Which OS is the most advanced?

[MulletRobZ]

So, which Operating System do you m8s consider to be the most advanced?

Here's my honest opinion:

Linux is indeed the most advanced OS out there! Why? When I was scanning the Window Manangers, the consoles, and everything else, I found that Linux had many of the technologies that Microsoft (and maybe Apple) didn't use yet or until recently, with Windows XP.

The logon screen is te perfect example! Linux had the logon screen available since 1995 or earlier and Microsoft didn't have "reliable" logon screens until Windows XP was released. The ones in WIndows 95 and 98 only store control panel preferences and can be bypassed just by pressing "Cancel"!

Also, instead of having to wait for everything to load up after logon in Windows, Linux automatically starts the services necessarily as soon as you boot up your PC and once you log in, you can start using it immediately!

The most recently used programs that Windows XP has in their Start Menu existed probably before Mandrake 7 (KDE 2)! The Quick Navigation that KDE has is more efficient than Windows Explorer or Konqueror and yet, Windows hasn't come up with that yet? :o

The console modes and GUI's in both Windows/DOS and Linux are about identical, with both offering the same quality of graphics and similar difficulty of learning on how to use the console modes!

However, Windows does jump ahead of Linux and Macintosh with hardware support. Linux also lacks ease of software installation. The software installation format Linux uses (RPM) doesn't work all the time as I have tested various RPM's that I've downloaded. Therefore, in order to get the installation to work correctly, the Tarball (TAR.GZ) method is necessary! If Linux improves the RPM format, then it would be more advanced with software installation as well!

The Macintosh always beats Windows and Linux with graphics and hardware quality.

As I have summarized all of the facts, I consider Linux more advanced!

[Chicane-UK Veteran]

Tough one... I agree that Linux is the most advanced... the code is so fast, tidy, and streamlined.

I also rate some of the commercial UNIX platforms pretty highly - I own and use both Silicon Graphics (IRIX 6.5) and Sun Microsystems (Solaris 8) boxes - they are very complex and advanced operating systems.. but they also run VERY slowly.

Windows is good for a lot of things, and it has made a lot of advances in the past 2 or 3 years... but it still doesnt seem *that* advanced to me.

I like Macintoshes quite a lot, but I dont think I would ever buy one simply because of the cost - even when I think about buying a basic low spec one, I think of the PC hardware upgrades I could buy for my main machine and I just forget about it right away :)

Yep.. Linux gets my vote :)

[Silvorgold]

DOS :D, nah, i'm thinking Win XP since i've never seen an OS more stable than it (with the exception of the normal frozen IE), and with all the networking and sharing features, linux is way to complicating for the normal computer user, but it sure is advanced for servers, and mac OS is way too user friendly

[Koto]

DOS , nah, i'm thinking Win XP since i've never seen an OS more stable than it (with the exception of the normal frozen IE), and with all the networking and sharing features, linux is way to complicating for the normal computer user, but it sure is advanced for servers, and mac OS is way too user friendly

Linux is way more stable than Windows XP. It's also more advanced in every way, normal user or server. You probably mean that Windows XP is easier than Linux.

[thingsforjason]

i've always been partial to the hefty commodore 64 os. :D

[ptah]

Linux isn't the most advanced operating system, it makes a good server: nothing more. The GUI is horrid, and it's a huge pain in the ass to get anything done with it - aside from masq/webserv/ftp.

Windows is much better as a desktop OS, but the GUI is still ugly in comparison to Mac OSX. Its hardware support is top notch, and if you're looking for performance, you really don't have any other choice. Apple hardware is certainly not better than pc hardware.

As far as the most advanced operating system currently on the market, I have to give the nod to OSX. OSX has revolutionized the way Windows advocates will look at Apple computers. With it's strong Unix underlying and beautiful GUI, it's going to come down to application development and optimization.

IMO, if you need a good reliable server, use a bsd.

If you need top notch performance, use Winxp.

If you want the most advanced OS ever, use OSX.

[mortensen]

/me wonders why OS's are so bloated... all they need to do is run programs. You don't need all the typical Windows bloatware that will do everything from automatically manage the timing of your toast or interface with the fridge... all you need is a way to organise your files and a way to run programs.... how the hell does Windows now need 700mb to do that?!

DOS was pretty close to how it needed to be.... you could manage files and run all your programs... and did it take up 700mb? Me thinks not.

Is Windows XP good? NO. I use it but I'd rather have a much more streamlined interface... just wait you say, Windows XP is very streamlined - I think not. Do I really need an 'Other Places' link in every folder so I can access the Control Panel slightly more quickly? No. Do I need huge obtrusive pictures for all my folders... I coped fine with DOS but you need it prettier... even so, Windows folders seem to wasteful of space.

Now let's look at the Windows XP Start Menu... it is so wasteful of space it's untrue. And the Luna interface... I'd rather have Classic any day and it runs a lot faster.

The advantage Windows has is you don't need to recompile your kernel for optimal performance or manually write out lines of code for hardware for it to work [which is 'apparently' what you have to do with Linux].

Linux could get more customers by going the simpler route where you DON'T include 2GB of apps that some people 'may' like... and the install is more like 100mb and is extremely streamlined; and where you don't have to touch anything to get your hardware to work.

Sorry about this rant but Windows is getting huger and the only benefit I can see is that it's more stable [apart from the Luna interface obviously].

Boy am I bored.... I hope you don't just see this as a rant and at the moment I use Windows XP, but after a while of using it all sorts of dud registry settings and hundreds of programs start to conflict with each other... and uninstalling them doesn't help. Why do programs need hundreds of registry settings... they managed fine in DOS without them. And I HATE programs that include all sorts of 'protection' or try to be 'helpful' by hiding registry settings so that if you enter dud serialz, etc, it will hide in your computer forever or where it remembers your serial number for next time you install.... if I uninstall I don't want it to keep all my information to be helpful.... I want to get rid of the darned thing.

And do you know how I can prove my point.... look at the number of people who have to format or reinstall Windows.... I've seen dozens [maybe 40+ - I lose count] on this forum - ONE person is too many.

I voted for Mac by the way because the graphical side of it is very impressive [the genie effect, etc]. It also seems to be a lot more streamlined. I just hate Windows and it's registry... it causes MORE problems than it can ever solve. You should have a text file for each installed program and a link to it in a big text file in the Windows folder. Windows looks at it's text file which links to the programs text file which tells it how it integrates into Windows or how it works. Not a thousand registry settings here and there and a dozen .inf and .ini files telling the program how to run!!!

SOOO sorry for the long post.

[Koto]

Yeah, the whole registry thing is kind of stupid...

[bkellner]

My Opinion..

[ Logon ]

Webgraph was wrong! Ever since NT 4, Windows has had much security in this area. By disabling the Guest account you may eliminate the possibility of bypassing the logon screen. 9x had a feature simular to this I'm sure. Linux begins with a console logon, unless enabled otherwise to boot into X Windows (depending on the distro), and is no more secure than Windows, as shown above. Windows wins here.

[ Window Manager / Shell ]

Windows wins here as well, X Window's Window Managers and Windows Shells are basically one in the same. Granted X Windows comes with a few different Window Managers and Windows only comes with Explorer, but it is not as difficult to download and install Shells in Windows.

[ Themes ]

Windows wins here again! I know XP is the 'first' Windows to be released with built in Themeing Systems, but it has always had the ability to be very customizable. (Just look at Stardock.com).

[ Networking / Sharing ]

Windows wins here once more, it is MUCH easier to setup a network and share something. The NT line of Windows has a much more advanced way of sharing & access privledges, which a pig could learn how to do.

[ Plug-in-Play / Driver Support ]

Windows definately wins here, no doubt about it.

[ Price ]

Linux wins here, it's free!

[ Security ]

Windows is pretty much secure behind a firewall and a nice router. What computer isn't? Linux has it's flaws as well, but Windows seems to have more. Linux does win in this area, but not by much.

[ Stability ]

Windows, again. Windows systems became more stable ever since the release of Windows 2000, but then again, I have seen some 9x boxes with great uptimes (5 weeks), using memory managers. But 2000 and XP are pretty much just as stable, if not more stable than Linux.

[ Ease of Use ]

Windows wins here again. Again, a pig could use it.

[ Installation ]

Windows wins here, it's simple, GUI, and walks you through it. Linux has very bad and heart breaking installations. Who the hell needs a Swap Partition? Not Windows!

[ Overall ]

Overall, we must remember that Linux is not only one operating system. It is a kernel, with many different distro's. All distro's are different, and work different, and are only similar by the 3rd party applications (KDE, Gnome, etc..) and their kernel which bind them. And remember, it is open source. And NOTHING open source can be as great as a company with billions of dollars to buy perfection.

Windows wins, in the real world.

By the way, what is a neowin staff person doing supporting Linux? I should be a neowin staff!

[sanctified Veteran]

krazie

MacOSX is the easiest os to install, just one click

Stability, I agree, Windows 2k/XP both are great in this, but almost every *nix OS is more stable

dont take me wrong, XP is my favorite os but is not perfect

[bkellner]

Oh yeah, I'm on a roll. I should critisize some more people...

Like mortensen. mort, let me quote.. "Linux could get more customers by going the simpler route where you DON'T include 2GB of apps that some people 'may' like..." And what about the people who do like, and don't have Internet Access to download? Did you forget about them? Also, I guess you never read the install: You can choose which packs to install, thus, not having to install 2GB of apps. And how does 2GB of apps fit all on one CD? Maybe you downloaded the other CD's along with the install one. The ones usually labed "extra.iso".

More for you mort, dissing the Windows Registry. Do you even know what it is? All operating systems have something similar. They HAVE to, to run. Somewhere to store information about where you last stuck that icon on your desktop, or that you installed this program or that. How would it know what to do without it? Have you ever been in the Windows Registry? Yes? Why? The average user doesn't even know it exists, there is no need to go in it. If you don't like it, don't go in it. Just learn how to use a computer and yours may not crash. Plug it in, and it may boot up. It's idiot proof, unless you're just plain dumb.

mort, you're just an easy target today. 40+ people who had to reinstall windows? WOW! They all must be as dumb as you, I myself format once a month. Not because of Windows though. I like to download and try other Operating Systems. By the way, if you're having registry problems where programs conflict with other programs, I advise upgrading, virus checking, or letting someone that knows what they are doing, do it.

(By the way, just a little proof that mort doesn't know anything about computers, look at his IRC Style '/me') Someone should tell him this ISN'T mIRC. By the way, he complains about 700mb of space. AHaH. Maybe you DO need to upgrade. By the way, anyone who complains that the start menu is a waste of space, and uses the start button as their picture on neowin, has GOT to be dumb. (By the way, I have said By the way too many times).

Enough with mort, who else..

tr4nce: for agreeing with mort. Registry, useless? You're kidding, right?

[saint dark]: I have nothing against Mac, but Windows is more superior in every aspect (except some GUI effects Mac has). And I don't know about you, but I have had 8 weeks uptime on Windows 2000, then the power went out. Since then I haven't kept my computer with one operating system long enough to get past 5 weeks.

[bkellner]

Another thing mort, people who use Linux are not customers. They are users. Customers are people whom buy or deal with a product. Linux is free, thus eliminating both possibilities unless you actually buy it with the book in a store. But then you're a Best Buy customer, not a Linux customer. :)

[Randy026]

Yeah, the logon screen is not a very good example and plus the Windows XP logon screen is just a Pretty GUI version of there logon screen anyway. But Linux is very advanced like how you can have a internal mail system so you can have CRON mail you feedback from programs ( Example: Like if my CPU gets to hot then mail me, or if a intruder is attacking my system,ect.) and reminders ( like when my fav TV show is on :p) with out being connected to your mail account.

That is one reason why I have a Linux box alone is because of CRON. Also since you can run everything from the command line you can kill/run anything really at a scheduled time, thus makes the OS very powerful. I am not a Linux Guru but that is what I use it for and I feel Windows lacks, but that?s why my Linux box and Windows box go good together but I think Linux is still more advanced and works fine (for me) as a desktop OS.

Also Mac?s have made a huge stride going to BSD kernel, but I don?t know much about Mac?s so I?ll put my vote on Linux but I think Windows is also good I like them both.

[Nutop]

mac.

[bkellner]

Obviously Seeker22 did not read my first post. Maybe I should also critisize him. First off, he uses his Linux box mainly for CRON.. This, I would have to say is a pitiful reason to use an Operating System. There are phones, cellphones, e-mail, and hey, Window's Messaging. There are also programs like CRON in telnet servers for Windows. Thus, Windows has this ability as well.

[ptah]

Seriously krazie, you shouldn't be so argumentative with your posts, you clearly don't know **** about operating systems and your childish assumptions are laughable. Save the pointed remarks for a subject you're familiar with. "You" are the easy target here.

[bkellner]

ptah - and how do you know i'm not merely critisizing people in all reverse points for fun, because of boredom? And where have I been wrong about anything anway, point it out for me please? I've never disagreed that Linux wasn't powerful for servers, which I do agree it is. But I do disagree with OSX being more advanced than Windows. OSX may behave like a nice little BSD box now, but it is no where near as strong as easy as windows. Linux is more for the user who wants 20 people to have access to his machine with run privledges (even though there are windows programs that do this same thing). And web servers, it is either/or, since it's not the operating system that makes the web server, but the httpd (apache, etc..) and server-side scripting support (php, perl), that make the web server. ftp server either/which way. What more could you possibly want? It's preference, if you like long, hard, work: use linux. It is your choice if you don't want your sound card and video card to be driverless.

[Randy026]

By the way krazie, Linux installs aren't that hard. They can be just as easy as any Windows install. Linux also doesn't 'need' a swap partition it to can use a swap file. also windows can also use a swap partition to.

PS. I don't have any of the troubles you are claiming like how its hard to get up and running my box took the same to set up as windows with all drivers and everything working fine.

[bkellner]

Seeker - it all depends on the distro of linux. And also, there have been no real problems with any Windows partition format. But the old Linux type had a lot of problems.

[Randy026]

Originally posted by krazie

Seeker - it all depends on the distro of linux. And also, there have been no real problems with any Windows partition format. But the old Linux type had a lot of problems.

Yep, that's very true. no argument there.

[bkellner]

If anyone is planning on trying Linux, I do support that. I myself try everything I can, and stick to windows for it's support, reliability, and ease of everyday things. I can download and install programs without having to compile them, and everything on windows can easily be done without the aide of console commands. Running programs is much easier. Most of the Window Managers are very ugly and confusing. Windows does not have a separate calculator and word processor and internet browser for each Window Manager. And to download and install themes, you just need to unzip and load in Windows. Linux, is a time consuming Operating System not worth the time to customize, get a Litestep port of a Linux Window Manager theme, there are many.

[Randy026]

I to can install programs with out compiling them :)

try a real distro. One word.

Debian. <-- Solves all of those problems.

Your replies are completly false

[bkellner]

Depends on the program in that case, not the distro.

[ptah]

ptah - and how do you know i'm not merely critisizing people in all reverse points for fun, because of boredom?

Because trolls are generally much more creative than this.

OSX may behave like a nice little BSD box now, but it is no where near as strong as easy as windows.

You'll have to define "strong" for me. As for "easy," there isn't really another definition to it. You've obviously never used OSX.

And web servers, it is either/or, since it's not the operating system that makes the web server, but the httpd (apache, etc..)

Half way true. Apache+BSD is the much better option here. Sure you can use Apache for win32, but is it a perfect port? Does it work exactly as it should all the time? No.

Is IIS even an option? *laughs* No.

It's preference, if you like long, hard, work: use linux.

Not true, again. I'd venture to say that I could get three secure slackware webservers up and running before I could get one win32 box up and running (and with shi*tty security, as we become increasingly aware of every day, just look at your logs.)

It is your choice if you don't want your sound card and video card to be driverless.

I've never built a linux machine that didn't have the drivers for all of my sound/video cards either as modules, built in, or from the same place you probably get yours, nvidia.com.

Linux is free, thus eliminating both possibilities unless you actually buy it with the book in a store. But then you're a Best Buy customer, not a Linux customer.

Wrong. Serious users will easily contend to being customers, support is a huge industy on the linux side of things. See: Redhat.

Oh yeah, I'm on a roll

Yeah, you're on a roll all right.

I should critisize some more people...

How about we start with you.

It's idiot proof, unless you're just plain dumb.

Yeah, that's the ticket. Blame the users. Windows support is expensive, and it's in high demand; there's a reason for this.

(By the way, just a little proof that mort doesn't know anything about computers, look at his IRC Style '/me') Someone should tell him this ISN'T mIRC. By the way, he complains about 700mb of space. AHaH. Maybe you DO need to upgrade. By the way, anyone who complains that the start menu is a waste of space, and uses the start button as their picture on neowin, has GOT to be dumb.

:right:

I have nothing against Mac, but Windows is more superior in every aspect

Really? I'm shocked, as I thought the truth was nearly polar to this. Care to elaborate on Windows' superiority?

Please don't refer me to your first post, I mean /really/ elaborate on it. Your first post is so ****ing stupid I'm not even going to accept that it exists.

[Randy026]

Again. no it doesn't, Debain uses .deb packages you don't even need a web browser to download/install new programs with Debian. it's not a program it's a distro. maybe you should try it before you say that. and you don't even need to tell it to install. it downloads, sets up, installs, configures, installs shortcuts, restarts services all by it self. very easy if you ask me.