Best OS for non-gaming use

[Nick]

I assume you meant ordinary in terms of Apple PCs, which is still expensive; Apple prices even their low-end stuff quite high. MacBooks start at $999, and you usually have to at least get some hardware upgrades if you plan to actually use it for anything.

Ummmm. Not really.

The default specs of customization for a MacBook, or any Mac for that matter, are better than that of a typical un-customized PC. It's default specs are enough to get around in whatever someone is doing. 1 GB of memory is enough to use up about ten applications that you have on your dock at the same time without stalling on a Mac OS X system where as on a Windows OS, it takes forever.

Way to assume.

 

[twocows]

So? I'm still running OSX on ordinary PC hardware; thus negating your "Expensive" argument.
Thanks for playing.

I tend to not consider OS X on PC (I won't use the actual name) when discussing an OS to use for standard, everyday use. It's a bit tough to install OS X on a PC (not to mention illegal), it's tough to upgrade, and it's not exactly what you'd call error-free. While it may be cheaper than the legal alternative, it's not a valid solution for everyday use, and the nice people at the project's forum say the exact same thing in about fifteen different places.

 

[Bianca Paragon]

I tend to not consider OS X on PC (I won't use the actual name) when discussing an OS to use for standard, everyday use. It's a bit tough to install OS X on a PC (not to mention illegal), it's tough to upgrade, and it's not exactly what you'd call error-free. While it may be cheaper than the legal alternative, it's not a valid solution for everyday use, and the nice people at the project's forum say the exact same thing in about fifteen different places.

Incorrect.
OSX86 is simple to install from a retail disk, nowadays. And if by "tough to upgrade" you mean "can upgrade using automatic system update, like any other Mac", then sure. If that's tough for you though, you've got issues. And it's "error free" as much as OSX on Apple hardware is; as it's installed from the same disk and the install itself remains unmodified.
Way to assume.

 

[Nitrous Oxide]

Windows 7. I used to love Mac and hate Microsoft, you know the deal, but I never owned one (used them a lot though). Got the Windows 7 Beta back in January, and I have to say, it's about 100 times better than anything Mac will ever be. Turns out the big guys at Microsoft finally used their brains. RIP Mac.

Not to mention it works with games.

Also yeah, Windows 7 boots up in about 30 seconds, which is tied with the fastest I've gotten a Linux distro to boot up on my machine. Sorry to say, but Windows 7 is everything gone right. Not to mention it's a lot less confusing than Linux distros.

One more thing, the Windows 7 kernel is a lot less resource demanding, to the point where it's actually faster than XP for basically everything. The fact is, Vista sucked, XP was great but boring, and Windows 7 took the best of both, and made it better. I've actually tested Windows 7 on my old PC (196 MB of RAM) and it works fine (I normally ran XP off of that machine, no problems either).

 

[twocows]

Ummmm. Not really.

The default specs of customization for a MacBook, or any Mac for that matter, are better than that of a typical un-customized PC. It's default specs are enough to get around in whatever someone is doing. 1 GB of memory is enough to use up about ten applications that you have on your dock at the same time without stalling on a Mac OS X system where as on a Windows OS, it takes forever.

Way to assume.

I concede this; the last time I checked the Apple store was about a year ago, and at the time, the hardware they offered was not worth the price.

Incorrect.
OSX86 is simple to install from a retail disk, nowadays. And if by "tough to upgrade" you mean "can upgrade using automatic system update, like any other Mac", then sure. If that's tough for you though, you've got issues. And it's "error free" as much as OSX on Apple hardware is; as it's installed from the same disk and the install itself remains unmodified.
Way to assume.

It's not simple at all, even if you're doing a vanilla install. Look at the installation tutorials in the forums and tell me that someone without tech experience could do that. Also, last I heard, the system update was buggy on any PC install of OS X.

And if you wish to argue that it's as error-free as a plain Apple, perhaps you can clue me in as to why topics like the ones below exist in the "Post-Installation" forum.

Hard Drive not showing in finder or desktop with ******* Leopard 10.5.2, ticked in preferences

[HELP!] unable to install .pkg programs

VGA output not working! HELP!

CoreUI.framework all messed up

Hackintosh Making Weird Boot Noises From Disk Drive? My Hackintosh Is Making Weird Boot Noises From Disk Drive

Big Problem! PC ground to a halt! no clue why... Leopard 10.5.6

Mouse and dock issues After 10.5.6 install

how to automatically start pinging website when comp turns on? to fix this bug i hav with airport

Major kext install headache

Hm. Error-free indeed.

Windows 7. I used to love Mac and hate Microsoft, you know the deal, but I never owned one (used them a lot though). Got the Windows 7 Beta back in January, and I have to say, it's about 100 times better than anything Mac will ever be. Turns out the big guys at Microsoft finally used their brains. RIP Mac.

Not to mention it works with games.

Also yeah, Windows 7 boots up in about 30 seconds, which is tied with the fastest I've gotten a Linux distro to boot up on my machine. Sorry to say, but Windows 7 is everything gone right. Not to mention it's a lot less confusing than Linux distros.

One more thing, the Windows 7 kernel is a lot less resource demanding, to the point where it's actually faster than XP for basically everything. The fact is, Vista sucked, XP was great but boring, and Windows 7 took the best of both, and made it better. I've actually tested Windows 7 on my old PC (196 MB of RAM) and it works fine (I normally ran XP off of that machine, no problems either).

I, too, have used the Windows 7 beta. While I will say it's better than Vista, and at least as good as XP, there are a number of things I don't like. First of all, Microsoft is integrating Office 2007's horrible "ribbon" interface into a lot of programs, and you can't disable it. Also, the ability to make the OS look like previous versions has been tweaked down a bit; with Vista, I have it pretty much feeling the same as Windows 98, but the best I could do with Windows 7 was a slightly classic-type start menu and a taskbar that was gray. I couldn't disable the dock-type quicklaunch bar, which I didn't like; I like the old style program tabs interface. As for the startup time, I disagree with your 30 seconds. I've run it on a 2006 laptop and my current gaming laptop under VirtualBox, and neither install has started in under a minute (from boot to desktop). It's just slightly faster than my Vista install. I will concede that Windows 7 is far less resource intensive than Vista, but not to the point where "it's actually faster than XP for basically everything." Some applications feel like they start faster, but according to the benchmarks I ran, looks can be deceiving; OpenOffice, Firefox, and IE all took about as long to start up as they did on Vista.

 

[Nitrous Oxide]

I love whoever gave me negative rep.

https://aquate.us/u/hi1.png

Do you think I speak from my ass or something? I suggest you go read over every single review of Windows 7.

As for boot up, I'll get a video for you if you're too thickheaded to believe me. Same with my old PC, I can go film it up and running, dxdiag, you know the deal.

 

[Bianca Paragon]

I concede this; the last time I checked the Apple store was about a year ago, and at the time, the hardware they offered was not worth the price.



It's not simple at all, even if you're doing a vanilla install. Look at the installation tutorials in the forums and tell me that someone without tech experience could do that. Also, last I heard, the system update was buggy on any PC install of OS X.

And if you wish to argue that it's as error-free as a plain Apple, perhaps you can clue me in as to why topics like the ones below exist in the "Post-Installation" forum.

All these problems come from using outdated installation methods; using hacked together disk releases and not using vanilla install media.
"Last you heard"; Apple System Update had problems with non vanilla kernels. And rightly so, as it updates the kernel and replaces the non vanilla one.
The process is a very simple one. Select well supported hardware, prepare the installation destination's EFI partition as per Boot 132/Chameleon's requirements (including any kexts/efi strings you'll need for your hardware - this is WELL documented), and then install from the vanilla install disk. I installed from a 10.5.0 install disk and updated to 10.5.6 using the Apple System Update.
This method leaves no opportunity for any problems to arise if you do your research as the install is never modified; any custom kexts you need are loaded from a hidden partition at boot time and everything remains vanilla.

Just for fun, here's a breakdown for you:

Hard Drive not showing in finder or desktop with Kalyway Leopard 10.5.2, ticked in preferences
This user is using non-vanilla install; but has forgotten to enable the chipset/sata driver for his hardware. User error.

[HELP!] unable to install .pkg programs
Using a non-matched system.kext to kernel version. User error.

VGA output not working! HELP!
Using a videocard with a hacked kext instead of EFI strings and vanilla kext. User error.

CoreUI.framework all messed up
Installed Magnifique; beta software. User error.

Hackintosh Making Weird Boot Noises From Disk Drive? My Hackintosh Is Making Weird Boot Noises From Disk Drive
Faulty HDD. Hardware error

Big Problem! PC ground to a halt! no clue why... Leopard 10.5.6
Problem software; User Error

Mouse and dock issues After 10.5.6 install
Not using vanilla install, user error

how to automatically start pinging website when comp turns on? to fix this bug i hav with airport
Problem with third party wifi card being forced to identify as an airport despite different hardware ID's. User error

Major kext install headache
Kexts should only be used in your EFI partition and not put in /S/L/E/ as that method is outdated. User error.

Are we noticing a pattern, here?

 

[twocows]

All these problems come from using outdated installation methods; using hacked together disk releases and not using vanilla install media.
"Last you heard"; Apple System Update had problems with non vanilla kernels. And rightly so, as it updates the kernel and replaces the non vanilla one.
The process is a very simple one. Select well supported hardware, prepare the installation destination's EFI partition as per Boot 132/Chameleon's requirements (including any kexts/efi strings you'll need for your hardware - this is WELL documented), and then install from the vanilla install disk. I installed from a 10.5.0 install disk and updated to 10.5.6 using the Apple System Update.
This method leaves no opportunity for any problems to arise if you do your research as the install is never modified; any custom kexts you need are loaded from a hidden partition at boot time and everything remains vanilla.

Just for fun, here's a breakdown for you:

Hard Drive not showing in finder or desktop with Kalyway Leopard 10.5.2, ticked in preferences
This user is using non-vanilla install; but has forgotten to enable the chipset/sata driver for his hardware. User error.

[HELP!] unable to install .pkg programs
Using a non-matched system.kext to kernel version. User error.

VGA output not working! HELP!
Using a videocard with a hacked kext instead of EFI strings and vanilla kext. User error.

CoreUI.framework all messed up
Installed Magnifique; beta software. User error.

Hackintosh Making Weird Boot Noises From Disk Drive? My Hackintosh Is Making Weird Boot Noises From Disk Drive
Faulty HDD. Hardware error

Big Problem! PC ground to a halt! no clue why... Leopard 10.5.6
Problem software; User Error

Mouse and dock issues After 10.5.6 install
Not using vanilla install, user error

how to automatically start pinging website when comp turns on? to fix this bug i hav with airport
Problem with third party wifi card being forced to identify as an airport despite different hardware ID's. User error

Major kext install headache
Kexts should only be used in your EFI partition and not put in /S/L/E/ as that method is outdated. User error.

Are we noticing a pattern, here?

I do see a pattern. Users are having trouble installing and using OSx86. Sounds like a usability problem if you ask me.

 

[Bianca Paragon]

I do see a pattern. Users are having trouble installing and using OSx86. Sounds like a usability problem if you ask me.

Way to disregard most of the post.
The problem is people using out-dated install methods. That's a user problem, not a usability problem. Pebcak.

 

[Nitrous Oxide]

I, too, have used the Windows 7 beta. While I will say it's better than Vista, and at least as good as XP, there are a number of things I don't like. First of all, Microsoft is integrating Office 2007's horrible "ribbon" interface into a lot of programs, and you can't disable it. Also, the ability to make the OS look like previous versions has been tweaked down a bit; with Vista, I have it pretty much feeling the same as Windows 98, but the best I could do with Windows 7 was a slightly classic-type start menu and a taskbar that was gray. I couldn't disable the dock-type quicklaunch bar, which I didn't like; I like the old style program tabs interface. As for the startup time, I disagree with your 30 seconds. I've run it on a 2006 laptop and my current gaming laptop under VirtualBox, and neither install has started in under a minute (from boot to desktop). It's just slightly faster than my Vista install. I will concede that Windows 7 is far less resource intensive than Vista, but not to the point where "it's actually faster than XP for basically everything." Some applications feel like they start faster, but according to the benchmarks I ran, looks can be deceiving; OpenOffice, Firefox, and IE all took about as long to start up as they did on Vista.

Disagree with my start up time all you like, but I swear on my life it's true. 10 seconds to get to the log in screen, 20 seconds to desktop. Of course, I am running a dual-core 3.0 GHz with 4 GB of RAM, and a 7600 GT with 1.5 GB of video RAM for Aero.

As for asthetics, well, you can't really complain. If people are willing to learn Mac's terrible setup of a dock and it's dumb Finder bar thing, Windows 7 no doubt wins in any comparison of level of confusion. And if you're that picky, you'd already know about programs like Windows Blinds which will obviously have a Windows 7 version once 7 is released. Everything can be customized with the right tools.

As for my benchmarks, I guess it's spec-related. I have noticed that more memory extensive programs like Photoshop and ObjectDock are significantly faster in 7 than in XP. Photoshop opens in about 15 seconds as opposed to the whopping 45 seconds it used to take, and ObjectDock doesn't lag when I open my flyout menus.

Another thing is what background programs you have running that clog up your RAM. The only things I have running in the background are Xfire and Steam, so nothing that actually requires resources to run (unlike things like iTunes, AIM, anti-virus programs, etc.).

 

[Bianca Paragon]

7600 GT with 1.5 GB of video RAM

...lol. Which idiot company put 1536MB of RAM on a mid-range card that old? Unless you're making it up ;)

 

[twocows]

Way to disregard most of the most.
The problem is people using out-dated install methods. That's a user problem, not a usability problem. Pebcak.

If the users are having problems installing, it's because the forums are confusing. And because the forums are supposedly supposed to be a guide for installing (according to the project website), it's a usability problem.

 

[Bianca Paragon]

If the users are having problems installing, it's because the forums are confusing. And because the forums are supposedly supposed to be a guide for installing (according to the project website), it's a usability problem.

...so...if one forum in the community is disorganized; that means the product has usability problems? wut? Did you even read what you posted?

 

[Nitrous Oxide]

...lol. Which idiot company put 1536MB of RAM on a mid-range card that old? Unless you're making it up ;)

I have a RAM slot that's dedicated to video RAM. :paranoid:

And the GeForce 7600 GT used to be a high-mid-range card. ;)

 

[Bianca Paragon]

I have a RAM slot that's dedicated to video RAM. :paranoid:

Shared System Memory? Gross :X What motherboard model is this?
And no, the 7600GT was never "high range"; it was mid-range. The 7800GTX and GT were the initial high end of the 7 family, followed by the 7900GTX and GT. Then we had the 7950GX2 and 7950GTX, et al. The point is, the 7600GT is a mid range card; and always has been.

 

[Nitrous Oxide]

Shared System Memory? Gross :X What motherboard model is this?

Some Dell. Works for me though, the extra gig of video ram does wonders for gaming nowadays compared to just the 512 MB on the card itself.

And I meant high mid-range.

 

[Bianca Paragon]

Some Dell. Works for me though, the extra gig of video ram does wonders for gaming nowadays compared to just the 512 MB on the card itself.

And I meant high mid-range.

It wasn't high-mid-range, either. Technically the 7800GT was high/mid; the 7600GT was really upper-end-budget :X

And that "extra video memory" is just like using an onboard videocard with shared system memory; gross. Run CPU-Z and grab the model of that motherboard; I'd be interested to see who made THAT terrible decision.

 

[mewthree w/armor]

Ok folks, back on topic. You got a problem sort it out somewhere else please.

 

[Nitrous Oxide]

It's a Dell (0HJ054).

Anyways, we're getting way off topic.

Haha, beaten to it by an admin. Nice.

 

[twocows]

...so...if one forum in the community is disorganized; that means the product has usability problems? wut? Did you even read what you posted?

I thought that was the project homepage. Wikipedia steered me wrong; I suppose if there are more organized forums out there that I don't know about, it's possible that it's easy enough for a non-technical user to install. I haven't seen any, though.