6 ms·

Things hold me back from "loving" windows (I say this as a continuing daily user of Windows for 18+ years) as my primary system instead of my MacBook Air. o

Things hold me back from "loving" windows (I say this as a continuing daily user of Windows for 18+ years) as my primary system instead of my MacBook Air. o Add a half decent gcc/bash/posix tool chain (something built in, not cygwin) o Include a decent terminal/ssh client. o License apple's touch pad They've got a lot of things going for them: o Better Games o The new tablet/wacom SurfacePro blows away anything apple offers for stylus digitization on the iPad. Microsoft has a chance here - they just have to keep pushing.

rschmitty 14y ago
Agree on your 2nd & 3rd bullets, but I would have so very little faith in the 1st happening with any good success What drove me to mac was the little bugs here and there when trying to do things with cygwin What drove me to linux (both ubuntu and debian) was the little bugs here and there when trying to do things with ports/brew I'm back on windows now (because the linux desktop is just lagging behind in areas) only I'm using a VM to run linux shell. Now I get all the nice gui but can still run shell with no hiccups. (I could have gone back to mac and done VM too, but I just prefer windows)
- ghshephard 14y ago
  Indeed - I always have at least one Linux VM running on my Windows Workstation. I found, that when I really want the nice posix tool chain, that was a more satisfactory approach than futzing with cygwin all the time. Perhaps that should be my long term windows solution - thanks.
Stratoscope 14y ago
> Include a decent terminal/ssh client. It's a commercial product, but I've used SecureCRT for many years, and it is very nice. It would be great if a decent ssh client were included with Windows, but I don't mind paying for software like this - it pays for itself many times over. http://www.vandyke.com/products/securecrt/index.html http://www.vandyke.com/products/securecrt/index.html
- alexkus 14y ago
  PuTTY is free. http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/ http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/
  - ghshephard 14y ago
    Neither Putty, nor Secure CRT - both of which I have used extensively (I even purchased Secure CRT for personal use on my windows system) are as polished as to Terminal.App on OS X. It's not like Terminal.App is 10x better than SecureCRT (It isn't) - and I love the fact that I can get Putty up and running on every windows system I touch in < 30 seconds - but if you spend as much time in the console as I do, even a 10-15% improvement is enough to chose a different platform for the terminal app alone, and I would suggest, after having used all three of these tools, for a minimum of 1000 hours each (approx. 1000+ hours on Putty, 2000+ hours for SecureCRT, 4000+ hours on Terminal.app) - that the OS X Terminal.app gives me that 10% improvement. I don't know if I should be embarrassed to admit that the Terminal application is the single most important driver as to which operating system I use, but I guess it's okay as long as I realize it's not everyone's.
    - falcolas 14y ago
      I find this comment very interesting, because the first thing I did when moving to a mac was ditch terminal.app for iTerm2. Coming from putty, terminal.app was terrible to try and use. Arcane commands to move between tabs/windows, command keys going to the window and not the terminal (such as pageup, pagedown, home, end), limited configurability and a middle button paste in an ecosystem without middle buttons... all kept me from seeing terminal.app as more than just something to be immediately replaced. Your experience is obviously different than mine, but I ditched terminal.app as soon as I learned about iTerm2.
      - ghshephard 14y ago
        I've certainly experimented with iTerm2, but, except for radically better copy+paste performance of large blocks of text, nothing about it really pulled me in. Perhaps I should spend more time with it. To your points - Tabs are cmd+shift { }, which feel very natural on my keyboard given the location of cmd+shift - you 'chord" thumb+little finger and then switch windows with your right hand (or maybe it's just entered my finger DNA). Windows Switching is the OS X standard Cmd+` PageUp/Page down are just your standard Fn+Up/Down - but, I'll admit I just normally use the touch pad it's so fast, particularly with two+finger drag + acceleration. The loss of the middle put-on would probably be painful - but I've never had one, so no huge impact to me personally. (Copy/Paste are, once again, touch pad reflexes that I do constantly). But - with all that said - I really should spend more time with iTerm2 - lots of people rave about it. Time to give it another try.
baby 14y ago
Microsoft is full of talented developers, why have they not added all those things that make people switch to a UNIX system yet?
- jfb 14y ago
  The number of people who might switch from OS X to a mooted Windows with a POSIXy toolchain is approximately zero. Engineering time and energy are not free.
  - actf 14y ago
    I disagree. This is one of the main reasons that drove me to switch over to OSX. I don't think I'm alone in this either. I have a number of colleagues that have switched from windows as their primary OS for similar reasons. I'd like to believe that if Microsoft were to add POSIX support, and a decent terminal as part of the default Windows installation it would go along way to improving their perception in the minds of technical users.
- InvisibleCities 14y ago
  Microsoft is an organization made up of many of the smartest, most creative developers on Earth that has been completely hobbled by organizational bureaucracy and office politics. Microsoft stifles more good ideas in one year than most companies have in a decade.
  - Kluny 14y ago
    The world must benefit from all the developers who get frustrated and say "screw you guys, I'll do it myself with blackjack and hookers", and quit to start their own company. Right?
- astrodust 14y ago
  Would you want Ballmer flipping your desk out the window because you dared to dilute the purity of the Windows ecosystem with UNIX? Thus, PowerShell instead of something like bash.
wolfgke 14y ago
Concerning gcc: Visual Studio 2012 Express can be downloaded for free on the Microsoft website (OK, you have to pay if you want to use the Professional edition; but since version 2012 the Express version is far less limited than the older versions). Linux/OS X lovers will hate me, but I prefer Visual Studio over the gcc toolchain (I personally miss something similar on Linux). Concerning bash: Windows also offers PowerShell (depending on version of Windows either included or can be downloaded for free on the Microsoft website). Many convinced command-line users admit that PowerShell is better thought-out than bash or other Unix shells. Microsoft says for most things on Windows it is better to use the GUI, but if you really need or prefer a command-line shell, we offer PowerShell for free.
- ghshephard 14y ago
  I'm almost 100% certain that anything properly designed these days will be better thought out than bash - but, 20+ years of bash knowledge in my fingertips is hard to say goodbye to. If I was starting out now on windows - I'd spend the next 2 to 3 years training my fingers on powershell (there is a difference between book knowledge, and instinctive "finger" knowledge), and I'm sure it would serve me well. But now, I just want to leverage my existing knowledge. And yes, I realize that makes me a relic. With regards to "it is better to use the GUI" - scripting configuration of dozens (hundreds?) of remote servers through the GUI is probably possible, but not something I would look forward to. Once again, old habits die hard, and having 30-40 ssh sessions open to various environments is like a good fitting shoe - it's just comfortable.

rschmitty 14y ago

Agree on your 2nd & 3rd bullets, but I would have so very little faith in the 1st happening with any good success What drove me to mac was the little bugs here and there when trying to do things with cygwin What drove me to linux (both ubuntu and debian) was the little bugs here and there when trying to do things with ports/brew I'm back on windows now (because the linux desktop is just lagging behind in areas) only I'm using a VM to run linux shell. Now I get all the nice gui but can still run shell with no hiccups. (I could have gone back to mac and done VM too, but I just prefer windows)

ghshephard 14y ago
Indeed - I always have at least one Linux VM running on my Windows Workstation. I found, that when I really want the nice posix tool chain, that was a more satisfactory approach than futzing with cygwin all the time. Perhaps that should be my long term windows solution - thanks.

Stratoscope 14y ago

> Include a decent terminal/ssh client. It's a commercial product, but I've used SecureCRT for many years, and it is very nice. It would be great if a decent ssh client were included with Windows, but I don't mind paying for software like this - it pays for itself many times over. http://www.vandyke.com/products/securecrt/index.html http://www.vandyke.com/products/securecrt/index.html

alexkus 14y ago
PuTTY is free. http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/ http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/
- ghshephard 14y ago
  Neither Putty, nor Secure CRT - both of which I have used extensively (I even purchased Secure CRT for personal use on my windows system) are as polished as to Terminal.App on OS X. It's not like Terminal.App is 10x better than SecureCRT (It isn't) - and I love the fact that I can get Putty up and running on every windows system I touch in < 30 seconds - but if you spend as much time in the console as I do, even a 10-15% improvement is enough to chose a different platform for the terminal app alone, and I would suggest, after having used all three of these tools, for a minimum of 1000 hours each (approx. 1000+ hours on Putty, 2000+ hours for SecureCRT, 4000+ hours on Terminal.app) - that the OS X Terminal.app gives me that 10% improvement. I don't know if I should be embarrassed to admit that the Terminal application is the single most important driver as to which operating system I use, but I guess it's okay as long as I realize it's not everyone's.
  - falcolas 14y ago
    I find this comment very interesting, because the first thing I did when moving to a mac was ditch terminal.app for iTerm2. Coming from putty, terminal.app was terrible to try and use. Arcane commands to move between tabs/windows, command keys going to the window and not the terminal (such as pageup, pagedown, home, end), limited configurability and a middle button paste in an ecosystem without middle buttons... all kept me from seeing terminal.app as more than just something to be immediately replaced. Your experience is obviously different than mine, but I ditched terminal.app as soon as I learned about iTerm2.
    - ghshephard 14y ago
      I've certainly experimented with iTerm2, but, except for radically better copy+paste performance of large blocks of text, nothing about it really pulled me in. Perhaps I should spend more time with it. To your points - Tabs are cmd+shift { }, which feel very natural on my keyboard given the location of cmd+shift - you 'chord" thumb+little finger and then switch windows with your right hand (or maybe it's just entered my finger DNA). Windows Switching is the OS X standard Cmd+` PageUp/Page down are just your standard Fn+Up/Down - but, I'll admit I just normally use the touch pad it's so fast, particularly with two+finger drag + acceleration. The loss of the middle put-on would probably be painful - but I've never had one, so no huge impact to me personally. (Copy/Paste are, once again, touch pad reflexes that I do constantly). But - with all that said - I really should spend more time with iTerm2 - lots of people rave about it. Time to give it another try.

baby 14y ago

Microsoft is full of talented developers, why have they not added all those things that make people switch to a UNIX system yet?

jfb 14y ago
The number of people who might switch from OS X to a mooted Windows with a POSIXy toolchain is approximately zero. Engineering time and energy are not free.
- actf 14y ago
  I disagree. This is one of the main reasons that drove me to switch over to OSX. I don't think I'm alone in this either. I have a number of colleagues that have switched from windows as their primary OS for similar reasons. I'd like to believe that if Microsoft were to add POSIX support, and a decent terminal as part of the default Windows installation it would go along way to improving their perception in the minds of technical users.
InvisibleCities 14y ago
Microsoft is an organization made up of many of the smartest, most creative developers on Earth that has been completely hobbled by organizational bureaucracy and office politics. Microsoft stifles more good ideas in one year than most companies have in a decade.
- Kluny 14y ago
  The world must benefit from all the developers who get frustrated and say "screw you guys, I'll do it myself with blackjack and hookers", and quit to start their own company. Right?
astrodust 14y ago
Would you want Ballmer flipping your desk out the window because you dared to dilute the purity of the Windows ecosystem with UNIX? Thus, PowerShell instead of something like bash.

wolfgke 14y ago

Concerning gcc: Visual Studio 2012 Express can be downloaded for free on the Microsoft website (OK, you have to pay if you want to use the Professional edition; but since version 2012 the Express version is far less limited than the older versions). Linux/OS X lovers will hate me, but I prefer Visual Studio over the gcc toolchain (I personally miss something similar on Linux). Concerning bash: Windows also offers PowerShell (depending on version of Windows either included or can be downloaded for free on the Microsoft website). Many convinced command-line users admit that PowerShell is better thought-out than bash or other Unix shells. Microsoft says for most things on Windows it is better to use the GUI, but if you really need or prefer a command-line shell, we offer PowerShell for free.

ghshephard 14y ago
I'm almost 100% certain that anything properly designed these days will be better thought out than bash - but, 20+ years of bash knowledge in my fingertips is hard to say goodbye to. If I was starting out now on windows - I'd spend the next 2 to 3 years training my fingers on powershell (there is a difference between book knowledge, and instinctive "finger" knowledge), and I'm sure it would serve me well. But now, I just want to leverage my existing knowledge. And yes, I realize that makes me a relic. With regards to "it is better to use the GUI" - scripting configuration of dozens (hundreds?) of remote servers through the GUI is probably possible, but not something I would look forward to. Once again, old habits die hard, and having 30-40 ssh sessions open to various environments is like a good fitting shoe - it's just comfortable.