So recently due to a crash in windows and the unability to reinstall it with my windows disc i was forced to install linux, and after a day of trying i finally got lamp and phpmyadmin up and running, so my question to yall is as a web developer is it a better enviroment when developing/ designing websites then windows is? or is it just a better OS in general thanks in advance.

It's very much down to personal choice and which system you find suits you better.

I have worked on many OS's such as Windows (2000, XP, Vista, 7 and 8 ), MAC OSX and Linux (a handful of different compiles) and i currently choose to use Windows Vista or 7 and will probably move to 8 as and when.

Edited January 27, 201214 yr by MikeChipshop

It's very much down to personal choice and which system you find suits you better.

I have worked on many OS's such as Windows (2000, XP, Vista, 7 and 8 ), MAC OSX and Linux (a handful of different compiles) and i currently choose to use Windows Vista or 7 and will probably move to 8 as and when.

well i must say for now atleast imma stick with linux, quick question though, i noticed i can't reinstall windows vista with linux already installed it says the hardrive has to be in NTS something format i forget anyways what would u do to reinstall windows if i decided to at a later time

From a web development point of view I don't think there's any real major drawbacks to using either platform. Personally I use a lot of Photoshop and Dreamweaver and not sure how WINE handles that on Linux...

Quite happy with windows 7 (can dual book or use VMware to Linux if you wanted).. works perfectly for everything web/programming related... using the 64bit ultimate variaty... but they are all cracking this time arround and 8 is looking good as well, as for vista ... it was the second coming of windows 2000NT in my opinion ... a stain that we should all wipe from our memories

Edited January 27, 201214 yr by CSN-UK

I prefer Windows 7 over Linux and OSX, but it really comes down to preference. I've used all of them in some capacity and they all do the same stuff.

 

The only thing that really seems to differentiate them is hardware and software support. If you need a specific input device that doesn't have Linux drivers you might consider switching to a different OS... and I'm not sure if they have Creative Suite for Linux... but beyond problems of that ilk I can't see any reason to work with something you aren't completely comfortable with.

I prefer Windows 7 over Linux and OSX, but it really comes down to preference. I've used all of them in some capacity and they all do the same stuff.

 

The only thing that really seems to differentiate them is hardware and software support. If you need a specific input device that doesn't have Linux drivers you might consider switching to a different OS... and I'm not sure if they have Creative Suite for Linux... but beyond problems of that ilk I can't see any reason to work with something you aren't completely comfortable with.

i run two laptops, one with win 7 and another with linux mint on. TBH I prefer the linux box, its on a aging lappy and it runs super fast. as for web work on it i've got a decent code editor on it (bluefish) and for graphics got the decent GIMP. As long as you are not compleatly locked in to Adobe products, linux will do you fine. I think WINE supports adobe cs1, but don't quote me on that.

Seems like you found a setup that works for you. I'm too entrenched in Photoshop to ever consider abandoning it (except maybe for in-browser design...)

 

So recently due to a crash in windows and the unability to reinstall it with my windows disc i was forced to install linux, and after a day of trying i finally got lamp and phpmyadmin up and running, so my question to yall is as a web developer is it a better enviroment when developing/ designing websites then windows is? or is it just a better OS in general thanks in advance.

 

I recommend Google Chrome os its the best!

I recommend Google Chrome os its the best!

Its good as long as you have a net connection....

and want to run Google apps only.

and only run a netbook....

ahh i like windows, not se7en or vista but XP, xp is just nice tidy clean and amazing just my opinion though haha

ubuntu

ahh i like windows, not se7en or vista but XP, xp is just nice tidy clean and amazing just my opinion though haha

 

You mean fugly, unorganised and backward. Not to mention out of date, insecure and lacking.

You mean fugly, unorganised and backward. Not to mention out of date, insecure and lacking.

do u mean xp or vista? but anyways guys i decided to just dual boot vista and ubuntu which is linux get the best of 2 worlds i guess

I would recomend Win7, but the linux MEPIS looks promising. I am currently testing it.

do u mean xp or vista? but anyways guys i decided to just dual boot vista and ubuntu which is linux get the best of 2 worlds i guess

Ubuntu is ok, I used to use it, but I've now switched to Linux Mint, It's based on Ubuntu, but has a cleaner interface then the "marmite" (love it or hate it) unity desktop.

According to my personal experience i can say that windows are much better then linux.

ubuntu

Looks like I'm not alone

A lot of opinions flying around this thread and not one concrete example or reason behind them...

 

Here's a page that benchmarks Windows 7 against the release of Ubuntu that was current when Win7 was first released. Makes for pretty interesting reading actually http://www.tuxradar.com/node/33

A lot of opinions flying around this thread and not one concrete example or reason behind them...

 

Here's a page that benchmarks Windows 7 against the release of Ubuntu that was current when Win7 was first released. Makes for pretty interesting reading actually http://www.tuxradar.com/node/33

 

I'm all for seeing which one is better but benchmarks like this really only tell a small story. I'd like to see a full test including hot spot ananalys and also from an impartial source. Of course none of that would matter at the end of the day as having used Ubuntu for long period of time I know it's not for me.

I'm all for seeing which one is better but benchmarks like this really only tell a small story. I'd like to see a full test including hot spot ananalys and also from an impartial source. Of course none of that would matter at the end of the day as having used Ubuntu for long period of time I know it's not for me.

Haha yep I'd like to see that too. And definitely from an impartial source, although if you read that article, you'd be surprised how fair it is. Mind you, might be a different story if Ubuntu didn't *win* most of the tests! ;p

 

The comments are pretty interesting on that page though.

I've never enjoyed using Linux. Admittedly I haven't in a while, but I have before and it was not an experience I enjoyed or would want to repeat. It was just far too fiddly for my liking.

I've never enjoyed using Linux. Admittedly I haven't in a while, but I have before and it was not an experience I enjoyed or would want to repeat. It was just far too fiddly for my liking.

 

I found that after the initial novelty wore off it was just a case of "so... now I just have to use this?". Fun to set up and mess around with, not great to use full time in my opinion.

It's not different enough either, IMO. All three OS's, it's just windows, toolbars, etc etc. They are all basically a variation of the same thing.

 

I'd like to see an OS really push the boat out and try to, even if not succeed, revolutionise the interface.

 

I think the Metro UI is a possible step in this direction. Someone needs to do some crazy, innovative, different.

 

That would make the whole Which OS debate much more interesting, rather than just choosing between three that pretty much all look and work the same way.

Is linux better then windows?

 

No, it is simply a matter of personal preference.

Edited February 8, 201214 yr by oakleaves

It's not different enough either, IMO. All three OS's, it's just windows, toolbars, etc etc. They are all basically a variation of the same thing.

 

I'd like to see an OS really push the boat out and try to, even if not succeed, revolutionise the interface.

 

I think the Metro UI is a possible step in this direction. Someone needs to do some crazy, innovative, different.

 

That would make the whole Which OS debate much more interesting, rather than just choosing between three that pretty much all look and work the same way.

 

There's been some great innovations and frankly weird implementations in OS design over the years. Many are just replacements for the explorer.exe in Windows. With a decent hex editor and a little knowledge on how to get round the restrictions, you can build a pretty crazy interface. However decades of usability studies all point to what we have now. Windows, task bars and icons.

It's not different enough either, IMO. All three OS's, it's just windows, toolbars, etc etc. They are all basically a variation of the same thing.

 

I'd like to see an OS really push the boat out and try to, even if not succeed, revolutionise the interface.

 

I think the Metro UI is a possible step in this direction. Someone needs to do some crazy, innovative, different.

 

That would make the whole Which OS debate much more interesting, rather than just choosing between three that pretty much all look and work the same way.

 

I'd like to be able to control the interface with my face.

Not as far off as you'd think

 

http://www.neowin.net/news/windows-8-demoed-with-new-gaze-eye-tracking-tool

Edited February 8, 201214 yr by MikeChipshop

It's not different enough either, IMO. All three OS's, it's just windows, toolbars, etc etc. They are all basically a variation of the same thing.

 

I'd like to see an OS really push the boat out and try to, even if not succeed, revolutionise the interface.

 

I think the Metro UI is a possible step in this direction. Someone needs to do some crazy, innovative, different.

 

That would make the whole Which OS debate much more interesting, rather than just choosing between three that pretty much all look and work the same way.

 

 

 

snip

 

There's been some great innovations and frankly weird implementations in OS design over the years. Many are just replacements for the explorer.exe in Windows. With a decent hex editor and a little knowledge on how to get round the restrictions, you can build a pretty crazy interface. However decades of usability studies all point to what we have now. Windows, task bars and icons.

 

I think you've both hit the nail on the head, it's important to understand that in everything we do there is a pattern or routine (and we like routines and patterns) that are common place and as such allows us simply to identify a device or software and use it appropriately.

 

The same can be said for design (web, graphic or otherwise), despite being creative... both consciously and sub consciously, you are simply re-designing based on heuristics and inputs that you are accustom to and have experienced.

 

As such good practice and usability heuristics follow on with this pattern, as these are simply derived from identifying commonly used designs or implementations in certain situations... the more the said design or implementation is used the more accepted it becomes and as such becomes a defacto as the routine becomes common knowledge.

 

As for the whole OS debate, it is fairly flawed if you are comparing the GUI's, as in reality we as the user never deal with the operating system first hand, we are only able to communicate to it via its interfaces and these as has been said are variations of the same design, method and implementation and are such open to a matter of opinion.

 

The fact that windows currently is the standard could be its interfaces, but dig deeper and as hinted in the paragraph above you would or should start to think "if they have the same or similar gui's, methods or routines... there must be something else ... something i cant see...?"... leading on...

 

The functional difference and performance aspects should be the comparative method, however it is important to note that windows does not used shared GUI interfaces unlike the linux (most, or mac) and as such does have greater overheads to contend with performance wise.

 

The core of windows, linux (and the mac OS) however all have their very different purposes but share many of the same goals/objectives.

 

Something to have stimulated the mind i hope

Edited February 8, 201214 yr by CSN-UK

I'm concern about piracy.

Personally i prefer Linux for its stability and speed, but i cant live without windows because of the amount of software i need to use with it. Wine on Linux helps for some stuff though.

 

Getting my new desktop on Tuesday though woo hoo!

 

Matt

It all comes back to personal preference in the end. Windows operating systems, such as Windows 7 are very user-friendly and let you do your web design and graphic design easily. There will be some differences when you use linux, but it gets easier when you get used to it.