i still use xp...
the only blue screens i've ever seen have been due to buggy drivers or broken hardware. it's the actual truth of it. apple's more integrated approach is maybe better in terms of minimizing points of failure, whereas linux driver support remains largely hopeless. but, you have to consider a trade-off in price and customization. the key thing is this, though: if you get compatible hardware from respectable vendors, the bluescreens really don't happen. when they do, it's because the hardware manufacturers didn't create drivers that work properly in the system, and you can't really blame microsoft for it. you just have to do that research.
Schwarzer
XP of gaming, Linux for working.
deathtokoalas
it depends on your job, though. if you're working in science, that makes sense. if you're working in art, serious software and hardware support for linux is going to require a change in the economic system we live in. and, of course, windows remains the dominant operating system in networked work environments. i've stuck with windows because i don't have linux driver support for my audio hardware (which is my "job"). i could switch to a mac, but i'm not keen to pay 30-50% more for the privilege of losing control over the customization of the machine.
i acknowledge that linux is in some ways a superior system. but, in terms of day-to-day functionality, it's just not there - and will likely never be so long as we organize our technology sector in terms of corporations.
i've stuck with xp because i have a minimal winlite image connected to dozens of scripts. upgrading to seven would cost me several months of rebuilding the image and rewriting the scripts, and i'm not convinced a lot of it is even really possible. this is the same problem businesses are dealing with, but i don't have the resources of a business to deal with it. on top of that, i don't think i'd really gain anything besides higher ram usage. i mean, my final xp sp3 image is only about 100 mb. it's very fast, because i've completely ripped 85% of the os out. and, it's very safe because i've removed essentially all of the networking functionality - including most of the code libraries.
it's mostly stopped, now. i think the companies have reacted to the outcry, or moved to more sophisticated tracking methods (social media). but something that i'd see happen around 2010 was that i'd download software from a respected company (adobe, say) and then get error messages when the spyware kicked in. what was happening was that the spyware was going looking for dialer software in windows, and erroring out when it couldn't find the c libraries. that would tell me where the executable was and what i needed to remove - or if i needed to uninstall the entire program.
xp was created to exist in a safe, corporate networking environment behind a hardware firewall. it's very open and trusting, but it's by design because you're only supposed to be talking to other computers in close proximity that you have serious one-on-one trust with; security is supposed to be dealt with on the way in and out of the network. this is of course inherently meant for "work" use. it's not a home operating system, and trying to use it as one is never going to be safe - unless you set up behind a hardware firewall, recreating the same conditions.
what that means is that the best way to make xp safer is to take all that inherently trusting networking software right out of it.
kanekan
what people forget is that windows (at least started) is a software company and apple is a hardware company but people blame windows for a hardware problem anyway which is stupid but many also buy an apple computer and put windows on it
Schwarzer
That sounds really stupid. Apples and PCs are build from the same parts.
deathtokoalas
most people don't really have the kind of modular understanding of a computer as a collection of parts that defined the early days of the industry, they take it as a single thing - like a car or a phone. this idea that they're dealing with something complicated that needs to work together is sort of beyond them. when the os crashes, they blame the os.
apple computers were really something entirely different until relatively recently. i think they moved to the x86 architecture around 2005. up until that point, they were really very different computers.
regardless, apple still produces it's products as single entities, which means everything is tested over the same hardware, drivers are built for specific purposes, etc. so, this idea of complicated things working together is very much minimized.
microsoft just doesn't deal with this. it throws the operating system down and tells the hardware companies to figure it out on their own - with varying results. i think they introduced a driver testing process around vista, but it's still a step down in terms of rigorous testing.
when you keep that in mind, you would have to expect that apples are going to be more stable with the hardware they ship with. and, this is generally true.
the trade-off is a loss of flexibility. if i want to swap the hard drives out on my pc, i'll do it myself and not expect the stability to move up or down. but if i want to break the warranty in swapping a mac's drive out (if it isn't soldered in), i have no assurances that i'm not going to destabilize the system.
i do agree that i couldn't see any reason to pay 40% more for an apple logo and then put windows on it, given that apples are mostly made in the dell factory nowadays. i experimented with hacking os x for a while around 2007, though. in the end, the software flexibility i thought i could get out of it never really materialized and i just formatted it...
Blue Dragon
In the last 2 years since I use Linux as my main desktop system,I haven't met a device without Linux drivers and I have had 1 kernel panic.
deathtokoalas
you must not be doing anything interesting with it, then.
don't get me wrong: if you work in science, linux is the way to go. and if you just want to browse the internet and other normal "computer stuff", it's as good as the next operating system.
but if you're using virtually any kind of specialized hardware, you're more or less at the whim of the company that's making it. and, if they don't feel like it's a worthwhile investment, you're probably shit out of luck.
well, unless you can write them yourself.
(deleted response)
deathtokoalas
well, xp comes in 64-bit flavours....
...but, to be honest with you, i'm more concerned about running 16-bit software than running 64-bit software. and i'm not concerned about support or security for the reasons i outlined. it's a recording pc - it needs to launch a version of cubase from 2005, host vst plugins and connect to a few hardware consoles (neither of which have stable 64 bit drivers). now, i admit i've recently run into a few circumstances where i wish i could upgrade my ram past 3 gb. but it hasn't reached the breaking point and probably won't for at least a few more years.
i think the reality is that computing hit a kind of functional flatline around 2005 or so, where increasing specs don't really make any difference unless you're into really high end gaming or something.
i'm simply not going to gain anything of value by upgrading windows, increasing my processor speed or moving to 64 bit. i'm just going to lose an image i spent a lot of time with. what's going to finally break me is when i can't launch a sampler because it has minimum requirements of 8 gb of ram.
(deleted response)
deathtokoalas
that's what i'm saying - i will probably stick with xp until i feel i need more ram. and that's probably years into the future. even so, i'll probably end up dual booting into 32-bit xp due to the hardware. i mean, even if i end up upgrading the hardware one day i'm not going to discard the old devices...
i built this thing myself in 2007; i dropped quite a bit of cash into it, because i expected it to last at least ten years. it's a 64-bit chip and the board can take 8 gb, but, like i say, there's no 64-bit drivers and i like my image. people actually laughed at me. "you'll upgrade in two years.". but i haven't. and all i've lost in that period is one of the four hard drives.
like i say: it's going to be the ram, eventually. and it could be another ten years...
and...i'll still be running xp, even if i upgrade the music pc, because i've got it running on my old pc that just sends a youtube signal to my tv, which is from the 90s (those quantum fireballs don't die. there's a 20 gb hard drive in it. it still spins. it belongs in a museum.) and can't run anything newer than xp. if that drive goes one day, i have every intention to hit a pawn shop and find another one just so i can put xp back on it...
