why blame MICROSOFT

[Solar]

Linux has the best compiler in the world GCC...

As a C++ developer, I disagree. gcc is neither the best compiler technically (that would probably be the EDG compiler), nor does it produce the best code for IA-32 (that would be ICC).

stdlibc++ does pale in comparison with the Dinkumware C++ library.

gcc is free, it is cross-platform, and that's where it's advantages end, in my book.

That isn't to say I don't enjoy using it. Better than shelling out big bucks for "pro" compilers / libraries.

[elias]

well wat i was really getting into was a philosophical issue, but ill try and summarize what i was trying to say quickly. its not a matter of opinion because an opinion is what you think of something, something that no one can prove or disprove, such as how good a certain food tastes to you. what i meant was there is a best aoperating system, just not a universal one. if you need an os thats easy to use and you dont need to know much to use, then windows is the best. see? its not a matter of opinion, but what is best for a situation. thats what i was trying to say. and when i said what makes a good os, i was refering to the definition of an os, and saying that the best os, is one that does its job best.

[Tim]

I don't think gcc is the best x86 compiler by a long shot.

From what I've heard, the top three compilers are:
1. Intel (great optimiser, but the compiler itself is slow)
2. Microsoft (really good optimiser, good all round)
3. gcc (fairly good optimiser, wide range of platforms supported)

Later versions of Microsoft's compiler bring features such as runtime security checks and full-program optimisation. FPO will perform optimisations across source modules, and even inside libraries, so, for instance, it can come up with custom register calling conventions, or it can inline library code inside the calling function.

[Whatever5k]

gcc is fine, I cannot see any problem with it.
Anyways (to stay to the main topic), I agree with Tim when he sais that the question is not "Which is the best OS?", but "Which is the best OS for me?".

[nullify]

its not a matter of opinion because an opinion is what you think of something, something that no one can prove or disprove, such as how good a certain food tastes to you. what i meant was there is a best aoperating system, just not a universal one.

Well, first you mention that an opinion is what you think of something. When you describe something as the "best", isn't that your opinion? For example, the best tasting food is someone's opinion. In the same respect, how could you decide on _the_ best operating system? What is considered the best will vary from person to person.

if you need an os thats easy to use and you dont need to know much to use, then windows is the best. see? its not a matter of opinion, but what is best for a situation. i was refering to the definition of an os, and saying that the best os, is one that does its job best.

So if Windows does its respective job better than Linux (Windows is better for non-technical users), why did you initially state that Linux is the best, and that its not an opinion that Linux is better? If you say its not an opinion that Linux is the best, then it seems to imply that you think Linux is better as a *fact*. You go on to agree that the "best" operating system is the best one for the situation. So, if Windows is better in a newbie-situation, it is the "best." Obviously Linux and Windows can't _both_ be the best operating system at the same time, that's a mutually exclusive statement. Therefore, they're both opinions, not facts.

[elias]

there is a best, just not a universal best. you cant say an OS is the best. but its not your opinion either. there is a best for each situation. why i brought up the example of food is that you cant prove which food tastes better. you can prove which os is better for a particular task.

[anubis]

Oops didnot know that mine streesing for GCC for the best would create such a long lists of post.
Just like Tim said the question is not 'which is the best OS?' but should better be 'which is the best OS for me?' GCC seems the best for me...the best compiler for writing my OS . I forgot to add that to the post. ;D

[nullify]

there is a best, just not a universal best. you cant say an OS is the best. but its not your opinion either. there is a best for each situation. why i brought up the example of food is that you cant prove which food tastes better. you can prove which os is better for a particular task.

You raise an interesting point, but here's how I see it: although certain aspects of system A may be superior to their respective aspects of system B, system B may also have certain aspects to it that is superior to system A. It will depend on one's /opinion/ of which aspects are more important for the task they want to do. And they will then choose the operating system which they thought was superior based on what qualities of the system they consider important.

For example, let's hypothetically say you are deciding whether to use Linux or Windows as an independent software developer. Windows has much better hardware support and automation (meaning you don't have to intervene with the system as much and can focus on your real tasks), a well documented API and several mature development tools. Also, if you are developing for Windows you can reach a much wider audience, as over 90% of the desktop market belongs to Microsoft. Linux can be obtained free of charge (but you then lose out on the opportunity for commercial support), typically already contains a set of well integrated development tools, and you can get lots of free help through IRC, mailing lists, etc. Many of these issues probably have various levels of importance, depending on the person's point of view.

[elias]

there are many factors and thats wat makes a hypothetical situation so difficult to come up with. but depending on the particular situation, there is a right choice. if the software developer is very poor, but knows much about linux and computers, then linux would be the better choice for that person. if you are raising the skepticism viewpoint, that everything is your opinion because you cant prove anything, then you must look at it with two opinions. one side is that with trivial things, such as how things taste, and the other side is that which is right or wrong. if a person is a racist, that is their opinion, but isnt that opinion wrong?

[nullify]

there are many factors and thats wat makes a hypothetical situation so difficult to come up with. but depending on the particular situation, there is a right choice. if the software developer is very poor, but knows much about linux and computers, then linux would be the better choice for that person. if you are raising the skepticism viewpoint, that everything is your opinion because you cant prove anything, then you must look at it with two opinions. one side is that with trivial things, such as how things taste, and the other side is that which is right or wrong.

That I shall do, but not exactly the way you have described. The two faces to this is trivial issues, and nontrivial issues. A trivial issue (e.g., 1 item + 1 item = 2 items total) *can* be proven right or wrong without too much dissent. In terms of OS comparisons, this is akin to comparing one element of Linux to the complementary element of Windows (Linux is free, Windows costs money - that is "correct"). However, nontrivial issues are of greater complexity -- usually involving multiple trivial issues in one (or possibly an issue with a not-so-straight outcome). This is like comparing multiple aspects of Linux to Windows (Linux comes with source code but lacks standards and integration, while Windows is proprietary but is cohesive) When it consists of multiple trivial issues, some will work out in the OS's favor, some will not. That's where opinion comes in. The simple example above only compares two differences between Linux and Windows, but there are /lots/ more differences than those two, as you must realize. As such, the person must balance those factors to determine which system provides those qualities he/she is most concerned with. People will consider certain technical aspects to be more important than others. For example, if two people are running servers, one may think overall throughput to be the deciding factor, while the other may think stability is more critical.

if a person is a racist, that is their opinion, but isnt that opinion wrong?

This fits under the category of a "trivial" matter, as I have described above. Since you are not trying to balance multiple factors, you can easily determine how the opinion is wrong. When two operating systems are being compared, its a nontrivial issue, because you must consider all the "trivial" factors of each and weigh them out.

[elias]

by trivial i meant focusing on small details rather than the whole feature. when looking at trivial details, you cannot see the full picture

[nullify]

by trivial i meant focusing on small details rather than the whole feature. when looking at trivial details, you cannot see the full picture

I'm not sure how this is relevant... you need to examine each of the details of the full picture in order to decide which operating system you are going to use.

[elias]

all im saying is that people focus on tiny details rather than the big picture. its lke focusing on a map of aruba when your supposed to look at the world. anyways, my whoel point in this argument was to establish there is a right and wrong, no matter the point of you.

[bkilgore]

I think this has kind of left the realm of Operating System discussion and entered that of philosophy. You both seem to agree that the "best" Operating System depends on a lot of factors and changes based on a specific set of criteria and/or circumstances. Your disagreement lies only in whether this "best" is an opinion or a fact given those set conditions. You're both arguing your points well and I don't think either is going to convince the other to see their point-of-view, so it's probably best to bring the conversation back to Operating Systems instead of racists and food. ;D

As a side note (and I probably shouldn't do this, it'll just get you guys going again), here's my take on it. If you were to enumerate all factors on which you were going to base your decision, and you were to give each factor a relevant "weight" of importance, and then assign each Operating System a rank for each factor, you would then arrive at a mathematical "best" for the given situation, regardless of "opinion," or at least a tie saying that two or more are equally well suited. But even then, one could argue that the "weight" of each factor and the rank of each operating system for that factor are themselves matters of "opinion." So, like I said, it can go either way depending on how you look at it, and it's really more of a philosophical issue than an OS one.