This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
My laptop is on the way out, so I need to think about a replacement. I'm happy with Windows 7 but 8.1 which I use for work is awful. MacBook pro seems a sensible alternative to similarly constructed PC (eg Dell XPS) but if I wait for Win 10 I may be happy to stay in the pc camp.
I would need to run MS Office, particularly running large and complex excel files and from what I've read the Mac version of Office lacks some keyboard shortcuts and takes longer over the calcs - so I'd probably go with Parallels and a copy of Windows 7 for the Mac (just for running Office, all the other stuff would be on Yosemite)
Any comments or advice?
I would need to run MS Office, particularly running large and complex excel files and from what I've read the Mac version of Office lacks some keyboard shortcuts and takes longer over the calcs - so I'd probably go with Parallels and a copy of Windows 7 for the Mac (just for running Office, all the other stuff would be on Yosemite)
Any comments or advice?
In reply to kevin stephens:
If you are interested in win10, but don't want to wait, I believe it will be offered as a free upgrade to win7 and win8 users.
Source: http://www.pcworld.com/article/2873214/windows-10-will-be-a-free-upgrade-fo...
Not sure how I feel about "We think of Windows 10 as a service" though, I hope they don't mean the way they see office 365 as a service...
If you are interested in win10, but don't want to wait, I believe it will be offered as a free upgrade to win7 and win8 users.
Source: http://www.pcworld.com/article/2873214/windows-10-will-be-a-free-upgrade-fo...
Not sure how I feel about "We think of Windows 10 as a service" though, I hope they don't mean the way they see office 365 as a service...
In reply to kevin stephens:
Here is a link to what allegedly is supposed to be the definitive list of Excel shortcuts to PC and Mac:
https://exceljet.net/keyboard-shortcuts
Here is a link to what allegedly is supposed to be the definitive list of Excel shortcuts to PC and Mac:
https://exceljet.net/keyboard-shortcuts
In reply to Jack B:
It sounds like Microsoft have finally woken up. An operating system always should be a service. It provides a software service between the applications and the hardware. Microsoft lost the plot when they integrated the badly written internet explorer into their OS along with a whole heap of other junk.
Windows 8.1 is very good apart from some of the new App store apps that insist on using the whole screen or nothing.
> Not sure how I feel about "We think of Windows 10 as a service" though
It sounds like Microsoft have finally woken up. An operating system always should be a service. It provides a software service between the applications and the hardware. Microsoft lost the plot when they integrated the badly written internet explorer into their OS along with a whole heap of other junk.
Windows 8.1 is very good apart from some of the new App store apps that insist on using the whole screen or nothing.
2
1
In reply to duchessofmalfi:
This is why more people don't use linux, why suggest it when you know full well it doesn't meet his needs?
For OP, you don't need a mac if all you're doing is using excel and you can't even run it natively. Get one of the new toshiba satellites or a lifebook from fujitsu, don't waste your cash on shit brands like dell/hp/acer. I'd stick with win 7 myself, no reason to upgrade to 10 and as you rightly say, win 8 is shite.
This is why more people don't use linux, why suggest it when you know full well it doesn't meet his needs?
For OP, you don't need a mac if all you're doing is using excel and you can't even run it natively. Get one of the new toshiba satellites or a lifebook from fujitsu, don't waste your cash on shit brands like dell/hp/acer. I'd stick with win 7 myself, no reason to upgrade to 10 and as you rightly say, win 8 is shite.
4
1
In reply to kevin stephens:
Out of interest, what is wrong with your laptop? I hear so many people say 'my laptop is dying, I need a new one' and all it requires is a clean re-installation of Windows, or even less. Not having a go, just a genuine question.
Out of interest, what is wrong with your laptop? I hear so many people say 'my laptop is dying, I need a new one' and all it requires is a clean re-installation of Windows, or even less. Not having a go, just a genuine question.
4
In reply to kevin stephens:
I like 8.1. Have you installed "Classic Shell" which makes it much more like w7.
I like 8.1. Have you installed "Classic Shell" which makes it much more like w7.
In reply to Removed User:
If our Toshiba TV is anything to go by, I would avoid with a passion. Can't even eject the DVD without having to switch on / off several times!
> Get one of the new toshiba satellites
If our Toshiba TV is anything to go by, I would avoid with a passion. Can't even eject the DVD without having to switch on / off several times!
1
In reply to ByEek:
It's not, but perhaps you should take your busted tv to get fixed? :p
> If our Toshiba TV is anything to go by
It's not, but perhaps you should take your busted tv to get fixed? :p
In reply to Removed User:
It's not busted. It is a pile of crap. Totally illogical. Half the buttons on the remote don't do anything, the eject button only works under certain conditions and if you leave a DVD in, the TV switches itself on in the middle of the night. And all bets are off if you try and access media on a USB stick. Will be avoiding Toshiba like the plague. Our TV has all the hallmarks of Chinese engineering except it wasn't that cheap!
> It's not, but perhaps you should take your busted tv to get fixed? :p
It's not busted. It is a pile of crap. Totally illogical. Half the buttons on the remote don't do anything, the eject button only works under certain conditions and if you leave a DVD in, the TV switches itself on in the middle of the night. And all bets are off if you try and access media on a USB stick. Will be avoiding Toshiba like the plague. Our TV has all the hallmarks of Chinese engineering except it wasn't that cheap!
In reply to ByEek:
On one hand I agree with you, if Microsoft's engineering team are more willing to see Windows as a service (in the technical sense) that lets you run the applications you want to run on the hardware you own, then that might be a good thing. However "software as a service" is marketing speak for an annual payment, like office 365. If that's what they mean it's going to be bloody annoying.
> An operating system always should be a service.
On one hand I agree with you, if Microsoft's engineering team are more willing to see Windows as a service (in the technical sense) that lets you run the applications you want to run on the hardware you own, then that might be a good thing. However "software as a service" is marketing speak for an annual payment, like office 365. If that's what they mean it's going to be bloody annoying.
Post edited at 12:22
1
In reply to Jack B:
Fair point. Not sure how they could achieve that though since there are many many PCs off grid - and rightly so. SAS tends to be a bit more webby, unless Windows is destined to become a bit like Chrome OS?
> However "software as a service" is marketing speak for an annual payment, like office 365. If that's what they mean it's going to be bloody annoying.
Fair point. Not sure how they could achieve that though since there are many many PCs off grid - and rightly so. SAS tends to be a bit more webby, unless Windows is destined to become a bit like Chrome OS?
In reply to ByEek:
Eek - that sounds like every TV I've ever seen. Nothing unique about those issues. TVs are consumer-grade products and, like microwaves and VCRs, they're shit for all the same reasons.
On topic: I'd stick with Windows and I'd stick with Windows 7. Windows 10 may be a huge relief for those of us who are stuck with Windows 8 already but Microsoft's philosophy is still sorely lacking. After all, there is absolutely nothing that won't work just fine on Windows 7.
Windows 7 is like a DMM WallNut. Windows 8 is like a Gear4Rocks plastic nut. Windows 10 might be better than windows 8. Might.
Eek - that sounds like every TV I've ever seen. Nothing unique about those issues. TVs are consumer-grade products and, like microwaves and VCRs, they're shit for all the same reasons.
On topic: I'd stick with Windows and I'd stick with Windows 7. Windows 10 may be a huge relief for those of us who are stuck with Windows 8 already but Microsoft's philosophy is still sorely lacking. After all, there is absolutely nothing that won't work just fine on Windows 7.
Windows 7 is like a DMM WallNut. Windows 8 is like a Gear4Rocks plastic nut. Windows 10 might be better than windows 8. Might.
In reply to Removed User:
Don´t agree, IMO recommending Linux is fair enough. In my experience spreadsheet work is the one field where Linux / open source programs and Excel go along well (word documents and open office writer is much more unreliable).
I am stuck with Macs for the moment, and try to delay upgrading for as long as possible. Most computers in the lab still run MacOS 10.6, which does not get security updates anymore. The computers themselves are fine for the job, but can´t be updated to the most current OS version. If our IT department gives 10.6 the thumbs down I will have to buy new computers. Even worse, I won´t be able to run my Adobe CS programs anymore, and would have to lease them for extortionate monthly rates. I would not remotely consider leasing the OS for my computers and risk access to my own data.
I have therefore started installing Linux on some of my old Macbook Pros, works nicely so far. If I have to upgrade my hardware I won´t hesitate to switch the entire lab.
CB
Don´t agree, IMO recommending Linux is fair enough. In my experience spreadsheet work is the one field where Linux / open source programs and Excel go along well (word documents and open office writer is much more unreliable).
I am stuck with Macs for the moment, and try to delay upgrading for as long as possible. Most computers in the lab still run MacOS 10.6, which does not get security updates anymore. The computers themselves are fine for the job, but can´t be updated to the most current OS version. If our IT department gives 10.6 the thumbs down I will have to buy new computers. Even worse, I won´t be able to run my Adobe CS programs anymore, and would have to lease them for extortionate monthly rates. I would not remotely consider leasing the OS for my computers and risk access to my own data.
I have therefore started installing Linux on some of my old Macbook Pros, works nicely so far. If I have to upgrade my hardware I won´t hesitate to switch the entire lab.
CB
1
In reply to cb294:
I am all in favor of Linux and have actually been paid to do stuff with Linux on servers and desktops alike but I'd never, ever recommend it to anyone. Quite simply, one must acknowledge that they WILL end up fighting with it, sooner or later, no matter what they use it for. Some people choose to accept that risk and the "fun" they might experience as a consequence. On their heads be it.
Yes, it will do your spreadsheets just fine, it will browse the web and play Spotify and Book to your your Twitface stream or whatever you want it to do but every time you turn it on, you're casting a die - there's a measurable chance that "quickly check the weather forecast" or "get online so that I can receive that scheduled Skype call" will become "fiddle with xorg.conf until 03h30" or "beat head against wall trying to understand why the boot loader has died... again... for no reason" or "why oh why did I believe I had got UEFI working" or "oh sod, I knew I should never have clicked 'update'"
I am all in favor of Linux and have actually been paid to do stuff with Linux on servers and desktops alike but I'd never, ever recommend it to anyone. Quite simply, one must acknowledge that they WILL end up fighting with it, sooner or later, no matter what they use it for. Some people choose to accept that risk and the "fun" they might experience as a consequence. On their heads be it.
Yes, it will do your spreadsheets just fine, it will browse the web and play Spotify and Book to your your Twitface stream or whatever you want it to do but every time you turn it on, you're casting a die - there's a measurable chance that "quickly check the weather forecast" or "get online so that I can receive that scheduled Skype call" will become "fiddle with xorg.conf until 03h30" or "beat head against wall trying to understand why the boot loader has died... again... for no reason" or "why oh why did I believe I had got UEFI working" or "oh sod, I knew I should never have clicked 'update'"
2
1
In reply to kevin stephens:
The new MacBook would be an awful choice if you need to run a VM - and you sound like you know about the issues that plague the OS X version of Excel already; they don't affect my low level Excel usage, thankfully. The new MB has a very energy efficient and slow processor, and limited RAM options. Plus that one USB port that no-one anywhere supports yet, and is used for the charger anyway.
Linux - just no, for the reasons Xharlie has outlined above. Anyone who thinks Linux is ready for normal people and their desktops is frankly delusional. Linux is wonderful for people who need and understand it. For the rest of us, it's a pain in the backside.
For VMs I would certainly suggest the more RAM the merrier, as well as an SSD big enough to be happy with enough space for all machines. I'm typing this on a 2011 MBA, which is running Windows 7 (for some crappy but machine specific software) in Parallels, plus a Remote Desktop to work. It is coping fine with 4Gb RAM now, but previously the VM was on a SD card stuck in the slot and it was an utter dog because of the bottleneck getting data to/from the card. Since opening it up and replacing the stock 256Gb SSD with a 6G 480Gb SSD (thanks Transcend), I have been able to fit the VM on the native SSD and it's really quick.
Mac hardware is generally lovely, but you do need to spec as much RAM as possible as it is soldered on these days and can't be replaced later. A 13' Retina MBP with 16Gb RAM would be my choice, I think.
Cheers
b
The new MacBook would be an awful choice if you need to run a VM - and you sound like you know about the issues that plague the OS X version of Excel already; they don't affect my low level Excel usage, thankfully. The new MB has a very energy efficient and slow processor, and limited RAM options. Plus that one USB port that no-one anywhere supports yet, and is used for the charger anyway.
Linux - just no, for the reasons Xharlie has outlined above. Anyone who thinks Linux is ready for normal people and their desktops is frankly delusional. Linux is wonderful for people who need and understand it. For the rest of us, it's a pain in the backside.
For VMs I would certainly suggest the more RAM the merrier, as well as an SSD big enough to be happy with enough space for all machines. I'm typing this on a 2011 MBA, which is running Windows 7 (for some crappy but machine specific software) in Parallels, plus a Remote Desktop to work. It is coping fine with 4Gb RAM now, but previously the VM was on a SD card stuck in the slot and it was an utter dog because of the bottleneck getting data to/from the card. Since opening it up and replacing the stock 256Gb SSD with a 6G 480Gb SSD (thanks Transcend), I have been able to fit the VM on the native SSD and it's really quick.
Mac hardware is generally lovely, but you do need to spec as much RAM as possible as it is soldered on these days and can't be replaced later. A 13' Retina MBP with 16Gb RAM would be my choice, I think.
Cheers
b
1
In reply to ben b:
I've recently lashed out on a 13" retina MBP with 8Gb RAM - my 7th Mac in 24 years. By far the best I've ever had, with a blistering performance and a joy to use. Boots up in under 10 secs. Screen a delight. Hooks up v successfully with a cheapo ACER 24" monitor, which turns it into a superb desktop computer. Very smooth, totally soundless running, with no glitches or bugs whatever. Really thrilled with it - way better than the last, much cheaper MBP I had. One very noticeable thing is that it runs very coolly, scarcely ever more than slightly warm, whereas all previous laptops became very hot when used heavily.
> Mac hardware is generally lovely, but you do need to spec as much RAM as possible as it is soldered on these days and can't be replaced later. A 13' Retina MBP with 16Gb RAM would be my choice, I think.
I've recently lashed out on a 13" retina MBP with 8Gb RAM - my 7th Mac in 24 years. By far the best I've ever had, with a blistering performance and a joy to use. Boots up in under 10 secs. Screen a delight. Hooks up v successfully with a cheapo ACER 24" monitor, which turns it into a superb desktop computer. Very smooth, totally soundless running, with no glitches or bugs whatever. Really thrilled with it - way better than the last, much cheaper MBP I had. One very noticeable thing is that it runs very coolly, scarcely ever more than slightly warm, whereas all previous laptops became very hot when used heavily.
In reply to Xharlie:
Not in my experience, and I am a dedicated end user who simply wants his computer to work. For family use I switched to a stable linux distribution (Linux Mint 15 Cinnamon desktop) that is currently running on three new to ancient notebooks (Lenovo, Sony, and Samsung), and after fixing two minor problems (monitor brightness after starting on the Lenovo and a sound issue with the Sony) had no problems at all.
edit: agree with the MBP retina comments. Expensive but brilliant
CB
Not in my experience, and I am a dedicated end user who simply wants his computer to work. For family use I switched to a stable linux distribution (Linux Mint 15 Cinnamon desktop) that is currently running on three new to ancient notebooks (Lenovo, Sony, and Samsung), and after fixing two minor problems (monitor brightness after starting on the Lenovo and a sound issue with the Sony) had no problems at all.
edit: agree with the MBP retina comments. Expensive but brilliant
CB
Post edited at 16:41
4
In reply to kevin stephens:
Thanks everybody
My current laptop is still useable but the case and hinge is on the way out, keyboard not great ad prone to over-heating.
Also I would really like a Retina standard screen (Or the Dell XPS equivalent), SSD, backlit keyboard, solid build etc of a good new machine
Currently I use my works issue laptop (Win 8.1) for all my MS Office work - but if I decide to change my work arrangements then MS Office functionality would be very important to me.
It seems impossible to buy a good new PC with Win 7. I'm told I should be able to retrospectively install Win 7 over Win 8.1 (albeit at extra cost). Can anyone confirm this would be trouble free and as robust as a fresh Win 7 install?
In the meantime I'll keep backing up the laptop
Thanks everybody
My current laptop is still useable but the case and hinge is on the way out, keyboard not great ad prone to over-heating.
Also I would really like a Retina standard screen (Or the Dell XPS equivalent), SSD, backlit keyboard, solid build etc of a good new machine
Currently I use my works issue laptop (Win 8.1) for all my MS Office work - but if I decide to change my work arrangements then MS Office functionality would be very important to me.
It seems impossible to buy a good new PC with Win 7. I'm told I should be able to retrospectively install Win 7 over Win 8.1 (albeit at extra cost). Can anyone confirm this would be trouble free and as robust as a fresh Win 7 install?
In the meantime I'll keep backing up the laptop
In reply to kevin stephens:
It would definitely be as robust as a fresh Windows 7 install - in fact it would be a fresh Windows 7 install. I'm hoping that Windows 10 (free upgrade from Windows 7 or 8) will give a Windows 7 type user interface.
Whatever happened to Windows 9?
It would definitely be as robust as a fresh Windows 7 install - in fact it would be a fresh Windows 7 install. I'm hoping that Windows 10 (free upgrade from Windows 7 or 8) will give a Windows 7 type user interface.
Whatever happened to Windows 9?
In reply to John2:
They've skipped 9; possibly because it would confuse geriatric software that needs 95 or 98 to install; possibly because the number 9 is unlucky in some cultures, possibly because they wanted to persuade people it was a long way from 8!
b
They've skipped 9; possibly because it would confuse geriatric software that needs 95 or 98 to install; possibly because the number 9 is unlucky in some cultures, possibly because they wanted to persuade people it was a long way from 8!
b
In reply to ben b:
Since when did the OP say he wanted to run a VM? Who runs VMs at home anyway?
> The new MacBook would be an awful choice if you need to run a VM
Since when did the OP say he wanted to run a VM? Who runs VMs at home anyway?
In reply to ByEek:
In his OP. ' so I'd probably go with Parallels and a copy of Windows 7 for the Mac'
Lots of people.
> Since when did the OP say he wanted to run a VM?
In his OP. ' so I'd probably go with Parallels and a copy of Windows 7 for the Mac'
> Who runs VMs at home anyway?
Lots of people.
Post edited at 10:51
1
In reply to kevin stephens:
Usually trouble free.
You may have to go to the manufacturers website to get some of the Win 7 drivers for your specific machine.
> It seems impossible to buy a good new PC with Win 7. I'm told I should be able to retrospectively install Win 7 over Win 8.1 (albeit at extra cost). Can anyone confirm this would be trouble free and as robust as a fresh Win 7 install?
Usually trouble free.
You may have to go to the manufacturers website to get some of the Win 7 drivers for your specific machine.
In reply to Xharlie:
Not in my experience. Find it much more reliable and quicker than any of the myriad windoze platforms I've used (currently using ubuntu). But I have been developing on top of unix since Berkely 4.2 circa 1984, so I guess I understand the system better than many.
Not in my experience. Find it much more reliable and quicker than any of the myriad windoze platforms I've used (currently using ubuntu). But I have been developing on top of unix since Berkely 4.2 circa 1984, so I guess I understand the system better than many.
In reply to Willi Crater:
Exactly - I have yet to meet anyone who uses Linux on their own, home machine who doesn't either (a) love it, and enjoy fiddling with it or (b) have a tame geek in the above category who can set it up for them.
OSX and Linux are like in the same way the climbing wall and the Dawn Wall are alike. Running Debian might well be an extraordinary technical experience but probably best reserved for those with a long trad apprenticeship first...
cheers
b
Exactly - I have yet to meet anyone who uses Linux on their own, home machine who doesn't either (a) love it, and enjoy fiddling with it or (b) have a tame geek in the above category who can set it up for them.
OSX and Linux are like in the same way the climbing wall and the Dawn Wall are alike. Running Debian might well be an extraordinary technical experience but probably best reserved for those with a long trad apprenticeship first...
cheers
b
In reply to ben b:
Ha ha. Nice comparison. Perhaps more like Right Unconquerable than the Dawn Wall.
> OSX and Linux are like in the same way the climbing wall and the Dawn Wall are alike.
Ha ha. Nice comparison. Perhaps more like Right Unconquerable than the Dawn Wall.
In reply to ben b:
I used to have this on paper, I think from the Freelance Informer in the early 90s, comparing operating systems to airline operators. I suppose not many people would appreciate MVS jokes these days.
http://www.fiction.net/tidbits/computer/os_airlines.html
I used to have this on paper, I think from the Freelance Informer in the early 90s, comparing operating systems to airline operators. I suppose not many people would appreciate MVS jokes these days.
http://www.fiction.net/tidbits/computer/os_airlines.html
In reply to wercat:
That's very good (although the MVS bit is indeed lost on me - although I can appreciate the experience).
cheers
b
That's very good (although the MVS bit is indeed lost on me - although I can appreciate the experience).
cheers
b
In reply to wercat:
Thanks for posting that! MVS was probably the first OS I used, at university (once we'd graduated from punched card). Good old Freelance Informer, I remember it well.
> I used to have this on paper, I think from the Freelance Informer in the early 90s, comparing operating systems to airline operators. I suppose not many people would appreciate MVS jokes these days.
Thanks for posting that! MVS was probably the first OS I used, at university (once we'd graduated from punched card). Good old Freelance Informer, I remember it well.
In reply to ben b:
Think of the noise of a server room but louder, dozens of 1.5gB, or less, disk drives (sorry, DASD - direct access storage devices) the size of washing machines and huge printers, sitting at the centre of a huge hardwired network connecting to hundreds of terminals ...
Think of the noise of a server room but louder, dozens of 1.5gB, or less, disk drives (sorry, DASD - direct access storage devices) the size of washing machines and huge printers, sitting at the centre of a huge hardwired network connecting to hundreds of terminals ...
Post edited at 16:45
In reply to wercat:
>.. I suppose not many people would appreciate MVS jokes these days.
Saddos! I still long for the return of the day we upgraded to XA. What a party.
>.. I suppose not many people would appreciate MVS jokes these days.
Saddos! I still long for the return of the day we upgraded to XA. What a party.
In reply to kevin stephens:
Thanks all again.
Is anyone running Windows 7 on a mac via Bootcamp? iI realise this would need a separated disk partion and therefore maybe a bigger drive
Thanks all again.
Is anyone running Windows 7 on a mac via Bootcamp? iI realise this would need a separated disk partion and therefore maybe a bigger drive
In reply to kevin stephens:
I run Win7 on Macs, but use Parallels. The 'Coherence' mode means you're running the operating systems in parallel at the same time, but it just looks like your normal OSX desktop, and the file systems are integrated. I only do this so I can run Matlab on my MacBook, otherwise I wouldn't bother. In processing terms, the parallels mode doesn't seem to hit performance when running pretty intensive simulations. My wife has previously run OpenFoam, Ansys and other 3d mesh software and not found it to be a problem.
BTW I use office for Mac when I have to and find it ok. Obvs in a perfect world one wouldn't use Microsoft products at all. I'm experimenting with using the office bundled with OS X Yosemite and haven't run into any problems yet.
I run Win7 on Macs, but use Parallels. The 'Coherence' mode means you're running the operating systems in parallel at the same time, but it just looks like your normal OSX desktop, and the file systems are integrated. I only do this so I can run Matlab on my MacBook, otherwise I wouldn't bother. In processing terms, the parallels mode doesn't seem to hit performance when running pretty intensive simulations. My wife has previously run OpenFoam, Ansys and other 3d mesh software and not found it to be a problem.
BTW I use office for Mac when I have to and find it ok. Obvs in a perfect world one wouldn't use Microsoft products at all. I'm experimenting with using the office bundled with OS X Yosemite and haven't run into any problems yet.
In reply to ben b:
Well (b) is probably fair but its also true that very few Mac or Windows users set up their own computers either. Modern Linux installs are scarcely harder than installing Windows these days.
I know quite a few technophobes who use Linux just fine, though admittedly it was installed by someone else. For general use Ubuntu, Mint or several other versions are really not much different Windows, and of course they're completely free.
> I have yet to meet anyone who uses Linux on their own, home machine who doesn't either (a) love it, and enjoy fiddling with it or (b) have a tame geek in the above category who can set it up for them.
Well (b) is probably fair but its also true that very few Mac or Windows users set up their own computers either. Modern Linux installs are scarcely harder than installing Windows these days.
I know quite a few technophobes who use Linux just fine, though admittedly it was installed by someone else. For general use Ubuntu, Mint or several other versions are really not much different Windows, and of course they're completely free.
2
In reply to stp:
And run an order of magnitude faster, and don't require re-installation every five minutes. The installation is easier than windoze these days too. Online support is better than microshaft too. Of course I may be biased (shirley not!).
> I know quite a few technophobes who use Linux just fine, though admittedly it was installed by someone else. For general use Ubuntu, Mint or several other versions are really not much different Windows, and of course they're completely free.
And run an order of magnitude faster, and don't require re-installation every five minutes. The installation is easier than windoze these days too. Online support is better than microshaft too. Of course I may be biased (shirley not!).
2
In reply to Willi Crater:
The kids had brought a laptop already burdened by Vista to a creeping death, unusable even to do admin chores. Apart from needing a new battery it flies with Ubuntu like a new machine.
The kids had brought a laptop already burdened by Vista to a creeping death, unusable even to do admin chores. Apart from needing a new battery it flies with Ubuntu like a new machine.
2
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
on the subject of the MBP running cool, i was doing a bit of vid editing and had a few different things on the go at the same time when it started making a funny noise. it was the fan, id had it for a year before it had come on for the first time!
on the subject of the MBP running cool, i was doing a bit of vid editing and had a few different things on the go at the same time when it started making a funny noise. it was the fan, id had it for a year before it had come on for the first time!
In reply to Xharlie:
What's all this 'turning on' business? It's Linux, you don't really need to turn it off.
uptime
20:58:41 up 241 days, 8:31, 4 users, load average: 0.95, 0.81, 0.79
ps. The last install of Debian on this machine was simpler, easier and more automated than the install of Window 7 on my missus' machine.
Horses for courses really, but I haven't seen the Linux you describe for several years.
> I am all in favor of Linux ...
> ... but every time you turn it on...
> ... but every time you turn it on...
What's all this 'turning on' business? It's Linux, you don't really need to turn it off.
uptime
20:58:41 up 241 days, 8:31, 4 users, load average: 0.95, 0.81, 0.79
ps. The last install of Debian on this machine was simpler, easier and more automated than the install of Window 7 on my missus' machine.
Horses for courses really, but I haven't seen the Linux you describe for several years.
Post edited at 20:06
3
In reply to interdit:
I use Linux at work both for development and on the target platforms (OpenSuse on my dev machine and Ubuntu gets put on the targets), installing is simply a matter of booting up with the USB drive containing the image and answering a few questions then letting it do its thing. Updates to anything other than the kernel don't require half a dozen reboots in the way that Windows does.
I've used a Windows machine once in the last 18 months.
At home I use a Mac which is basically BSD Unix with a pretty face - today I've spent most of the time at the command line. Similar to Linux machines you just let it run, the memory management just works, it's six years old and runs as fast as it did when new, I only tend to turn it off when going on holiday.
I use Linux at work both for development and on the target platforms (OpenSuse on my dev machine and Ubuntu gets put on the targets), installing is simply a matter of booting up with the USB drive containing the image and answering a few questions then letting it do its thing. Updates to anything other than the kernel don't require half a dozen reboots in the way that Windows does.
I've used a Windows machine once in the last 18 months.
At home I use a Mac which is basically BSD Unix with a pretty face - today I've spent most of the time at the command line. Similar to Linux machines you just let it run, the memory management just works, it's six years old and runs as fast as it did when new, I only tend to turn it off when going on holiday.
1
In reply to kevin stephens:
Why Parallels? I use Virtual Box, which is free from Oracle, and it works just fine to run my XP VM (must get around to upgrading to Win 7 soon).
That said, there's only one Windows application I run regularly. I use MS Office for Mac 2011 on Yosemite and that too works just fine for me. I've yet to find any issues using it to work with Office docs sent from Windows users at work. That said, I'm not a major Excel power user so I can't comment on whether there might be some missing functionality cf the Windows version.
> I'd probably go with Parallels and a copy of Windows 7 for the Mac (just for running Office, all the other stuff would be on Yosemite)
Why Parallels? I use Virtual Box, which is free from Oracle, and it works just fine to run my XP VM (must get around to upgrading to Win 7 soon).
That said, there's only one Windows application I run regularly. I use MS Office for Mac 2011 on Yosemite and that too works just fine for me. I've yet to find any issues using it to work with Office docs sent from Windows users at work. That said, I'm not a major Excel power user so I can't comment on whether there might be some missing functionality cf the Windows version.
In reply to Willi Crater:
I don't know which version of Windows you are talking about, but the none of the versions I have been running since around 1998 have conformed to what you are talking about.
> And run an order of magnitude faster, and don't require re-installation every five minutes. The installation is easier than windoze these days too. Online support is better than microshaft too. Of course I may be biased (shirley not!).
I don't know which version of Windows you are talking about, but the none of the versions I have been running since around 1998 have conformed to what you are talking about.
In reply to ByEek:
Following versions, since circa '92.
3.1, 95, NT4, 98, 2000, xp, Vista (unbelievably poor), w7.
Maybe you've been using windoze versions from the twighlight zone, or (more likely) not had the opportunity to sample the somewhat better opposition. As during this period I have developed and supported software on a whole bunch of OS' s, from myriad Unix, VMS, and Microshaft systems I tend to favour my opinion over yours.
> I don't know which version of Windows you are talking about, but the none of the versions I have been running since around 1998 have conformed to what you are talking about.
Following versions, since circa '92.
3.1, 95, NT4, 98, 2000, xp, Vista (unbelievably poor), w7.
Maybe you've been using windoze versions from the twighlight zone, or (more likely) not had the opportunity to sample the somewhat better opposition. As during this period I have developed and supported software on a whole bunch of OS' s, from myriad Unix, VMS, and Microshaft systems I tend to favour my opinion over yours.
Post edited at 18:08
In reply to Willi Crater:
That's me told then. My experiences with Windows must be completely wrong. I do apologise.
> I tend to favour my opinion over yours.
That's me told then. My experiences with Windows must be completely wrong. I do apologise.
In reply to NottsRich:
I have a five year old laptop that is maddeningly slow and runs very hot. Is it worth re-installing windows (or getting windows 7) and sorting out the fan, or should I just shell out for a new one? If I do the former, how much am I looking at, and if the later, is it easy to get w7 rather than 8?
> Out of interest, what is wrong with your laptop? I hear so many people say 'my laptop is dying, I need a new one' and all it requires is a clean re-installation of Windows, or even less. Not having a go, just a genuine question.
I have a five year old laptop that is maddeningly slow and runs very hot. Is it worth re-installing windows (or getting windows 7) and sorting out the fan, or should I just shell out for a new one? If I do the former, how much am I looking at, and if the later, is it easy to get w7 rather than 8?
In reply to seankenny:
How good a laptop was it to begin with?
One relatively cheap upgrade (depending on usage) is to switch to an SSD. Will give most computers a decent speed boost.
How good a laptop was it to begin with?
One relatively cheap upgrade (depending on usage) is to switch to an SSD. Will give most computers a decent speed boost.
In reply to dissonance:
It was okay, I guess, I'm not an expert on these things but it worked fine for me. I only use it for writing, web use and storing/very slightly editing my pictures.
> How good a laptop was it to begin with?
> One relatively cheap upgrade (depending on usage) is to switch to an SSD. Will give most computers a decent speed boost.
It was okay, I guess, I'm not an expert on these things but it worked fine for me. I only use it for writing, web use and storing/very slightly editing my pictures.
In reply to duchessofmalfi:
Linux obviously gives you vastly more control over your system but most users don't need this. Some distributions are heading in the right direction to becoming more suitable for the average user, however I would say they are still a good bit of work to be done before I would honestly recommend it to anyone and everyone. Its quite easy to change permissions or delete essential system files (I've done it!).
I don't use Linux regularly but even after doing 4 years of a Computer Science degree and some work using it, I still need to use Google for a good chunk of stuff I want to do with it.
You really need to be using it regularly and doing something that you cant achieve as easily on Windows/Mac to get the benefit of Linux if you ask me.
Linux obviously gives you vastly more control over your system but most users don't need this. Some distributions are heading in the right direction to becoming more suitable for the average user, however I would say they are still a good bit of work to be done before I would honestly recommend it to anyone and everyone. Its quite easy to change permissions or delete essential system files (I've done it!).
I don't use Linux regularly but even after doing 4 years of a Computer Science degree and some work using it, I still need to use Google for a good chunk of stuff I want to do with it.
You really need to be using it regularly and doing something that you cant achieve as easily on Windows/Mac to get the benefit of Linux if you ask me.
In reply to Removed User:
My laptop was a slow mess. My local shop said the major reason laptops die is disk crashes. So I installed a 128G SSD for the OS and a faster larger optical Hard Drive for the rest. I bought and did a clean install of Windows 8.1 (remember the kernel has been rewritten and is faster). I then added the free classic start menu download. Now my laptop is faster and more reliable than it has ever been.
My laptop was a slow mess. My local shop said the major reason laptops die is disk crashes. So I installed a 128G SSD for the OS and a faster larger optical Hard Drive for the rest. I bought and did a clean install of Windows 8.1 (remember the kernel has been rewritten and is faster). I then added the free classic start menu download. Now my laptop is faster and more reliable than it has ever been.
Post edited at 14:42
In reply to seankenny:
I would be tempted by an SSD then. The dodgy bit is the fan since if that needs replacing/fixing it would be a fairly uncertain cost.
You can now get a 250gb SSD for 75 quid or so. Can either copy across the old drive or just reinstall and does give a rather nice boost.
> I only use it for writing, web use and storing/very slightly editing my pictures.
I would be tempted by an SSD then. The dodgy bit is the fan since if that needs replacing/fixing it would be a fairly uncertain cost.
You can now get a 250gb SSD for 75 quid or so. Can either copy across the old drive or just reinstall and does give a rather nice boost.
In reply to dissonance:
Thanks for the info. Is doing that a fairly simple job - or best to get a shop to do it? I'm not a complete techno-phobe, just never done this before.
Thanks for the info. Is doing that a fairly simple job - or best to get a shop to do it? I'm not a complete techno-phobe, just never done this before.
In reply to Martin McKenna - Rockfax:
Mac OS is linux re-wrapped and locked down so that the user cannot take control of the device they bought without remarkable effort and expertise. By analogy, consider the manufacturer of your nice new shiny belay device approaching you at the rocks and prohibiting use of the device because they decided you should not use it in the fashion of your choosing. The same control issue is inherent in Windows, albeit much of that is due to the inherent weakness in Microsoft's development.
For the average user there is absolutely no problem with a stable release of Debian which is only ever updated after near bomb-proof testing. Counter-intuitively, average users should avoid the shiny distributions such as Ubuntu which are chasing Mac and Windows tails and consequently release updates prematurely.
There is a good reason why 95% of the top 500 supercomputers in the world run linux - it's because it is a far better operating system. It's also free, as are the applications that run on it. It is also entirely possible to emulate other OS on linux (again for free) if needed. Moreover, the more of us that use it, the better it gets and the more accessible it will be to those who would otherwise struggle to afford the technology. Choose life, choose linux
Mac OS is linux re-wrapped and locked down so that the user cannot take control of the device they bought without remarkable effort and expertise. By analogy, consider the manufacturer of your nice new shiny belay device approaching you at the rocks and prohibiting use of the device because they decided you should not use it in the fashion of your choosing. The same control issue is inherent in Windows, albeit much of that is due to the inherent weakness in Microsoft's development.
For the average user there is absolutely no problem with a stable release of Debian which is only ever updated after near bomb-proof testing. Counter-intuitively, average users should avoid the shiny distributions such as Ubuntu which are chasing Mac and Windows tails and consequently release updates prematurely.
There is a good reason why 95% of the top 500 supercomputers in the world run linux - it's because it is a far better operating system. It's also free, as are the applications that run on it. It is also entirely possible to emulate other OS on linux (again for free) if needed. Moreover, the more of us that use it, the better it gets and the more accessible it will be to those who would otherwise struggle to afford the technology. Choose life, choose linux
In reply to seankenny:
It varies according to the manufacturer but generally is easy enough particularly on older models (the trend for ultra thin ones makes upgrading hellish but thats another subject).
Normally just a case of unscrew a panel and then unscrew the drive, google your one to double check though.
If you are going to do a fresh install of windows then its really easy. if not then need to clone the drive. not hard and you can often get an bundle which contains everything you need.
> Thanks for the info. Is doing that a fairly simple job - or best to get a shop to do it?
It varies according to the manufacturer but generally is easy enough particularly on older models (the trend for ultra thin ones makes upgrading hellish but thats another subject).
Normally just a case of unscrew a panel and then unscrew the drive, google your one to double check though.
If you are going to do a fresh install of windows then its really easy. if not then need to clone the drive. not hard and you can often get an bundle which contains everything you need.
In reply to seankenny:
Can't remember exactly. Windows I got online not from MS, maybe 25. And the two disk upgrades about 200 including labour. But to be fair, it was a top of the range machine 4 years ago, so still worth the upgrade costs.
And takes 18 secs to boot.
> And how much did that cost you to do?
Can't remember exactly. Windows I got online not from MS, maybe 25. And the two disk upgrades about 200 including labour. But to be fair, it was a top of the range machine 4 years ago, so still worth the upgrade costs.
And takes 18 secs to boot.
Post edited at 13:29
In reply to kevin stephens:
I went from win 7 to 8.1 W8.1 is definitely faster. and it has some nice features. The initial screen is ugly, but I go straight to the Classic shell to persuade it that no, it is NOT a smart phone, but a REAL computer. I would not worry about getting 8.1, certainly not enough to go back to 7, not worth it in hassle, money or features.
> It seems impossible to buy a good new PC with Win 7. I'm told I should be able to retrospectively install Win 7 over Win 8.1 (albeit at extra cost). Can anyone confirm this would be trouble free and as robust as a fresh Win 7 install?
I went from win 7 to 8.1 W8.1 is definitely faster. and it has some nice features. The initial screen is ugly, but I go straight to the Classic shell to persuade it that no, it is NOT a smart phone, but a REAL computer. I would not worry about getting 8.1, certainly not enough to go back to 7, not worth it in hassle, money or features.
Post edited at 13:36
In reply to John2:
According to Microsoft : 7 8 9. Which is why 10 is next.
> Whatever happened to Windows 9?
According to Microsoft : 7 8 9. Which is why 10 is next.
In reply to Kipper:
> >.. I suppose not many people would appreciate MVS jokes these days.
I would. S**t, , I even remember OS/360. Did you ever play Startrek on MVS during those long nights?Post edited at 14:09
1
In reply to John2:
One theory is that there is still code out there that finds out if it is in Win 95 or 98 by checking the first digit of the OS.
> Whatever happened to Windows 9?
One theory is that there is still code out there that finds out if it is in Win 95 or 98 by checking the first digit of the OS.
In reply to MikeTS:
Yes; and OS/360 (just).
> I would. S**t, , I even remember OS/360. Did you ever play Startrek on MVS during those long nights?
Yes; and OS/360 (just).
In reply to Kipper:
I worked briefly on an IMS database system. The users were allowed to create their own online help transactions and one of the engineers who were the main users of our application asked if I'd tried the 'UFO' transaction. It turned out that this was the key to a whole subculture of user entered "help" that had been used surreptitiously to create a "chat" facility about UFOs etc. I won't say who the very large employer was except to say that they are known to practically everyone in Britain.
I worked briefly on an IMS database system. The users were allowed to create their own online help transactions and one of the engineers who were the main users of our application asked if I'd tried the 'UFO' transaction. It turned out that this was the key to a whole subculture of user entered "help" that had been used surreptitiously to create a "chat" facility about UFOs etc. I won't say who the very large employer was except to say that they are known to practically everyone in Britain.
In reply to kevin stephens:
You don't need Parallels, run it dual boot. From what I've been reading Win 10 Beta runs better on a Macbook than Yosemite.
D
You don't need Parallels, run it dual boot. From what I've been reading Win 10 Beta runs better on a Macbook than Yosemite.
D
In reply to herbe_rouge:
It's BSD/NeXTSTEP isn't rather than Linux? Which bits are Linux?
Also what can't you take control of?
If you were talking about IOS I'd agree but what can't you do on OSX?
I'm guessing this is tongue in cheek but...
most people don't want to run apps that supercomputers are used for, they want to edit documents, browse the web, edit photos etc and OSX is pretty good at doing those kind of things.
The problem with Linux is not Linux, it's the interface on top of it. The user experience on Linux which is still pretty poor in a lot of ways, Ubuntu has gone downhill after trying to simplify the desktop so it was more in keeping with interfaces for tablets, a bit like Windows 8 did. I don't want a tablet interface on my desktop!
If they sorted that out I'd be a happy user of Linux (I'm currently a not particularly happy user of Linux, a reasonably happy user of OSX and Windows 7 and a "what on earth have they done to it" user of Windows 8.1).
> Mac OS is linux re-wrapped and locked down so that the user cannot take control of the device they bought without remarkable effort and expertise. By analogy, consider the manufacturer of your nice new shiny belay device approaching you at the rocks and prohibiting use of the device because they decided you should not use it in the fashion of your choosing. The same control issue is inherent in Windows, albeit much of that is due to the inherent weakness in Microsoft's development.
It's BSD/NeXTSTEP isn't rather than Linux? Which bits are Linux?
Also what can't you take control of?
If you were talking about IOS I'd agree but what can't you do on OSX?
> There is a good reason why 95% of the top 500 supercomputers in the world run linux - it's because it is a far better operating system. It's also free, as are the applications that run on it. It is also entirely possible to emulate other OS on linux (again for free) if needed. Moreover, the more of us that use it, the better it gets and the more accessible it will be to those who would otherwise struggle to afford the technology. Choose life, choose linux
I'm guessing this is tongue in cheek but...
most people don't want to run apps that supercomputers are used for, they want to edit documents, browse the web, edit photos etc and OSX is pretty good at doing those kind of things.
The problem with Linux is not Linux, it's the interface on top of it. The user experience on Linux which is still pretty poor in a lot of ways, Ubuntu has gone downhill after trying to simplify the desktop so it was more in keeping with interfaces for tablets, a bit like Windows 8 did. I don't want a tablet interface on my desktop!
If they sorted that out I'd be a happy user of Linux (I'm currently a not particularly happy user of Linux, a reasonably happy user of OSX and Windows 7 and a "what on earth have they done to it" user of Windows 8.1).
In reply to kevin stephens:
We have a MacBook Air and it is amazing. We have also just bought a laptop with Windows 8.1 on it for our office and I have to say it is utter crap.
It's really clunky, too much crap cluttering the place up and generally the laptop seems so outdated it's unreal. All this navigating to different parts of the computer, press this and that and it just seems so old fashioned and they are clearly trying to make things better but all of it just seems so unnecessary.
It's going back and we will save for another Mac. I just wanted to throw the thing out the window!
We have a MacBook Air and it is amazing. We have also just bought a laptop with Windows 8.1 on it for our office and I have to say it is utter crap.
It's really clunky, too much crap cluttering the place up and generally the laptop seems so outdated it's unreal. All this navigating to different parts of the computer, press this and that and it just seems so old fashioned and they are clearly trying to make things better but all of it just seems so unnecessary.
It's going back and we will save for another Mac. I just wanted to throw the thing out the window!
In reply to MeMeMe:
Yes you're right, the kernel is a BSD/XNU hybrid - part of the Unix family.
In terms of taking control, what I said is that OSX puts up often tall and unnecessary hurdles, for instance, to login in as root is, by Apple's own account, a 10 stage process. Network and system administration is similarly opaque and useful tools like iptables either do not exist or are deprecated in favour of GUIs that do half the job.
Granted, much of this might not appear to be relevant to the 'average user' but it affects them directly because the system is bloated and therefore runs far slower than linux. The main reason that Linux is used on virtually all supercomputers is because it is faster - this is relevant to the average user because it means that the user can browse the web, edit documents etc at the same speed with a less powerful machine. In turn that means they can buy a cheaper computer and consume less power whilst doing the same thing. I
Alternatively, the average user can pay Apple or Microsoft for an inferior OS that requires more expensive hardware to do the same thing and requires the user to pay for software, OS upgrades and 'support' to find their way through the opacity of the inferior OS. You're right, the user experience does need to be enhanced in Linux, mainly due to strategic errors in the development of Gnome 3 but the advantages over OSX and windows far outweigh this.
Yes you're right, the kernel is a BSD/XNU hybrid - part of the Unix family.
In terms of taking control, what I said is that OSX puts up often tall and unnecessary hurdles, for instance, to login in as root is, by Apple's own account, a 10 stage process. Network and system administration is similarly opaque and useful tools like iptables either do not exist or are deprecated in favour of GUIs that do half the job.
Granted, much of this might not appear to be relevant to the 'average user' but it affects them directly because the system is bloated and therefore runs far slower than linux. The main reason that Linux is used on virtually all supercomputers is because it is faster - this is relevant to the average user because it means that the user can browse the web, edit documents etc at the same speed with a less powerful machine. In turn that means they can buy a cheaper computer and consume less power whilst doing the same thing. I
Alternatively, the average user can pay Apple or Microsoft for an inferior OS that requires more expensive hardware to do the same thing and requires the user to pay for software, OS upgrades and 'support' to find their way through the opacity of the inferior OS. You're right, the user experience does need to be enhanced in Linux, mainly due to strategic errors in the development of Gnome 3 but the advantages over OSX and windows far outweigh this.
In reply to herbe_rouge:
Or just 'sudo bash' in a terminal if you want a root shell.
Most linux distributions discourage users from login as root too for good reason.
I think the tools are just different and people just prefer what they are used to and are understandably unfamiliar with equivalent tools on other platforms (pf is what you want on OSX rather than iptables).
OSX does generally let you do on the command line anything you can do in a GUI but it's usually just much easier in a GUI, I don't really see any difference between Linux and OSX in this regard.
<rant chopped>
You pays your money and makes your choice. If I wasn't paying (which I'm not) I'd take a Mac with OSX because it offers a superior experience (for more money!) but not an experience that could be matched by any current Linux distribution at any price.
If I was paying then I'd have a more difficult decision!
> Yes you're right, the kernel is a BSD/XNU hybrid - part of the Unix family.
> In terms of taking control, what I said is that OSX puts up often tall and unnecessary hurdles, for instance, to login in as root is, by Apple's own account, a 10 stage process.
Or just 'sudo bash' in a terminal if you want a root shell.
Most linux distributions discourage users from login as root too for good reason.
> Network and system administration is similarly opaque and useful tools like iptables either do not exist or are deprecated in favour of GUIs that do half the job.
I think the tools are just different and people just prefer what they are used to and are understandably unfamiliar with equivalent tools on other platforms (pf is what you want on OSX rather than iptables).
OSX does generally let you do on the command line anything you can do in a GUI but it's usually just much easier in a GUI, I don't really see any difference between Linux and OSX in this regard.
<rant chopped>
You pays your money and makes your choice. If I wasn't paying (which I'm not) I'd take a Mac with OSX because it offers a superior experience (for more money!) but not an experience that could be matched by any current Linux distribution at any price.
If I was paying then I'd have a more difficult decision!
In reply to wercat:
> I worked briefly on an IMS database system.
IMS! Where IBM thinks the whole world is hierarchical. Software reflects the structure of its author.In reply to MikeTS:
as was pointed out at the time - for some applications its performance was critical - absolutely minimal IO to get to the record you want, but the price is by following horrible pointer chains. But, much as I like relational databases, I had to concede its performance for the time critical applications it ran on a huge scale. But I didn;t like it!
Anyone remember ARTEMIS 9000/EX or its parents running on HP1000s?
as was pointed out at the time - for some applications its performance was critical - absolutely minimal IO to get to the record you want, but the price is by following horrible pointer chains. But, much as I like relational databases, I had to concede its performance for the time critical applications it ran on a huge scale. But I didn;t like it!
Anyone remember ARTEMIS 9000/EX or its parents running on HP1000s?
Post edited at 16:34
In reply to MeMeMe:
That's not the same as logging in as root and there is absolutely no reason to make the process so long-winded or opaque. Anyone who is logging in as root should know the implications of doing so - the average user is not going to accidentally log in and type rm -rf /.
Nope, most distros don't but I believe Ubuntu frowns upon it.
I know, I work with both platforms. The difference is apple ship OSX server with a configuration error that means no rules actually get loaded by pfctl.
As I said, there are fewer hurdles in Linux.
The 'rant' is the part relevant to most people - the 'average' user wants something that boots and performs quickly. The 'rant' explains that linux does this cheaper than either Windows or OSX.
Here comes the real rant:
You are paying - virtually every school in the UK pays for Microsoft licenses. The same is true of UK universities, Government departments etc..... Everything that is done on these machines could be done without paying for any software whatsoever and could be run on cheaper hardware with no performance loss. The saving on public expenditure would be massive.
my, what fun.....
> Or just 'sudo bash' in a terminal if you want a root shell.
That's not the same as logging in as root and there is absolutely no reason to make the process so long-winded or opaque. Anyone who is logging in as root should know the implications of doing so - the average user is not going to accidentally log in and type rm -rf /.
> Most linux distributions discourage users from login as root too for good reason.
Nope, most distros don't but I believe Ubuntu frowns upon it.
> I think the tools are just different and people just prefer what they are used to and are understandably unfamiliar with equivalent tools on other platforms (pf is what you want on OSX rather than iptables).
I know, I work with both platforms. The difference is apple ship OSX server with a configuration error that means no rules actually get loaded by pfctl.
> OSX does generally let you do on the command line anything you can do in a GUI but it's usually just much easier in a GUI, I don't really see any difference between Linux and OSX in this regard.
As I said, there are fewer hurdles in Linux.
> <rant chopped>
The 'rant' is the part relevant to most people - the 'average' user wants something that boots and performs quickly. The 'rant' explains that linux does this cheaper than either Windows or OSX.
> If I was paying then I'd have a more difficult decision!
Here comes the real rant:
You are paying - virtually every school in the UK pays for Microsoft licenses. The same is true of UK universities, Government departments etc..... Everything that is done on these machines could be done without paying for any software whatsoever and could be run on cheaper hardware with no performance loss. The saving on public expenditure would be massive.
my, what fun.....
1
In reply to herbe_rouge:
I just wish that the industries that I need to buy products and services from were as focused on giving stuff away and bombing prices as the one I work in.
> You are paying - virtually every school in the UK pays for Microsoft licenses. The same is true of UK universities, Government departments etc..... Everything that is done on these machines could be done without paying for any software whatsoever and could be run on cheaper hardware with no performance loss. The saving on public expenditure would be massive.
I just wish that the industries that I need to buy products and services from were as focused on giving stuff away and bombing prices as the one I work in.
1
In reply to herbe_rouge:
At home I work on a 7 year old W7 2 GB machine and need to replace it.
I'd love a Mac, but they are very expensive, and now that I find myself using open source software (R, Latex, Git etc) for most of what I do, I am happy to entertain the idea of going over to Linux.
If I were to do that, do I go for any old hardware, just as long as it has enough RAM, or are there particular finicky requirements? Sound and vision just need to be OK.
Which Linux would I go for? If I am going to use Linux, it seems silly to buy a machine with W X.Y installed on it, but if I buy a bare bones machine, how do I get it on there? Make a CD etc of it first and install from that?
I am moderately, but not properly(as you can see) techy, if that makes sense.
At home I work on a 7 year old W7 2 GB machine and need to replace it.
I'd love a Mac, but they are very expensive, and now that I find myself using open source software (R, Latex, Git etc) for most of what I do, I am happy to entertain the idea of going over to Linux.
If I were to do that, do I go for any old hardware, just as long as it has enough RAM, or are there particular finicky requirements? Sound and vision just need to be OK.
Which Linux would I go for? If I am going to use Linux, it seems silly to buy a machine with W X.Y installed on it, but if I buy a bare bones machine, how do I get it on there? Make a CD etc of it first and install from that?
I am moderately, but not properly(as you can see) techy, if that makes sense.
In reply to mbh:
Any reasonably modern PC will run well and both Intel and AMD processors are supported. In terms of 'which Linux', this depends very much on your tastes/ needs etc. The only major division in Linux is in terms of what is called 'package management' which is basically how you get software on the machine - some use a Red Hat based system (RPM), others use a Debian based system (apt) - Nothing wrong with either but I'd go Debian by choice. These package managers will allow you to install R, Latex etc with the press of a button.
Distributions like Ubuntu are updated frequently and tend to go for a user experience similar to Windows/Mac. Ubuntu is based on the Debian kernel but with a modern desktop/interface look. The Debian distribution itself is only updated after exhaustive testing so bugs are rare but the feel of the environment is more spartan/dated (I like it!). I haven't used Red Hat for over a decade so can't really comment. Fortunately, it's easy to try out the various distributions quickly and painlessly. Many distributions have a live cd/dvd/usb image option - just download the one(s) you want to try, burn to cd, insert in the dvd reader and reboot your old W7 machine which will then boot up in Linux. A list of live cd distributions can be found here http://livecdlist.com/
If you're persuaded that you want to go with one of the Linux distros you try out then I agree, really not worth paying for a machine with Windows pre-installed. You'll make a big saving buying a machine with no OS (chekout places like ebuyer or yoyotech) and installation is simply a question of inserting your live CD in the bare-bones machine and then pressing the "Install" button.
Choosing hardware is really a question of what you're going to do with it. If you're using R to run a t test then a modest spec will be fine, if you're running Machine Learning Algorithms on terrabytes of data you're going to need something a bit flashier. Either way, you'll need less processing power by far than you will under Windows. Might even be worth creating a partition on your old W7 and installing your favourite linux. You can then dual boot and evaluate how much quicker the old PC runs under Linux which should give you some idea of what spec you need.
Hope this helps.
Any reasonably modern PC will run well and both Intel and AMD processors are supported. In terms of 'which Linux', this depends very much on your tastes/ needs etc. The only major division in Linux is in terms of what is called 'package management' which is basically how you get software on the machine - some use a Red Hat based system (RPM), others use a Debian based system (apt) - Nothing wrong with either but I'd go Debian by choice. These package managers will allow you to install R, Latex etc with the press of a button.
Distributions like Ubuntu are updated frequently and tend to go for a user experience similar to Windows/Mac. Ubuntu is based on the Debian kernel but with a modern desktop/interface look. The Debian distribution itself is only updated after exhaustive testing so bugs are rare but the feel of the environment is more spartan/dated (I like it!). I haven't used Red Hat for over a decade so can't really comment. Fortunately, it's easy to try out the various distributions quickly and painlessly. Many distributions have a live cd/dvd/usb image option - just download the one(s) you want to try, burn to cd, insert in the dvd reader and reboot your old W7 machine which will then boot up in Linux. A list of live cd distributions can be found here http://livecdlist.com/
If you're persuaded that you want to go with one of the Linux distros you try out then I agree, really not worth paying for a machine with Windows pre-installed. You'll make a big saving buying a machine with no OS (chekout places like ebuyer or yoyotech) and installation is simply a question of inserting your live CD in the bare-bones machine and then pressing the "Install" button.
Choosing hardware is really a question of what you're going to do with it. If you're using R to run a t test then a modest spec will be fine, if you're running Machine Learning Algorithms on terrabytes of data you're going to need something a bit flashier. Either way, you'll need less processing power by far than you will under Windows. Might even be worth creating a partition on your old W7 and installing your favourite linux. You can then dual boot and evaluate how much quicker the old PC runs under Linux which should give you some idea of what spec you need.
Hope this helps.
2
In reply to MeMeMe:
You know that you don't have to use the default desktop?
It's not Ubuntu that dumbed down the interface, they just made a really bad decision to stick with Gnome as default when they moved to the abomination that is Gnome 3.
Choose any other desktop you like, or make Gnome Classic your choice.
For me Gnome 2 was pretty much perfect. That and a black terminal with green text.
> The problem with Linux is not Linux, it's the interface on top of it. The user experience on Linux which is still pretty poor in a lot of ways, Ubuntu has gone downhill after trying to simplify the desktop so it was more in keeping with interfaces for tablets, a bit like Windows 8 did. I don't want a tablet interface on my desktop!
> If they sorted that out I'd be a happy user of Linux (I'm currently a not particularly happy user of Linux, a reasonably happy user of OSX and Windows 7 and a "what on earth have they done to it" user of Windows 8.1).
You know that you don't have to use the default desktop?
It's not Ubuntu that dumbed down the interface, they just made a really bad decision to stick with Gnome as default when they moved to the abomination that is Gnome 3.
Choose any other desktop you like, or make Gnome Classic your choice.
For me Gnome 2 was pretty much perfect. That and a black terminal with green text.
1
In reply to interdit:
Couldn't agree more - which is why I still run Debian squeeze at home....
> You know that you don't have to use the default desktop?
> It's not Ubuntu that dumbed down the interface, they just made a really bad decision to stick with Gnome as default when they moved to the abomination that is Gnome 3.
> Choose any other desktop you like, or make Gnome Classic your choice.
> For me Gnome 2 was pretty much perfect. That and a black terminal with green text.
Couldn't agree more - which is why I still run Debian squeeze at home....
1
In reply to herbe_rouge:
I run OpenSuse on one machine at work and an old Debian system on another (it's for a contract and what the customer uses). Our demo boxes run Ubuntu which TBH I'm not that fussed about though that's the UI rather than the kernel. At my previous employer we ran RedHat Fedora.
I run OpenSuse on one machine at work and an old Debian system on another (it's for a contract and what the customer uses). Our demo boxes run Ubuntu which TBH I'm not that fussed about though that's the UI rather than the kernel. At my previous employer we ran RedHat Fedora.
1
In reply to wercat:
I spent a number of years developing a 'post-relational' (in marketing speak ) database - both on and off mainframe. All the kids of today seem to think of is something with SQL in the name; even if it's NoSQL, which just seems a throwback to stuff done years ago with some of the important database stuff (like ACID, backups etc.) thrown out because they're not really important
> ... much as I like relational databases, ...
I spent a number of years developing a 'post-relational' (in marketing speak ) database - both on and off mainframe. All the kids of today seem to think of is something with SQL in the name; even if it's NoSQL, which just seems a throwback to stuff done years ago with some of the important database stuff (like ACID, backups etc.) thrown out because they're not really important
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Loading Notifications...