....Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
You do know the mainline Linux kernel can take advantage of many, many thousands of CPU's
see here
http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7313
You think OS X beats this....:P
SMP & NUMA are server technologies (which have only recently hit the desktop)
I thank you that you took the time to type out such a long reply! :) There's no problem in it not doing bluray. I yet have to find a need for more than 5 gb on a single disc ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
I'll think I'll make a dual-boot then, but only if I'm buying it. I promised I wouldn't until summer break. Anyway, I figured I'd get some advice early on. Thanks guys, keep them coming!
Darwin is UNIX, so it has all the features of UNIX. The only difference is that Darwin was written specifically for multicore computers, I don't even think it will run on a one core machine. It's not as flexible as the Linux kernel because Macs have a most 32 cores. Linux would beat it at the super computer level with hundreds and hundreds of cores, but at the average level, OSX and Linux are about the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot
Oops, I meant to say that Linux has better memory management :P Linux outperforms OSX when it comes to memory allocation and management, but once the memory is allocated, OSX outperforms Linux because of it's thread and process management.
Also, starting with 10.6, OSX will use OpenCL and push large chunks of it's floating point calculations out to the graphics cards.
Just to fact check...
That can't be accurate because Darwin has been around since Mac OS X v10.0 (Cheetah), which came out eight years ago. My parents have an iMac that came with Mac OS X v10.1 (Puma). Its CPU is an 800 MHz PPC G4, which needless to say has a single core.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
Not true. Depending on your X environment (e.g. any WM lighter than Aqua) and file system types (e.g. JFS), Linux can certainly be less resource intensive and can outperform Mac OS X. Edit: That's one of the main reasons I switched to Linux.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
There are two versions of Darwin. A PPC version and an Intel version. The Intel version never did, nor was ever designed to run on a single core processor.Quote:
Originally Posted by dsr
It will run on one core, but not designed to. You can even find comments in the Darwin source code to that affect.
Don't listen to him, most of the stuff he said was wrong. Most of the Windows programs are far better, and GIMP will run on all platforms. It doesn't really matter, because Photoshop is much better. iWork isn't that great, Office 2007 is actually pretty nice, and if you don't like it, you could always try OpenOffice(But it sucks). Macs do not last any longer than PCs, I've had this PC for 4 years, only having to put in a couple minor upgrades. I've used Macs that are 3-4 years old, they are very slow, and can hardly handle having two programs open at once. Also, iTunes is a piece of crap, it's really bloated, and infested with DRM. Foobar2000, Winamp, and Media Monkey are far better alternatives. Quicktime does not play "every media file", it's just a piece of crap. If you want to play media, get Mplayer, it's plays everything, and is pretty awesome. It's a lot better than VLC, anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by ThreeLetterSyndrom
Also, Macs ARE overpriced. You are paying more money for the same hardware as a PC of lower price. The average PC can be built from scratch for maybe about 1/4th of the price, and sometimes it's more expensive, depending on what you're putting on it. Building a PC with the same parts as an iMac can be up to half the price, which sort of proves that it's overpriced. And no, you're not paying for "superior quality" or any other bullshit like that, you're paying for aesthetics.
Quicktime on Mac will play any media file other than DVDs (there is another program for that) It requires the proper codecs (like every other media player,) and will prompt you if you try to open a file that you have to download the codec for.Quote:
Originally Posted by Demon Parasite
Photoshop is a Mac program, the Windows version is the port. Photoshop also doesn't come with Windows, it's $900 for the whole Adobe package (cheaper if you're a student.)
The average PC lifespan is 2 years. It's problem is that the core of it is the registry, which requires additional software to clean. The disk also gets fragmented, which most people forget to fix. The average span of a Mac is 6 years. No one cares how long your PC lasted, average is what people should look at.
Word has an absolutely terrible rendering and formatting engine. iWork has a LaTeX backend. LaTeX has been the word processing gold standard for 35 years. Keynote is considered he gold standard in presentation tools. The only thing that Office has that's better than the iWork equivalent is Excel, but unless you're doing advanced metrics, Numbers will suit you just fine.
You need to come up with some figures that show that Macs are overprices, not just saying that they are. Find a PC with a quad core processor, all-in-one display and computer, 20" screen, Nvidia gfx card and Intel gfx card, 5 receiver n wireless receiver, and 4gb of DDR3 ram that's significantly cheaper than a 20" iMac (running Windows of course, Linux PCs are always cheaper because their OS is free).
Photoshop is not all that much better, they're about the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by Demon Parasite
WTF. MS Office released for Macs as well, so I don't know what you're talking about. And OpenOffice IMO is better than MS Office, it has features the latter does not. I love it far better.Quote:
iWork isn't that great, Office 2007 is actually pretty nice, and if you don't like it, you could always try OpenOffice(But it sucks).
Macs don't NEED any upgradesm from as far as I have used it. Unless you want optional RAM and HD space.Quote:
Macs do not last any longer than PCs, I've had this PC for 4 years, only having to put in a couple minor upgrades.
You lost me here. I use old macs all the time, and they flow just as easily as they always did. I don't know where you got that from. I have had 5 programs open at once on an oldie, worked fine. LIER.Quote:
I've used Macs that are 3-4 years old, they are very slow, and can hardly handle having two programs open at once.
iTunes store has DRM. If you get music elsewhere, it doesn't need DRM. Dummy. Also, please clairify the "crap" other than DRM (optional?) and "it's really bloated". As for the latter, how do you mean? Filesize? Who gives a shit, there's enough memory on your mac a few megs won't matter.Quote:
Also, iTunes is a piece of crap, it's really bloated, and infested with DRM.
Or if you're on Linux, Rhythmbox Music Player is amazing. It doesn't make you erase all the crap on there.Quote:
Foobar2000, Winamp, and Media Monkey are far better alternatives.
Quicktime was the first media player of it's kind. It has the most experience. I also use it mainly for anything I watch on a Mac. I haven't encountered a problem with it, period. Sources for the "it's just a piece of crap".Quote:
Quicktime does not play "every media file", it's just a piece of crap. If you want to play media, get Mplayer, it's plays everything, and is pretty awesome. It's a lot better than VLC, anyway.
I actually mainly agree with this, but hey. Mac hardware is pretty standardized, so it's actually a good thing. Bringing computers closer to game consoles.Quote:
Also, Macs ARE overpriced. You are paying more money for the same hardware as a PC of lower price. The average PC can be built from scratch for maybe about 1/4th of the price, and sometimes it's more expensive, depending on what you're putting on it. Building a PC with the same parts as an iMac can be up to half the price, which sort of proves that it's overpriced. And no, you're not paying for "superior quality" or any other bullshit like that, you're paying for aesthetics.
We use the new iMacs at school for video production, they're very nice. If you're not used to OS X then theres a slight learning curve. Not too hard to master. So far the only problems I've ran into involve the retarded network setup we have. The machines are powerful, but quiet (the mac room doesnt have the constant whirr that most computer labs have). They also have to put up with the other kids' constant abuse, and do so quite well.
I've never been a fan of all-in-ones, but admittedly dealing with wires everywhere is getting really old. If you've got the money I say why not, TAKE THE PLUNGE
I prefer OO over MO anytime. I do like photoshop better, but as Ninja said, it's a Mac OSX app, so I'll have to see how that goes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Demon Parasite
I don't have a clue about that, but I've looked at the structure of a mac, and they don't seem to have any problems with cluttered registries and stuff like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Demon Parasite
What's with you trying to shoot down every piece of software the mac has? As far as I've used macs, they seem reliable and not all that hard to use. I can handle a learning curve.Quote:
Originally Posted by Demon Parasite
Then I'm paying for aesthetics. I absolutely hate all the wires that come out a computer these days. I'm not a big fan of clutter, and a mac keeps my desk clean. Also, macs are quiet, another big plus for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Demon Parasite
I get the idea that his is turning into more of an argument than an advice thread.:roll:
That's because they don't have one. OSX uses plist files, which are kept clean and removed and created on application install and deletion.Quote:
Originally Posted by ThreeLetterSyndrom
You school is using Macs for networking? :shock: They are better than Windows for that, but Sun is by far the best for networking. Sun invented networking and their OS is far more secure than anything else. With the possible exception of specialized versions of Linux specifically for security.
I use my PC to make videos with my friends, using Sony Vegas 8, and it far outperfoms using iMovie on my school's computers.Quote:
Originally Posted by MSG
yeah, iMovie is shit, we use Final Cut Pro. Personally I hate FCP, and much prefer adobe. Frequent crashes, annoying rendering issues and terrible capturing glitches (using dedicated DV decks, btw) really put a damper on workflow. Then again the capturing issue could be our shitty camera/tape situation. At home I use After Effects and Premiere for video, however I cant speak for how well they run on the mac. Never had real problems for either on Windows.Quote:
Originally Posted by Demon Parasite
I've heard FCP is basically Premiere with a different GUI.Quote:
Originally Posted by MSG
OMG, it's MSG! :welcome: back!