Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

What is the best OS

What are these alternatives of which you speak?

With windows there is another alternative, which is to change the shell/gui to something less demanding on resources. I believe you can also do a similar thing with osx albeit I have not tried it.
 
With windows there is another alternative, which is to change the shell/gui to something less demanding on resources. I believe you can also do a similar thing with osx albeit I have not tried it.

Why bother? Its not like duel/quad core chips are expensive and RAM is cheap as.
 
Why bother? Its not like duel/quad core chips are expensive and RAM is cheap as.

Depends on what you call cheap. The most I have spent in recent years on a desktop computer is £15 at a car boot sale for a 2 point something ghz, 64bit Sempron box with 1gb ram 80gb hd and xp installed. I triple booted the os with ubuntu 9.04 64bit version and browser linux and plugged into my cheap lcd tv to create a multimedia centre. Anyway my most recent project is a £5 car boot sale athlon xp 1800+ box with 2gb of ddr ram 40gb hd and nvidia 256mb graphics card. I wiped xp and replaced it with crunchbang linux and browser linux and found it to be a faster than the sempron box probably the extra ram. What is this cheap dual/quad core and ram? I doubt if I will ever use it until it turns up at a car boot sale :D
 
Why bother? Its not like duel/quad core chips are expensive and RAM is cheap as.

You've got bigger issues running modern software if changing the window manager gives a noticeable improvement. If your one of these overclockers who want to optimize every last thing, go for it, but most people don't care.

We are thankfully now at a stage that, gamers aside, the vast majority of people have boxes that are totally overpowered considering their average use, thats a good thing.
 
but incredibly easy to do with linux. :)

Yeah linux is great no doubt, I wouldn't want any other OS when its a box of the type that when it fails I get a call at 3am.

Its great at what it does being a rock solid server OS but I have no interest in using it as my daily work machine. Reading your post made me smile as it reminded me of seeing this cartoon a few days ago, enjoy.

supported_features.png
 
Your missing the point, its the priorities of the kernal developers that is being put into question.

I can see the point but the overall message is that desktop linux is not any good for multimedia tasks. This might have been true two years ago but not now. There is still an issue with restricted format support in distros like ubuntu but then you just download mint instead.
 
Media production is still an issue (though, interestingly, not at the high end), but not playback. Ubuntu makes installing codecs easy.
 
Yeah linux is great no doubt, I wouldn't want any other OS when its a box of the type that when it fails I get a call at 3am.

Its great at what it does being a rock solid server OS but I have no interest in using it as my daily work machine. Reading your post made me smile as it reminded me of seeing this cartoon a few days ago, enjoy.

supported_features.png

actually my response was to stowpirates assertion that many of todays popular OSes are running a hell of amount of bloat. He said this included some of the more popular linux ditros. I just trying to point out that disabling alot of this bloat is very easy in say for example Ubuntu. In comparison to OSX or Windows.

FWIW I am writing this on a 1.42 Ghz PowerPC G4 Mac Mini with 512 MB RAM running OSX 10.4.11.

To be honest it runs like a piece of shit. It manages itunes and web browsing.
Or watching a video. Multi tasking is pointless as is video editing. It ran great when I got it, but bloat from apple on the OSX updates has rendered it virtually unusable.
 
actually my response was to stowpirates assertion that many of todays popular OSes are running a hell of amount of bloat. He said this included some of the more popular linux ditros. I just trying to point out that disabling alot of this bloat is very easy in say for example Ubuntu. In comparison to OSX or Windows.

FWIW I am writing this on a 1.42 Ghz PowerPC G4 Mac Mini with 512 MB RAM running OSX 10.4.11.

To be honest it runs like a piece of shit. It manages itunes and web browsing.
Or watching a video. Multi tasking is pointless as is video editing. It ran great when I got it, but bloat from apple on the OSX updates has rendered it virtually unusable.

Turning off services in windows and linux is a simple task. Identifying what services are required for a stable system is another problem. I would guess your problem is more to do with unnecessary software starting at boot and maybe the stream of individual update processes from software you have installed. My main os is browser linux with a few extra bits of software installed for photo editing.
 
there's no programs starting at boot on that system other than the OS and automatic update for this. It's just a relatively old system struggling to run the current OSX.
 
actually my response was to stowpirates assertion that many of todays popular OSes are running a hell of amount of bloat. He said this included some of the more popular linux ditros. I just trying to point out that disabling alot of this bloat is very easy in say for example Ubuntu. In comparison to OSX or Windows.

FWIW I am writing this on a 1.42 Ghz PowerPC G4 Mac Mini with 512 MB RAM running OSX 10.4.11.

To be honest it runs like a piece of shit. It manages itunes and web browsing.
Or watching a video. Multi tasking is pointless as is video editing. It ran great when I got it, but bloat from apple on the OSX updates has rendered it virtually unusable.

Please define what that means?
 
there's no programs starting at boot on that system other than the OS and automatic update for this. It's just a relatively old system struggling to run the current OSX.

Is a less demanding version of linux a possible alternative?

I have no idea what is compatible with your machine but what about trying Mint Linux Gnome version or if you want something less demanding Xubuntu, Crunchbang or maybe even my favorite Browser Linux.

http://www.linuxmint.com/
http://www.xubuntu.org/
http://crunchbanglinux.org/
http://www.browserlinux.com/

Crunchbang appears to be popular at the moment


http://news.softpedia.com/news/First-look-CrunchBang-A-faster-Ubuntu-77535.shtml
 
I prefer OSX Leopard for all my everyday computing needs: Email, media consumption/editing, downloading, surfing and music making/farting around.


Windows 7 is what I use on my gaming PC and I like it very much.


Windows XP I use on my work PC and it...suffices. It was a good OS in it's day, but feature-wise is fairly limited these days.


So yeah - OSX for me, with W7 second.
 
Is a less demanding version of linux a possible alternative?

I have no idea what is compatible with your machine but what about trying Mint Linux Gnome version or if you want something less demanding Xubuntu, Crunchbang or maybe even my favorite Browser Linux.

http://www.linuxmint.com/
http://www.xubuntu.org/
http://crunchbanglinux.org/
http://www.browserlinux.com/

Crunchbang appears to be popular at the moment


http://news.softpedia.com/news/First-look-CrunchBang-A-faster-Ubuntu-77535.shtml

All of the above are for standard i386 architecture. I believe there are versions of Ubuntu and Gentoo (amongst others, just cannot recall of the top of my head) that will work on a PowerPC architecture, however this will mean losing the support for my ipod touch and the apps store.
Alternatively my other option is to increase the RAM to 1GB, however my cackhandedness means that this is not an option for me - opening the Mac Mini looks like a task - so it looks like an expensive trip to the mac dealership is required.

That is just 1 of my systems at home however, the rest all run different flavours of linux.
 
All of the above are for standard i386 architecture. I believe there are versions of Ubuntu and Gentoo (amongst others, just cannot recall of the top of my head) that will work on a PowerPC architecture, however this will mean losing the support for my ipod touch and the apps store.
Alternatively my other option is to increase the RAM to 1GB, however my cackhandedness means that this is not an option for me - opening the Mac Mini looks like a task - so it looks like an expensive trip to the mac dealership is required.

That is just 1 of my systems at home however, the rest all run different flavours of linux.

I've never done it myself but this video makes it look very easy http://www.lockergnome.com/diy/how-to-open-a-mac-mini/
 
trust me, I will fuck it up, I'm a person who managed to snap an ikea coffee table whilst assembling it. :D
I have looked into it previously but the next step to adding more RAM is to remove the HDD which is apparently held in place with plastic clips that you have to gently snap off. I fear that's where I would get unstuck.
 
All of the above are for standard i386 architecture. I believe there are versions of Ubuntu and Gentoo (amongst others, just cannot recall of the top of my head) that will work on a PowerPC architecture, however this will mean losing the support for my ipod touch and the apps store.
Alternatively my other option is to increase the RAM to 1GB, however my cackhandedness means that this is not an option for me - opening the Mac Mini looks like a task - so it looks like an expensive trip to the mac dealership is required.

That is just 1 of my systems at home however, the rest all run different flavours of linux.

There might be a version that works on your hardware here:

http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/ports/releases/jaunty/release/
 
Back
Top Bottom