5 ms·

Mac, most definitely. For one, Mac OS X comes with a Python version installed. It also comes with a whole toolbox of Unix utilities, including a number of tex

Mac, most definitely. For one, Mac OS X comes with a Python version installed. It also comes with a whole toolbox of Unix utilities, including a number of text editors. (There are many other 3rd party text editors for the Mac, too. Though I stick with "vim" or Xcode myself, both of which are included.) You can't understate the value of being able to pop down to the Unix layer when needed. There are lots of times where a simple "grep" or "cp" or "mv" is exactly what you need, and I love that this is just built in to the Mac. If you aren't that familiar with Unix commands, I think it's knowledge well worth having; most of the basic ones are really not that hard to use. I have to use Windows at work, and I have to say I'm amazed with how little it comes with. While it is possible to work productively on Windows, I have found this is only true after a large setup cost. So if you don't mind downloading stuff for hours, you can eventually get the right tools. Still, I have never found Windows tools to be as "integrated" as Unix utilities are; every Windows program wants its own scripting language, its own hackish way of doing things (in my experience, that is; YMMV). Microsoft's command prompt is also pretty lousy; it really doesn't compare to a Unix shell, and the idea that you could only get that level of power by installing all of Cygwin, is a turn-off to me.

zepolen 18y ago
A PC can run *nix too, it's not limited to Windows. In fact, it can run OS X too :)
- ideamonk 18y ago
  Getting OS X run under a PC would be tougher than getting Windows and Linux run over a macbook.
cglee 18y ago
As a web developer, you'll also probably need to test in Windows and IE. For that, get Fusion or Parallels and you can have Windows and OSX running side by side.
- zealog 18y ago
  That's true - and another reason to go with Mac. On my Mac I can test Mac versions of Safari, Firefox, and Opera. I can also have virtual machines to test for Windows Firefox, IE6, IE7, and IE8 at the same time. If I were on a PC I would only be able to have one version of IE installed. It's still funny to me that to develop websites that work on all of the Windows browsers a Mac is the only thing that makes sense.
  - joechung 18y ago
    "If I were on a PC I would only be able to have one version of IE installed." That's not true. You can have virtual machines to test multiple versions of IE, too.
    - ks 18y ago
      Microsoft has released a program called "Web SuperPreview". It enables you to compare pages both in IE6 and IE7/8. http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=8e6ac106-525d-45d0-84db-dccff3fae677&displaylang=en http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=8e6...
      - duskwuff 18y ago
        The performance is kind of "meh", though, especially in VMWare (where it's practically unusable). I personally prefer IETester: http://www.my-debugbar.com/wiki/IETester/ http://www.my-debugbar.com/wiki/IETester/
- whatusername 18y ago
  This would be the key reason to get a mac. To test anything in OSX legally - you need to be running Apple hardware. (Boot-camp/VMWare Windows and Linux). Until/unless Apple go to selling the OS on it's own - from a testing perspective (if you have to do that) - then a mac is the only way to go.
- rimantas 18y ago
  You can also try free http://www.virtualbox.org/ http://www.virtualbox.org/ from Sun.
nx 18y ago
Excuse me, "PC" does not mean "Windows computer", so I'd pick a PC and install some Linux distro.
- MrRage 18y ago
  On the same token, a Mac is a PC.
  - nx 18y ago
    It's not the same. If you say "Mac or PC", it is understood that you mean "Apple computers, or other type of general-purpose personal computers, i.e., non-Mac PCs". But if we interpret "PC" only as "Windows computer", then there's this huge number of OSes we're not taking into account, since we're just considering OS X and Windows.
    - MrRage 18y ago
      I suggest that we're all getting a little too pedantic here. The point is it's basically all the same hardware. You can buy anything and put any OS on it, although it's not so nice to put OS X on hardware that didn't come from Apple.
      - nx 18y ago
        That's my point: "Mac PCs or non-Mac PCs".
        nailer 18y ago
        Or simpler: 'Mac, Linux or Windows?'
- kwamenum86 18y ago
  Most people mean "Windows machine" when they say "PC" though. Since the way people use a word define the meaning of the word more than even a dictionary definition, PC does in fact mean Windows machine.
GeneralMaximus 18y ago
I second that. Sure, you could get productive on Windows and Linux, but they're definitely not low maintainence. Plus, you could always install Windows using BootCamp or VMWare Fusion. I wrote a blog entry on this. although it's from a hobbyists's perspective: http://blog.uncool.in/2009/03/10/thoughts-on-using-a-mac-as-a-development-platform/ http://blog.uncool.in/2009/03/10/thoughts-on-using-a-mac-as-...
- jrockway 18y ago
  I second that. Sure, you could get productive on Windows and Linux, but they're definitely not low maintainence [sic]. Nor are Macs. Every piece of software needs to be updated manually, as there is no system-wide update manager. If you want to install UNIX software (like C libraries that your language needs to bind to), you will need to install some sort of ports system, and maintain that. (When I used a Mac a few years ago, none of the ports systems all had the latest versions of packages I needed, so I had more than one installed. This was a fucking nightmare to maintain.) Anyway, this (along with Apple's evil-ness) is what killed OS X for me. Yeah, it's really pretty, but it is too hard to maintain. Debian is much better. It is never missing anything I need, and full-system updates are just an apt-get away. For programming, nothing beats a good UNIX system, as long as you are willing to learn how to use it properly.
  - carbon8 18y ago
    When I used a Mac a few years ago, none of the ports systems all had the latest versions of packages I needed, so I had more than one installed. This was a fucking nightmare to maintain. macports is pretty much dead simple to deal with. And if you want to install something straight from source on OS X it is often no more difficult as it is on linux. My servers are all debian and ubuntu and it's basically painless using them side by side with OS X all day. Plus, with OS X you can have most linux desktop apps + any OS X apps. Even so, OS X is definitely not necessary if someone spends all of his or her time in the shell, and if that's the case linux would be a better choice.
  - mechanical_fish 18y ago
    When I used a Mac a few years ago, none of the ports systems all had the latest versions of packages I needed Things change. Hackers have been migrating to the Mac en masse. So MacPorts has gotten better and better. Two or three years ago I went through the pain of installing Ruby/Rails, MySQL, Apache, and git from source -- that was the popular choice at the time, because MacPorts was just not up to date. But MacPorts now has current versions of ruby, mysql, git, and apache, so it's time to switch back. Yeah, it's probably not as good as apt-get. On the other hand, on the Mac I have Mac software, which more than makes up for it. And if I'm ever nostalgic for apt-get a Linux virtual machine is not far away.
intranation 18y ago
Mostly agreed, but beware that the UNIX layer on OS X is BSD-based rather than GNU/Linux-based, so it's not exactly the same as Ubuntu or Debian etc. The biggest win on OS X for me is all the slickness of the desktop (Ubuntu doesn't even come close), and adding easy virtualisation to drop into any OS you want (my choice is VMWare Fusion, but Parallels or Virtual Box work too). Best of both worlds.
- graemep 18y ago
  Desktops are a matter of personal preference. I am a Linux Mint (Ubuntu with some additions) user. I have used other people's Macs occasionally and I dislike the desktop. The advantage Linux has is that if you do not like the desktop you can switch to another.
  - jamesbritt 18y ago
    "I have used other people's Macs occasionally and I dislike the desktop." Same here. I bought a Mac Mini for some dev work, and the UI drives me nuts. It's pretty, but so far requires way too much mousing and clicking. I'm sure much of my angst is habituation from using a customized Kubuntu install, but as best I can tell those customizations are much easier in KDE than on the Mac.
- deleted 18y ago
  [deleted]

zepolen 18y ago

A PC can run *nix too, it's not limited to Windows. In fact, it can run OS X too :)

ideamonk 18y ago
Getting OS X run under a PC would be tougher than getting Windows and Linux run over a macbook.

cglee 18y ago

As a web developer, you'll also probably need to test in Windows and IE. For that, get Fusion or Parallels and you can have Windows and OSX running side by side.

zealog 18y ago
That's true - and another reason to go with Mac. On my Mac I can test Mac versions of Safari, Firefox, and Opera. I can also have virtual machines to test for Windows Firefox, IE6, IE7, and IE8 at the same time. If I were on a PC I would only be able to have one version of IE installed. It's still funny to me that to develop websites that work on all of the Windows browsers a Mac is the only thing that makes sense.
- joechung 18y ago
  "If I were on a PC I would only be able to have one version of IE installed." That's not true. You can have virtual machines to test multiple versions of IE, too.
  - ks 18y ago
    Microsoft has released a program called "Web SuperPreview". It enables you to compare pages both in IE6 and IE7/8. http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=8e6ac106-525d-45d0-84db-dccff3fae677&displaylang=en http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=8e6...
    - duskwuff 18y ago
      The performance is kind of "meh", though, especially in VMWare (where it's practically unusable). I personally prefer IETester: http://www.my-debugbar.com/wiki/IETester/ http://www.my-debugbar.com/wiki/IETester/
whatusername 18y ago
This would be the key reason to get a mac. To test anything in OSX legally - you need to be running Apple hardware. (Boot-camp/VMWare Windows and Linux). Until/unless Apple go to selling the OS on it's own - from a testing perspective (if you have to do that) - then a mac is the only way to go.
rimantas 18y ago
You can also try free http://www.virtualbox.org/ http://www.virtualbox.org/ from Sun.

nx 18y ago

Excuse me, "PC" does not mean "Windows computer", so I'd pick a PC and install some Linux distro.

MrRage 18y ago
On the same token, a Mac is a PC.
- nx 18y ago
  It's not the same. If you say "Mac or PC", it is understood that you mean "Apple computers, or other type of general-purpose personal computers, i.e., non-Mac PCs". But if we interpret "PC" only as "Windows computer", then there's this huge number of OSes we're not taking into account, since we're just considering OS X and Windows.
  - MrRage 18y ago
    I suggest that we're all getting a little too pedantic here. The point is it's basically all the same hardware. You can buy anything and put any OS on it, although it's not so nice to put OS X on hardware that didn't come from Apple.
    - nx 18y ago
      That's my point: "Mac PCs or non-Mac PCs".
      - nailer 18y ago
        Or simpler: 'Mac, Linux or Windows?'
kwamenum86 18y ago
Most people mean "Windows machine" when they say "PC" though. Since the way people use a word define the meaning of the word more than even a dictionary definition, PC does in fact mean Windows machine.

GeneralMaximus 18y ago

I second that. Sure, you could get productive on Windows and Linux, but they're definitely not low maintainence. Plus, you could always install Windows using BootCamp or VMWare Fusion. I wrote a blog entry on this. although it's from a hobbyists's perspective: http://blog.uncool.in/2009/03/10/thoughts-on-using-a-mac-as-a-development-platform/ http://blog.uncool.in/2009/03/10/thoughts-on-using-a-mac-as-...

jrockway 18y ago
I second that. Sure, you could get productive on Windows and Linux, but they're definitely not low maintainence [sic]. Nor are Macs. Every piece of software needs to be updated manually, as there is no system-wide update manager. If you want to install UNIX software (like C libraries that your language needs to bind to), you will need to install some sort of ports system, and maintain that. (When I used a Mac a few years ago, none of the ports systems all had the latest versions of packages I needed, so I had more than one installed. This was a fucking nightmare to maintain.) Anyway, this (along with Apple's evil-ness) is what killed OS X for me. Yeah, it's really pretty, but it is too hard to maintain. Debian is much better. It is never missing anything I need, and full-system updates are just an apt-get away. For programming, nothing beats a good UNIX system, as long as you are willing to learn how to use it properly.
- carbon8 18y ago
  When I used a Mac a few years ago, none of the ports systems all had the latest versions of packages I needed, so I had more than one installed. This was a fucking nightmare to maintain. macports is pretty much dead simple to deal with. And if you want to install something straight from source on OS X it is often no more difficult as it is on linux. My servers are all debian and ubuntu and it's basically painless using them side by side with OS X all day. Plus, with OS X you can have most linux desktop apps + any OS X apps. Even so, OS X is definitely not necessary if someone spends all of his or her time in the shell, and if that's the case linux would be a better choice.
- mechanical_fish 18y ago
  When I used a Mac a few years ago, none of the ports systems all had the latest versions of packages I needed Things change. Hackers have been migrating to the Mac en masse. So MacPorts has gotten better and better. Two or three years ago I went through the pain of installing Ruby/Rails, MySQL, Apache, and git from source -- that was the popular choice at the time, because MacPorts was just not up to date. But MacPorts now has current versions of ruby, mysql, git, and apache, so it's time to switch back. Yeah, it's probably not as good as apt-get. On the other hand, on the Mac I have Mac software, which more than makes up for it. And if I'm ever nostalgic for apt-get a Linux virtual machine is not far away.

intranation 18y ago

Mostly agreed, but beware that the UNIX layer on OS X is BSD-based rather than GNU/Linux-based, so it's not exactly the same as Ubuntu or Debian etc. The biggest win on OS X for me is all the slickness of the desktop (Ubuntu doesn't even come close), and adding easy virtualisation to drop into any OS you want (my choice is VMWare Fusion, but Parallels or Virtual Box work too). Best of both worlds.

graemep 18y ago
Desktops are a matter of personal preference. I am a Linux Mint (Ubuntu with some additions) user. I have used other people's Macs occasionally and I dislike the desktop. The advantage Linux has is that if you do not like the desktop you can switch to another.
- jamesbritt 18y ago
  "I have used other people's Macs occasionally and I dislike the desktop." Same here. I bought a Mac Mini for some dev work, and the UI drives me nuts. It's pretty, but so far requires way too much mousing and clicking. I'm sure much of my angst is habituation from using a customized Kubuntu install, but as best I can tell those customizations are much easier in KDE than on the Mac.
deleted 18y ago
[deleted]