Why Linux? performance. philosophy. cost.
The following gives some of my background and thinking that led me to switch to Linux. Though each user's concerns are different, my experience may be useful to people making similar decisions or even to advocates of the various platforms.
I began using MACs in 1988. Up until 2002, for many years, my primary use of computers at home was on a MAC.
I was planning to buy a MAC in 2002 and actually went to a store to arrange a purchase of one but was surprised that rather than helping me to resolve my concerns the sales person raised further issues about whether I should purchase one. So I did not make the purchase.
I began using UNIX in 1989. In the work environments I've worked in, I've used UNIX more than any other system. I've also used MACs and PCs with some version of Windows on them at work. I've not used UNIX (except Linux) on a PC at all.
I began using Linux at home in 2001 when a friend built me a PC and installed SuSE Linux on it. I've never used Linux at work. Generally, I think of Linux as a version of UNIX.
Before, I had a PC, my friend tried to install Linux on a Performa 6400/180 for me, but that effort failed. I considered putting Linux on a MAC G3 or G4, but was discouraged from doing so by the moderator of the Linux conference on a MAC bulletin board I frequented.
Each time I'm about to purchase a computer, I reflect on my criteria and review my options. In 2002, the question I addressed was whether to
I had day to day experience with a Linux box that was similar to the system I would have my friend build, though the system I was already using had less powerful and elegant components. I had used OS X briefly in several different stores. I'd also closely followed various relevant conferences on PlanetMUG (a very active MAC bulletin that had its origin in BMUG, which for many years was the largest MAC users group in the world).
My concerns in 2002 were in five broad areas:
Here's how it came out for my particular concerns.
1. Installation: MAC wins by a mile.
Hey, the machine would already be built and the MAC OS/X preinstalled.
Subsequent installation of hardware would likely be far easier on a MAC.
One annoying negative on a MAC,
is that to install a new OS, you may have to first install an earlier system.
Subsequent installation of application software that did not come with the system
would also likely be far easier on a MAC.
However, so far on Linux there has been no software I was eager for
that was not part of the original distribution.
And installation of software that is part of the distribution,
though not already installed,
has generally turned out to be quite smooth and easy.
2. Applications: even.
I had expected that MAC would be a clear winner here,
but that turned out not to be true.
Generally everything I need is on the distribution,
though not necessarily in the default installation, which is the one I usually choose.
For the MAC, I could go to one of several MAC stores in the area and there would be many choices. For Linux, generally, if there is something I want it's likely on the distribution I purchased. It's fun to got to the stores and I believe there are more choices, however, having the applications immediately available to try is worth a lot.
MAC applications would in some cases be considerably easier to use. But for the applications that are most important to me, there is little difference. Linux applications tend to be more configurable.
3. Performance and Stability: Linux wins.
Even relatively inexpensive PCs have much higher MHz ratings than MACs these days.
And Linux is very efficient.
My slower PC at 483MHz and 192MB of memory running Linux is plenty fast enough for what I do.
My faster PC at 1460MHz and 256MB of memory is blazingly fast.
(not very fast, of course, compared to some of the PCs available at fairly reasonable prices.)
My Linux system is incredibly stable too.
My impression is that I probably could get performance approaching my slower Linux box by getting a 700MHz iMAC with 512MB memory.
Based on reading the concerns of users, it looks like OS X is fairly stable and a big improvement over earlier MAC OS. However, it apparently is not as stable as Linux.
4. Philosphy and User Community: Linux wins by a mile.
Apple continues to be committed to innovations that attract me.
I like the user interface that Apple has developed over the years.
And I think the move to UNIX was a very good one.
However, Apple seems much less committed to the community in which they operate. Some things that have been particularly disappointing to me are:
For a while, there were two MAC stores in my local area that I considered excellent. Then for years one. Now none.
One of the selling points of the MAC in this area used to be the user community. I'm thinking particularly of BMUG. But BMUG came upon hard times and is no more. There are remnants remaining, but the irreverent expansiveness is gone.
The Linux community seems more promising to me both for learning and contributing.
5. Cost: Linux wins.
There is a lot of price competition among PC vendors
and prices are much lower
than for comparable MACs.
For PCs, there is also a lot of competition among parts vendors,
and generally there are more choices and the parts are cheaper.
Linux distributions are incredibly cheap.
So I now use my faster Linux box as my primary machine. I do my email, web browsing and web site development, etc. on it.
I still have my MAC, and occasionally, I need something on it. I haven't bought a printer or a scanner for my Linux boxes as yet. It's infrequent that I need either, but right now if I did I'd use my MAC. At some point I may even buy another MAC, but, at least to begin with, it will not be my primary machine.
Copyright 2002 George Woolley
return to MAC to Linux