Jump to content

OS Discussion


raemeredith

Recommended Posts

I tried to keep track of all the posts that I would have liked to quote throughout this 8-page topic... but since I got lost around page 6 or so, I'll recite from memory:

 

Firstly, I believe that every OS has particular benefits and downfalls, and what you run signifies what a computer means to you (mostly). Linux is the best for servers, etc., Mac is outstanding with design, etc., and Windows rocks with performance gaming. Unfortunately, no one can figure out how to combine these elements (yet) into one kick-ass system as efficiently as is needed to do it all at once as well as if they were still stand-alone. So, the masses that don't know what "dual-booting" means (or any other method of working two systems at once) are stuck with what they have. Not to mention that crossing over is not only difficult, but very very expensive. Which is why most people just go with a pc running Windows and are happier than clams. Thus, most products (games, especially) that come out for computers are made for Windows.

 

But that leaves the "specialist" users out in the rain when it comes to the newest, coolest games. Most of the real, productive nerds of the computer world run Macs and Linux machines, not because they are neccessarily better (although I must plug for Apple, which rules), but because they are better suited for what the user needs. Someone made the comment that Macs are "technically far superior" to a pc, but (to developers and producers) it doesn't make economical sense to mass produce a game for a small percentage of the computer population. Some companies tailor their games to the systems that will run them the best... Savage (an entirely online game), for instance, was made available for Linux because the game developers -knew- that Linux means a rock-solid server. Many many design and music applications are made exclusively for Macs because these machines are owned by people who do nothing else in life than design and/or make music. And though I mean not to offend, it is painfully true that most computer newbies run to Windows because it's cheaper and much easier to get ahold of than any other system, thus most of the popular software is exclusive to Windows.

 

Someone also made the comment about Virtual PC... I'll give advice I recieved from experience with that damnable program: it eats everything memory-wise. We've got a nearly new G4 Powerbook, and Virtual PC slogged the poor thing down to even slower than the pace of our 5-year-old iMac (which is actually getting along fairly well with Panther, though Tiger will be a stretch). Running a game (even on minimal settings) on that would be like trying to get a half-ton woman to sprint across a football field.

 

I believe the original topic was simply asking if Obsidian was even considering making versions for Mac and Linux. Again, someone stated earlier that most Mac users have accepted the fact that games will always be just out of reach, and I am one of them. I have argued with myself over the audacity of buying another machine just to run games, but there aren't many other options. I love my Mac (and Unix!) and wouldn't think of abandoning it for Windows and DOS, and most penguins I know are staunchly against leaving their OS for another as well. We just have to hope and pray that one day, maybe in the future, producers will recognise us as a valid percentage of the gaming community. Until then, we're not giving up our high-paying design and programming positions, and I'm "stuck" with the small niche blues.

 

Much love to the Window-stompers,

Meagan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[snip]

 

(As a side note, your apple isnt any more secure or stable then my xp pro or w2k box. Please stop spreading FUD.)

 

Please direct your anger at atari and their forums. thank you.

 

I just wanted to add my two cents onto this comment, which itself is a load of FUD.

for one thing any OS X mac straight out of the box is more secure than a w2k or xp machine (again comparing like with like, the PC is straight out of the box) simply because all but the needed ports on the mac are closed whereas all the ports on the windows box are open. Straight away the attack surface of the PC is greater than the mac.

 

Then lets add in the many more security updates that windows needs compared to macs and finally add in the fact that 99% (or thereabouts) of all virii, malware and spyware are written for the PC platform whereas the mac has approx 40 virii in TOTAL and you can see that the mac is head and shoulders more secure than the PC.

 

I won't even begin to say what I think about the stability issues, but a sys based on BSD compared to winblows - puhleeze!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets not turn this into an OS war, everybody here is savy enough to already having decided what OS they want to run. I personally run Gentoo in particular because I love it, not because I plan to stick it to anyone.

 

As to Obsidian, all I ask is that you guys push the issue, but I understand that Atari has the last word, one of the reason most people are posting here is because you are the only ones with any say that will listen, Bioware points here, and Atari is hard to reach. I imagine the best bet is to get a petition going so that we can get Atari's attention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was actually going to quote you,  but I couldnt allow myself to repeat that mess, even for a quote

 

 

 

This is truely the biggest load of crap I have read in the last 6 months, easy. Do you work for SCO?

 

This post is just irritating. Its th spread of this kind of complete and utter mis-information that hurts the linux (and mac) community.

 

I dont even know where to begin with this...

 

1.) Where you get off saying, "crossing over is not only difficult, but very very expensive", is lost on me. Linux is free to download where as MS Windows costs $199, or adds $99 to the msrp of a new pc.

 

2.) Windows is about as performance oriented as a school bus.

 

3.) Security... why bother.

 

4.).... Nevermind this is ridiculous. Its a good thing Im not a moderator because I would delete your reply to this thread and ban you from this site for a week.

 

Arrgh... I need more coffe. :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with every knock you just posted on Windows. I use Unix, Win2k, WinXP, and AS/400 every day. I've used tons of operating systems from Lindows, to Linux, to beOS, to GEOS, to AmigaOS, to System 6 through OS X, OS/2 Warp, DOS 3 to 6.22, Windows 3.11, Novel DOS, etc. etc.

 

I can point out flaws in all of them, including the much beloved Linux (of you pick your flavor). If you're going to rip on someone for making argumentative comments on OSes, then don't be a hypocrite. Most people are running the operating system that they desire to run, and aren't going to change because someone told them off in a public forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with every knock you just posted on Windows.  I use Unix, Win2k, WinXP, and AS/400 every day.  I've used tons of operating systems from Lindows, to Linux, to beOS, to GEOS, to AmigaOS, to System 6 through OS X, OS/2 Warp, DOS 3 to 6.22, Windows 3.11, Novel DOS, etc. etc.

 

I can point out flaws in all of them, including the much beloved Linux (of you pick your flavor).  If you're going to rip on someone for making argumentative comments on OSes, then don't be a hypocrite.  Most people are running the operating system that they desire to run, and aren't going to change because someone told them off in a public forum.

 

 

I never said linux was flawless, and I dont expect someone to change because of my comments. What I said was that the information posted was crap and for the most part wrong. At least that's what I was going for.

 

This paticular statement. "Most people are running the operating system that they desire to run", is wrong. Lets assume for a minute that all the statistics taken are correct and Microsoft dominates 94% of the desktop market. Also, most if not all retail PCs come pre-installed with a MS OS. Then what you qualify as "most people" probably dont know any better and / or dont know they have a choice. Thats why Microsoft was declared a monopoly.

 

Lets keep this on topic though shall we, I am guilty of going out of scope as well.

 

Peace

 

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally would like to see all OS's supported. Its not that I don't like windows but it has cornered the market as far as operating systems are concerned and it shows. I am also the type of person that wants some of you Linux guys to make a Linux based OS that anyone can install and run in a PC. The only reason I have never installed Linux is from what I understand I would have enough programming knowledge to get the job done.

 

 

To the gentleman who said there are more virusus for windows than Mac. I agree but as a hacker sending malicious code out to do damage doesn't it make more sense to attack windows since you will reach more people? I think there would naturally be more viruses for the OS that has the most users.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[snip]

 

(As a side note, your apple isnt any more secure or stable then my xp pro or w2k box. Please stop spreading FUD.)

 

Please direct your anger at atari and their forums. thank you.

 

I just wanted to add my two cents onto this comment, which itself is a load of FUD.

for one thing any OS X mac straight out of the box is more secure than a w2k or xp machine (again comparing like with like, the PC is straight out of the box) simply because all but the needed ports on the mac are closed whereas all the ports on the windows box are open. Straight away the attack surface of the PC is greater than the mac.

 

Then lets add in the many more security updates that windows needs compared to macs and finally add in the fact that 99% (or thereabouts) of all virii, malware and spyware are written for the PC platform whereas the mac has approx 40 virii in TOTAL and you can see that the mac is head and shoulders more secure than the PC.

 

I won't even begin to say what I think about the stability issues, but a sys based on BSD compared to winblows - puhleeze!!!!!

 

 

While I dont want to turn this either into a OS war this needs to be addressed.

 

First what fairly skilled PC user (of ANY os) uses said os right from the box without tweaking/patching/locking it down in some way, shape or form?

 

Last time I ran redhat I did a update check and had a few dozen megs of patches it suggested.

 

So yes, ANY os, not just win32, out of the box has flaws and exploits, its up to the end user to be somewhat educated on their platform of choice and beable to secure it.

 

Also if you follow secuirty bulletins you will find many exploits in ALL OSes, linux and the mac is not immune. Plus since the user base of win32 is so vastly larger, its no surprise there are more people gunning to find exploits. If the tables were turned the argument would be the exact opposite. Windows would seem more secure then linux.

 

My 2 coppers

Admin of World of Darkness Online News

News/Community site for the WoD MMORPG

http://www.wodonlinenews.net

---

Jericho sassed me so I broke into his house and stabbed him to death in his sleep. Problem solved. - J.E. Sawyer

---

"I cannot profess to be a theologian; but it seems to me that Christians who believe in a super human Satan have got themselves into a logical impasse with regard to their own religion. For either God can not prevent the mischief of Satan, in which case he is not omnipotent; or else He could do so if he wished, but will not, in which case He is not benevolent. Fortunately, being a pagan witch, I am not called upon to solve this problem."

- Doreen Valiente

---

Expecting "innovation" from Bioware is like expecting "normality" from Valve -Moatilliatta

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am also the type of person that wants some of you Linux guys to make a Linux based OS that anyone can install and run in a PC. The only reason I have never installed Linux is from what I understand I would have enough programming knowledge to get the job done.

 

There are many user friendly distros where you never have the need to program or use the command line, if you can install windows you can easily install those.

 

The easiest is knoppix since you do not install anything at all, just put the CD and boot your machine and you will have an OS running, it is not a ful expirience since it is slow but you might get an idea.

 

If you want to install the OS one of the easiest distros are Mandrake and Lycoris which you can download here Other distros

 

First what fairly skilled PC user (of ANY os) uses said os right from the box without tweaking/patching/locking it down in some way, shape or form?

 

First I was once quite skilled in windows, yet I still got spyware and viruses, could I have done better? sure but the odds were against me anyhow. Secondly there is no denying that the average windows user is less savy than an average Linux user, those that think that their OS is AOL are tho ones that provide the infrastructure and bait for malware.

 

Also if you follow secuirty bulletins you will find many exploits in ALL OSes, linux and the mac is not immune. Plus since the user base of win32 is so vastly larger, its no surprise there are more people gunning to find exploits. If the tables were turned the argument would be the exact opposite. Windows would seem more secure then linux.

 

Nobody here is claiming that any OS is inmune, however proportionally speaking the numbes do show that windows is far less secure. Even if Linux did command an equal lead that MS currently enjoys I have no doubt it would still be more secure, simply because it is open source. Apache run servers dominate IIS either 3-1 or 2-1. Yet they only have a fraction of the explois.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I dont want to turn this either into a OS war this needs to be addressed.

 

First what fairly skilled PC user (of ANY os) uses said os right from the box without tweaking/patching/locking it down in some way, shape or form?

 

Last time I ran redhat I did a update check and had a few dozen megs of patches it suggested.

 

So yes, ANY os, not just win32, out of the box has flaws and exploits, its up to the end user to be somewhat educated on their platform of choice and beable to secure it.

 

Also if you follow secuirty bulletins you will find many exploits in ALL OSes, linux and the mac is not immune. Plus since the user base of win32 is so vastly larger, its no surprise there are more people gunning to find exploits. If the tables were turned the argument would be the exact opposite. Windows would seem more secure then linux.

 

My 2 coppers

 

I am not interested in carrying on an OS war but I would just like to answer a couple of your points that I have been mis quoted/understood on.

 

First what fairly skilled PC user (of ANY os) uses said os right from the box without tweaking/patching/locking it down in some way, shape or form?

The reason I said out of the box is that this is the only true way to compare security issues with respective OSes. you are right any OS can be made secure with the right patches/firewall/ids mechanisms. The only way to tell if one OS is 'more secure' than another is to give them as even a playing field as possible, my interpretation of this is to evaluate each OS as sold from the respective manufactures, the vanilla release is you will.

 

Last time I ran redhat I did a update check and had a few dozen megs of patches it suggested.

I never mentioned Linux, I was just comparing Win2k and XP with Mac OS X (10.2.8 and greater)

 

So yes, ANY os, not just win32, out of the box has flaws and exploits, its up to the end user to be somewhat educated on their platform of choice and beable to secure it.

I partially agree with you on this one, yes people should have a rudimentary knowledge of what their computer can do and what pitfalls it may be susceptible to, BUT (and it is a biggie) given that most people (present company excepted) who buy a computer just want to use it to play games on, surf the net, do their texes on etc etc, they don't care about patches firewalls and all that other junk (and why should they?) then my initial statement stands OS X is more secure than win32 platforms.

 

Cheers

G

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i seem to remember that mac os had a major flaw that when the users when to a web site that web site could take control. this is just one example that no os is secure.

 

 

i for one use multi os, but mostly use xp can its nice when it works. Altough everyone of those os will crash eventually.

 

although it is know that the mac community has had the shaft with games and it would be nice to see nwn 2 for mac. But i wouldn't hold your breath.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3.) Security...  why bother.

 

4.).... Nevermind this is ridiculous.  Its a good thing Im not a moderator because I would delete your reply to this thread and ban you from this site for a week. 

 

Arrgh...  I need more coffe.  :angry:

 

Wow. Did somebody push your grandma down the stairs?

"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."

 

- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials

 

"I have also been slowly coming to the realisation that knowledge and happiness are not necessarily coincident, and quite often mutually exclusive" - meta

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...