Subscribe by EmailOperating Systems Venn Diagram
September 22, 2009 by Geeks are Sexy | 16 comments
So, dear readers, do you think this diagram reflects reality or would you put each OS at a different spot?
[Via Graphjam]
- Nerd Venn Diagram
- Things Crazy People Own Venn Diagram
- An Introduction to Multicore Systems
- Friday Evening Humor: Why I Don’t Have a Girlfriend
Did you enjoy this post? If so, subscribe to the geeksaresexy RSS feed.
You’re damn right I wish.
I have to disagree. This diagram must not take in to account newer linux distributions like Ubuntu. I run Ubuntu on my daily laptop. I have found it to be as user-friendly as Windows and less burdensome for maintenance. I am in no way a Linux prophet or fanatic. I just decided to try to use Linux as a daily OS and haven’t needed to look back. I feel strongly enough about it that I have deployed Ubuntu as a desktop in a number of public internet cafe scenarios and have yet to have a complaint or much of a problem.
Linux is definitely better than it used to be, but if I paid for it I’d be VERY pissed off.
I would like to see Ubuntu in the center instead of “You Wish.” I only have to use CLI when I doing stuff above what a normal user would.
It’s a great diagram on operating system STEREOTYPES.
Windows CAN be stable, if you don’t fuck with it and keep it up to date.
Linux CAN be friendly, if you choose the right distro and applications.
You’re right i was young and then i crashed the pc countless times but now i am 14.
And my windows pc is stable as hell no errors,no bsod’s it’s as stable as you make it.
Same with linux it can be friendly just it matters from the distro and applications.
I use both windows and linux.
But i don’t hate any other os they are made all for ones particular needs.
(also sorry for my english i’m dutch)
Linux can be made friendlier but it takes an effort, OSX can be customized but it takes an effort, Windows can be made more stable with the same.
The point is you can live in that middle zone if you just engage what you use. It gets so tiresome the way people want access to the wonders of any of these systems but then not realize that they MIGHT have to do more than just show up and click things.
Sure, bla bla bla, it should be easy…well, ANY of these can be used that way…but then let’s stop moaning about the parts that are the way they are to make it so the average Joe can show up and click things.
Some proud Linux users fail to comprehend that alot of newer users to computers can barely operate a mouse and call up tech support to find out where the “any” key is.
Yes all OS can be a mix of all 3 but stick a new computer user in front on a computer and this is likely the results they will give.
While I agree that distros like Ubuntu have made leaps forward for the user friendliness of Linux, there’s still a long way to go before they can match Windows/Mac.
Last I checked, in order for my mouse side button to be used as Back in Firefox, I had to google up various cryptic instructions from the web, go to the command line and type something like “xmodmap 1 2 5 4 3″ or something.
That’s not user friendly for something that should work out of the box.
Whenever I use linux I always have to resort to the command line. Definitely not user-friendly, so in that I agree.
Although I think Windows comes more under the “stable” category than “customizable”.
Disagree… but nice diagram by the way..
Looking forword if you can put it forwoard in a better way. Brgds.
I think it’s a great diagram – and quite to the point, statistically speaking.
Have to disagree with some comments about Linux user friendliness, though. It all depends on the user scenario. I would say that for an average not-so-accustomed-to-computers internet user, Ubuntu can be way more user friendly than Windows for instance. As long as you stay inside the box, and do not try to customize things, you get lots for free: setup (much simpler than a Windows install), security (e.g. no virus killer hassles), freedom (no license hassles), etc. Also, like the Mac, the true multi-user paradigm of Linux makes it virtually impossible to “break the computer” by accident.
However if you’re trying to customize, you can quickly end up in terrible situations.
Well, Linux isnt VERY user friendly but it can certainly be friendly depending on the circumstances. I really dont think Windows is customizable at all (compared to Linux, at least).
Anyway, to talk about the advantages and disadvantages of OSs you really need a lot more than 3 adjectives and 1 graph. Its pretty clever though…
Aha.. Windows is not that customizable comparable to Linux. Its Userfriendly only.
None of these properties can/should be described as 1 and 0. The question is not if X is e.g. customizable, but how much it is (and how much you need it to be).
All of the above systems tend to be quite stable these days, even if I managed to bring down every single one of them within minutes just by doing some simple tasks.
The question a user should ask herself is “which one does BEST suit my needs?”.
To find that out, a hard task it is. Pretty much must check it yourself or listen to a friend. And live with the consequences of either one.
I don’t see why everyone says Windows is so unstable. Sure, it screws up sometimes, but that’s what computers do. “All computers are shit and will break down just to piss you off.”