Apple Gatekeeper- looks like OSX is moving towards a closed App store type system....

[mostapha]

If you like the idea of gnome-do, quicksilver and alfred are very good similar pieces for OS X.

[tombruton69]

yea i do mean zfs lol. Again as I said before its personal opinion. I love linux cuz it has lots of tools for it that I use and it runs vm's like a boss. osx pretty much is free BSD with a nice interface. Linux is good for the person that likes to tweak. Most linux ppl change there OS every couple of months just cuz they can. I just find OSX slow even with a quad core and 16 gig of ram and windows the same, my linux gnu which is ubuntu but with kde and a million other changes just runs so much better. I do use all 3 OS's. bsd is good just doesnt have the level of support linux now has

[mostapha]

Please don't take this as an insult, tom, but I find it very hard to believe/trust a linux guy who uses Ubuntu. It's part of the gentoo snobbery that I still have. (heh…I use some of the desktop backgrounds that came with my gentoo build on OS X for the same reason).

[zestoi]

If you like the idea of gnome-do, quicksilver and alfred are very good similar pieces for OS X.

cheers just grabbed them both

re: ubuntu - i started out on yggdrasil when the kernel was at 0.9*something* and then used slackware for years, then debian. i still use debian on my datacenter servers but the last few years have mostly used kubuntu or xubuntu on laptops - and recently ubuntu studio just to see what it was like. tried redhat and mandrake a long time ago too - thought mandrake was ok. it does feel like i have loads of crap installed that i don't need but my system is pretty usable. never actually bit the bullet on gentoo - tho always meant to. thinking of switching to archlinux for a cleaner system - i hear it has a more bsd-like package system building from source? (all servers i work on that aren't debian are freebsd). at least now this laptop isn't my main "work" one i can afford some down time to experiment with different distros. what are you using?

[tombruton69]

Please don't take this as an insult, tom, but I find it very hard to believe/trust a linux guy who uses Ubuntu. It's part of the gentoo snobbery that I still have. (heh…I use some of the desktop backgrounds that came with my gentoo build on OS X for the same reason).

If you ask me in a month IL be using something different most likely. However people decide with there feet and it is a popular linux gnu distro. There not contributing enough back to linux but that is changing. They are integrating paid apps really well now this is something that could keep me on Ubuntu for good.

Loads of the tools I use are command line based so it really doesn't matter to me what environment i am in. I make sure I am open minded about every product and the only ppl with snobbery are idiots on forums. In the real world of work ubuntu is popular. It generally works out the box, looks pretty good, its fast if your on an older pc there are light weight desktops like pretty much every version of linux.

Ubuntu server is gaining real ground in the server market. This is mainly to do with awesome documentation, this is hard to measure tho as you should mis report your OS a server and I properly setup firewall and ids should limit the amount of system scans

[mostapha]

I don't have a linux installed on my main computer at the moment. One of my file servers is still running a gentoo build from a long time ago…though I haven't actually done anything with it lately. It's software is mostly ridiculously out of date.

When I get around to ordering a data doubler, I'm probably going to be dual-booting either ArchLinux or Gentoo and OS X on my MBP. I kinda want to try arch because of some very positive comments about it from other geek friends.

Gentoo's portage system was based on BSD ports. I think ArchLinux followed from crux, which was based on a very similar idea, though I thin pacman was also based on ports. Both of them are IMHO just plain better than things like apt……as long as you've got the time to sit around and wait for most things to compile.

At this point, I think Arch is going to win just because the default install is more minimalist (as in, no window manager by default) so there's less for me to undo as soon as I install. Gentoo switched to only stage 3 installs (basically format, untar, boot loader, reboot) and I don't feel like reading the documentation again to find out what kinds of defaults they chose.

@tom, the last time I installed linux, it was Ubuntu for those exact reasons: I just needed something that worked and had very limited needs: vim, java, Bluetooth, and a build tool that only worked on Linux and Windows. There's just so much to undo to make me actually like using it that it's not worth it, especially with how limited apt is. Even macports provides a little more power.

[tombruton69]

yea arch is really good, really good teaching distro for linux aswell

[mostapha]

It's funny that "teaching" and "powerful" tend to go together. Ubuntu, for example, is neither. But it is "popular".

I'll not make the obvious joke about the same trend showing up in other areas.

[tombruton69]

ubuntu is powerfull, my home media centre is based off the 30meg version

none of the rubbish just a command line add the repos and install what i need. jobs a goodun. All maintenance is done though ssh. only thing I have not done is changed the bios boot image

[GeekGod]

While you guys are on the subject of the *Nix's try out PC-BSD which is FreeBSD based.

http://www.pcbsd.org/