Microsoft may still own the desktop market, but Apple continues to make slow progress beyond its graphic design user base. There’s also Linux and maybe even Chrome OS.
An operating system is an operating system. Windows isn’t perfect. MacOS isn’t perfect. Linux (regardless of the distro being considered) isn’t perfect. Linux? Distro?
In the Linux world, a “distro” can be thought of as a version. Ubuntu is a distro; so are Fedora, Arch, Red Hat, Mandrake, and dozens of others.
Historically, Linux users have been like home auto mechanics — the people who enjoy getting their hands dirty and who understand what’s going on under the hood. Some current versions of Linux, Ubuntu in particular, try to shield users from much of that, but the complexity can still be a challenge to those who don’t have a background with Unix or Linux.
Windows traditionally has been used in both corporate and home settings and still has an overwhelming market share in both.
Microsoft’s extensive enterprise applications will allow Windows to maintain that position for the foreseeable future even though Macs now show up in the management suite in addition to the design department.
MacOS machines continue to have a grip on the graphic design team, but Windows systems have made some inroads there. Additionally, software developers sometimes gravitate to Macs — at least for personal use — because of the Unix platform on which the MacOS was built.
There is no right or wrong choice. All operating systems provide services to applications that run on the computer. All operating systems manage peripherals such as disk drives, video monitors, and internet connections. All operating systems have procedures that allow the computer to be configured to suit the needs of the users.
Unfortunately, operating system “wars” persist. Some Linux users consider Windows and MacOS systems to be useless. Some Windows users say that Mac owners should get “real computers”. And some Mac owners continue to claim, illogically, that the MacOS is totally secure.
An operating system is an operating system, as I mentioned before. Most of the computers I work with run Windows 10, but I also use a MacOS (Sierra) computer nearly every day and usually there’s at least one Linux computer on the premises. And there’s also a Chromebook that runs Google’s Chrome OS.
Those users who must run Windows Office suite or Adobe Creative Cloud applications have a binary choice: Windows or Mac. While it’s possible to run these programs using an application such as WINE on Linux systems, it’s not particularly easy or straightforward. And they won’t run at all on a Chromebook.
Switching from one operating system to another can be troublesome. One office worker I know listened a bit too naively to a co-worker who prefers Macs and administers Linux systems. He told her how easy Macs are to use, so she bought one. Her experience has not been pleasant. The Mac does everything her Windows machine did, but in significantly different ways; her next computer will not be a Mac.
Switching from the MacOS to Windows, from either Windows or MacOS to Linux, or from Linux to Windows or MacOS can be equally distressing. Probably the easiest possible transition would be from Linux to MacOS because so much of the underlying operation is the same.
So, if you’re currently a MacOS user and you’re content with the system, there’s no good reason to look at Windows computers. The reverse is also true. Switching systems isn’t a trivial task. You’ll need to learn new keystrokes for familiar operations, deal with new methods to configure the computer, and understand the substantial differences between the way disk drives are mounted under Linux and MacOS as compared with the Windows system of assigning letters to drives.
Each operating system has good points and each has challenges. Choosing the one that’s right for you requires considering both.
Nearly every application, driver, or game has a version that runs under Windows. Microsoft has adequate technical support and there’s no shortage of on-line resources that can provide answers to questions. Sometimes the answers are even right.
Windows accepts a huge array of hardware and is highly configurable. Microsoft’s new policy means that you’ll never have to pay for an updated version of Windows as long the device it’s installed on remains in service.
On the down side, Windows is the target for most malware, so you’ll need protective applications. Because Windows accepts hardware and drivers from thousands of developers, conflicts are common.
The MacOS is built on BSD Unix. Because the operating system has native support for read, write, and execute permissions on a per-file basis, it’s more resistant to malware. Even so, Macs do need protective software. The MacOS runs only on Apple computers, so hardware is strictly controlled and that all but eliminates hardware and driver conflicts. (Disclaimer: It is possible to run the MacOS on non-Apple hardware, but it’s not easy.)
Macs are considerably more expensive than equivalent Windows machines, though, and not all applications that are available for Windows computers will run natively on a Mac, but because Macs now use Intel CPUs, it’s possible to run many Windows applications using an emulator.
Linux, which is based on Unix, is free. It is, however, just the operating system “kernel”. To be a full operating system, it needs additional software (also free) from the developer of what’s referred to as a “distro” (distribution). Ubuntu, Red Hat, Fedora and literally hundreds of other distros exist.
Some distros are easy to set up and use, but all of them require considerable knowledge to configure. No Windows or MacOS programs run natively under Linux and open source applications such as LibreOffice and OpenOffice usually are less comprehensive than commercial software.
Chrome isn’t what most people would think of as an operating system because it depends on the Chrome browser to provide an interface for most of the apps.
For this reason, Chromebooks are not likely to assume a dominant position, or even a secondary position, on desktops or notebooks in homes or in offices. But these small and inexpensive machines do have a place.
Chromebooks rely on Google’s applications. They expect an internet connection and a Google account. If Gmail, Google Calendar, and Google Drive are your main applicaions, a Chromebook may be all you need.
But if you depend on Apple, Microsoft, or Adobe applications, a Chromebook will be less appealing.
Adobe’s Creative Cloud and Microsoft’s Office suite, aren’t available for Chromebooks. There is Microsoft Office Online, but it’s a shadow of the full suite.
Chromebooks don’t have a lot of storage, but they connect to Google Drive.
Microsoft Office suite files can be saved to the cloud and imported in to Google’s apps. Although this is a good solution for occasional needs, it’s not a good choice if you need to work with a team that uses Microsoft applications. Too much can be lost in the translation.
Most new Chromebooks can use a wide range of Android applications and this opens the door to games, messaging, and productivity tools. Although Chromebooks expect to have an internet connection, several hundred Chrome apps will work when you don’t have access to the internet.
So while a Chromebook might not be your primary computer, it might be the perfect device when you’re on the road.
The latest computer from Apple or one of the PC or Chromebook manufacturers might look good, but a computer’s abilities don’t depend on its looks.
Those who thrive on change might find switching from one type of computer to another entertaining and enjoyable. Those who are change averse will not enjoy the experience.
I offer these general guidelines in conclusion:
Have you ever moved a window slightly in one direction and then decided that you wanted to move it the other way? Perhaps Windows then "helped" you by minimizing all other windows on the screen or screens.
This feature has been around since Windows 7 and I can safely say that I never, ever want Windows to do this. Usually I'm trying to locate one of those other windows and having them all disappear doesn't help. This behavior can be disabled.
I'm reminded of this because the feature returned following the update to the Windows 10 Creators Edition. That's to be expected because major upgrades return many (maybe all) Registry settings to their defaults. That's not a bad thing if you have a list of what you've changed.
If you want to make this behavior cease, you'll need to use the Registry editor and the usual cautions. Here's a good review of the precautions to take.
The Registry key described here is the same in Windows 7, 8, and 10.
The #1 rule in the Tech Support Alert list of precautions is making a backup of the Registry and an easy way to do that is to create a Restore Point. Windows 10 has hidden this feature several levels deep, but you can use the Start Menu to find it. Press the Windows key and type "create". One of the items in the list will be "Create a restore point." Click it.
This will open the System Properties dialog. Confirm that protection is turned on at least for the boot drive and then click "Create". Fill in a name and click "Create". Close the success dialog when it appears.
Now it's time to start the Registry Editor. Press the Windows key, type "regedit", and click the regedit.exe link.
Locate HKEY_CURRENT_USER and click the icon at the left of the name to expand it.
If a key called "Explorer" exists under the Windows key, you'll use it; this key probably won't exist, so you'll need to create it. With the Windows key selected, right-click and choose New > Key from the context menu. Name the key "Explorer".
Right-click Explorer and create a new "DWORD (32-bit) Value" called "NoWindowMinimizingShortcuts".Biometric identifications are supposed to be totally secure, right? So you may think that the fingerprint scanner on your smart phone is the most secure method you can use. Maybe it's time to rethink that.
Vindu Goel, writing in the New York Times, says that the technology isn't as safe as you probably think it is.
My Google Project Fi phone has a fingerprint reader. I use it and think it's pretty cool, but "While such wizardry is convenient, it has also left a gaping security hole," is the way Goel puts it.
It seems that researchers at New York University and Michigan State University have determined that smart phone fingerprint readers "can easily be fooled by fake fingerprints digitally composed of many common features found in human prints." How much risk is there? The researchers were able to create composite fingerprints that unlocked more than half of the phones they were tested on.
"Yikes!" seems like a reasonable response to that, but there is a side note. It's not as bad as it might seem: "The researchers did not test their approach with real phones, and other security experts said the match rate would be significantly lower in real-life conditions." But even if the success rate is reduced by half, that would still be more than a quarter of all phones.
Should you continue to use your finger to unlock your phone? Goel's article: "It's almost certainly not as worrisome as presented, but it's almost certainly pretty darn bad," said Andy Adler, a professor of systems and computer engineering at Carleton University in Canada, who studies biometric security systems. "If all I want to do is take your phone and use your Apple Pay to buy stuff, if I can get into 1 in 10 phones, that's not bad odds."
Fingerprints might be more secure than 4-digit codes, but maybe not. "The actual risk is difficult to quantify. Apple and Google keep many details of their fingerprint technology secret, and the dozens of companies that make Android phones can adapt Google's standard design in ways that reduce the level of security."
I've noticed that my Google Pixel phone requires me to enter the security code whenever the phone has been restarted and occasionally at other times. Less risk might be achieved if the phone would require using the security code the first time the phone is used each day and then allow the fingerprint after that. But one researcher suggested that the fingerprint could be used unless the phone has been idle for an hour. Then the security code would be required again.
You can read the full article on the New York Times website.
