What is the best OS ...... FIGHT

[[AlAdDiN]]

i suggest to you to choose one or more OSs from this list and tell why it is the best OS(s) for you (and for what) ?

-BSD (all free)
-DOS
-Linux (all)
-MacOS X
-QNX (neutrino not the demo)
-Windows 9x
-Windows NT/2k
-Windows XP

I use only linux (Gentoo distro) , i think linux is the best developpement OS, all needed tools are provided by default, and others can be found easylly, moreover, now you can do everythink with linux, i know games are not all supported but personally i don't play modern games, and i play emulated or nativ linux games...
If i have to setup a server i think i will prefer freeBSD for its stability, and all security tools.

that's my opinion

[smiddy]

From a pure business perspective the best OS would be the one that is available to all employees and supported at a moments notice. That OS would have to be what the customer uses too. That would have to be Windows XP. In addition market share is considered too, and that being your customer base, then you have to select Windows XP.

[cipek]

Windows rullezz :] Windows r0xi. Why? because i love Bill

[dr_evil]

windows 2000. hasn't got the default teletubbie-look of winXP, is very stable and supports more progs/hardware than nt.

qnx rocks too, looks nice, but is... unix. the same thing's true for freebsd.

and linux sucks. because of it's arrogant and missionary community. and because linux has a weak design (no wonder linus got bad marks in school for os design). most things of the "LINUX IS OBSOLETE" message are still true. and linux sucks because it draws attention away from other, better os's.

[[AlAdDiN]]

and linux sucks. because of it's arrogant and missionary community. and because linux has a weak design (no wonder linus got bad marks in school for os design).

agree with you but this is due, to the fact that linux is developped by thousand of ppl around the world, which make it harde to keep a clean code, but this is comming with new kernel versions, since linus is writing some standards ...etc
also, lot of linux kernel clean project are working on that, maybe version 3.0 will be better in this point

most things of the "LINUX IS OBSOLETE" message are still true. and linux sucks because it draws attention away from other, better os's.

Do you know that current linux kernel (2.6.9) is the less buggy kernel, it was tested with moste popular code validators, and got the best marks, also, the new linux memory manager is got the best performance, i'm not talking about security here (i know BSD is the best), but, linux, is the best personnal OS since it s flexible tweakable and performant



AND PLEASE, CHECK YOUR INFORMATION TWICE BEFORE POSTING ANYTHING (^_^)

[dr_evil]

AND PLEASE, CHECK YOUR INFORMATION TWICE BEFORE POSTING ANYTHING (^_^)

was that because of me?



i think most unix mem-managers are not suitable for desktop use. they may be great if you do batch-processing or run a db-server, but they're annoying if you're on a desktop (same thing's true for windows). LAZY-thingING is not always the best option.

linux 2.6 has made a leap forward compared to older version but is still behind other operating systems. especially with the vm subsystem.

i think micokernels are nicer than bloated, big, fat and ugly monolithic kernels. be inc. did a good job selecting their line between user and kernel-mode in beos r6 (dan0).





does linux have any real advantages compared to freebsd? i don't think so...

btw: freebsd too is tweakable and performant.

[krillzip]

The best OS, from my point of view.
Have tried all Windows, and guess what? SUCKS!
Have been running Linux last years, quite cool! Tried Red Hat, problems with adding some support. Tried Gentoo latest now, impressive but had som problems with harddisk crash and lost important system files,still trying to repair the flaws, takes to long to reinstall.
My favorite are still Mac OS, and at this time X!

[[AlAdDiN]]

@krillzip i think if u use reiserfs as systemfile, u may avoid loosing data, and if there is a problem, u can repare it in 99% of cases, because it's simply the BEST filesystem (developper for NASA computers and available for public now )
but i agree with you that MacOS X is one of the best OSs -----> it is a BSD (^_^)

@dr_devil

i think most unix mem-managers are not suitable for desktop use. they may be great if you do batch-processing or run a db-server, but they're annoying if you're on a desktop (same thing's true for windows). LAZY-thingING is not always the best option.

again check ur info before posting ...
have u allready tried a linux distro or a modern unix system or not, coz u are speaking like ppl do 40 years ago, now linux/BSD is more userfriendly to use than windows, there is hundred windows managers that feet any user needs, and all applications used under windows have now their equivalent(s) under linux, if u can give me only one program that exist under window and have not n equivalent under linux ??

linux 2.6 has made a leap forward compared to older version but is still behind other operating systems. especially with the vm subsystem.

What operating systems ???
and what about windows DLLs LOL

i think micokernels are nicer than bloated, big, fat and ugly monolithic kernels. be inc. did a good job selecting their line between user and kernel-mode in beos r6 (dan0).

in theory yes, and do u know why, because, in microkernels, if a module crash , the operating system and other modules remains available, and because of reduced responce time (to interrupts ....etc)
QNX is the best microkernel, and the only one that really have those features.
but windows, is a FAKE microkernel, just try to kill a system process while running windows and u ll see, also responce time is too big, compared to what it should be in microkernels.


and dont forget that nowdays, monolitic kernels are considered as the most stable and scured kernels, this is not my opinion, personally i think that a hybrid kernel can be developped to take advantages from the two.

[Legend]

@dr_devil

i think most unix mem-managers are not suitable for desktop use. they may be great if you do batch-processing or run a db-server, but they're annoying if you're on a desktop (same thing's true for windows). LAZY-thingING is not always the best option.

again check ur info before posting ...
have u allready tried a linux distro or a modern unix system or not, coz u are speaking like ppl do 40 years ago, now linux/BSD is more userfriendly to use than windows, there is hundred windows managers that feet any user needs, and all applications used under windows have now their equivalent(s) under linux, if u can give me only one program that exist under window and have not n equivalent under linux ??

That Linux is now user-friendly to use is mostly because of the two big desktops KDE and Gnome, the rest is trash, unless you can't run KDE or Gnome well on your system. A general problem is the development of hundreds of tiny "solutions" that basically fit none. And it took a long time to get rid of that (especially when you think that the desktop problem did not start with linux, basically it started with the invention of X).
Instead of the freedom to choose between different solutions and pick the best one the freedom to choose between trash where there is basically no best.

and other very necessary things are coming now with ideas like the linux standard base, but that development is slow.

However, some things especially Linus does not want to change as it seems. For example what about packing the drivers with the kernel? Does that ever change? No one gave ever a good reason why to keep it this way, only by mixing into their argumentation things that did not belong any close to this topic.

Unfortunately, a promising OS would have to be developed. And there is the issue that dr_devil spoke of. Instead of developing something that is really today's standard (in terms of research, not implementation, implementation's top are linux, bsds and windows basically), most developers get attracted to program in the same old mess.

Today's monolithic kernels are well tested, that is why they are stable and secure, a micro kernel that would be developed as far would surpass a monolithic kernel. However, those systems are not main stream operating systems (QNX, etc.). I heard Darwin would be based on Mach, but I don't know for sure anymore ...

But there comes the already talked about community. Theory does not count. At least for them. No surprise. Would not look too good for them if it would.

Even if Linux has a O(1) scheduler etc. etc. those are just details in the basic strategy. And that one hasn't really evolved at all, or is just at the peak to evolve yet.

[[AlAdDiN]]

it's sure that microkernels are the future solution (this is why i'm developping a microkernel ) , but not all microkernels are performant, QNX is a good example and windows is a very bad microkernel example ...

and about linux desktops : KDE and GNOME are not the most popular, they are mostly used for office working ...etc
but the idea behind other desktops it to keep it small and useful (the smaller is the better...) , WindowMaker is very good, and personally i use fluxbox for general use (it contains some useful features that doesn't exist in FDE and gnome) and Ion2 for developping since it have a very good windows managing system.


and i want to tell , that all what i'm saying is mostly my personal opinion i hope there will be a better free OS than linux and BSD one day, if this happens i'll migrate (as i did with windows 5 years ago ) ... (^_^)Y

[frizzz]

When I look on Your list, my opinion is one word: linux
linux is for free and if You are a programmer, You will miss nothing.
But linux is the best example too, how NOT to do it! You could change everything - but if You start doing it, You need month, to dig in the documentation and source and finally give up frustrated. It's a mess!
There is nearly everything available, but nothing to find (Have a look to the message-boards of linux-users, and You know, what I mean). And You need the knowledge of about a dozen languages to find out, what a program does (if it is an "application").

Because I want to do some things, which are not provided in linux (control of external electronic devices / robotics), I decided to write my own OS
www.rcfriz.de
in assembler, which is the only way to get rid of any restriction reasoned in all that multi-everything-****, which leads to doing mostly the wrong thing. There is only on program-counter! Memory has an upper border!
Controllers must not be disturbed by at least one IRQ every 100ms! There is only one time!
But there is a bottleneck, I did not expect: well hidden or none documentation about those fundamentals as I/O-adresses, controller-datasheets and so on. And there is a lot of vendor-specific garbage.

I mention this, because I'm shure, that everyone, who reads here and desires something better than linux has the same problem.
As there is no problem to encapsulate assemblercode in C-program, I suggest to cooperate depending on this - especially on pci,usb,agp, sound,camera.
Everyone wants to play with it - nobody seems to know how.

[[AlAdDiN]]

erm ....
linux can control external electronics throught, serial, parallel or usb port whitout any problem, and whtout the need of assembly language, python caontains many libraries for such things .

secondly, developping an OS in assembly doesn't mean that you can acces externel electronic devices coz the assembly language is arch-dependent, and in your case, you'r only writing an OS for x86 compatible processors ....

[frizzz]

AlAdDIN...
You are right, if You think of those electronic devices, which are known by those who wrote the drivers for linux. But You are wrong, if You think, that linux&python are prepared for every possible device.
You are right, when You see, that extern devices need to be programmed in an other way than the AT-PC. But You are wrong, when You think, that programming those extern devices could be done without using an assembler-OS inside the AT-PC.

Maybe you can bring up linux to the desired state, writing your own drivers and programs. But you will need to dig in in MBytes of code and docs, you will need to learn half a dozen programming languages and remember much more as a dozen expressions, representing modes, states and functions.
I won't dispute, that linux is a well done instrument for doing a lot of things. But if you need a bare PC with its memory, timers, interrupts and controllers, this means, that you need to switch off multitasking and paging and a lot of other things. And if you need this, you will need to read docs for some month, to manage it. I choosed the shorter way with my own OS...

[Kimm]

Linux!!

It has support for almost all hardware, its fast and secure and extremely stable, its free, great variety of desktop enviroments (also true for *BSD), its very powerfull, perfect for software developers! perfect for servers. It tends to speed up your internet, almost no known viruses, microsoft didnt make it, its open source, depending on what desktop environment your using its very easy to use for newbies, alot of apps of witch almost all are free and open source, atleast one eqauilent to all windows apps...

list goes on...

[Kimm]

There is nearly everything available, but nothing to find (Have a look to the message-boards of linux-users, and You know, what I mean). And You need the knowledge of about a dozen languages to find out, what a program does (if it is an "application").

eh... I can see you dont have much experiance with linux...........
there is like a ton of websites where you can search for apps for linux.

to name a few:

www.gnomefiles.org
www.sourceforge.net
www.freshmeat.net