This is a discussion on Lurker surfaces, annoyed at some idiot posters - Linux ; In article , "DFS" wrote: > An opinion shared by the vast majority of the PC-using world, which rejects > free Linux/OSS dirtware and would rather pay for Windows/Mac/commercial > code. I'm pretty sure a PC user opting for a ...
In article <%2Lgk.4431$US3.firstname.lastname@example.org>,
> An opinion shared by the vast majority of the PC-using world, which rejects
> free Linux/OSS dirtware and would rather pay for Windows/Mac/commercial
I'm pretty sure a PC user opting for a Mac (and thereby Mac OS X) is a
vote for Unix, unbeknownst to those Mac buyers who just want a pretty,
When I installed OS X (on a very old mac w/300MHz processor) I was
impressed with its speed, uncrashability, and multiuser environment,
since I shared my computer back then. When I found that Unix was the
guts of OS X I was pleasantly surprised. Years later I opted to go Linux
on my Windows PC, ditching the preinstalled XP. OS X and the Ubuntu
installed on my Dell feel almost the same from inside of a shell.
The iBook I type this on has been up continuously for over 40 days,
through dozens of sleep/wake cycles, program installs, plug/unplug
cycles without a reboot. The Unix core of Mac OS X gets all the credit
for this stability. My Dell running XP, or my old OS 9 macs could never
stay up this long.
Does the Linux community feel that Apple's decision to go with BSD Unix
underpinnings help of hurt the Linux community, or makes no difference?
I probably would have not demanded Linux on my own PC if not for the
exposure to the shell and its power through OS X. So I think that Apple
is helping familiarize users with Unix, and if these users have no
access to Mac hardware they will want Linux instead.