Ok, so maybe not entirely so, but I got you to click on the thread. Not that I can fairly evaluate a Mac since I really don't feel like spending $1,400 to upgrade my hardware (i.e. buy a new mac system) so that I can use the OS. However, I kinda agree with this guy when it comes to using Linux for schools/businesses, but it's still pretty neat for personal use if your adept at stuff into Google and have a few hours to get things worked out. Anyways, the main idea for this thread is:

... but extended to all operating systems... so, let 'er rip, but please refrain from brainless suxors or rox0rs comments.

windows xp r0x0rz

ok, fair enough...but be warned, any flaming will get you shot down and shut out

My view point:

It depends on what you want...

I use Linux at home to mess around with..my "home server" is Ubuntu Linux, running the free VMware server, so I can run "virtual machines" and create "labs" for scenarios I need to test for studying/learning/testing etc.
At home, on a desktop/laptop, it did not suite my requirements, but I was impressed...

I use Linux at work, as we are running the big version of VMware with the whole High Availability VMware cluster etc. (i.e. if one of our "hosts" goes offline, the virtual machines currently running {WIndows Servers} on that host automaticaly startup on another host), Dynamic Resources Availability (you can move virtual machines between hosts with no interruption of the virtual machine, the users do not even know it has been moved around). It works very well, but is not the answer to everything.
The linux OS that runs these boxes is rock solid.

I haven't used the Mac OS's much...only fiddled a bit when given the opportunity, so I can't really comment...

I used to be fairly highly certified on the Novell systems (ha...you didn't think of that as an OS did you!), but I haven't kept up with it, as I do not encounter those systems much, as here in South Africa, most enterprises run Windows environments. I did work on those systems for a good number of years, and the server OS's are very good...but they are specialised for server type setups!

I have to say I am a Windows guy...

I hold several Microsoft certifications for their products, and all my work is 95% Windows environment based (the other being the VMware linux boxes, and a small bit of AS/400).
This is because my work is supporting enterprise infrastructures/systems with a good number of users, based accross a very large geographical area. So I can say, I have a lot of experience with the Windows versions, going all the way back to Windows 3.1 (and of course DOS before that, but Windows is the subject).

Windows is a very good product. It does achieve a lot. Bill G worked hard for his money, and he did change the way the world looks at computers...he did create a standard. If you don't believe me, go and dig up the history...and while you are at it, the history of Apple and HP see if you can find the connection

Bill made some good deals way back when, when the computer was still a new thing, to get his product(s) sold (DOS and before), so he got his stuff on to a lot of machines. He then didn't sit around...he made something to try and make the computer easier to work, which turned out to be a graphical system, which he just kept improving...because he delivered a lot, made his name known, he got his stuff on a lot of PC's, thus it has become the most common OS world wide.

Windows is good, does a lot, and if you know you're way around it, you can make it do lots of things for you...

BUT, in conclusion, ALL Operating Systems are made by PEOPLE....people make mistakes!! Thus ALL OS's have faults...because the MS Windows code is not available to the public, it just means less people can look at it and find some of those faults, same with Apple...also remember, Microsoft and Apple are businesses, Linux people do not make money off the OS, they make the majority their money off the support (and donations etc.).

As for the Apple people, although the Mac OS's are good and are competition for Windows, they have lost their way a bit, and if you look at the company stratagies, they aim at other markets more than the OS market these days...

Final conclusion: There are a lot of OS's out there, the one you use, is the one you will be comfortable using, can afford, and it does what you need it to !! Competition is good, choice is good

PS: Sorry for the long post, but if you stick through it, you might just benefit

PSS: Computers in the home have only been around for about the last 10+ years, yes, PC's have been around for about 30yrs, but it is only for the last few years that they have been a "common" item in a household. As far as time goes, that's a LOT of advancements in technology in a short amount of time! I dare you to write down what you think we will have in 10yrs time from now, go and save it in the bank safety box or something and look at it in 10yrs time

Windows isn't a bad OS but I dislike is the deals and the Microsoft's methods to force the people to buy their OS, Linux is free but it's more for advanced users than beginners even if ubuntu, and many linux versions try to make their use more easy than the firsts linux OS versions.
The MAC is a complete machine in therms of software and hardware, when we buy a MAC we buy a machine made by Macintosh, it's not the case with a standard PC, Microsoft have only made the software part.
The only thing is if Microsoft wants to make an Xbox with windows they have the rights, but normally in a PC it's not normal because it's an independent machine, and it's not normal the softwares editors made only windows softwares for computers and consoles console versions and never made a MAC and a Linux version, many users wants to use Linux or even the MAC, but they are forced to use Windows because the editors think it's a little market ...

They are sleezy meatballs, but that doesn't mean they force the customers to buy the OS. Many websites and stores have for sale PC towers with no software or external hardware included, it will be supplied by the one who buys it.

If a customer is not ready to do some research prior to buying a computer, s/he will likely end up with Windows XP or Vista and plenty of useless crap supplied by the manufacturer.

Yes but most people doesn't make any research because they doesn't know somethings about computers, even if we can find sometimes PCs without softwares. When I bought my first PC I knew only the MAC and PCs with Windows and DOS ... I knew Linux/Unix and other computer forms only When I got Internet and by some friends ...

That is exactly what research is for. The information is there, if you are too lazy to inform yourself, then face the consequences.

So, what you're saying is that the main problem people ahve with computers and the war about which one to choose is really just a matter of educating the public on how to use computer and then use Google for everything unknown?

As for sleezy meatball stuff, you're talking about things like the new Microsoft Office saving documents as .docx, which nothing else can read? I recall having visited this website where someone wrote about how to handle situations where somebody sends you a docx file, replying with something about saving it as an open file format and that this is just an attempt at microsoft to force people to buy the newest Office.

As a side not, found this site that has some really funny spoofs on the Mac commercials. Slight bias towards Pc, I think, but the vids spit on all the popular operating systems jsut the same.
http://tv.truenuff.com/mac/

About the OS I think this OS can be the true alternative to windows
It's a windows clone like Linux is the Unix clone, it on alpha version and some further versions stay and are alpha

the link: [url=hyperlink url]http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html[/url]

Yes. Knowing the available options and their cons & pros will give each individual the ability to make an intelligent choice that fits his/her needs best.

The internet is full of information about everything from computer science to overclocking. I have no idea how the latter works so I will naturally read about it before doing anything stupid, just like you would read about each type of OS/computer before buying anything that has no relation with your plans. For example it would be nonsensical to buy a Mac solely for gaming.

Yes, you don't buy a house without finding out everything about it, the neighbourhood etc. If you want a new microwave, you find out about all the features etc. so you know which one you want, and which ones are rip-offs.

Same goes for a car....oh wait, some people do just go buy a car without thinking....

i dont know why people hate windows so much, i have never had any stability problems and with the proper spyware/virus protection i have never had any problems with windows. in fact i quite enjoy using windows, because i really find task manager extremely useful. i dont know, i just feel like i have more control over my computer with windows than with a mac. of course i would have more control using linux but i think if it aint broke, dont fix it, plus if i used linux i would have to keep switching b/w windows and linux for different programs, but with windows i can run everything. i never really saw why people disliked windows, i always thought it was a good operating system. also i HATED the mac when i was little because of a lack of a right click, it was such a hastle to keep on holding control everytime i wanted to open a menu, plus with OS X you cant make it ugly and fast, its always pretty and slow, but with windows i just turn off themes and BAM speed was doubled and the only difference is it is less colorful.

It is just a matter of taste and luck.
I don't have any anti-spyware installed and just use AVG 8.0 (which I normally don't keep running in the sys. tray), and my computer is always solid and working great.

I guess I am just very lucky and know how to use Windows properly after 14 years of experience, everything from 3.1 to XP.

My guess is that many people used Windows during its 9x/ME days, hated it and never looked back. To be honest I don't blame them. . .

yeah, those ones were kinda crappy if you comare them to XP and Vista. But they were new and good in their day, if you compared them to Win3.1, although ME was a total flop. ME was so buggy, you just had to look sideways at it, and it would fall over. BUT most of 95/98's problems were hardware related. If you had good stable hardware, then they worked well.
Same goes for XP and Vista.

That is a minor annoyance to the tech savvies, but the average user would be scared to hell and back seeing a blue screen of death pop up out of nowhere.

lol, yeah.
I've also been very impressed with a couple of blue screens of death we got on Vista....it was like...blue...with no writing, no dump codes, no error messages...just a lot of blue!

Seems their blue screen dump also doesn't work now and then

Either that or it is yet another feature of Vista's babysitting measures.

After a year, I have not seen any BSODs in Vista. I got a couple in XP when I was playing around with my FSB speeds, but those were my fault. Aside from overclocking, I don't think I've had any BSODs in the past couple years. I've had my share of frustrating lags, unresponsive programs that max my CPU usage and just won't die, and such things, but no BSOD.

Someday, I'm gonna build the safest operating system in the world that NEVER crashes. When you turn on the power, it will display a message: "You may mess things up, so I'm gonna shut down, now", then power off. It will be glitch free and cannot be broken by any users.

That statement contradicts with itself.

Safe operating systems are required to crash?

No, an operating system that doesn't crash when it encounters a problem it doesn't know how to deal with will possibly be the end of your computer. In other words; an OS that doesn't crash can't by any means be safe. You can make it as stable as you wish, but that doesn't mean 3rd party software will be that way as well.

This is no different from the way biology works. When the brain "crashes" it is a safety measure to prevent damage. And as with biology, operating systems are just too big to make them completely bulletproof. It is mathematically possible, but that's about it.

You're comparing two vastly differnet things, Bjossi. i was joking about a flawless OS that did nothing except shut down immediately upon startup, where you talked about the necessity of an OS to shut down when it tries to do stuff and fails. However, you are right that the BSOD itself is not bad, it's just a sign that something bad happened, like the FSB is too fast for the internal CPU cache refresh rate. or something messed up big time and Windows cannot recover except by restarting everything.

in tyser's operating system, there would be no 3rd party applications, because you cant install them since the computer would just turn off right after it started.

Exactly, which is why it would never crash. Just a joke... nevermind.

My ultimate operating system: Only allows programs that are able to be decompiled and recompiled 100 times in a row without crashing. So that means... you got long load times so you'll never end up really caring to use it!

The best thing for an OS is to just have a TON of fail-safes programmed in. That is the safest OS.

Don't forget the slowest OS, and the most restricted OS.

The rule was just the safest one. Didn't say safest for a certain thing, so this OS would be safest to itself (never corrupting itself by crashing for example).

Of course, I have one thing that could still break even this OS: unplugged for weeks.

My computer has been on the total wack (is that even a word? I didn't feel like putting much effort in thinking of a word...) since it's had to be unplugged for a while... the entire keyboard and mouse freeze up for 2 seconds in UT2004 at times...!

Are you sure that isn't just occasional stutter?

Never happened before the hurricane blew threw. Usually UT runs at about 30 FPS. For SOME reason... it runs at 60 now (with same settings), and also has the occassional mouse/keyboard jam (like moving forward after I let go of the W key still for a second or two).

You aren't using a wireless mouse/keyboard, are you? That'd be my only guess towards input lag.