It's hard to have an un-biased opinion on the age-old Windows vs. Linux vs. OSX argument (sorry uber geeks, no MINIX this time) as many people spend more time in one environment than that other. If you read ANY other comparisons, just keep that in mind. Also, the version of Linux that I'm using as a comparison is: LinuxMint v.7 - Gnome Edition (based on Ubuntu, which is based on Debian).
Windows - NT, 98, 98SE, 2000, XP, Vista, Windows 7
Cost: Desktop $200-$320 (Win 7)
Stereotype: "Normal" people (usually in bad mood due to spyware problems)
Pros:
- Compatibility (every app ever made can run on Windows)
- Ease of use (very good UI)
- Support & Purchase availability
- Regular updates
- Games (nearly the only major gaming O/S)
- Hardware independant (runs on anything, generally)
- Hardware support (requires drivers)
Cons:
- Price
- Viruses, malware, spyware (due to architecture of O/S)
- Stability (in some cases)
- Drivers
- Security (although regular updates help)
- The semi-annual reinstallation
- Too many versions
Who uses it:
- Pretty much everyone you know
- Businesses (due to popularity of the Office suite and application compatibility)
- Gamers
What else?
Let's get it straight. Windows is THE desktop standard and has been for as long as personal computers have been in your house and occupying your time. Nearly every application ever made runs on Windows and it will likely be this way for the forseeable future. But the news isn't all good. In many cases Windows requires a full reinstallation every 6 months due to viruses, trojans, malware, spyware, adware, browser hijacking, phishing...the list goes on and on. I understand that the latest versions are more secure, but still...I shouldn't have to 'be careful' when checking my email or checking out Facebook. If you've ever had to call Microsoft after losing your installation CD, you know it's almost 'not worth the hassle'...
Keep in mind that Windows' security vulnerabilities are mostly due to it's massive usage (IMO), but still...Windows is a very good operating system and there's a reason that it's #1 on the desktop (for now).
OSX - Panther, Tiger, Leopard, Snow Leopard
Cost: $600+ (hardware inclusive - basic model)
Stereotype: "Artsy" people dressed in black, wearing french berets, drinking non-fat lattes, stealing coffee shop wi-fi (due to money spent on lattes and expensive laptops)
Pros:
- Graphics and special effects are fantastic
- Stable (as it only runs on specific hardware)
- Upgrade price ($29 Snow Leopard upgrade? amazing!)
- Good Backup/Restore (Timevault) support
- Very easy to use
- Secure - nearly no viruses or spyware
- UI - very easy to learn and use
- Media support is top-notch (video/music/picture integration, the whole 'iLife' thing)
Cons:
- Only runs on Apple hardware (which is more expensive)
- Windows application compatibility (although this is getting much better)
- Very limited in what you can control
Who uses it:
- Graphics designers
- Web developers
- Publishers
- Rich people
- Video/Music producers
What else?
The early Mac experience was not one to be desired. It sucked to be quite honest. The only people in their right mind that would subject themselves to such torture were newspaper/magazine editors and graphic designers.
Now, cue the savior, Mac OSX. This "new" version took the best parts of the FreeBSD and NetBSD (a Unix variant) and incorporated it into the heart of the O/S, "nextstep", making it extremely secure and stable. The graphics and special effects were easily two years ahead of the competition, making it instantly 'cool' among young professionals and everyone who was pissed off at Microsoft (after having to reinstall twice a year and losing their resumes and photos from aunt Mae's second wedding). OSX is great for managing and manipulating music, video and photos from nearly any source. It's also quite easy to learn for those who are making the switch from Windows. Automatic backup (including revision control) is quite appealing to professionals who now choose OSX as their primary platform. Plus, "...holy shit those new macs are cool, eh!?"
Linux - Ubuntu, Fedora, Suse, RedHat, Gentoo, plus 8000000 other distributions
Cost: $0 ..."but only if your time is worthless"
Stereotype: Super geeks living in the dark basement of their parent's house, compiling kernels, drinking strong coffee, wearing birkenstocks and stained T-shirts with witty sayings on them
Pros:
- Free
- Secure
- Stable
- Open source
- Free applications
- New versions are interoperable with Windows and OSX
- Easily available
- Easy to install and use
- Graphics and UI are generally very good
Cons:
- Too many versions
- Upgrades usually 'break shit'
- Too many choices
Who uses it:
- Advanced users (hackers)
- Networking and security professionals
- Nearly every web site administrator in the world runs Apache on Linux
- IT guys
- You do! (cell phones, smart phones, routers, hubs, embedded devices)
What else?
10 years ago, Linux as a desktop was a big disappointment. There were way too many versions of the O/S, even BEFORE choosing a window manager. You had to be a genius to use it. It was extremely unstable and a huge pain in the ass. As an IT professional, I remember spending 6 HOURS editing my xorg.conf, just to get the right display resolution. Extremely frustrating to say the least...and whenever I updated the system EVERYTHING stopped working. Broken packages (if I could even figure out HOW to install it) and "dependancy hell" killed my Saturday nights. And support?? Like some message board is going to solve all my problems...gimme a break...
Apparently, 10 years is a long time.
Fast-forward to 2009 - Linux is now big business. Redhat, Ubuntu and Suse all have paid desktop support and are becoming the 'other guy' that gets mentioned whenever the quarterly budget review happens. Installing software used to be a headache (and a personal peeve of mine) but now, nearly every distribution has a graphical package manager. Although most of the well-known applications have different names than their Windows equivalent (MS Office - Openoffice, Outlook Express - Evolution, Internet Explorer - Firefox) each one is free and works just as well. Even the special effects manager "compiz fusion" has a 1-click installation and configuration and (IMO) looks better than any version of Windows. In addition, I have not once had to use the command line to do anything. Even wireless. Honestly though, it takes me at least 3 hours to build a Windows workstation (I'm talking drivers, updates and programs) and I have to be in the room the whole time. With the newest version of Linux (Mint) it's less than half of that and everything was working, even my webcam. Not one additional driver needed.
Windows vs. OSX- OSX experience is "cooler" but Windows as some nice effects as well (transparencies)
- OSX is more stable
- OSX is more secure
- Windows has more available applications (especially games)
- Windows is less expensive
- Windows can run on my current hardware
- Windows has too many versions
Verdict: OSX at home, Windows at work
Linux vs. Windows- Linux and associated applications are free in cost
- Linux has too many different versions
- Windows has far more applications
- Linux supports more devices upon installation
- Windows may have more complete hardware support (functionality), but you need to find the drivers
- Linux has superior security and stability
- Linux Compiz fusion graphics are better than Windows
- Windows transparencies are better than Linux
Verdict: Linux - no viruses and all my stuff works without drivers? I'll pay free bucks for that!
Linux vs. OSX- OSX is more stable (because Apple gets to choose the hardware)
- Linux runs on my current hardware
- OSX is much easier to upgrade (plus defined releases)
- OSX is far more expensive
- Linux is free
- Linux has more applications and you don't have to pay for them
- OSX has smoother graphics but Linux is very close
- OSX and Linux are equally secure
- OSX feels very restrictive compared to Linux
- Linux and OSX have many similarities
Verdict: OSX if you're rich, Linux if you're smart
Windows vs. Linux vs. OSXOverall verdict?
We've seen a few of the main differences between the three dominant desktop operating system players. I suppose that the only thing that's been determined is that there is more than enough room for each one to improve. There's no such thing as 'the perfect desktop'...just yet...
To sum it up, I'd like to offer the following advice:
- If you want to be cool, get OSX
- If you want to work, get Windows
- If you want to learn, get Linux.
Seriously though, moving forward into the next decade, we're going to see the fine lines between these three operating systems disappear. The next big step will be having OSX, Windows and Linux work seamlessly in one hetergeneous environment (we're actually starting to see it right now). Each one will become more like the others and in 5 years' time, you won't be able to tell the difference between them.
------------------------------
A little background on myself:
I grew up with computers (my parents owned a computer store). Ever since the days of the 486DX (yes, with the 'turbo' button of course...it makes it 'go faster'!) and modern operating systems in general, I've been completely in-love with the technology. This was my focus throughout high school, college and subsequent 10 years in the IT industry.
Notes:
- Compared Linux version is Linux Mint v. 7 - Gnome edition
- When I refer to Linux, I mean "The Linux kernel and GNU toolset" in general
- Nobody reads footnotes anymore