DBSTalk Forum banner

What OS will users choose

  • Stay as long as they can

    Votes: 5 26.3%
  • Upgrade when they upgrade computers

    Votes: 10 52.6%
  • Mac OS

    Votes: 5 26.3%
  • Linux

    Votes: 4 21.1%
  • ChromeOS

    Votes: 1 5.3%
  • Other

    Votes: 3 15.8%
41 - 60 of 87 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
That's not accurate; my Macs can send true 4K (and higher) to a monitor that can handle it.
9:31 AM - PDT

@kucharsk

Absolutely! My Hackintosh is displaying in native 4K at 3840 x 2160. The BenQ 28" 4K EL2870U monitor
is also HDR. So will be the BenQ 32" that I'm saving for. I have $50 already saved this month towards the
32" BenQ.


TimeLord04
 

· Beware the Attack Basset
Joined
·
26,461 Posts
Discussion Starter · #42 ·
That's not accurate; my Macs can send true 4K (and higher) to a monitor that can handle it.
They can technically send it but the result may be less than desirable (typically the text is too small on a <43" TV). When you ask it to start scaling things, it has a performance impact (according to at least two of the videos that I watched).
 

· Beware the Attack Basset
Joined
·
26,461 Posts
Discussion Starter · #46 ·
Even Microsoft is onboard with Linux these days... :)
I'd rather get my hands on the Google distribution based on Debian Unstable.

The Microsoft product is there because Windows doesn't offer the efficiency and variety of filesystems that modern cloud systems demand.
 

· Icon
Joined
·
4,491 Posts
I'd rather get my hands on the Google distribution based on Debian Unstable.

The Microsoft product is there because Windows doesn't offer the efficiency and variety of filesystems that modern cloud systems demand.
I'm working on this project at work where I need to deal with an Ubuntu Linux VM. How you think this is a good OS for day to day work for the average person is beyond me. Between all the security nuances, crazy command lines, etc. this has taken much longer then its had to. We even had all our scripts working on the Mac, which is supposed to be close to Linux, but when we tried to run them on Linux, one issue after another.

Even something stupid like setting an environment variable from a script has to be overly complicated.

There was another thing where we had to pipe in inputs to stdin which worked fine on the Mac, but on Ubuntu we got an "ioctl error". That's another issue, all the error messages are so cryptic and require a bunch of time googling.

And we can't run a UI on that VM because its an "operational" Linux box.

Sure, it's fine as a base for your Docker image for a K8s pod, but I can see why it has only 2% market share lol.

Windows has lost a bit of market share to Mac over the past decade, but not a whole lot. Linux has always been a non-event for the home market.
 

· Beware the Attack Basset
Joined
·
26,461 Posts
Discussion Starter · #48 ·
I'm working on this project at work where I need to deal with an Ubuntu Linux VM. How you think this is a good OS for day to day work for the average person is beyond me. Between all the security nuances, crazy command lines, etc. this has taken much longer then its had to. We even had all our scripts working on the Mac, which is supposed to be close to Linux, but when we tried to run them on Linux, one issue after another.
I hope I've not given anyone the impression that I'm a fan of Ubuntu (especially recent versions that feature Snap packages). Ubuntu offers desktop versions as a courtesy as their primary area of concentration is servers and similar where they can sell support contracts.
Even something stupid like setting an environment variable from a script has to be overly complicated.
You speak as if that is substantially easier in a Windows environment. Depending on whether the variable is a system variable or a user variable, that kind of stuff may even require logging out and back in again in Windows!

In most popular Linux (and Mac) shells, it is a simple "export <parameter>=<value>".
There was another thing where we had to pipe in inputs to stdin which worked fine on the Mac, but on Ubuntu we got an "ioctl error". That's another issue, all the error messages are so cryptic and require a bunch of time googling.
That seems like it may be more of an issue with design metaphors on the platform that the software originated on than with a different operating system. I find new programming languages like Rust and Go to be less obtuse than PowerShell and its long-winded OOP classes.
And we can't run a UI on that VM because its an "operational" Linux box.
Spinning up another VM takes seconds (unless you're using the WSL). Maybe you could approach it that way.
Windows has lost a bit of market share to Mac over the past decade, but not a whole lot. Linux has always been a non-event for the home market.
With school-age kids growing up with school-provided Chromebooks, I think that's likely to change pretty quickly. Windows is just too messy to interoperate with given its unique character sets and lack of modern filesystem support. The Mac platform could pick up a lot of that slack if the hardware (and all the requisite adapters -- probably why users choose laptops over desktops in the Mac world) didn't cost so damn much.

For me, the most unfathomable downside of programming on Windows is that Microsoft keeps introducing new programming tools. How long do you suppose it will be before Typescript replaces C#?

Apple has only put their development community through a couple such changes (Pascal to Objective C and then to Swift) and each time, they lost some key developers.
 

· Icon
Joined
·
4,491 Posts
You speak as if that is substantially easier in a Windows environment. Depending on whether the variable is a system variable or a user variable, that kind of stuff may even require logging out and back in again in Windows!
Yes, it is. Much.

If I run a batch file that sets an environment variable, and the batch file finishes, the environment variable is set as expected.

If I run a shell script that sets an environment variable, and the shell file finishes, the environment variable is NOT set as expected because it ran in a "child shell". To get it to stick in the current shell as a batch file would, you need to run it with the source command. And that's after you ran the chmod +x on it in the first place.

In most popular Linux (and Mac) shells, it is a simple "export <parameter>=<value>".
Not if you're trying to automate it. See above.

That seems like it may be more of an issue with design metaphors on the platform that the software originated on than with a different operating system. I find new programming languages like Rust and Go to be less obtuse than PowerShell and its long-winded OOP classes.Spinning up another VM takes seconds (unless you're using the WSL). Maybe you could approach it that way.
It's a VM that was spun up in AWS.

With school-age kids growing up with school-provided Chromebooks, I think that's likely to change pretty quickly.
Not sure what you're talking about here because ChromeOS has even less market share then Linux.

Windows is just too messy to interoperate with given its unique character sets and lack of modern filesystem support.
Windows uses UTF-16 which is a standard. Not sure what you're talking about here either. NTFS and even FAT32 is "good enough" for 99.99% of home users.

The Mac platform could pick up a lot of that slack if the hardware (and all the requisite adapters -- probably why users choose laptops over desktops in the Mac world) didn't cost so damn much.
Most young people choose laptops regardless of the OS.

For me, the most unfathomable downside of programming on Windows is that Microsoft keeps introducing new programming tools. How long do you suppose it will be before Typescript replaces C#?
As an actual software engineer, I'll quote the recent Twitter employee who got fired and say "you have no clue what you're talking about".

From day one of the IBM PC in 1983, the main programming language was C. First Borland C/C++, then when Microsoft took over it became Visual C/C++ but the language didn't change at all (aside from a few random hobbyists that used Pascal and/or Visual Basic for a short time, but neither of those languages were ever used heavily in professional environments). Around the early 2000's, C# became a thing. 20 yrs later, its still a thing if you're programming in Windows.

Except nobody really programs in Windows anymore except hobbyists and some small fly-by-night companies.

Most reputable tech companies today and using Java for the backend (some Kotlin as well). Facebook uses PHP. Some more recent unicorns like Uber use Go. For frontend, its pretty much Java script and the framework of your choice.

Apple has only put their development community through a couple such changes (Pascal to Objective C and then to Swift) and each time, they lost some key developers.
If you quit programming because a new language or technology came out, you shouldn't be a programmer.
 

· Icon
Joined
·
4,491 Posts
You do know that ChomeOS, Android, and hundreds of GNU distributions are all Linux based, don't you?
You do know that ChromeOS is counted separately, don't you? (not by me, but by the people that count such things). Those same counting people also say its an Android phone and not a Linux phone (since I'll assume you know there are phones that ACTUALLY run main branch Linux while an Android runs a heavily modified Linux kernel).
 

· Beware the Attack Basset
Joined
·
26,461 Posts
Discussion Starter · #52 ·
Windows uses UTF-16 which is a standard. Not sure what you're talking about here either. NTFS and even FAT32 is "good enough" for 99.99% of home users.
UTF-16 is mostly a Microsoft problem (shared by Java and Javascript?) and it is supported mostly within NTFS and Microsoft's own file formats (that they've paid to establish as "standards"). Other modern operating systems use UTF-8 across the board that requires as little has half the storage space yet supports up to 4 byte characters where UTF-16 is either two bytes or four. UTF-16 also suffers the question of "little endian" byte ordering (used by both Intel core and ARM cpus).

NTFS is fine for standalone desktop and portable computer use but at some point, everyone is going to need a NAS (especially if they are using laptops) and the best way to do that isn't using Windows.

The fact many Windows applications (including some Microsoft applications) use the Windows character sets rather than UTF-16 makes interoperability even within Windows a fairly a fairly nasty proposition without specialized tools or import/export procedures.

The dependence on file extensions (a holdover from the 1970s) is another bewildering oddity.

Don't get me started on the places where FAT32 doesn't intersect with NTFS.
From day one of the IBM PC in 1983, the main programming language was C. First Borland C/C++, then when Microsoft took over it became Visual C/C++ but the language didn't change at all (aside from a few random hobbyists that used Pascal and/or Visual Basic for a short time, but neither of those languages were ever used heavily in professional environments).
I go back to practical programming where MBASIC and CBASIC were the order of the day. Turbo C didn't happen for quite a while (1987) and Borland C/C++ came in the '90s. Your misremembering the timeline pretty badly.
If you quit programming because a new language or technology came out, you shouldn't be a programmer.
If you have mountains of code that use one paradigm and the OS company (Apple, in this case) intimates that thou shalt change thy evil ways without providing the necessary tools to make the conversion, why bother messing with the platform?

When I went to work for realz on DOS platorms (my original work experience was with COBOL on Xenix), Visual Foxpro was the Microsoft recommended database platform and a lot of the code was nearly 100% FoxPro/dBASE/DBXL. Only later did it turn to VisualBASIC and VisualC perhaps in combination with SQL Server (thankfully, Microsoft never recommended Access for serious applications).

All along the way, most Linux distributions offer just about any programming platform you want (without the complication of those hideous DLLs) along with some very competent compilers, linters, linkers and editors.

I've spent the better part of a week fussing with translating between Windows-1251, ASCII (with and without "ANSI"), UTF-16, UTF-8 and old Mac encodings as part of a personal project and I can assure you that it has been no fun at all.
 

· Icon
Joined
·
4,491 Posts
UTF-16 is mostly a Microsoft problem (shared by Java and Javascript?) and it is supported mostly within NTFS and Microsoft's own file formats (that they've paid to establish as "standards"). Other modern operating systems use UTF-8 across the board that requires as little has half the storage space yet supports up to 4 byte characters where UTF-16 is either two bytes or four. UTF-16 also suffers the question of "little endian" byte ordering (used by both Intel core and ARM cpus).
You seriously have no clue what you're talking about. Windows & Mac & iOS use UTF-16. Also Linux has support UTF-16 for ages.

everyone is going to need a NAS (especially if they are using laptops) and the best way to do that isn't using Windows.
Lol. No, not every needs or has a NAS.

The fact many Windows applications (including some Microsoft applications) use the Windows character sets rather than UTF-16 makes interoperability even within Windows a fairly a fairly nasty proposition without specialized tools or import/export procedures.
Again, you have no clue what you're talking about. Windows & C# uses UTF-16.

The dependence on file extensions (a holdover from the 1970s) is another bewildering oddity.
Lol, so how do you differentiate file types? How are file extensions different from having to chmod +x everything?

Don't get me started on the places where FAT32 doesn't intersect with NTFS.
Don't worry, I won't since they serve completely different purposes.

I go back to practical programming where MBASIC and CBASIC were the order of the day. Turbo C didn't happen for quite a while (1987) and Borland C/C++ came in the '90s. Your misremembering the timeline pretty badly.
Here's another example where you seriously have no clue what you're talking about. First off, I specifically mentioned the IBM PC, not some dinosaur mainframe you grew up on with punch cards. Turbo C was a Borland product btw.

If you have mountains of code that use one paradigm and the OS company (Apple, in this case) intimates that thou shalt change thy evil ways without providing the necessary tools to make the conversion, why bother messing with the platform?
Good thing you're retired. Technology changes every day. You wouldn't last a day in the real world if you whined every time there was a breaking change. That's SOP these days. And if you want to whine about breaking changes, you should have become a Microsoft developer since Microsoft was super stringent about no breaking changes up until .Net went open source. Java people have never cared about backwards compatibility.

When I went to work for realz on DOS platorms (my original work experience was with COBOL on Xenix), Visual Foxpro was the Microsoft recommended database platform and a lot of the code was nearly 100% FoxPro/dBASE/DBXL.
This explains why you are so out of touch with reality lol.

All along the way, most Linux distributions offer just about any programming platform you want (without the complication of those hideous DLLs) along with some very competent compilers, linters, linkers and editors.
How is a DLL different from a jar file or a lib file on linux?

I've spent the better part of a week fussing with translating between Windows-1251, ASCII (with and without "ANSI"), UTF-16, UTF-8 and old Mac encodings as part of a personal project and I can assure you that it has been no fun at all.
That sounds like you don't know what your doing then. Moving between code pages is all automated and mostly transparent to the developer and has been for ages.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
1,118 Posts
You do know that ChromeOS is counted separately, don't you? (not by me, but by the people that count such things). Those same counting people also say its an Android phone and not a Linux phone (since I'll assume you know there are phones that ACTUALLY run main branch Linux while an Android runs a heavily modified Linux kernel).
And the common desktop and server Linux kernel distros are GNU based. What's your point? Being able to modify the open source Linux kernel for your own needs is one of the great features of Linux. Even the Microsoft Linux based OS is easily modified if needed. Try that with a Windows NT kernel based OS.
 

· Icon
Joined
·
4,491 Posts
And the common desktop and server Linux kernel distros are GNU based. What's your point? Being able to modify the open source Linux kernel for your own needs is one of the great features of Linux. Even the Microsoft Linux based OS is easily modified if needed. Try that with a Windows NT kernel based OS.
What's yours? You told us like 3 yrs ago Windows was moving to a Linux kernel. What ever happened to that? We're talking home users here. Nobody at home is modifying Linux kernels except you & Harsh.

"Microsoft Linux based OS"? You mean WSL or Azure Linux? Lol. I can assure you nobody that uses Linux uses anything from Microsoft. Linux people hate anything Microsoft. Harsh is a perfect example. Every Mac/Linux Prod company I've ever worked at has had nothing Microsoft except Outlook. Java companies all use AWS.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
1,118 Posts
What's yours? You told us like 3 yrs ago Windows was moving to a Linux kernel. What ever happened to that? We're talking home users here. Nobody at home is modifying Linux kernels except you & Harsh.

"Microsoft Linux based OS"? You mean WSL or Azure Linux? Lol. I can assure you nobody that uses Linux uses anything from Microsoft. Linux people hate anything Microsoft. Harsh is a perfect example. Every Mac/Linux Prod company I've ever worked at has had nothing Microsoft except Outlook. Java companies all use AWS.
I have no reason to think MS is not still working on a Linux kernel for Windows. The MS CBL-Mariner 2.0 Linux distro is currently available on GitHub. It was updated in October...


 

· Icon
Joined
·
4,491 Posts
I have no reason to think MS is not still working on a Linux kernel for Windows. The MS CBL-Mariner 2.0 Linux distro is currently available on GitHub. It was updated in October...


Yeah, its the base Azure Linux container as I mentioned above. Nobody is running that at home or for any other purpose outside of Azure lol. And doubtful anybody would even run that in Azure when they can just run something proven like Ubuntu. But like I said, no Java shop is using Azure anyways. If you're a fly-by-night, random hole in the wall company using C# for production apps, you'd use Azure (maybe), but you wouldn't run them on Linux containers because you're a Windows shop. And .Net classic doesn't even run on Linux because it's tightly coupled to the Windows Kernel.

You can, of course, run .Net Core in a Linux container, but if you're doing that, you're just doing it to try to "be cool" (and failing) without really understanding the point of Linux containers. Go interview at a bunch of well known tech companies to get familiar with what tech stacks people actually use.

Maybe your fantasy Linux based Windows will come out in another 3 yrs? I'll check back.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
1,118 Posts
Yeah, its the base Azure Linux container as I mentioned above. Nobody is running that at home or for any other purpose outside of Azure lol. And doubtful anybody would even run that in Azure when they can just run something proven like Ubuntu. But like I said, no Java shop is using Azure anyways. If you're a fly-by-night, random hole in the wall company using C# for production apps, you'd use Azure (maybe), but you wouldn't run them on Linux containers because you're a Windows shop. And .Net classic doesn't even run on Linux because it's tightly coupled to the Windows Kernel.

You can, of course, run .Net Core in a Linux container, but if you're doing that, you're just doing it to try to "be cool" (and failing) without really understanding the point of Linux containers. Go interview at a bunch of well known tech companies to get familiar with what tech stacks people actually use.

Maybe your fantasy Linux based Windows will come out in another 3 yrs? I'll check back.
A Linux based Windows is certainly not my "fantasy". As far as I'm concerned MS can keep the fingers out of the Linux pie completely. I've just commented on Linux/MS links that have been reported in the tech press. Fine with me if it never happens, but MS is obviously looking at Linux just as they looked at Chromium and eventually adopted it for Edge. Neither one of us has any idea when or if MS might move ahead with a Linux based product.
 
41 - 60 of 87 Posts
Top