Poll: What OS do you use everyday, or most often?

Gmail isn't exactly an OS in itself. If we were to answer the poll according to the OS that the web pages we visit use, we would see a poll dominated by FreeBSD and Linux. Somehow I don't think that is what the OP intended.

sfphotoarts2• 17 years ago

of course Gmail isn't an OS, that's not what I meant, but when we use Gmail we're really making more use of the server operating system than the clients, so my point is that it very hard to really say what operating system we're using.

It would be interesting to measure the usage of say posting this comment, how many machine instructions were used at the OSX end, and how many by the various routers (running their own operating systems), servers etc used in the full life cycle of what I am doing.

rewind• 17 years ago

Does it not make a bit more sense to indicate why you're conducting the poll? I don't mind polls, but usually they're only interesting if the poster sets it up and comments on his/her own choice and the reason for the poll in the first place. Polls like this seem to serve no more of a purpose than "What's your favorite color?".

Could you indicate the reason for the poll? That will get the conversation going in the direction you want it to and will give everybody some context when replying.

w1ntermute• 17 years ago

I think the reason for the poll is just curiosity as to what the OS distribution is among HN users.

btw02• 17 years ago

I am just curious about how HN readers are different from the general computer users when it comes to OS preference, this is interesting because HN community is a special group of people who are interested in technology startup, usually tech savvy and practical.

This poll is different from the favorite color poll because it's technology related, I guess it's not only me who is curious about this question, as people are actually upmodding the poll.

dkarl3• 17 years ago

If you wanted to know our preferences, you should have asked what we wish we used. However, I think the question as you stated it is more interesting, since people are quite vocal about their preferences anyway.

dpcan• 17 years ago

All my contact management, todos, calendar, etc are on the web on a Linux platform, SO, you could technically say I'm on Linux all day, however, I access everything from Windows and code in Windows so...

bkj123• 17 years ago

hello dpcan. what software do you use on linux for the tasks you mention - contact mgt, cal, todos, etc. Do you sync with other devices like an ipod or cell phone? Thanks.

hugs• 17 years ago

I voted twice. I develop on Linux (Ubuntu) running inside VMWare on my Mac.

davi2• 17 years ago

Yup. I voted three times. My microscope & downstream processing tools use Windows Server 2003, XP Pro x64, XP Pro, Ubuntu, and OS X. MacGyver hacker, here.... and yes, I use them all every day.

barnaby• 17 years ago

When you do a cost-benefit analysis, do you find that it's worth your time to tinker with all that and switch between systems?

That's why companies standardize on a toolchain. By the way, we standardized on Ubuntu at my company. And while the the home computer is my girlfriends Macbook I hardly ever really use it, so I voted once.

rottencupcakes• 17 years ago

Haha, yah, I voted twice too. I run Linux (Fedora) on VMWare on my Windows box. Windows just runs much better on my poor graphics hardware.

jhickner5• 17 years ago

Me too, OSX with windows XP under VMWare.

tdavis• 17 years ago

Same, plus two Windows VMs for IE testing (not nearly used every day, thank god)

pavelludiq2• 17 years ago

Kubuntu. I occasionally reboot to xp to play starcraft or LOMAC.

chez17• 17 years ago

Starcraft works almost perfectly in wine. Th only thing that doesn't work are the background on battle.net when you are in the lobby. Game play works 100%.

pavelludiq2• 17 years ago

It doesn't work with a launcher i use to play on a private server, its retarded, but i don't mind.

Zarathu• 17 years ago

OS X is perfect for me, thanks to its Unix terminal. Linux is now useless, but I still use BSD for my servers.

I use Windows to play Quake Live.

chops• 17 years ago

My desktop OS is Windows, but all my servers run Linux and OpenBSD, and I ALWAYS have a handful of terminals open.

CyberFonic• 17 years ago

My desktop and all servers run Linux (Ubuntu) the notebook is Mac OS/X and the home PC is Windows (the wife can't get her head around Ubuntu nor OS/X). All the applications I write run on all three platforms and I spend more time in a browser (FireFox/Chrome/Chromium/Safari) than any other program. Oh yes, I use both OpenOffice and iWorks. Write complex documents using Latex / Lyx which in turn run on all three OS.

Does the OS really matter that much these days? I use OS/X on the notebook because everything works! Could only get 90% of stuff to work reliably on a HP notebook (C700) with Ubuntu. The Mac Book Pro cost three times the HP, but it's worth every dollar in saved time. Don't get me started on how much Vista kept getting in the way as originally shipped on the HP.

andrewljohnson3• 17 years ago

Our team develops on two MacBooks and a Linux box. We virtualize Windows via VirtualBox (which is just amazing). Our production server runs Ubuntu on EC2.

jhickner5• 17 years ago

I use vmware fusion, and I keep hearing great things about virtualbox. But when I tested the new 3.0 version a couple of days ago I still got multi-second freezes, increased CPU usage and a lot of general slowness. And yes, I have the virtualbox tools installed.

What am I missing?

andrewljohnson3• 17 years ago

You might not have enough memory allocated for VirtualBox. That would make it jerky. I give it 1 gig of my 4.

I'm not sure about CPU performance differences between VB and anything else, but it's never been a problem for me.

there• 17 years ago

many laptops and servers running openbsd over the past 10 years or so, with the occasional mac os-powered powerbook/macbook pro.

Tudisco• 17 years ago

Windows/Linux side by side.. two large monitors and sharing keyboard and mouse with synergy.

jamesbritt7• 17 years ago

I've a Mac, Kubuntu, and Vista, with two 24" monitors and a laptop, via Synergy.

Synergy rules.

ianbishop• 17 years ago

I find the comments in this thread really show the potential in virtual machines.

Personally, I develop on a macbook and virtualize Windows XP and Linux (Arch Linux). I tend to just use which ever is the native environment for what I'm working with (eg: C on linux, ruby on mac).

dkarl3• 17 years ago

I work with my Windows laptop and my Linux workstation side-by-side. I use my laptop for Outlook, company IM, Office documents, and web surfing. I use my workstation for everything else. That gives me a strict division between productivity sucks on the Windows laptop and productive work on the Linux box. When I want to focus, I can sit with the laptop outside my field of view, so I don't see new emails and IMs. If I need to consult html docs while I'm coding, I use Conkeror on my Linux box so I'm not tempted into random surfing. Using Conkeror and Awesome WM on my Linux box makes it very no-nonsense and very conducive to concentration.

Ummm, so, I already voted for Linux since that's where all the work gets done. Should I vote for Windows, too?

anigbrowl• 17 years ago

Yes, I do think you should vote for windows too. you just don't enjoy the work you do in that context as much, but that isn't Windows' fault.

dkarl3• 17 years ago

I was wondering if we were supposed to choose only one option. And I'm flattered by your assumption that I enjoy doing my job more than surfing the web -- it isn't always true, even though I try to work as if it were ;-)

GeneralMaximus• 17 years ago

I use:

1. Mac OS X - for "normal people" stuff. Web browsing, IM, Twitter, music, movies, foo.

2. Linux (Ubuntu) - so that I can build (3).

3. Haiku (http://haiku-os.org) - because I can.

antirez• 17 years ago

I've two laptops, one with Mac OS X and one with Linux. I use both for development but as a client I prefer Mac OS X that Just Works. It was fun years ago to hack on config files and even to write my own device drivers when it was needed, it was a game with the benefit of learning a lot of stuff, but seriously, I expected Linux to be mature enough after a few years... instead it's the same problems again and again. All my wishes for Linux are instead incarnated by Mac OS X, so after more than 10 years of only linux one year ago I switched to mac os x, and I'm very happy so far.

jamesbritt7• 17 years ago

I have a Mac mini and Linux laptop, and use both for development, but prefer Linux Kubuntu that Just Works.

Not sure what your specific issues are, but I've been finding development on Linux to be much more accommodating for me.

path3• 17 years ago

Linux seems to be a development "Just Works" environment, e.g. apt just works, and getting dependencies is simple, or at least reliable.

On the mac getting libraries can be painful with MacPorts (I don't use Fink, does anyone know if it's better?)

zimbabwe11• 17 years ago

What about the Leopard UI is snarky? As an interface geek, I'm curious to hear your thoughts on it.

The specific issues the OP mentioned were installing drivers and tweaking system preferences.

timdorr• 17 years ago

Speaking particularly about hacking on my OS of choice, I've got to hand it to the MacPorts crew for making that kind of thing possible without serious headaches. I've got a custom build of Apache, PHP (yes, I know...) and MySQL alongside my desktop OS tools that I love to use. It's a best of both worlds. Mac OS X from the developer's perspective is basically Linux done right.

moe• 17 years ago

Mac OS X from the developer's perspective is basically Linux done right.

That's an often-cited overgeneralization.

I'm a developer and OSX is not Linux done right for me. In my book the OSX window management is ridiculously clumsy and gives me nowhere near the speed/control that I have under ion3. For example: The latter gives me tabs on every frame, that means I can rapidly tab through any windows I have attached there, without moving my eyes. It also lets me setup multiple parallel mini-IDEs without thinking, because everything stays in place and never overlaps - unless I explicitly move it or make it so. People often get dizzy watching me because my workflow involves a lot of muscle memory; I know which sequence of keystrokes gets me where, hence my edit/compile/test roundtrips are quite a bit faster than what I've seen on eclipse or OSX jockeys - who commonly have to fall back to the cable-rat for any sequence that deviates from what their IDE anticipates (e.g. to juggle a few config files along the line).

For bragging rights, my sequence to setup a new "mini-IDE" with a 50/50 horizontal split (browser window full width on top) and a 50/50 vertical split in the bottom frame (two terminal windows each in left/right):

   * F9, Enter  (new desktop)
   * Alt+s (split horizontal)
   * Alt+Down (move to bottom frame)
   * Alt+d (split vertical)
   * F1, F1 (launch two xterms, left)
   * Alt+right (move to right frame)
   * F1, F1 (launch two xterms, right)
   * Alt+up (move to top frame)
   * F5 (launch browser)

That sequence takes me under 5 seconds, zero thinking and ofcourse I have the freedom to create any layout appropiate for the task at hand, with just a few keystrokes.

These sequences are my bread & butter (have 7 virtual desktops open for various tasks right now). I can not imagine going back to an old-fashioned mouse-driven window manager ever again.

So, show me functionality like that on OSX, then we can start talking about the other areas where OSX falls short for me.

kashif3• 17 years ago

What rubbish, a Mac doesnt 'just work'. Dont't get me wrong - Macs are good but this high ground is BS.

@antirez what device driver did you have to write for linux, can you point me to your source code? And seriously, linux has matured significantly, what distribution have you tried? And how about quoting specific stuff instead of the some general gyaan.

chewbranca2• 17 years ago

Fact of the matter is OSX 'just works' better than anything else _I_ have personally used. Less hassles, less issues, less crashes than linux or windows. And when you have lots of people saying the same thing, its not 'high ground' its a result of having a unix based OS that you don't have to waste your time to have it work.

I switched to OSX after using linux as my primary OS for about 5 or 6 years, and the big difference for me was that I didn't have to spend valuable time actually getting osx to work. Linux is amazingly customizable which can be great, but when it comes to getting work done all I care about is having a terminal, vim, and being able to run a local server to test my work. Anything else that I have to configure is just getting in my way.

Edit: As much as I like OSX, there is only only app that I actually require that is OSX specific, and that is quicksilver, which for me completely changes my workflow and allows me to productively use a 13" laptop as my primary development machine without the need for an external monitor. I think also goes to show my point, that OSX doesn't necessarily have any spectacular features or applications that draw me too it, but really its the fact that it is a unix based OS that I can use without hassle.

uriel2• 17 years ago

Plan 9 from Bell Labs ( http://plan9.cat-v.org ) and Inferno ( http://code.google.com/p/inferno-os/ )

btw02• 17 years ago

Do you use Plan 9 as your main OS?

uriel2• 17 years ago

I do use many OSes during the day, Plan 9 is the only one I actually enjoy using.

dtf• 17 years ago

Question for Mac/Windows users: I develop on Linux, but occasionally on Mac or Windows. To be honest I'm pretty happy with a text editor and a few terminals on any platform, but one thing I miss is fast window management. Specifically:

* Focus follows mouse

* Alt+LMB drag to move whole window

* Alt+MMB drag to move nearest corner (ie resize)

The default Mac interface in particular I find difficult, as there's just one tiny resize tab in one corner. Is there anything that can help me here? Or do you do things differently?

psadauskas• 17 years ago

I'm the same. I use Windows for gaming, and I have a case of Mac envy for all the slick apps, but everytime I get more than a couple windows open, I really, really miss my tiling window manager (http://awesome.naquadah.org/). Not having anything I need within one or two keystrokes (or having to reach for the mouse) feels very cumbersome now.

krakensden• 17 years ago

I feel the same way about window managers. For some reason, the less user friendly they get, the more usable they are.

thenduks3• 17 years ago

Put your windows where you want them at the size you want them and don't ever touch them again... that's what I do, anyway. Expose to get at things that are hidden. I also use hiding apps in general a lot, cmd+h to hide and then either click the dock, use opt+tab or use a launcher like quicksilver or launchbar to get those apps back.

Personally I don't use the mouse much at all so I don't need focus follows mouse, and I don't move windows and instead use the methods described above to move between them.

cpr• 17 years ago

Also, note that you can use Spotlight to do fast app switching, just like Launchbar or Quicksilver: just type your Spotlight search shortcut (mine is control-space), type the first few letters of the app name, and hit return.

It's good enough I gave up on Quicksilver. I never used the fancier features.

jhickner5• 17 years ago

There are a couple of mac apps I use that get you most of the way there:

MercuryMover - lets you move windows and resize them to preset positions with hotkeys (left half of screen, top half of screen, etc.)

MondoMouse - adds hotkeys that allow you to drag or resize a window from any position

zimbabwe11• 17 years ago

On the Mac, the trick is to figure out what size you want for your apps and keep them there. Safari's always big for me, iTunes I almost always keep shrunk down, Mail shows a few messages at a time and has a large window for message display. Then I control everything via keyboard so focus never really bothers me.

There's also a Mac application that lets you resize your window from any side, but I don't recall what it's called.

jodrellblank• 17 years ago

There's an app called KatMouse for Windows which might be able to do focus follows mouse.

(I really use it because it lets me use the scrollwheel on any window, without bringing the window to the foreground or giving focus to it).

Zancarius• 17 years ago

I'm not so sure about Vista/Win7 but Windows XP's tweakui allows a primitive form of "focus follows mouse." It doesn't work exactly like I'm used to with other managers, but it also doesn't require loading additional software (well, beyond going to MS' site and downloading tweakui).

mixmax3• 17 years ago

Related question for Mac users: Don't you ever view windows in fullscreen? It seems there's no easy way to get windows to fullscreen, except for laboriously resizing and dragging to make it fit with the screen. This is one of the things that threw me off Mac (I bought one that I used as my main OS for about half a year, but I just never really liked it)

So do Mac users simply not like fullscreen windows, do they all have some utility that does this, or am I just missing something? To me it seems like an extreme shortcoming, but I'm sure there's a reason for the limitation.

bayareaguy2• 17 years ago

Although it does me little good at the moment since HN's text area is a mere 6 lines, I'm posting this from Opera's fullscreen mode which I use quite frequently.

While few applications on any platform seem to support this kind of true fullscreen mode, I use "almost fullscreen" windows all the time: on OSX the green orb in the upper left corner of every window acts as a toggle which maximizes the window or returns it to its original size. I say "almost fullscreen" because the omnipresent menu bar and window decorations remain visible when you work this way.

zimbabwe11• 17 years ago

The reason: Apple designed OS X to focus on using multiple windows at once, and they didn't want developers making single-window apps that ate at the screen. It's why, of their own applications, the only ones that allow full-screen are their video players, the iWork suite, and the pro apps. Those are the only applications Apple thinks ought to be maximized.

There's an application called Mega Zoomer that gives all Cocoa apps a sexy fullscreen view. But mostly, the answer's that Mac users don't like fullscreen.

chewbranca2• 17 years ago

You can definitely get some windows in full screen. There is a program called megazoomer which will allow you get fullscreen for a lot of OSX apps. I use it all the time to have a full screen terminal. I also use full screen in Mac Vim which I believe is a built in feature, not added in by megazoomer.

Edit: typo

mmphosis• 17 years ago

I do things differently.

In 1986, I used QNX with primitive window managers -- I still miss a scroll button with a large usable trackball to scroll through code, and the focus followed pointer. I started using Macs about 1987, and the interface felt awkward at first, but I liked it's overlapping windows as opposed to apps that filled the screen, or only ran at a specific resolutions.

I remember Microsoft Excel for DOS which was ported from Macintosh. Since it was DOS, they built an entire Window Manager for Excel. I think that this is why Windows inherited the application windows within windows (Multiple Document Interface) that some applications still have, and some people still love MDI in apps like Opera. I think that because of this Excel port, Windows inherited function names from the original Mac API. I don't like the gymnastics of using my pinky finger to hold down the Control key in Windows, I'd prefer using my thumb on the Command key in Mac OS, but thankfully Microsoft put out a little hack to reverse those keys.

To me, Linux inherits X Windows, features from older Unix window managers, and a bias from Windows because that's what a lot of people have used. But Linux brings lots of choices and possibilities, and lots of configuring if that's what your into.

Since the advent of USB mice, the Mac now has more than one mouse button. I remember seeing a mouse at a CAD/CAM show that probably had about nine buttons on the mouse.

Don't flip the bozo bit.

ivanstojic• 17 years ago

I've been using Mac OS on and off for the last six years, but in the last year it has replaced Linux as my dominant workstation OS. I still have a few Linux and Windows build machines around the office.

thorax• 17 years ago

I use:

Windows/Windows/Windows/Windows/OSX side-by-side, shared keyboard through Synergy (w/ synergy server as a Vista+Vaio).

With 4 perpetual ssh connections to different flavors of Linuxy servers (CentOS/CentOS/Fedora/SuSE). With 2 perpetual RDP sessions open to 2 more Windows boxen.

mattmcknight• 17 years ago

I use Blackberry OS quite a bit as well...

mathogre• 17 years ago

Mac OS X is what I use at home on my iMac and MacBook. At work I use Linux on compute servers for development and data analysis, and connect to the machines via (cough) Windows.

cema• 17 years ago

I use Windows, various versions, both at work and at home. Ubuntu only at home, but more and more. Going to try a Mac OS just for fun.

wavesplash• 17 years ago

Most used? My smartphones: I used WebOS (linux underneath) and MacOS (stripped down iphone version) the most.

10ren• 17 years ago

Linux, but one annoyance is about 10% of the time I have to manually enable the LAN connection to my ADSL modem. I never had to do that with Windows.

For developing it's great though.

MikeW• 17 years ago

My main laptop runs Windows 7 - nearly all development is done on this, compiles using Visual Studio 2008 and Cygwin. My netbook runs Windows 7 - I do nearly all my social/recreational stuff on that machine. Also it has VGA out and I've come to rely on Win7s projector detection magic for presentations to just work. It's the only machine I travel with. My top-of-the-range Alum Macbook runs just OSX, got it for xcode, which is gathering dust because most of my dev work is in VS.net and even after months I still can't get into the swing of using OSX. Machines synced with the amazing DropBox of course.

In serverland, 1 dedicated server (France) and 1 slice (USA) running Ubuntu 9.04 server, the other vps running RHEL; Mono 2.4.2.

I always have a stack of Putty windows open.

minus13• 17 years ago

I assume this type of poll is self-selecting and that Windows is greatly underrepresented. In a 2005 article, PG states that the ycombinator visitor OS breakdown is as follows: Windows 66.4%, Macintosh 18.8%, Linux 11.4%, and FreeBSD 1.5%

I would love to see the current OS breakdown from ycombinator logs to compare. Anyone?

derefr• 17 years ago

It wouldn't help much: I imagine people are mostly on HN when they aren't working, and so are possibly on a secondary computer that doesn't necessarily run their preferred/default OS.

khingebjerg• 17 years ago

A lot of people have to use Windows at work, and i think that's why Windows scores that high in the visitor OS breakdown.

ratsbane• 17 years ago

Here's a breakdown based on referrals from YC to a short essay I wrote about a month ago comparing Bing Travel and Kayak. There were 2382 uniques from YC over two days to that page:

  45.5% Windows
  37.6% Mac
  15.1% Linux

Comparing that with an e-commerce site I work with which has a less geek-centric audience, during the same two days:

  84.94% Windows
  12.46% Mac
  1.55% Linux

minus13• 17 years ago

Thanks for the information. These numbers seem more plausible given my own anecdotal evidence. Now compare this to the poll percentages:

  21.37% Windows (199)
  40.28% Mac (375)
  35.12% Linux (327)

My conclusion is that a Linux user is far more motivated than a Mac or Windows user to respond to this poll, making the results interesting, but not accurate.

mixmax3• 17 years ago

Interesting to see those and grandparents numbers and compare them with the poll.

Seems like there's a discrepancy somewhere, and I would say that it's users voting for the OS they would like to use as their main OS and not the one they actually use.

The little tricks that psychology plays on us...

jyothi• 17 years ago

Actually we would need 2 set of numbers from PG.

[1] ycombinator visitor OS breakdown

[2] ycombinator visitor OS breakdown of people who actively contribute by voting/comments. (note intentionally avoiding the ones who post)

Given what user ratsbane reports (above) - windows 46% & mac 38% the gap is not big. So it could be like among visitors the breakdown win-(mac+linux) is like 60-30, then among ones who check out articles 45-50 and among ones who contribute it is 30-60.

Additionally it might be the case looking at comments people vote on both mac & linux as they use both and at same capacities.

MaysonL• 17 years ago

I wonder how much, if any, significant difference there is between this poll and data from the server logs?

csomar• 17 years ago

Mac was recommended by many of my friends, so I'll say it's good. However I tried linux (mandriva) one time and I'll never get BACK to any linux version (although I like the servers os), wonder how you work with them. Linux is fast, but not comfortable to work with

lallysingh• 17 years ago

Mac Laptop, (Open)Solaris desktop. A good combination for me.

drhowarddrfine• 17 years ago

I have 10 FreeBSD server boxes, 1 Linux box for compiling web apps for Linux and one Windows box for testing in IE. My laptop runs FreeBSD, too.

ntoshev• 17 years ago

It would be interesting to compare the results from this poll to the actual browser statistics of the Hacker News site.

kellishaver• 17 years ago

I have a Macbook that runs Leopard and my desktop runs WinXP Pro. I prefer the Mac OS to Windows, but the Windows PC has more powerful hardware for running the graphics apps and my little white Macbook just can't keep up.It also has a 24in display and a full-size keyboard, which makes it a little more practicle to use for long periods of time. Some day, when I can justify the expense of a 24in iMac, I'll switch entirely to Mac. In the mean time, I use them both about equally. The Mac is far superior as a dev environment.

wglb• 17 years ago

I use Linux (major parts of the workhorses) open BSD (routers) Mac (for video conferences and development support). There is a freebsd there for good measure.

cubicle67• 17 years ago

Work - Linux

Home - OSX

theschwa• 17 years ago

So about 78% use a Unix based system and 22% use something else.

bayareaguy2• 17 years ago

All of the above: at work I have a Windows desktop and several servers running Linux and Solaris, at home I use a Mac OSX laptop along with a colocated FreeBSD server.

crabl• 17 years ago

I just recently migrated from a late-2006 MacBook Pro with Leopard to a shiny new ThinkPad T500 with Ubuntu Jaunty. I'm actually impressed with how well Linux on the desktop has matured over the past few years (I experimented with Ubuntu in late 2005 and it was nowhere near as refined as it is today), moreover, how easy it was to get everything working as seamlessly as it did on the Mac.

Granted, in terms of user interface (among other things), OS X is far superior to Gnome; however, aside from the gorgeous design of Aqua, in terms of actual day-to-day usability, they are pretty much on par with each other (at least as far as I'm concerned).

duairc• 17 years ago

I use Linux exclusively. I did try OS X before (I have an iBook), but I just couldn't get into it. Linux users trying OS X have already commented on problems with window managers etc, so I won't repeat what they've said.

The real thing is that I just can't stand about OS X though isn't about practical like not being able to get a certain application or type of application working or anything like that (I do generally prefer the applications I use on Linux to their OS X counterparts though). It's simply that it's non-free, and the whole ecosystem of software for it is generally non-free. I know lots of Mac users and this doesn't seem to bug them or occur to them at all.

When I first turned on my iBook, I have to tell it more than once "no, I don't want a .Mac account". When I start iTunes, and possibly other applications (I just remember iTunes specifically), I have to click "I agree" to a license agreement. There are lots of really trivial bits of software which you'd get with `sudo apt-get install x` in Linux but the OS X equivalent is some sort of shareware crap... I found this to be particularly bad for tools that convert between file formats.

Am I just crazy or does this not bother anybody else that uses OS X?

zimbabwe11• 17 years ago

It's simply that it's non-free, and the whole ecosystem of software for it is generally non-free. I know lots of Mac users and this doesn't seem to bug them or occur to them at all.

That's because the exchange for a lot of OS X stuff is: You pay a small sum of money in exchange for developers that work their asses off on making your user experience perfect. Delicious Monster, Cultured Code, RealMac, Blacktree, Panic Inc. - especially Panic Inc. Then there are the developers who don't make commercial Mac apps but who are part of the same developer scene: Coudal, 37signals, Neubix, on and on.

They're actually why I bought OS X: Once upon a time, I used Virb - designed by Neubix - read their blog, and slowly came across these other developers and their blogs, and fell in love with all these small development teams whose lives focus on developing their applications and making a profit. When I got my Mac, I started with a few of those teams' applications. Specifically, I bought Panic's Coda and demoed CC's Things. The experiences I get with those applications are stupendous.

Coda's the only thing I use that makes me love coding; without it, I get bored easily with the processes. I'd say it's absolutely been worth my $100 purchase. A hundred dollars for a code editor, FTP transmitter, CSS styler, a set of well-formatted reference books, and in-app browser testing? That's a damned good deal. And yes: I can do that for free, I could open emacs next to Safari, download free guides online. But it's worth my money not to ever have to bother with that stuff at all.

The license agreement... I don't find the license agreement at all frustrating. You click "Accept" once, then never see it again. MobileMe I got almost immediately: It syncs up everything I've got, gives me a nice email system, and it's worth the money I pay for it. I've seen the free alternatives, and they're not worth paying money for.

As for the "trivial bits of software", I've found I need very few applications to complete my Mac experience. I used the free OnyX to tweak my settings, I got Dropbox, and outside of Coda and iWork I find I rarely need anything else. I used to use Fluid.app to run web applications I liked, and that was free. Max converts every file format I need converted, excepting WMVs which I can convert using iTunes in a virtual simulator, and I need to convert WMVs very rarely.

Some people need free. Some people think that everything should be free. They're absolutely allowed to go that route. But most Mac users don't find it outrageous to pay developers for their time. A hundred dollars for a product is nothing, when that hundred dollars ensures never once having to look in a help manual to get something done or dealing with a crash or a slowdown or anything, really. It's similar to the thousands of dollars spent on the Mac itself. You don't pay that money for the RAM, or the screen. You pay that money because Apple tries to guarantee that things don't fuck up for you, and the impressive thing about Apple is that things really don't fuck up. I've been on my current set-up for a year and I've had five total crashes, each from weeks of multitasking processes without ever putting my computer to sleep. I have no problems that I can't find an app for. A lot of things on the Mac are so simple that I now have problems using Windows and Linux because they can't handle the functions that I use now. So no, that doesn't bother me, because for my money I get trust. Working with Ubuntu bothers me, because things don't feel like part of a logical whole. It's a matter of personal preference.

Tichy3• 17 years ago

While I voted you up for interesting insights into another mindset, just one inaccuracy: 'You click "Accept" once, then never see it again.' - actually, it happens with every iTunes update. Even if you read the license the first time (and I don't), how many more times are you going to read it? So Apple can put in the license whatver they want?

Also I don't like your tone when you say "But most Mac users don't find it outrageous to pay developers for their time. "

It really isn't about that. I just don't want to tie myself to proprietary software. And something like apt is fundamentally impossible with proprietary software, unless you go the App store route (let Apple control everything).

Whenever I install a proprietary application that I have downloaded from some website I googled for, I feel as if my Computer has become unclean and untrustworthy.

Basically, the second half of your post is just nonsense ("Apple never fucks up etc."), but as I said, the first part was OK.

jamesbritt7• 17 years ago

" When I start iTunes, and possibly other applications (I just remember iTunes specifically), I have to click "I agree" to a license agreement"

Side question: Is it possible to get and use iTunes without agreeing to let Apple spy on you? The EULA says I have to grant Apple the right collect assorted information, but with no definite restrictions or limits on what I'm allowing them to collect. This is nuts. I pay several hundred dollars for a Mini, and to use the software I have agree to annoying bullshit like that?

OK, rant over.

path3• 17 years ago

I have a few Mac's and I run VM's on them with Ubuntu and OpenSolaris, I also have Windows XP available on a VM, but I have less and less need to use it.

dhughes• 17 years ago

Linux at home for seven hours a day and Windows at work off and off for 9 hours per day mostly just office stuff.

I prefer Linux for its freedom, I'll put up with the lack of a polished OS and inconveniences for the freedom it provides.

_b8r0• 17 years ago

All of the above. I use a Windows Vista laptop for most work, A Mac Mini hooked up to the TV for Movies, Music, Photos and syncing my iPhone, a Windows XP VM with Adobe Lightroom for touching up photos, a Linux box upstairs for Music, file serving and number crunching, various Linux VMWare images for development in Django, Perl, Ruby etc., an OpenBSD PC as a Firewall and IDS and an Amiga 1200T for Email (YAM) and Usenet (NewsCoaster).

catch404• 17 years ago

I use Fedora Core on my laptop and desktop pcs, and use a windows box with terminals to Fedora Core servers at work.

I've been thinking of getting a macbook lately - I've never used OSX and have heard good things (I also love the look of them).

I'm torn between my tried and true Fedora/ Thinkpad (I'll upgrade my existing one) combo and a shiny new macbook.

Are there any converts here? Did you miss the package manager? Do you find the paid upgrades not worth it compared to the 6 monthly Linux distro revisions?

I have a bad feeling I'll miss the convenience of yum install [package].

celticagent• 17 years ago

I have 2 desktops and 2 laptops, all running Windows. FWIW, I still like being able to open the hood and tweak.

But not enough to change my OS completely (a la Linux)

Poll: What OS do you use everyday, or most often?

Related Stories