Windows, OSX, or Linux? - That Is The Question

Blog Archive Repost

Windows, OS X, or Linux? That is the question.

Published 28 November 07 08:46 AM | RjBass  Edit

Hmmmm, where do I start with this one?  This is a topic that always turns into a big debate.  It's a topic that I have wanted to write about for some time now, but until Eggxpert came along, didn't have the place to write it. 

Well first things first.  I come from an IBM family.  My father, stepfather, and stepmother were all career IBM employees in Boca Raton Florida until IBM started to crash in the late 80's and early 90's.  Why do I share that with you all?  Well because sometime in 1981 we received our first home computer or PC.  It was an old IBM 5150.  And the reason why I tell you that, is because prior to 1981, all home computers as well as some other computer devices were all referred to as PC's, or Personal Computers.  It didn't matter if they were made by Tandy, IBM, Apple, Commodore or whomever, they were all PC's.  That is how I still feel all computers bought and purchased by individuals for home and office use should be called today.  From Apples/Macs to Linux based machines to machines running Windows, to me they are all PC's.  I just needed to get that out of the way so as not to lead to any confusion later in this blog post.  What's actually really funny about that though is that when IBM released the 5150 in 1981, it became so popular that it fully adopted the "PC" name and most of the rest of the computer world started to manufacture hardware and software that was IBM Compatible or PC Compatible after it's release and huge public support.  However Apple (having released it first computer to the public in 1977) continued to build machines that were not IBM compatible.  Many years later, PC's were still supposedly IBM compatible, but mostly were running hardware not even manufactured by IBM, while Apple was fitting it's PC's with hardware like the IBM PowerPC processor, but yet were not IBM compatible.  I just think that is rather ironic. 

So anyways, enough with the history lesson and onto the real topic.   

Today we have few choices in PC operating systems.  We have Windows which typically runs on IBM Compatible machines, OS X which runs on Apple/Mac machines (which are now actually IBM Compatible and can run Windows) and Linux which from what I have seen, can run on just about anything you put it in.  Their are a few others out there, but for the sake of the mainstream market, we will just stick with the big three. 

So which one of these operating systems is better, and which one should you choose?  Well we can break down the pros and con's of all three and still not be any further along then where we are right now.  In reality it all boils down to what you the reader truly prefer.  By all rights they are all fantastic operating systems, but with each having it's own flaws.

The true fact of the matter is, business's.  Big business, small business, about 90% of all business's connected to the computer world are running Microsoft/Windows based software.  Many of these businesses don't want to use Microsoft software anymore, but they are stuck with it.  When you have a small business with a limited budget needing to use specific types of software, and that software will only run on a Windows based server, with Windows based workstations, well then that business is stuck using Windows.  New business's that are just starting up are the lucky ones because they have the option from the start to get their business going with something other then Windows.  They can dive head first into the Linux server based world or Apple server based world and from the start up have a smooth operating business.  But most don't do that.  Why?  Because it all stems back to what we know.  I don't know about all of you, but where I grew up in South Florida, IBM donated thousands of computers to local schools.  It was to help educate it's future work force.  Around the globe in the early 80's IBM aggressively promoted it's PC's to the market, converting much of the market to IBM compatible computers.  In 1985 when Windows was first released to the world, it was released solely for IBM compatible computers.  So for almost 23 years we have been bombarded with IBM compatible computers running Windows based software.  Windows is what people really know.  It's what they are comfortable with.  If you were to take a larger start up business with 150 employees and you get a new server and new workstations for all the employees, it is much easier and cheaper to do it with Windows because the chances are that most of the employees are at least semi familiar with Windows based operating systems.  When it comes to a new start up business, cheaper and easier almost always rules over what is better.  So then what you have are another 150 people working on a Windows based network with Windows based workstations.  Those same 150 people are more likely to go out and pick up a new Windows based PC as opposed to a Mac or Linux based PC because they want something familiar to them. 

In reality, a smarter new business would take a look at the big picture.  Let's look at a small business.  ABC Company is just starting up with 10 employees.  Instead of going with a Windows based server, they go with a Linux based server and Linux based workstations.  The hardware cost about the same, while the software is potentially thousands of dollars cheaper.  The money saved on the software is rolled over into training for it's ten employees.  In the future when it's time to upgrade, ABC Company saves serious money because Linux based servers and workstations are almost always a bit cheaper, and OpenSource software is almost certainly cheaper.  So in this case, for the adventurous types, Linux wins. 

I would go into Apple based servers and workstations, but truth be told, Apple servers and workstations can actually cost more then their Windows based counterparts as Apple hardware is almost always really expensive, and then you have to deal with training all the employees who are only Windows smart and not OS X smart.  The higher start up cost for a Apple based network with training could be more profitable in the end though, as it is more likely that the OS X based employees will be happier in the end with their computers and thus increase productivity resulting in more money earned.  But that is purely speculation. 

Now let's take a look at existing business's.  Most existing business's are running networks using Windows based servers and work stations.  These same business's, while sick of paying the price premiums for Windows based software, are usually stuck in that environment. 

I am the IT Admin for a small business that currently has 10 employees.  Recently when it was time for me to build them a new server, we talked about getting away from Microsoft based software and move over to something cheaper.  We knew that doing so would create some problems with the employees having to learn new software.  But just to give it a shot we loaded OpenOffice on a couple machines.  Yes it worked, but the employees didn't like it.  They liked the features and ease of use with Microsoft Office better.  However, with the huge price difference, we could live with the grumbling.  So I researched it more.  I started looking into the server based software that the company absolutely has to have in order to run their business properly.  In particular they have two very specific programs that are an absolute must have.  I contacted the makers of those two programs.  I won't post all the details from their responses, but basically both were the same.  Here is a snippet from one response.

"What if I do not want a Windows Server?

Due to the nature of the **** program, a Windows server is not required to house our software.  Novell and Linux servers could house the software.  Here are your considerations before choosing Novell or Linux as the storage choice.  You are not able to run our software from either Novell or Linux servers.  The software is stored there, not run from there.  Live updates to our software must occur from a Windows workstation and update across the network.  The **** E-mail Service tool runs using .NET programming and will not run on Novell or Linux.  **** must run on a Windows server.

At no time do we recommend using a removable storage device to house our program.  This is mostly because of access rights and permission setting abilities. Removable storage includes thumb drives, snap drives or flash drives.  At this time, MAC/APPLE servers are not supported as a housing solution. 

Do we recommend an operating OS?

Yes. Due to advances in security and file access protocols in Windows, we recommend Windows Server 2003.  Our software will run on Windows NT and Windows 2000.  If you are going to be hosting **** or Web services, we recommend Windows Small Business Server 2003."

-End Quote

The response that I received from the other program was extremely similar.  Since both programs require at least a Windows based workstation to update across the network, and since all workstations are usually busy doing the work required from the employees, the option of using a Linux based server just didn't seem logical and the software can't even be stored on a Apple/Mac server.  So it was at that point that we decided to bite the bullet and stick with the Windows based server and workstations. 

The business world for the most part shapes the home end user world, and with most business going with Windows based networks, that tends to lead to more Windows based home end users.  You really have to give it to IBM and Microsoft, their enormous marketing campaigns and excellent products in the mid 80's eventually worked them up to the business standard world wide in modern times, even if Windows operating systems are not technically the best anymore.  An example of what I am talking about there goes back again to the small business that I am the IT admin for.  The average age of the 10 employees in that office is 46 with the youngest person being 33 and the oldest person being 69.  Just three weeks ago I got an order for a new home computer from one of the employees.  They specifically told me they wanted Windows on the machine and not Linux.  They didn't even consider a Mac.  This person happened to be 44 years old and had been using Windows based products for the last 15 years.  They wanted a machine for home use that worked like their office machine.  Whats more, this person has three kids.  Those three kids are now going to grow up with a PC running Windows based software.  Now kids are really smart, we all know this.  So theirs really nothing stopping one of those kids from exploring Linux or OS X in the future, but chances are, they won't.  People like what they know.  There has been and always will be a fear of the unknown. 

So because of the business world, we now have the majority of PC users running Windows based software, and this is a trend that will most likely continue in the foreseeable future. 

But not everybody is willing to stick with Windows.  There are still plenty of people who grew up on Mac's and stuck with them even when Mac's were not exactly top of the line systems.  They obviously got their revenge, as now Apple is one of the top computer makers in the world.  More people are using Macs and Apple based computers then ever before.  A strong marketing campaign, specifically against Microsoft along with some of the best rated products in recent history like the iPod have catapulted Apple right back to the near top.  A position they haven't held since the late 70's and early 80's.  There are a few reasons for this.  Newer more modern Apple computers are now running hardware that is Intel based.  Many of the latest Macs can actually run Windows and Linux as well.  Some will say the reason for the Macs rise to recent fame is due mostly to the iPod.  However I tend to think otherwise.  The iPod can work with any type of PC.  You don't have to have a Mac to use one.  But when people purchase a product that they really like, they then like to look at other products from the same product maker.  And when they look at a Mac, they like what they see, and what they see is OS X.  OS X is a near perfect operating system.  It's really easy to use, it looks great, and it's not as vulnerable to viruses and malware like a Windows based machine.  What are it's problems then?  Well like all of the operating systems there are a few.  OS X doesnt do games very well.  It also doesn't do Microsoft Office products very well.  Well actually it runs OS X based Microsoft Office based products just fine, but then the Microsoft Office based products open up the Mac to multiple viruses making the OS X based machine more unstable.  Many working office products also won't run on a Mac either.  As I pointed out above in the quote from a software maker, their software won't run on a Mac, and that is a well known issue with Mac's.  And like all the other PC makers, with Apples rise to the top, also came problems.  Their being sued for different reasons, several of their Mac laptop and desktop models have had numerous issues etc.. etc...  It really just comes with the territory. 

But in OS X's favor, those who work in the graphics industry, mainly working with programs like Adobe Photoshop, Mac's are the king.  For whatever reason, Adobe products just run way better on a Mac.  When combining the power of Adobe CS3 with OS X and a Core 2 Duo Mac, what you have is a power house graphics producing computer that really can't be beat when compared to a similar computer with similar specs, but running Windows. 

Another issue with OS X is the hardware you have to have to run it on.  OS X as most of us know will only run on a Mac.  While the actual hardware that makes up a Mac isn't bad, it is really expensive.  A Mac running OS X Leopard that cost $1000 from the Apple store is expensive when compared to a similar model (hardware wise) running Windows from Dell or HP.  The Dell or HP computer with the same hardware specs can cost sometimes hundreds less then it's Mac counterpart.  While cost is not that big of a deal to some, the majority of PC users dont have $1000 to spend on a PC, and for this reason alone you will see them looking at a Windows based machine. 

Now if we dig even further into the cost of systems, by far the cheapest OS today is Linux.  In most cases Linux is FREE.  Yes that's right, FREE!!!

I have Linux.  I use Linux.  I love Linux.  It is a great OS.  I use Ubuntu.  It's free, it does what it is supposed to do.  It looks similar to Windows and it doesn't have near the amount of virus problems that Windows does. 

So here we have a free OS that works great, with less viruses, but yet people still choose Windows.  Why?  Well Linux may look like Windows, but it certainly doesn't operate like Windows.  Theres allot of programs for Linux that need to be installed using the command line and for those thinking that their old Dos expertise will do the trick, it won't.  The command line in Linux uses different commands then good old Dos.  The other problem with Linux is similar to the problem with OS X being that many programs that work in Windows don't work in Linux.  While more and more programs are starting to be written for Linux and it is improving every day, it still isn't up to the level that Windows is at. 

But for those who absolutely refuse to use Windows based products, and are not afraid of learning something new, and don't want to spend serious money to do so, Linux is a great solution. 

So going almost all the way back to the beginning of this post, here we have three great operating systems.  They all have their advantages, and all have their problems. 

I recommend any of the three depending on what you want to do with your computer.  If you need to, take a look at all three, try them out for awhile (I don't know if you will be able to do that with OS X though) and see which one you prefer, as ultimately it's not about what I or anybody else says, it's about what you want.