macOS vs. Windows vs. Linux

[Sal1950]

Maybe, but I am almost certain that the overwhelming vast majority of Linux users don't have a real compelling reason why they are using Linux, aside from the 3 reasons I provided.

Well in 20+ years of running a Linux OS on the desktop I've never had a virus, malware, trojan, worm, spyware or like become imbedded in my computer. I've never had to purchase a OS or anti-virus program like Norton or McAfee to secure my install or personal info. I've spent plenty of time surfing the most dangerous places on the net without worry, and even went to known places containing things like mentioned in the first sentence just to see what was there.
OTOH, places like BB Geek Squad to mom and pop computer shops have made a fortune cleaning and repairing computers for the poor Windoz folk who have clicked on the wrong link once or twice and ended up with a boat anchor for a computer. I wouldn't want to add up the hours I spent at my last H-D dealer job trying to keep all the Doz computers usable and I was a just a floor manager there, not a IT guy.

However, it is my believe that unless you can navigate and configure Linux via command line (I would even add fluency using the VI editor), you will forever be known as a beginner Linux user.

Irrelevant. If you think a Bose radio/CD player is the height of Hi Fi you will forever be known a as a beginner at this site or most any other enthusiast place. LOL
For last 15 years I've maintained the computer in our community library running a Linux OS desktop on it. Folks come in and out using it daily to do all their normal computer type needs and don't even realize they're not using Windoz. All I've done is to rename a few basic apps and icons to the ones they recognize from Doz. They wouldn't know a "command line" if I hit them in the head with it. LOL

Linux may be secure because of it's basic design, or simply because of it's rarity like a Mac's.
In the end it matters little, it still a super secure platform and unlike a Mac, most Doz users can sit in front of it (like my library desktop) and navigate normal applications without problem.
YMMV

 

[PristineSound]

Have you met many people?

The flip side is that there are people out there that may not know much about Linux but who have different knowledge and skills that may leave you looking left behind.

But I didn't say anything about existing knowledge, I am talking about acquiring new knowledge: "In 2026, if you have a half decent brain, you can get to 100 level knowledge in anything and everything with very little effort, you can even get to 200 level with mild to moderate effort."

Tell me any topic where you want me to gain 100 level knowledge, it will take me less than few hours, especially with AI today. We live in a golden age of knowledge acquisition.

In fact, you can take a PDF of Toole's book and throw it into AI and get a very detail and concise summary that you can read within couple of hours.

 

[PristineSound]

But I wouldn't say that qualifies me as any sort of windows expert now that those things have been rendered irrelevant by OS improvments. Just as knowing Linux command line or vi will say nothing of linux prowess - when eventually those things are no longer needed. Or in use cases and/or linux versions where those things are not needed now.

If you know Linux, you know. The OS was built based on Unix, where there were no GUI originally, the GUI was an add on. The OS was designed foundationally and ground up with command lines as the only user interface, just like DOS. If you truly needed to do anything advance with Linux, there is absolutely no getting away with not using the command line. Though you could get away by using a different editor, but till this day, all power users prefers VI, there is a reason why.

 

[Ralph_Cramden]

I wonder how many MacOS users know that it’s a certified Unix OS?

The Register of UNIX® Certified Products

 

[PristineSound]

Well in 20+ years of running a Linux OS on the desktop I've never had a virus, malware, trojan, worm, spyware or like become imbedded in my computer. I've never had to purchase a OS or anti-virus program like Norton or McAfee to secure my install or personal info. I've spent plenty of time surfing the most dangerous places on the net without worry, and even went to known places containing things like mentioned in the first sentence just to see what was there.

A lot to unpack here.

1) The golden misconception and misunderstanding about malware.

Why is Windows so susceptible to malware? No, not because Windows is less secure; no, not because Windows is less capable. Because the overwhelming vast majority of desktop computers are Windows, so it's a bang for the buck for bad actors. As a bad actor, would you rather spend 600 hours creating a ransomware that targets 60%-70% of all desktops? Or spend the same amount of time targeting 3.2% of desktops (Linux)? Now that MacOS has grow in market share over the last several decades, so has the malware threat.

2) No, you do not need to buy any anti-virus software for Windows anymore, anti-virus and anti-malware is built into Windows, it's been like this for years now.

3) How do you know for sure that your Linux was never infected with malware? In fact, how can you guaranteed that you don't have any malware creeping in your Linux right this moment? No computer or OS are ever safe from Malware, while some are more resilient, such as Windows 11, but the real risk are user habits, any cybersecurity professional will vouch for this statement. I know what I am doing, but not everyone does; in the last 25 of 31 years of using Windows, I have been very cautious of malware. I have isolated VMs setup on a firewalled vlan, if I ever needed to do anything that is questionable.

Irrelevant. If you think a Bose radio/CD player is the height of Hi Fi you will forever be known a as a beginner at this site or most any other enthusiast place. LOL
For last 15 years I've maintained the computer in our community library running a Linux OS desktop on it. Folks come in and out using it daily to do all their normal computer type needs and don't even realize they're not using Windoz. All I've done is to rename a few basic apps and icons to the ones they recognize from Doz. They wouldn't know a "command line" if I hit them in the head with it. LOL

That does not make you an advanced Linux user, whatsoever. And that certainly doesn't qualify you to go around being a Linux evangelist on the internet. You are of course free to use Linux, but let's not overextend the undue Linux enthusiasm.

 

[PristineSound]

I wonder how many MacOS users know that’s it’s a certified Unix OS?

The Register of UNIX® Certified Products

The kernel (Darwin) is based on BSD, a variant of Unix) and if you ever needed to do anything advanced, unfortunately, Darwin is still very much command line driven under the hood.

The UI (Aqua) is designed from ground up and to integrate with the Kernel. Unlike Unix and Linux who suffers non standardized GUI flooding to compete for the users' attention.

As such, most users are shielded from any signs of Unix on MacOS.

 

[pablolie]

...

Tell me any topic where you want me to gain 100 level knowledge, it will take me less than few hours, especially with AI today. We live in a golden age of knowledge acquisition.

...

Define "100 level knowedge"? Do you really think if AI summarizes Toole's book, you'll achieve his level of expertise in a single day? I hope not.

For one, I am sure AI robots have read the entire thing, and yet hallucinations don't see rare at all in its reponses about audio...

 

[PristineSound]

Define "100 level knowedge"? Do you really think if AI summarizes Toole's book, you'll achieve his level of expertise in a single day? I hope not.

For one, I am sure AI robots have read the entire thing, and yet hallucinations don't see rare at all in its reponses about audio...

Do you think Toole only has 100 level knowledge?

 

[pablolie]

If you know Linux, you know. The OS was built based on Unix, where there were no GUI originally, the GUI was an add on. The OS was designed foundationally and ground up with command lines as the only user interface, just like DOS. If you truly needed to do anything advance with Linux, there is absolutely no getting away with not using the command line. Though you could get away by using a different editor, but till this day, all power users prefers VI, there is a reason why.

On the other hand, while VIM (VI) is included with all distributions (POSIX history and such), but if you go for an LFCE certification, you will not use it, it's a different certification... not sure how many people take it these days.

I've got to admit that on my personal and beloved and very practical Ubuntu destop based laptop, I've used the CLI on very counted occasions. That 10 year old Thinkpad X250 is total plug&play for me, but I admit on sometimes experimenting with it. Maybe when I upgrade to a stable 26.04.1 version (August/September?) I'll have to tweak a few things, but I don't recall it being an issue with 24.04.

 

[pablolie]

A lot to unpack here.

1) The golden misconception and misunderstanding about malware.

Why is Windows so susceptible to malware? No, not because Windows is less secure; no, not because Windows is less capable. Because the overwhelming vast majority of desktop computers are Windows, so it's a bang for the buck for bad actors. As a bad actor, would you rather spend 600 hours creating a ransomware that targets 60%-70% of all desktops? Or spend the same amount of time targeting 3.2% of desktops (Linux)? Now that MacOS has grow in market share over the last several decades, so has the malware threat.

2) No, you do not need to buy any anti-virus software for Windows anymore, anti-virus and anti-malware is built into Windows, it's been like this for years now.

3) How do you know for sure that your Linux was never infected with malware? In fact, how can you guaranteed that you don't have any malware creeping in your Linux right this moment? No computer or OS are ever safe from Malware, while some are more resilient, such as Windows 11, but the real risk are user habits, any cybersecurity professional will vouch for this statement. I know what I am doing, but not everyone does; in the last 25 of 31 years of using Windows, I have been very cautious of malware. I have isolated VMs setup on a firewalled vlan, if I ever needed to do anything that is questionable.


That does not make you an advanced Linux user, whatsoever. And that certainly doesn't qualify you to go around being a Linux evangelist on the internet. You are of course free to use Linux, but let's not overextend the undue Linux enthusiasm.

The entire infrastructure is based on Linux, and if Linux was so secure and trouble-free, security (from Firewalls to ZTNA to SASE) would't be a thriving multi-billion dollar business. The global Linux infrastructure is the primary target of hackers these days, they can make far more money hacking a big bank than by stealing your credit card info from your personal computer. So no, Linux is NOT immune to major attacks at all. Every huge breach you see in the media is on Linux servers - those are the one's that hurt.

 

[Roland68]

But I didn't say anything about existing knowledge, I am talking about acquiring new knowledge: "In 2026, if you have a half decent brain, you can get to 100 level knowledge in anything and everything with very little effort, you can even get to 200 level with mild to moderate effort."

Tell me any topic where you want me to gain 100 level knowledge, it will take me less than few hours, especially with AI today. We live in a golden age of knowledge acquisition.

In fact, you can take a PDF of Toole's book and throw it into AI and get a very detail and concise summary that you can read within couple of hours.

Sorry, but that is so naive.
You might be able to read up on some basic knowledge, but you still have zero experience.
In my life, I’ve seen hundreds of experts and engineers—people with immense technical knowledge across a wide range of fields—fail simply because they lacked years of practical experience.
I still laugh today when I think about all the IT applicants we wanted to hire back then for high-availability IT systems; they claimed to know everything and had aced all the theoretical exams and certifications. Yet, in reality, they failed catastrophically.

Another fact: despite the advent of AI, we have lost more knowledge in the last 10 to 20 years than in all of human history prior to that. Certain products and materials can no longer be manufactured because there is no one left who knows how to make them.
For example, there has been a project involving over 15 universities for more than 20 years attempting to recreate the massive pipes of centuries-old church organs—replicating their exact characteristics and sound.
These pipes—some measuring several meters, even over 10 meters in length—could be manufactured centuries ago using the tools available at the time, right up until the early or mid-20th century. Isn't that ridiculous?

 

[pablolie]

The kernel (Darwin) is based on BSD, a variant of Unix) and if you ever needed to do anything advanced, unfortunately, Darwin is still very much command line driven under the hood.

The UI (Aqua) is designed from ground up and to integrate with the Kernel. Unlike Unix and Linux who suffers non standardized GUI flooding to compete for the users' attention.

As such, most users are shielded from any signs of Unix on MacOS.

It may be "inspired", but the ENTIRE UNIX code -especially the kernel- was actually rewritten from scratch to create Linux. So not based on UNIX, just very similar.

 

[PristineSound]

Sorry, but that is so naive.
You might be able to read up on some basic knowledge, but you still have zero experience.
In my life, I’ve seen hundreds of experts and engineers—people with immense technical knowledge across a wide range of fields—fail simply because they lacked years of practical experience.
I still laugh today when I think about all the IT applicants we wanted to hire back then for high-availability IT systems; they claimed to know everything and had aced all the theoretical exams and certifications. Yet, in reality, they failed catastrophically.

I don't dispute the value of experience. I am only talking about gaining new knowledge. In 2026, to gain 100 level knowledge in anything, is very very low effort. We are living in the golden age of knowledge acquisition.

Another fact: despite the advent of AI, we have lost more knowledge in the last 10 to 20 years than in all of human history prior to that. Certain products and materials can no longer be manufactured because there is no one left who knows how to make them.

I agree, although, I don't have the citation on f what you are saying. But losing knowledge is mutually exclusive from gaining knowledge, I am only talking about gaining 100 level knowledge in 2026 is relatively and incredibly easy.

 

[pablolie]

Do you think Toole only has 100 level knowledge?

That was not even remotely my statement, not sure how that's a reply.

 

[pablolie]

... In 2026, to gain 100 level knowledge in anything, is very very low effort.

Since you can't define what "100 level knowledge" is, the statement carries little meaning.

We are living in the golden age of knowledge acquisition.

Parroting what ChaGPT spits out describing the status quo is not truly knowledge. Memorizing something doesn't provide any expertise in deploying something. That kind of intellectual arrogance (bah why ask experts if I can learn it myself in a single day") can be very costly.

 

[PristineSound]

That was not even remotely my statement, not sure how that's a reply.

I was responding to the below bold:

Define "100 level knowedge"? Do you really think if AI summarizes Toole's book, you'll achieve his level of expertise in a single day? I hope not.

I specifically said, you can gain 100 level knowledge today very easily with very little effort. Then you asked if I really think AI can summarize his book and help me achieve Toole's level of expertise. His level of expertise is probably in the 600 level range. I specifically said 100 level.

 

[PristineSound]

Since you can't define what "100 level knowledge" is, the statement carries little meaning.

"It's kind of like college courses, you have the 100, 200, 300, 400 and 500 level course."

Parroting what ChaGPT spits out describing the status quo is not truly knowledge. Memorizing something doesn't provide any expertise in deploying something. That kind of intellectual arrogance (bah why ask experts if I can learn it myself in a single day") can be very costly.

Again, I said 100 level.

 

[pablolie]

I was responding to the below bold:

I specifically said, you can gain 100 level knowledge today very easily with very little effort. Then you asked if I really think AI can summarize his book and help me achieve Toole's level of expertise. His level of expertise is probably in the 600 level range. I specifically said 100 level.

Your scale is entirely arbitrary, so impossible to follow and thus undermines your argument... and on top of that, I find claiming you can achieve 1/6th of a luminaries' level by chatting with AI for a single day is a preposterous and ridiculous statement, sorry.

Here are statements that ChatGPT has used to apologize over the last few days...
"Ha — fair catch. You're right to call that out. I phrased that badly."
"You’re right. I botched it repeatedly."
There are at least half a dozen more. These weren't even advanced level queries in network technology, they were based on hallucinations based on flawed interpretations. Enjoy internalizing WRONG expertise that will make you look like a class clown among people that really understand the subject.

You're totally and naively overestimating the amount of true subject expertise you'll gain from ChatGPT and such.

 

[PristineSound]

Your scale is entirely arbitrary, so impossible to follow and thus undermines your argument... and on top of that, I find claiming you can achieve 1/6th of a luminaries' level by chatting with AI for a single day is a preposterous and ridiculous statement, sorry.

This is not meant to be deprecating or disparaging but since I can't just assume everyone went to college, allow me to elaborate: 100 level does not equate to 1/6th of 600 level. Level is degree of complexity, not subject coverage.

 

[pablolie]

This is not meant to be deprecating or disparaging but since I can't just assume everyone went to college, allow me to elaborate: 100 level does not equate to 1/6th of 600 level. Level is degree of complexity, not subject coverage.

I have a PhD, thanks vey much. Off to the ignore list. I guess comprehension of basic percentage math escapes your genius.