What OS do you have?
- Thread starter exleper
- Start date
parallelepipete
Aelod cysylltiol y Taliban Cymraeg
Mac OS 10.4 on desktop and 10.3 on laptop. Did have an XP machine but the mainboard went tits-up and I don't miss it.
I love* my Macs!
* Platonically
I love* my Macs!
* Platonically
fractionMan
Custom Title
At home I have a crappy laptop with win2k/redhat dual boot and a crappy winXP desktop. At work I have root passwords to about 20 boxes of various sizes. My favourite runs solaris and is the size of a large fridge. Most run redhat and my desktop is a winxp with cygwin box.
God that's boring.
God that's boring.
ChrisFilter
Like a boss.
home: XP
work desktop: XP
work powerbook: Tiger
work laptop: Suse 9.3
work desktop: XP
work powerbook: Tiger
work laptop: Suse 9.3
stdPikachu
Plughole in bathtub curve
Server runs Linux
TV server runs Linux
Workstation dual boots W2K (for Windows-only games) and Linux
Machine hooked up to the TV runs Linux
TV server runs Linux
Workstation dual boots W2K (for Windows-only games) and Linux
Machine hooked up to the TV runs Linux
BassJunkie
Clams on the half shell, and roller skates.
Gentoo linux, xp for the vpn to work 
dirtysanta
Original Casual
OSX 10.3
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
j26 said:Liar!
**Sends packet of screen wipes**
jæd said:
Is suspect that there'll be far more pc stats, partly because of browser identification isssues, partly because a lot of people who prefer macs will be toiling away on pcs during the working day. Others will use both platforms at home.
I use Mac OSX Tiger at home, but XP and 2000 at work.
lobster said:
Did Windows really get a lot of people into computers? Obviously I'm showing my age here, but people were always far more loyal to platforms such as the Amiga Vs ST, or the C64 vs Spectrum back in the day. Windows is just one of those default things that you just learn to deal with ime.
untethered
For industry & decency
Windows nearly got me _out_ of computers. The general bullshit and flakiness of Win95/98 was almost enough to make me pack it in entirely. Admittedly 2000 and XP are to some extent an improvement.
However, for the last few years I've been running various Linux distros exclusively. Currently Mandrake and Ubuntu, with the intention to switch to Ubuntu completely very shortly.
However, for the last few years I've been running various Linux distros exclusively. Currently Mandrake and Ubuntu, with the intention to switch to Ubuntu completely very shortly.
Out of curiosity I d/loaded and tried minix3 from http://www.minix3.org/. Burned it to a cd (it's live). Boots really quicky. There are a /few/ commands in /bin and /usr/bin. Even managed to get onto the net. Question is, who uses it? Seems like a great learning tool.
stdPikachu
Plughole in bathtub curve
As you surmise, Minix wasn't really designed to be a useful OS, but more of a hands-on textboox on how to build one correctly. Linus originally wrote Linux in order to show the auhtor of Minix that his way was "better" - the old macro-vs.-micro kernel debate.
It's an aesthetic thing. There are a whole bunch of reasons why a microkernel should be better, but in practice they are outweighed by the problems of debugging them.Crispy said:
And, for the record, Linus started writing a kernel for fun; but the initial development was done on minix. At that time, lots of people used minix because it was a zero-cost Unix, but Tanenbaum had no interest in enhancing minix because it was intended as a compact teaching tool.
As soon as Linux got "good enough", the people who were trying to do things with minix seem to have moved over.
jayeola said:
Thats Win95/8/Me. Windows 3.0 didn't have *any* users... (You can see where Windows Xp gets it multi-user capabilities from... Its kindof why I was so impressed witl Linux when I first installed it when I was at Uni... Wow... A proper multi-user system -- and its free...!)
Similar threads
