Du må være registrert og logget inn for å kunne legge ut innlegg på freak.no
X
LOGG INN
... eller du kan registrere deg nå
Dette nettstedet er avhengig av annonseinntekter for å holde driften og videre utvikling igang. Vi liker ikke reklame heller, men alternativene er ikke mange. Vær snill å vurder å slå av annonseblokkering, eller å abonnere på en reklamefri utgave av nettstedet.
  7 945
med fruktkjøtt.
Tias's Avatar
Crew
I dag kom jeg over en artikkel på gode, gamle OSNews. Artikkelen er det Aaron Vegh som står bak.

Dette er artikkel for deg som har tatt ditt livs valg; Et valg over hvilket operativsystem du velger å satse på:

Alle operativsystemer gjør jo i grove trekk det samme. Du surfer WWW like greit med GNU/Linux som du gjør med Windows, BeOS, Solaris, QNX eller MacOS, så hvorfor velger du akkurat ditt operativsystem? Denne artikkelen setter forhåpentligvis en liten støkk i deg, det gjor den i alle fall med meg .

GL, HF.

Subjectivity and Operating System Choice

While most people bicker about which OS is best, the truth is much vaguer: what computer is sitting on your desk has more to do with your comfort level than intellectual choice.

Everyone has a story. Mine goes something like this: in 1988, my sole computer experience revolved around DOS-based or other terminal-like environments, such as the popular WordPerfect for DOS. There, I was forced to learn key shortcuts that made the text different colours: red for italics, blue for bold, yellow for underline. Ctrl-F12. Ctrl-Alt-F13. Thank goodness for those paper templates that sat over the keyboard.

As a budding high-school writer, a computer was basically a glorified word processor to me, and there was no distincition between say, a TRS-80 (which I owned and tinkered with for a while), and a no-name dedicated word processing machine with a 5-inch amber monochrome display and built-in impact printer (which I also owned and used extensively). Except that the latter made a much better writing platform.

And then I met my first Mac: a Mac SE, the original-style beige box with the 9-inch, greyscale monitor. This was no text-only display. When I wrote, what I saw was what came out of a slick ImageWriter dot-matrix printer. This was a revelation, and let's face it, I never looked back. Through Windows 95 and all its ilk, I was firmly in the Mac camp, and by God, there was no worse fate for me than having to use Windows. And let's face it, in this world, I'm having to use Windows an awful lot.

You've got your own story for why you are using the computer you have today. If you've earned your geek credentials, chances are that story has a lot of meaning for you. And it was lately, while I was thinking of my story, that it occured to me: how much does my initial lasting impression mean for my computer choice?

Experiences such as my own have a way of hardening you against other platfoms. From my perspective, it was easy to heap scorn on DOS/Windows, and the very act of doing so deepens your resolve against the platform. When Windows 95 came along, it was interpreted as an attack on everything the Mac stood for. How could Microsoft's supporters call the Mac a toy, and then rush to an OS that steals all its best ideas? Windows became the system I loved to hate.

These days, it seems even easier to mount an argument against Windows: although usability issues have been largely resolved, there is a financial and practical argument to be made: due to its smaller profile, the Mac is simply less expensive and less troublesome to operate.

Or is it? Like from the very beginning, am I just slamming the "other guy" because it's not what I chose? Is my platform choice rational, or emotional?

Travel the forums on this and other sites, and you'll think that computers are chosen for rational reasons alone. The Mac is the easiest to use, and the hardware is of the highest quality. Linux has fabulous geek appeal, and allows you to achieve spectacular productivity on the command line. Windows has every application you could possibly need.

But what if all the controversy, all the heated opinion, is all about comfort level? What if you don't choose a computer based on having the best tool for the job? What if you choose it because there's nothing more soothing than the pulsing flash of the cursor in a Bash shell; the counter-physiological mouse motion in the Windows Start menu (up-and-to-the-right); the everything-where-you-left-it layout of your Mac folders?

It becomes even more clear when you think about what you do with your computer. Set aside specific applications, and there is not a single thing you can do on one platform that can't be done on any other. I say that from a high-level point of view: file management, word processing, Internet client tools... they're all there.

Really, it's all a matter of comfort, isn't it? You chose Windows because By Gum, Windows Explorer just handles files more sensibly. What you really mean is, it handles files more easy for you.

So next time someone says "well my OS smells better than yours!", remember, there are some cultures that find the smell of halitosis desireable.

Seriously.
Vis hele sitatet...
Artikkelen finner du i sin helhet HER
I like turtles
Skyfex's Avatar
Meget interessant egentlig. Ikke noe nytt egentlig, men han forklarte det veldig bra. OS handler om smak for det meste. Men bruker folk alltid det de egentlig ville syntes var best? Det gikk ca. 3 sekunder fra jeg så en mac til jeg bestemte meg for_å skaffe meg en. Og jeg har brukt Windows/DOS hele livet mitt.
very impotent freak
Delusional's Avatar
Hehe, er en veldig bra artikkel, det er mye derfor jeg kjøre windows og, fordi jeg er for lat til å installere noe nytt og gidde å bli kjent med et nytt os, windows har alle programmene jeg trenger, og kjører rimlig stabilt og er så og si like sikkert som linux dersom du opdaterer med de siste patchene og opdaterer virusdefinisjonene. Det er en smakssak...
Opprinnelig postet av Delusional
Hehe, er en veldig bra artikkel, det er mye derfor jeg kjøre windows og, fordi jeg er for lat til å installere noe nytt og gidde å bli kjent med et nytt os, windows har alle programmene jeg trenger, og kjører rimlig stabilt og er så og si like sikkert som linux dersom du opdaterer med de siste patchene og opdaterer virusdefinisjonene. Det er en smakssak...
Vis hele sitatet...
Du sier deg selv imot, du aner jo ikke noe om linux før du har brukt det og har satt deg inn i det. Å komme med påstander om at det er "like sikkert" etc blir ganske drøyt da. Selv bruker jeg stortsett freebsd og forskjellige former av linux, det er min nisje slik jeg ser det. Windows er helt fint, men det er en idé å iallefall sette seg inn i de alternative operativsystemene til arkitekturen sin før man gjør et valg - selv om det er noe så mainstream som linux man har som alternativ. Jeg liker også godt mac os x, men jeg har ikke brukt det så mye uten en egen mac selv.
Bra artikkel!

Omtrent genial faktisk...
Har aldri sett noen skrive så mye før og sagt så lite...
Ikke?
Let fram en tale av Gro Harlem Brundtland og skriv ned en setning.
Jeg gjorde det en gang. Det ble nesten en hel A4-side...uten komma eller punktum. Og hva var essensen i det hun sa? Ikke en dritt
Ganske interessant eksperiment egentlig...
med fruktkjøtt.
Tias's Avatar
Trådstarter Crew
Opprinnelig postet av fxxked
Har aldri sett noen skrive så mye før og sagt så lite...
Vis hele sitatet...
Jeg syns artikkelen var bra skrevet da den fikk meg til å tenke i baner jeg aldri har tenkt før. Kanskje den ikke gav deg noe, meg gav den i alle fall mye.