My point of view on the arguments about different operating systems

My Opinion on the debate over different operating systems-general Linux technology-Linux technology and application information is as follows. In terms of technology, Mac and other * nix systems have their advantages, while Windows has its advantages. In turn, both have disadvantages. In terms of user usage, the two are faced with different user habits. Some people like the huge and easy windows, some like the fresh and gorgeous Mac, and some like the customization and transparency of linux. This is due to different usage habits, so I said that there is no best system, only the most suitable system.

Everyone speaks from their own standpoint. Naturally, their views are one-sided, but to varying degrees. A single operating system is difficult to meet the needs of different people. Because of this, operating systems such as Windows, Mac, Linux, and FreeBSD coexist to meet different user needs. In the future, the development of technology will make various daily applications compatible with different operating systems, so that everyone can freely choose different operating systems according to their habits.

Let's talk about my personal experience. Because of some research work, some scientific software is often used, and most of these software work in * nix systems, therefore, I have the opportunity to have a lot of access to different operating systems (of course, I am not a professional, so I have not done a lot of in-depth development work or understand it ).

First, let's talk about Linux. This is indeed a small challenge for Windows users, but it is not difficult, because anyone who uses Google can find answers to some preliminary questions. For example, after Debian is installed (Debian is a Linux release that contains a large number of free software) systems, mp3 files cannot be played. You can find detailed solutions by using the google Keyword "Debian mp3. Or, post on the forum. Linux has many advantages for me. For example, customization: Ubuntu uses the Gnome desktop environment by default, but it contains a lot of software that I cannot use, which is large in size and has high hardware requirements. Therefore, during installation, I will select a lighter desktop environment, such as Fluxbox or Openbox. After some simple configurations (you can go to Google for a detailed tutorial ), it can also meet 100% of my needs. After Flux is started, there is only one status bar and one right-click menu, which is very simple. By editing the menu file, I can place all kinds of common programs in it (such as putting Firefox first, terminal second, and OpenOffice); by editing the shortcut key file, shortcut Keys can be set for different system actions (for example, Ctrl + H is minimized, Ctrl + Q is exited, etc.), highly customizable. But what if I want to implement widgets similar to Windows Sidebar or Dashboard? Google saw several software that can achieve this effect, such as GoogleGadget and Screenlets. The former only needs to download the source code from Google and compile the code (some people may think this work is uncertain. In fact, this is what I thought last year, but it turns out that it is not that difficult ); the latter is simpler-many Linux distributions provide a "software repository" that allows users to automatically download and install the software. For example, in Ubuntu, enter sudo apt-get installscreenlets in the terminal, and the system will automatically download and install the software (of course, there is also a corresponding graphic interface program to complete these tasks, the command line method is chosen because it is more efficient to do so after you are familiar with it ).

Through this configuration, install all the commonly used tools and software. My Ubuntu system only has 800 MB, And the boot time is 23 s, able to run properly on Pentium/32 MB memory-level computers (of course some large software will be slow)-it can also meet almost all of my daily work and entertainment needs, why should we use a bloated and slow Windows? This customization is far from comparable to Windows. Of course, the disadvantages of Linux as a desktop system are also obvious. For example, you need to make some effort to configure the system, learn some new knowledge, and have poor hardware support for Linux.

Next we will talk about Windows. I used Windows for the first time in the Windows 2000 era. I didn't use Windows 95 much (I thought it was a vase at that time). I used Windows 98/Me/XP for a long time, vista has been used intermittently. Windows is doing a very good job in its compatibility. For different hardware and software, if you have used DOS, you should know how difficult it is to install a sound card under DOS. PnP (Plug and Play, Plug-and-Play) does provide a good standard for the industry (although the early PnP was once ridiculed as Plug-and-Play, Plug andPray ), so that different hardware can work together perfectly without conflict. Although the kernel has been changed several times, the DOS/Windows98 programs can still run normally in Windows Vista. It is really not easy to do this, but because of this, the Windows platform will generate countless excellent applications and games (of course, viruses ). However, with this big and comprehensive model, many problems have emerged. For example, when Windows Vista is installed, several GB-sized hardware drivers will be installed on the user's hard disk for compatibility with different hardware, But 99.99% of the hardware may not be used for my whole life, in this case, a lot of disk space is wasted without reason. For example, the system before Windows Vista lacks the corresponding permission management system, resulting in abuse of administrator permissions and virus. Of course, there are also some of the above shortcomings at the same time. There are still many such comparisons, which are difficult to list. Windows does meet the vast majority or even all of the needs of most people, so it has won a large number of users.

Finally, let's talk about Mac. I have been using Mac for less than a year, but I may have learned a lot, so I am still familiar with it. For me, Mac is not only an excellent operating system, but also a combination of highly customized software and hardware. It also has some advantages of Linux and Windows, some of which are not available, of course, there are many shortcomings. You may know more about these advantages and disadvantages than me. I will not talk about them here. I will focus on my personal experience. First of all, Mac OSX is a Unix system, so it is inherently compatible with the vast majority of open-source software. I can compile and install the software running in the lab on Linux and run it on Mac, in this way, some work can be transferred to my personal machine.

Secondly, there are a lot of excellent software on Mac, such as Papers (Scientific Document Management Software) and iPhoto. in daily use, we cannot find a more suitable alternative. Finally, I like to do some graphic design (completely amateur, mainly poster, website, Tee design, huh, please advise a lot ), mac OS x is a unique Rendering Method for text (compared to Windows, Mac OS X uses the Postscript-based rendering engine to maximize the Appearance Features of fonts, unlike Windows, which simply pursues the definition of text and sacrifices the effect that font designers want to express) and many excellent design software.

The above are just some of my personal experiences. In view of my learning skills, mistakes are inevitable. I hope you will be grateful if you don't want to correct me!

In addition, let's talk about two additional questions. We hope that you can consciously maintain a pure atmosphere of discussion, and avoid further attacks. The purpose of the argument is to exchange different ideas with each other, rather than convincing or defeating the other party. I hope everyone can learn and improve together in the debate. If this goal cannot be achieved, all discussions will be futile.

[ This post was last edited by Inmaxen]