MP All Models What is stopping you from using Windows?

[jasonmvp]

Will you consider switching?

I use both on a daily basis, so there's no "switching" to be done, per se. During the work day, I'm all in with my Macbook Pro (provided by employer). UNIX-based OS underneath a usable GUI, and access to all of the usual Microsoft Office and other apps that I need. The key point is that I have a UNIX shell and can ssh to whatever I may need to, all while it's running inside a properly built terminal emulator.

Windows doesn't have that. Yet. Microsoft is trying... so hard, too. But they just can't seem to get the whole terminal emulator thing done properly. And the Windows Subsystem for Linux is very good, but it's not a perfect replacement for native UNIX.

Play, on the other hand, is all Windows. I have a thoroughly over-engineered gaming (and video editing, sometimes) PC sitting here in my office. I hate using Windows for anything, but it does gaming superbly.

Where the "switch" will likely happen is me coming back to the Mac for video editing. I've been a Premiere Pro user for several years, but it just runs like poop on a Mac in comparison with a PC. At least it does with my workflows. And, let's face it: the 6,1 wasn't a home run; when that was released, I decided to move my editing 100% to Windows and haven't looked back.

Until the other day when I tried some experiments with FCPX. Even on my personal Macbook Pro, it's... quick with h.264 and h.265 files. That gives me a lot of hope that the new Pro will perform wonderfully with those highly compressed formats.

 

[Ph.D.]

I use OS-X, Linux and Windows, all daily. I am forced to use Windows since a single key software package for my work only runs on it. What stops me from "switching" to windows is:

• The user experience and "elegance" is inferior to that of OS-X and a good Linux distribution.
• The security and amount of spying is worse than that of OS-X and a good Linux distribution.
• The infantile, unhelpful pseudo hand-holding (which usually just amounts to "sign up for this service!") is insultingly worse than OS-X or a good Linux distribution.
• The forced updates are insulting, disruptive and, in my experience, dangerous to ones' system.
• The opaqueness of what it's doing behind the scenes is creepy.
• The whole experience is creepy and loathesome. I feel dirty and vulnerable booting into windows every single time!

 

[defjam]

I use both on a daily basis, so there's no "switching" to be done, per se. During the work day, I'm all in with my Macbook Pro (provided by employer). UNIX-based OS underneath a usable GUI, and access to all of the usual Microsoft Office and other apps that I need. The key point is that I have a UNIX shell and can ssh to whatever I may need to, all while it's running inside a properly built terminal emulator.

Windows doesn't have that. Yet. Microsoft is trying... so hard, too. But they just can't seem to get the whole terminal emulator thing done properly. And the Windows Subsystem for Linux is very good, but it's not a perfect replacement for native UNIX.

I use PuTTY on my Windows systems. Is there something it's lacking?

 

[jbachandouris]

My first reason is the hardware. I have had zero problems with my 3 year old rMBP.

The other is the software itself. I grew tired of trying to 'fix' something the Windows Update screwed up not to mention the unwieldy 'security' suites that cause more harm than good.

Also, I find it fascinating that PC vendors have copied so much from Apple yet most can't or won't design a touch pad that's worth a crap. It's almost 2020. I just don't get it.

 

[jasonmvp]

I use PuTTY on my Windows systems. Is there something it's lacking?

Yes. A lot, in fact. It's slow, clunky, and requires you to click through a bunch of menu selections to try and ssh somewhere. And the terminal emulator that it uses can't really compare to iTerm or Terminal.app on the Mac.

From a UNIX shell prompt, I can just type

ssh hostname

and I'm off. No other app to open, no menus to click through, etc.

 

[chrono1081]

I use mac and windows, but for most of my work I need windows because of the programs that only run in windows.

I had always thought that in terms of raw performance, benchmarking etc for media related workflow, so for things like video editing, photoshop that macs were always superior in performance.

But recently with the high core count and lower prices on PC, I keep on hearing that Windows is actually performing better than macs and for less price?

Now I don't have a choice because of the programs I use, but if people are saying windows offers better performance for less cost, what is stopping you from using Windows?

Will you consider switching?

I would not. Windows is literally useless to me.

Also a big draw with Mac OS (and Linux) is that it can handle large data sets far better than Windows, and will actually utilize hardware much better than Windows. That's not a slam against Windows, its just a side effect of Window's strength which is hardware compatibility.

 

[defjam]

The other is the software itself. I grew tired of trying to 'fix' something the Windows Update screwed up not to mention the unwieldy 'security' suites that cause more harm than good.

What update and what was the issue it caused?
[automerge]1576520270[/automerge]

Yes. A lot, in fact. It's slow, clunky, and requires you to click through a bunch of menu selections to try and ssh somewhere. And the terminal emulator that it uses can't really compare to iTerm or Terminal.app on the Mac.

I click an icon to open PuTTY and then click on the system I need to connect to (if previously saved) or just type in the IP address. Not very involved at all.

From a UNIX shell prompt, I can just type

ssh hostname

and I'm off. No other app to open, no menus to click through, etc.

Well, you have to open the command prompt before you can type SSH.

 

[jbachandouris]

What update and what was the issue it caused?

Really? You expect me to remember which of the MANY garbage Windows Updates screwed up either Windows or Office? How about a Windows 'Update' wrecking the boot record of my wife's PC hard drive? The entire drive is completely accessible as a secondary but won't boot.

 

[defjam]

Really? You expect me to remember which of the MANY garbage Windows Updates screwed up either Windows or Office? How about a Windows 'Update' wrecking the boot record of my wife's PC hard drive? The entire drive is completely accessible as a secondary but won't boot.

Yes, I do. While updates have, do, and will cause issues they're not frequent nor are they limited to Windows.

 

[jasonmvp]

I click an icon to open PuTTY

First fail: taking hands off the keyboard.

and then click on the system I need to connect to

Second fail: hands still off the keyboard.

Well, you have to open the command prompt before you can type SSH.

Yes, I do. And I have Applescripts that can be executed directly that let me open a new terminal window and automatically ssh to a server that I designate, all without ever touching the mouse.

I don't do point-click-and-drool, whenever possible. And while Windows search bar is really good at allowing me to navigate through some of Windows with a keyboard, there's still way too much point-click-and-drool for my liking.

Further, you really haven't addressed the simple fact that I drive the Mac from its own terminal application, something that is exceedingly clumsy to do with the Windows CMD prompt. Because: it's a turd.

 

[ggibson913]

At some point I may end up switching to Windows, but until then I will continue to use Mac. My Mac's last much longer than my Windows machines and the old Apple Moniker, "it just works" still applies. Where Microsoft focused in past years to put every device on the same OS, Apple was focused amd making their unique device OS's work together seemleesly. I am with the "it's the ecosystem" chorus.

That said my work laptop has Windows on it as Mac isn't a choice.

 

[defjam]

First fail: taking hands off the keyboard.

Just as having to click on the Terminal.App

Second fail: hands still off the keyboard.

Just as having to click on the Terminal.App

Yes, I do. And I have Applescripts that can be executed directly that let me open a new terminal window and automatically ssh to a server that I designate, all without ever touching the mouse.

I don't do point-click-and-drool, whenever possible. And while Windows search bar is really good at allowing me to navigate through some of Windows with a keyboard, there's still way too much point-click-and-drool for my liking.

Further, you really haven't addressed the simple fact that I drive the Mac from its own terminal application, something that is exceedingly clumsy to do with the Windows CMD prompt. Because: it's a turd.

If having a command line ssh client is really a requirement then open a command window and type "ssh" as you do in Terminal.App. It's included with Windows as of late 2018.

 

[jasonmvp]

If having a command line ssh client is really a requirement then open a command window and type "ssh" as you do in Terminal.App. It's included with Windows as of late 2018.

I'm not going to sit here and debate this with you any further. You're not quite grokking my disdain for the Windows UI and environment, nor do you seem to understand that Microsoft's attempt at a terminal emulator is not very good. Nor is the command shell (cmd).

Fortunately, I don't have to defend my choice to you (or anyone).

As you were.

 

[defjam]

I'm not going to sit here and debate this with you any further. You're not quite grokking my disdain for the Windows UI and environment, nor do you seem to understand that Microsoft's attempt at a terminal emulator is not very good. Nor is the command shell (cmd).

Of course you're not. I just showed your reason for disliking Windows, requiring the use of a command line SSH client, is no longer valid. Windows includes a command line SSH client, it's called OpenSSH...perhaps you've heard of it, by default. IOW your dislike of Windows appears to be your ignorance of it.

 

[jasonmvp]

IOW your dislike of Windows appears to be your ignorance of it.

Keep swinging. You'll get a hit eventually. Have a great day.

 

[defjam]

Keep swinging. You'll get a hit eventually. Have a great day.

I nailed it out of the park.

 

[SecuritySteve]

When you need to test products on all platforms, be it Linux, Windows, and macOS, there's only one hardware vendor that can supply hardware that can run all three in a legal enterprise fashion. It may be an artificially created bubble, but it is a bubble I live in.

I also like macOS' GUI way better than Windows, and UNIX > DOS. Maybe when Microsoft switches Windows to a full UNIX system I will consider it.

 

[defjam]

I also like macOS' GUI way better than Windows, and UNIX > DOS. Maybe when Microsoft switches Windows to a full UNIX system I will consider it.

You may want to investigate Windows Power Shell. It's a very capable subsystem with some people saying it is more capable than UNIX.

 

[MisterAndrew]

I don't care for Windows for all the reasons people have posted so far. I would rather use Linux if I wasn't using macOS. I don't have a lot of experience with Linux though and it can be more challenging to use. I know someone who uses a version of Linux they built themself and it has no GUI. That's a little too hardcore for me, but I get the appeal of having the whole system under your control from a privacy perspective.

 

[th0masp]

Hmmm.... UX deficiencies, difficulty to properly set it all up and maintain it (registry, updates slowing down the OS or corrupting parts of it), privacy concerns, forced updates, some driver/compatibility issues (wacom-tablets). Very ubiquitous and thus the prime target for malware so better kept off the net.
Also developed by a company that these days just appears to try really hard to put the user at a disadvantage (different tiers of admin access depending on OS edition, apparently moving towards software as a service, dummy error messages that tell you nothing, etc).

I still use it, mind. But very locked down strictly to run some work related apps - and I would never let this thing roam the internet nor keep personal data on it.

It is however very stable and generally reliable for me. Perhaps more so than recent versions of macOS. Couldn't say which one is faster in general but it's notably worse at multitasking: foreground processes very impacted by background activity (stuttering, etc) - perhaps a configuration issue on my part though.

 

[SecuritySteve]

You may want to investigate Windows Power Shell. It's a very capable subsystem with some people saying it is more capable than UNIX.

I use it daily, it is not up to my standards at all. WSL is the closest they have gotten to meeting my needs. I used that until I replaced my Windows machine with a Mac last month.

 

[defjam]

Hmmm.... UX deficiencies, difficulty to properly set it all up and maintain it (registry, updates slowing down the OS or corrupting parts of it), privacy concerns, forced updates, some driver/compatibility issues (wacom-tablets). Very ubiquitous and thus the prime target for malware so better kept off the net.
Also developed by a company that these days just appears to try really hard to put the user at a disadvantage (different tiers of admin access depending on OS edition, apparently moving towards software as a service, dummy error messages that tell you nothing, etc).

Specifically what registry issues have you had? What update slow downs have you experienced? What OS corruptions have you encountered?
[automerge]1576523237[/automerge]

I use it daily, it is not up to my standards at all. WSL is the closest they have gotten to meeting my needs. I used that until I replaced my Windows machine with a Mac last month.

WSL implies you're attempting to use Power Shell as a UNIX system and not for what is. It would be like someone attempting to use macOS in the same manner as Windows (or vice-versa). Attempting to do so is not the best way to approach things.

 

[SecuritySteve]

Specifically what registry issues have you had? What update slow downs have you experienced? What OS corruptions have you encountered?
[automerge]1576523237[/automerge]

WSL implies you're attempting to use Power Shell as a UNIX system and not for what is. It would be like someone attempting to use macOS in the same manner as Windows (or vice-versa). Attempting to do so is not the best way to approach things.

I agree. It's also not an apples to apples comparison either. The times I use powershell to do large scale tasks (file system), extract the contents of MSI packages, and query Windows system settings are hard to compare to the system integration of a UNIX-like system's set of tools that are used via your favorite flavor of shell where that may be the only interaction that you have with the system. Many developers have contributed to creating specific tools for UNIX-like systems that meet specific needs. Powershell does not have as robust of an ecosystem of tools that allow you to get precisely what you need done.

Ultimately the aforementioned reasons about not being able to virtualize macOS on Windows machines is the biggest reason, FYI. The rest is my subjective opinion on ease of use. YMMV.

 

[Nugget]

WSL implies you're attempting to use Power Shell as a UNIX system and not for what is. It would be like someone attempting to use macOS in the same manner as Windows (or vice-versa). Attempting to do so is not the best way to approach things.

You are the one who suggested PowerShell as a viable alternative to a regular Unix shell. I agree, it isn't. You're being inconsistent here, though.

For people who conduct their work in a terminal, Windows can be unwieldy and awkward to use. Microsoft's recent moves with WSL and the new beta-release Terminal are encouraging (and should scare the crap out of Apple, if they're paying attention). But it's definitely not there yet.

macOS continues to be (by far) the best Unix workstation that you can get, although the gap between macOS and its competition narrows every year.

 

[defjam]

I agree. It's also not an apples to apples comparison either. The times I use powershell to do large scale tasks (file system), extract the contents of MSI packages, and query Windows system settings are hard to compare to the system integration of a UNIX-like system's set of tools that are used via your favorite flavor of shell where that may be the only interaction that you have with the system. Many developers have contributed to creating specific tools for UNIX-like systems that meet specific needs. Powershell does not have as robust of an ecosystem of tools that allow you to get precisely what you need done.

Ultimately the aforementioned reasons about not being able to virtualize macOS on Windows machines is the biggest reason, FYI. The rest is my subjective opinion on ease of use. YMMV.

Yes, it does. You may not be as familiar with them as you are UNIX but they exist. I get the impression it is your lack of familiarity with PowerShell that is the issue, not any inherent limitation of PowerShell itself. I know this from first hand experience...I am much more familiar with the UNIX shell than PowerShell and can more quickly assemble shell scripts to accomplish what I want. When it comes to PowerShell I have to figure out how to do it. Not because PowerShell is hard but rather because I don't know it as well as the UNIX command line.
[automerge]1576524998[/automerge]

You are the one who suggested PowerShell as a viable alternative to a regular Unix shell. I agree, it isn't. You're being inconsistent here, though.

How am I being inconsistent?

For people who conduct their work in a terminal, Windows can be unwieldy and awkward to use. Microsoft's recent moves with WSL and the new beta-release Terminal are encouraging (and should scare the crap out of Apple, if they're paying attention). But it's definitely not there yet.

For people who conduct their work in a terminal, whether Windows, UNIX, or otherwise, they've become familiar with that particular workflow. Microsoft provides versions of Windows Server which require management via the CLI (i.e. PowerShell). It's a very capable system and, as already mentioned, some people consider it superior to UNIX shell scripting.

macOS continues to be (by far) the best Unix workstation that you can get, although the gap between macOS and its competition narrows every year.

If you're looking for a UNIX workstation then yes, using a UNIX workstation is most likely better than using something emulating a UNIX workstation. That seems rather obvious. The question is...what does using a UNIX workstation, other than using a UNIX workstation, buy the end user?