Programming with Poise

Why Can’t We Be Friends?

If you’re looking to start a flame war, go ahead and mention that your operating system is better than another. Do it at work. Do it in school. Do it on a public forum. At lunch. Anywhere, really.

You’ve heard all about the big three: Windows, Mac, Linux. I know the topic has been beaten to death and back again, but I feel compelled to inject a bit of objective commentary to the fray. First, a history lesson, I should think. In order of popularity - that is to say, market share at the time of posting.

In 1980, an employee of Seattle Computer Products wrote a disk operating system called 86-DOS (also known as QDOS) for IBM Personal Computers using the Intel 8086. Microsoft Corp. licensed the software, fiddled with it, and sold it as MS-DOS (”Microsoft Disk Operating System”) in 1981. MS-DOS quickly gained popularity and market share. In 1985, Microsoft released Windows version 1.0. Windows continued over three major revisions until 1995. None of which were true graphical operating systems in their own right; rather they were simply graphic shells placed over top of MS-DOS. Windows 95, released in 1995 (surprised?) was the first true GUI OS from Microsoft. It included a command line reminiscent (read: taken directly from) MS-DOS, however this was merely the shadow of DOS, and not a window into the heart of the operating system. Even through to Windows Vista, traces of DOS can still be found.

Apple Incorporated released the Macintosh 128k in early 1984. This system was largely a success for Apple. The Macintosh 128k featured a mouse and keyboard to support a complete graphical user interface, which had not been done successfully before (an attempt called the Apple Lisa failed fairly quickly due to high costs and limited software availability). A few attempts later, Apple released the Macintosh Plus in 1986 which was, arguably, one of it’s more popular systems. System 7 was the first Mac to natively (and fully) support 32-bit addressing. Via many significant patches and retrofitting, Mac OS made it’s way up to version 9.2.2, however the system quickly became dated, and in early 2001, Apple released Mac OS X - entirely rewritten using the Unix variant (a hybrid of Nextstep and FreeBSD) called Darwin.

In the 1960’s, MIT, Bell Labs, and GE jointly worked on an experimental operating system called Multics. The project wasn’t particularly a hit, and eventually was dropped. However, one of it’s developers, Ken Thompson, led a team in writing a novel operating system for the PDP-7 in assembly language called Unics (yes, a play on the name Multics), which was to be a secure, efficient, time-sharing (read: multiuser) system. Unics was later renamed Unix. Between 1969 and 1973, the C programming language had been written by Dennis Richie et. al., and in 1973, Unix was rewritten in C. In 1984, Richard Stallman announced the GNU free software project with the goal of organizing a unix-compatible operating system entirely comprised of free software. Many things went well for the GNU Project. Their microkernel, called Hurd, was not one of them. However, in 1991, Linus Torvalds generated the monolithic Linux kernel, which was compatible with GNU software. This springboard gave enormous popularity to both projects and arose to what is now called the “Linux” operating system, although it is more properly titled “GNU/Linux.” Many, many, many GNU/Linux derivations exist today.

Now that we’re (roughly) on the same page, which one is best? The answer is simple: they all suck. If you’re a graphic designer, Linux will put you through torture and a half. Once you get done with all those pesky configurations files, manage to get your devices working properly, and swallow the fact that there’s no 1-800 number in case your machine crashes, you’ll realize that Adobe Photoshop CS3 is not available for you. If you’re a gamer, you scoff at Mac. It’s useless. I can’t play Team Fortress 2? The mouse only has one button! Where’s the registry? And certainly, if you’re a hard-core dev, you can’t stand all of Windows’ quirks. Memory leak galore, reboots after every five minutes, security measures consume the first hour of your morning routine…. And Mac? You can’t even tool around in certain system directories!

My favorite argument is the classic Windows guy vs. Mac guy. Let me explain what I mean.

Windows guy: Mac is too simple - there’s not even a right click!

Mac guy: Windows is too confusing! And what the heck is a right click?

Windows guy: There’s no control key!

Mac guy: Use the apple key, dummy!

Windows guy: I just want to defrag my computer now and then, alright?

Mac guy: I just want my computer to work!

[The Linux guy walks in, and the other two roll their eyes.]

Mac guy: Oh jeez….

Windows guy: Not HIM again…

Linux guy: Pffft…. Noobs.

You’ve heard it - you know you have. You’ve said it yourself, even. What is it, I wonder, about people and their obsession over their preferred operating system?

I haven’t figured it out quite yet. But let me be perfectly clear. If an operating system does what you need it to do, how you need to do it, and within reasonable limits of timeliness, then it’s the best system for you. And if your buddy has different needs, a different system might just be the best for him. Even if (heaven forbid) it’s from a competing vendor. One of my personal pet peeves are those computer users who religiously claim that their choice of operating system is simply the only viable solution, and anyone who claims any differently is a heretic.

I just like to keep in mind a simple analogy, whenever the topic arises. A Caravan would not be the optimal vehicle for a 17 year old student to drive back and forth to high school every day, while a Neon is certainly not the most sensical choice in transportation for a mother of 4. (Note, however, that both are produced by Dodge because, of course, Mopar is always the best manufacturer…)