Author Topic: linux, mac or windows ? (Read 7900 times)

bigpook · « **on:** Thu, 07 October 2010, 11:47:28 »

a friend of mine was asking what machine/os to use for creating multimedia content. Mostly static, I think, like flyers and presentations. The end product needs to look professsional and be business grade.

She isn't all that computer savvy and is currently familiar with windows and linux but is not a power user. Her friends tell her to get a Mac, but she isn't sure.

What do you guys think?

itlnstln · « **Reply #1 on:** Thu, 07 October 2010, 11:49:30 »

Mac or Windows. I think either would be just fine.

unicomp · « **Reply #2 on:** Thu, 07 October 2010, 11:53:15 »

Windows 3.1 is the best OS and is really fun to use. I run Windows 3.1 on some of my free computer systems, they might have lower clock speeds but they work fine (you wouldn't believe what people throw away these days, we are talking Pentium II grade components here, not just any old junk). Windows 3.1 is really stable too, I have been browsing the Internet for many years on Windows 3.1 and I have never had a crash.

You could also try DOS of some type, probably one of the later editions, however if this is for someone who is not that computer savvy then I think that the graphical user interface of Windows 3.1 is perfect.

keyboardlover · « **Reply #3 on:** Thu, 07 October 2010, 12:18:43 »

Quote from: unicomp;230882

Windows 3.1 is the best OS and is really fun to use. I run Windows 3.1 on some of my free computer systems, they might have lower clock speeds but they work fine (you wouldn't believe what people throw away these days, we are talking Pentium II grade components here, not just any old junk). Windows 3.1 is really stable too, I have been browsing the Internet for many years on Windows 3.1 and I have never had a crash.

You could also try DOS of some type, probably one of the later editions, however if this is for someone who is not that computer savvy then I think that the graphical user interface of Windows 3.1 is perfect.

This response makes absolutely no sense for someone who will need to run graphics-heavy software for creating multimedia content.

Windows 7, OS X, and most modern Linux distros are fine for this use (and some are tailored specifically for multimedia creation and come with the essential software pre-installed).

It sort of depends mostly on what software she wants to use and then you should figure out which OS supports it. Does she have a software preference?

zefrer · « **Reply #4 on:** Thu, 07 October 2010, 12:33:50 »

Quote from: unicomp;230882

Windows 3.1 is the best OS and is really fun to use. I run Windows 3.1 on some of my free computer systems, they might have lower clock speeds but they work fine (you wouldn't believe what people throw away these days, we are talking Pentium II grade components here, not just any old junk). Windows 3.1 is really stable too, I have been browsing the Internet for many years on Windows 3.1 and I have never had a crash.

You could also try DOS of some type, probably one of the later editions, however if this is for someone who is not that computer savvy then I think that the graphical user interface of Windows 3.1 is perfect.

Hahaha, MS Windows is that you?

itlnstln · « **Reply #5 on:** Thu, 07 October 2010, 12:44:08 »

Very poor epic trollage at that.

Regarding the OP, I would rule out Linux based on the learning curve and potential lack of applications (Photoshop, MS Office, etc.). The choice between the other two would just be what she would be more familiar with.

bigpook · « **Reply #6 on:** Thu, 07 October 2010, 13:11:07 »

I disregarded unicomps response. Totally off of the mark. Who in their right mind would run win 3.1?
I don't do graphics or multimedia but realize linux would be a poor choice. I am telling her to talk to the Mac people she works with. They will set her straight.

unicomp · « **Reply #7 on:** Thu, 07 October 2010, 13:17:12 »

For those who have not learned to Internet I will add the disclaimer that my previous post was mocking the style of certain users of this forum and was not a serious response.

abflex · « **Reply #8 on:** Thu, 07 October 2010, 14:16:55 »

Quote from: itlnstln;230905

Regarding the OP, I would rule out Linux based on the learning curve and potential lack of applications (Photoshop, MS Office, etc.). The choice between the other two would just be what she would be more familiar with.

This is a stupid myth that have plague *nix for a long time. If you really need MS Office (Open Office is mostly just as good, better if you ask me since you don't have a bloated, ****ty, UI) and other windows native software you can run them under wine (PS CS4 works flawlessly).

itlnstln · « **Reply #9 on:** Thu, 07 October 2010, 14:23:57 »

Quote from: abflex;230944

This is a stupid myth that have plague *nix for a long time. If you really need MS Office (Open Office is mostly just as good, better if you ask me since you don't have a bloated, ****ty, UI) and other windows native software you can run them under wine (PS CS4 works flawlessly).

This is complete crap. OO cannot replace Office. I prefer to run natively, not under an emulator. If you have to emulate to get it to work, you're doing it wrong.

patrickgeekhack · « **Reply #10 on:** Thu, 07 October 2010, 15:14:21 »

Quote from: itlnstln;230948

This is complete crap. OO cannot replace Office. I prefer to run natively, not under an emulator. If you have to emulate to get it to work, you're doing it wrong.

Agreed. The "problem" to be solved was ignored.

Problem:

Quote

She isn't all that computer savvy and is currently familiar with windows and linux but is not a power user.

Proposed solution:

Quote

This is a stupid myth that have plague *nix for a long time. If you really need MS Office (Open Office is mostly just as good, better if you ask me since you don't have a bloated, ****ty, UI) and other windows native software you can run them under wine (PS CS4 works flawlessly).

Some people just want to use a computer and not having to work for it.

JBert · « **Reply #11 on:** Thu, 07 October 2010, 15:32:24 »

Quote from: itlnstln;230948

This is complete crap. OO cannot replace Office. I prefer to run natively, not under an emulator. If you have to emulate to get it to work, you're doing it wrong.

It can if all you need to do is some spreadsheet work and basic word processing. I'm not paying for an Office license at home.

Heck, while one can argue that there are features missing in OO for the more decent spreadsheet, most of the time I can do my work with OO as well without scouring the ribbon for those dang features.

pikapika · « **Reply #12 on:** Thu, 07 October 2010, 17:07:32 »

if he has not much money, there are now many tools on linux to do graphics and such

you can find more "pro" softwares on mac and windows, but it'll cost him quite a lot

Daniel Beaver · « **Reply #13 on:** Thu, 07 October 2010, 17:12:46 »

Quote from: abflex;230944

This is a stupid myth that have plague *nix for a long time. If you really need MS Office (Open Office is mostly just as good, better if you ask me since you don't have a bloated, ****ty, UI) and other windows native software you can run them under wine (PS CS4 works flawlessly).

No.

Wine support has improved significantly over the years, but is ultimately a jury-rigged solution. If you are using MS Office or Adobe software as a primary work tool, use it on an OS that it is designed for.

I love linux, but the software I use for work is more important than the OS.

keyboardlover · « **Reply #14 on:** Thu, 07 October 2010, 18:12:45 »

He said that she's already familiar with Linux. If this is the case, there is already software made for Linux (and as I said, there are distributions that come with it preinstalled) for creating multimedia. So long as she is familiar with Linux and the software meets her needs, Linux is a fine choice. Period.

abflex · « **Reply #15 on:** Fri, 08 October 2010, 02:09:00 »

Quote from: patrickgeekhack;230965

Some people just want to use a computer and not having to work for it.

I agree with that for some users it might be a little work to use a linux based OS. But, in my experience, it's more often than not simply that a user is not accustomed to their new operating environment.

A lot of things in windows are really bothersome but so many are used to so they don't notice. Take updating software as an example. You need to get on the need download an .exe and install it over the existing one and sometimes you even have to remove the installed program before "updating".

Quote from: itlnstln;230948

This is complete crap. OO cannot replace Office. I prefer to run natively, not under an emulator. If you have to emulate to get it to work, you're doing it wrong.

Well depends on what you mean by emulator. It's not a CPU emulator like virtual machines. It's a library that have certain parts of the windows API in it. It's like any application library.

If you run a x64 OS you are emulating to make MS office work. At least if you call using a application layer for emulation.

Quote from: Daniel Beaver;231020

No.

Wine support has improved significantly over the years, but is ultimately a jury-rigged solution. If you are using MS Office or Adobe software as a primary work tool, use it on an OS that it is designed for.

I love linux, but the software I use for work is more important than the OS.

Yes it has a little makeshift feel to it. But nowadays it works pretty good pretty often. But a lot of applications aren't supported. But MS office is one of those that work really well.

zmurf · « **Reply #16 on:** Fri, 08 October 2010, 09:37:09 »

MacOS or Windows... It doesn't really matter anymore. Both OS do it equally well these days. I would tell her to get what's she's most used to use. This way it will be the most intuitive for her.

Basically the problems comes down to this.

If she gets a standard PC she will not have to spend as much money as if she gets an equivalent Mac.
If she gets a Mac she will have to learn how to use MacOS, since she is used to Windows.
If she gets a Mac she can still choose to use Windows on it. The other way around she will have to do some "hacking" to be able to run MacOS.
Since her friends apparently use Mac it will be easier for them to help her if she gets a Mac.

Otherwise my personal experience is that the old myth from the late -80ths and early -90ths that Macs are better for publishing and multimedia editing is no longer true. And haven't been since mid -90ths. I have friends that use standard PCs for it and other friends that use Macs for it. When we a couple of years ago actually made a benchmark test it turned out that there where no real differences. So just go on what you are used to use.

Quote from: pikapika;231014

if he has not much money, there are now many tools on linux to do graphics and such
you can find more "pro" softwares on mac and windows, but it'll cost him quite a lot

Most of the free software can also be found for both macos and windows. Take Gimp and OO for instance.

itlnstln · « **Reply #17 on:** Fri, 08 October 2010, 09:40:57 »

Quote from: abflex;231223

If you run a x64 OS you are emulating to make MS office work. At least if you call using a application layer for emulation.

Not if you're using Office 2010 64-bit. I don't **** around with productivity software. I make way too much money to be ****ing around with that junior-league ****. I'm not a programmer or a geek, so I don't really care too much about Open Source or customizabilty or whatever. I need an OS and software to get work done, not a bunch of half-ass workarounds for the sake of "**** MS/Apple."

patrickgeekhack · « **Reply #18 on:** Fri, 08 October 2010, 10:02:08 »

I say get the system on which help will be more readily available.

keyboardlover · « **Reply #19 on:** Fri, 08 October 2010, 10:22:59 »

I'd say pick the OS that she's familiar with and supports the software that meets her needs. We don't even really know what her software requirements are yet (other than a vague description). However, as I said Windows 7, many Linux distros and OS X all support multimedia creation software.

We can't really recommend a system until we know more about her exact software needs and OS familiarity. I think most people who are already making suggestions and/or fighting over other people's suggestions are missing this point.

patrickgeekhack · « **Reply #20 on:** Fri, 08 October 2010, 10:27:24 »

Quote from: keyboardlover;231374

I'd say pick the OS that she's familiar with and supports the software that meets her needs. We don't even really know what her software requirements are yet (other than a vague description). However, as I said Windows 7, many Linux distros and OS X all support multimedia creation software.

We can't really recommend a system until we know more about her exact software needs and OS familiarity. I think most people who are already making suggestions and/or fighting over other people's suggestions are missing this point.

True. We need to know where we are going to know if we have arrived or not.

zefrer · « **Reply #21 on:** Fri, 08 October 2010, 11:18:33 »

For the record, 'WINE Is Not an Emulator' is what WINE stands for because it is not an emulator.

And yes the WINE in the explanation also stands for 'WINE Is Not an Emulator', *nix geeks love their recursive acronyms

But I agree, if she's used to photoshop, use a Mac. If she's not using photoshop then either get a mac/windows with photoshop or linux with Gimp for simple stuff.

Quote from: kishy;231266

Uh, what? This is most commonly the case for, perhaps ironically, smaller free software projects (where it may even come distributed in a ZIP archive with no installer to speak of, which is incredibly irritating).
...
A few examples in my installed software which do what you said are:
WinRAR, VLC Media Player, I believe Notepad++ does it, FrostWire, FileZilla, CCleaner...

That's not what he's talking about. In Linux/*nix you can update _all_ software on the system with a single command/gui. You do not have to go to each program, run it, run check updates or whatever. The OS can update all its software, including the OS itself, automatically also if you wish, without user interaction.

There is _no_ equivalent on windows or Mac.

zefrer · « **Reply #22 on:** Fri, 08 October 2010, 17:32:22 »

Let's put it this way, you can upgrade the entire OS, for example Win95 to winxp, from within the OS itself. You're saying an update mechanism inside an app is the same thing?

abflex · « **Reply #23 on:** Fri, 08 October 2010, 18:27:49 »

Quote from: itlnstln;231338

Not if you're using Office 2010 64-bit. I don't **** around with productivity software. I make way too much money to be ****ing around with that junior-league ****. I'm not a programmer or a geek, so I don't really care too much about Open Source or customizabilty or whatever. I need an OS and software to get work done, not a bunch of half-ass workarounds for the sake of "**** MS/Apple."

That's true, but my point was that wine isn't an emulator. I promise you that you run some 32-bit software on your AMD_64 OS (if you are using one). Besides the installation program for office x64 is an x84 application.

Besides it's kind of contradictorily to say that you aren't an expert (code monkey/geek) but still say that a given solution sucks.

But I agree that you should use the OS that feels right for you. I was simply arguing in the favor of wine because it's underestimated and most people seem to think that it's a bad or hard-to-do solution.

I'm just trying to be objective and I'm definitely not saying "**** MS/apple" (using ideological arguments). The problem is that way to many say "**** linux (unix derivates)" because they feel it's for geeks and experts without even trying it or knowing anything about it.

For the record, I mostly use my windows install. Mainly because Mathematica seem to preform best under windows.

zefrer · « **Reply #24 on:** Sat, 09 October 2010, 06:54:27 »

Quote from: kishy;231568

In a sense...yes, very much so. It doesn't matter what is being updated, the point is that the software updates itself without a complete reinstallation every time (you don't reinstall Windows 7 to add a service pack).

Except that you can't do that within Windows because new versions are entirely new products, and you can't do that with Office (let's say, 97 to 2010) for the same reason.

I think you're suggesting that Windows is a product, which it is not. Windows is a product line...Windows 7 is not a new version of Windows Vista or Windows XP, it is an entirely new product and accordingly you can't just "upgrade to it" (though, in a sense, you can, but you still have to buy the new product to do it).

Well that's exactly my point. If you could upgrade from winxp or vista to win7 from within windows then it would be roughly equivalent to what you can do in *nix. But you can't. Having to buy a CD, reboot, try an "upgrade" that may or may not work is not the same thing. Plus it's the same thing you do to upgrade all your software.

bigpook · « **Reply #25 on:** Sat, 09 October 2010, 09:00:55 »

Nah, no trolling; at least not intentional. Yes the blue Ctrl IS awesome, I should have kept that keyboard : )

While expensive, I think apple would be the way to go. No flame wars please, its just an opinion.
Linux as an OS is fine, but I don't think the apps are quite there yet.
Windows reminds me of 1950's Soviet life: overcast, rainy and generally miserable.
Apple is all shiny. Beautiful hardware and from what I understand really good applications.

bigpook · « **Reply #26 on:** Sat, 09 October 2010, 09:45:00 »

I hear the burgers are pretty good there. The strippers in training look pretty good too.

keyboardlover · « **Reply #27 on:** Sat, 09 October 2010, 09:47:20 »

Quote from: bigpook

Nah, no trolling; at least not intentional. Yes the blue Ctrl IS awesome, I should have kept that keyboard : )

While expensive, I think apple would be the way to go. No flame wars please, its just an opinion.
Linux as an OS is fine, but I don't think the apps are quite there yet.
Windows reminds me of 1950's Soviet life: overcast, rainy and generally miserable.
Apple is all shiny. Beautiful hardware and from what I understand really good applications.

Glad that you at least ruled out one of the choices, although I must say I personally recommend Windows 7 highly. IMO it's the best modern OS from a user perspective. Have you used it? There's nothing overcast, rainy or miserable about it!

zefrer · « **Reply #28 on:** Sat, 09 October 2010, 10:03:55 »

Quote from: keyboardlover;231729

Glad that you at least ruled out one of the choices, although I must say I personally recommend Windows 7 highly. IMO it's the best modern OS from a user perspective. Have you used it? There's nothing overcast, rainy or miserable about it!

Sorry, the best modern OS from a user perspective has to be Mac OS. (I use linux..). Nevermind how ludicrous it is calling Win7 'modern'

keyboardlover · « **Reply #29 on:** Sat, 09 October 2010, 10:10:00 »

Quote from: zefrer

Sorry, the best modern OS from a user perspective has to be Mac OS. (I use linux..). Nevermind how ludicrous it is calling Win7 'modern'

Not in my opinion. Even little things like resizing windows annoys the **** out of me in OS X. Navigating the filsystem (from the GUI) is a chore, having to close AND exit applications is annoying, screen real estate isn't used well. The list goes on and on...

But some people do like it. It's just not for me.

microsoft windows · « **Reply #30 on:** Sat, 09 October 2010, 10:12:54 »

I would recommend Windows because it's by far the best computer operating system out there.

microsoft windows · « **Reply #31 on:** Sat, 09 October 2010, 10:15:00 »

Quote from: zefrer;231735

Sorry, the best modern OS from a user perspective has to be Mac OS. (I use linux..). Nevermind how ludicrous it is calling Win7 'modern'

Mac OS is a terrible operating system, especially with support. First, you have to buy some overpriced piece of **** in order to run the thing legally, and second, Mac OS doesn't have nearly the quality of support Windows does.

Let's just say that Windows 95 runs more modern web browsers than Mac OSX 10.3. Now that's just sad.

keyboardlover · « **Reply #32 on:** Sat, 09 October 2010, 10:20:07 »

Quote from: ripster;231743

On this we agree.

Windows key for maximum productivity. Plus it IS the prettiest one.

Realforce WIN keys are prettier

abflex · « **Reply #33 on:** Sat, 09 October 2010, 13:09:14 »

Quote from: ripster;231751

I dunno.

What do you Linux and Mac guys think?

I have a blank keyboard but this is an option of you dislike the windows key.

elservo · « **Reply #34 on:** Sat, 09 October 2010, 14:36:40 »

I binded my Windows key and the letter C to bring up my calculator. Pretty wicked. Basically the best hacking of all time went into making that happen. I also bound the Windows key and page up and down to change the volume, but it only goes up to 30%. If I need more volume, I have to drag the volume bar up manually from the taskbar. What could be causing that?

EverythingIBM · « **Reply #35 on:** Sat, 09 October 2010, 22:31:38 »

I'm rather surprised people complain about microsoft office, the ribbon, and the interface. I actually liked the ribbon. It was used by other programs such as 3DS Max: and it's still just as helpful as it is in office.
But I guess most people are stupid and are too dumb to remember where anything is (these types of people wouldn't use 3DS Max I presume). The ribbon makes editing things amazingly fast. Seriously. The layout is all logical, and it looks cool.

First of all, you can remove and minimize the things you don't want (a nice option, because, if you WANT to have extra options, you won't have that choice in a watered-down office program). There are some very useful features that can be added: it's fair to say most people won't use them, but then again, most people using a computer are very thick-headed.

With that aside, usually I prefer windows. It may be considered as poorly programmed: but it's *mainstream* (supporting all major applications) and generally doesn't resort to odd-ball things found in macs or linux.

patrickgeekhack · « **Reply #36 on:** Sat, 09 October 2010, 22:51:30 »

Someone pointed out that we need to know her requirements first. This is so true. To that I would add that she needs to consider her budget. If money is not a problem, then she should go with the one she really wants. Telling that Windows is a better option is useless if she really wants a nice looking MacBook Pro. The opposite is also true. Telling her that Mac is a better option is useless if she really likes Windows, feels she will be much more productive on Windows, and find the HP Envy or the Sony Viao sexy.

Personally, I don't care whether it's Windows, Mac or Linux as long as I get my work done, although I prefer how Mac OS X handles opened windows behaviour and adding a second screen. That said, I hate how Flash gets my CPU all crazy.

I don't know how good Linux is for graphic design. I have never looked into this side of Linux since graphic design is not my field. Now this makes me think. She should research what software she will need and then see what OS she needs.

vyshane · « **Reply #37 on:** Sun, 10 October 2010, 23:33:35 »

OS X if she can afford a Mac. Windows otherwise. Software on OS X tends to be more elegant. Apple sweats the little details, and third party developers on their platforms usually follow the lead. Microsoft software suffers from buttonitis (Although this seems to be getting better lately. Compare for example the default UI for IE 8 and IE 9). This is reflected in much of the third party software for Windows. It's a cultural thing. Designers are sensitive to these things, which is why they flock to OS X. The aesthetic of the Mac ecosystem appeals to them.

Linux is not really an option. The third party software isn't there yet. Gimp, Inkscape and co. are adequate. However, if you're going to make a living out of an activity, you want the best, not adequate. In any case, if you really must, Gimp and Inkscape will run on OS X and Windows too.

News:

Author Topic: linux, mac or windows ? (Read 7900 times)