What would you run on your Mac if OS X suddenly became unavailable?

Ubuntu for me, but Adobe better port Creative Suite to LInux if a meteor hits Cupertino and somehow wipes out the only copy of OSX,s source code

I run all sorts of Linux distros on various computers and just moved to OS X recently on my own laptop. Loving it so far and the similarities with Linux are pretty impressive. Easy to switch from one to the other. Without OS X I would just revert back to all my Linux distros, mostly Debian based but a few oddities like Fuduntu thrown in for fun.

AliOop said:

A mini lesson on installing programs for Linux: Keep to programs made for your distro. Use only those in the repos for the distro you are using. Not only is it easy to install and delete programs but it's safer as well.

Click to expand...

How so? Package repositories don't have everything and I'm not going to wait for someone to add it. For instance, I'm not going to stop using Opera because most repositories don't have it. On top of that, various distro's have "static repositories" that only receive bug fixes during the current release cycle.

This is where Arch is nice - the PKGBUILD system is excellent and having a rolling release means you're always up to date.

vansmith said:

How so? Package repositories don't have everything and I'm not going to wait for someone to add it. For instance, I'm not going to stop using Opera because most repositories don't have it. On top of that, various distro's have "static repositories" that only receive bug fixes during the current release cycle.

This is where Arch is nice - the PKGBUILD system is excellent and having a rolling release means you're always up to date.

Click to expand...

True, distro repositories don't have everything. Or in some cases the latest and greatest of package XYX. But is it necessary to have the latest and greatest? Come folks, XP has been around for 10 years and will probably be with us another 5.

Linux folks, at least a lot of them, feel the burning desire to constantly upgrade . Some don't. I got out of that cycle a long time ago. I'm one of those that feel v1.0 works just as well as v2.0. And if my repo does not have v2.0, oh well. So be it. At the very least, if I use a non-repo package it's designed for my package manager - an RPM package or debian package. But tarballs? No thanks. I can do without them. Even Slackware, one of the geekest distro that ever was, recommend using tarballs designed specifically for their particular distro. Also there are unofficial but approved third party repos one can use to install other programs.

So, if you can't get a package from your distro repo, stick to a package designed for your Linux OS package manager. You'll have a lot less hassles. Belive me. I've been there.

Concerning 'rolling' distros like Arch and others, I've been on the bleeding edge. It's not fun. Well, it was back then. Of course I was younger and had more hair. But I spent more time fixing things than using my OS. That's another thing I've left behind. I want my OS to work. Don't want to spend my time fixing, tweaking or repairing it.

(Linux user since '97 and still using it)

I'd probably sell my MacBook and switch to my desktop full time which is currently running Fedora Linux

I'd run Linux

"apt-get install Linux"

then I would ask Siri "dude,what happened to my Mac OS?"

Linux for me as well, though I'd have to learn it from scratch. Definitly not Windows because as I understand, Windows for Mac is generally not supported.

TilkiliKiz said:

as I understand, Windows for Mac is generally not supported.

Click to expand...

Oh, quite the opposite... Boot Camp makes it just as easy to install Windows on a Mac as any other computer.

Indeed, one of the things that holds Windows back vs. OS X is that Windows needs generic drivers for all the hardware out there while OS X only need kexts for the specific hardware that you find in no more than 20-30 current variations of models of Mac. While Boot Camp can't do anything about the flakiness of Windows's NT kernel vs. the UNIX kernel of OS X, it does have an "Assistant" app that you run within Windows (it's an exe file) that installs all the OS X kexts ported to Windows as drivers; greatly improving its performance, even vs. high-end generic PC hardware.

A Mac running Windows (+ Boot Camp Utilities) is probably the best PC you'll ever see!

ubuntu and windows 7

and not be happy about it....

Considering I'm running Fedora on my old Macbook, that's probably what I would do.

Definetly run Linux. Currently using Ubuntu on my Windows laptop, and it would be sweet to run on my mac mini if I could run it if Mac OS X was not around (but I shrudder to think of that possibility)

You know… I've thought on and off about toying with Linux again, but it's just too much bother to dual-boot. It just occurred to me that I could virtualize it. Are there any distros in particular that may work better under VirtualBox than others?

Linux seems to be way ahead here, and I'm not surprised. If OSX ML proves to be unusable ( I doubt that will happen though) I would install Linux on all 3 of my MAcs.

Having seen ML in action though, I don't think we have much to worry about.

I'd have to run Windows 7. I am pretty much forced to use it anyway for gaming, and Blu Ray playback, so I'd just switch over to it.

I really cant see Linux being a long term solution for me.

I'm siding with Linux.

lifeisabeach said:

You know… I've thought on and off about toying with Linux again, but it's just too much bother to dual-boot. It just occurred to me that I could virtualize it. Are there any distros in particular that may work better under VirtualBox than others?

Click to expand...

All of them will install just fine but installing the additions is easier in some relative to others. For instance, installing the additions in Ubuntu is simple since you can get them through apt and openSUSE comes with them pre-installed.

Regardless of what distro you choose, note that many desktops are now 3D accelerated which, as you well know, won't work well in virtualized products. Stay away from GNOME 3 and if you use Ubuntu, make sure to use the 2D version of Unity (it defaults to the accelerated one).

Unless this hypothetical question supposes that Mac OS X is literally erased off everyone's hard drives overnight, I figure on using Mac OS X 10.x (x being the last release made available to the general public) until I can no longer keep my Mac running. I'm currently running 10.4 on a G4 Powerbook without too many complaints. So an i5 or i7 Mac running 10.6 or 10.8 (I do NOT like 10.7!) should last for 7-8 more years. THEN I'll look around at what is available for newer computers and decide then. Who knows, by that time MS Windows may be a decent OS.