This article is the conclusion of an ongoing series of articles on this site comparing Apple Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger" to Red Hat Linux Fedora Core 4 (FC4). (The previous article is here.) The point of this comparison is not to say that one OS or the other is "better" but rather to point out the differences and indicate where an artist who previously used Mac OS X 10.4 would find Linux to be easier, harder, or the same to use as the Mac. See the introduction article for more information and links to the other articles in the series. Although the focus of this series is on the needs of designers, artists, and content creators, the content should be relevant to any number of Mac users or Linux users.
I've spent quite a while here comparing Mac OS X 10.4 and Linux to one another, trying to sort out what would go into switching someone from the Mac to Linux. I've looked at: - What software Mac designers typically use, and does it have a Linux equivalent?
- How do the Linux equivalents stack up against their Mac counterparts?
- How do the performance of Linux and OS X compare on the same hardware?
- If a user switched from OS X to Linux on Apple hardware, could they still run their Mac OS X software until they were completely over to Linux?
- Will the Linux desktop interface ever catch up to today's OS X?
- (And, in this series) How does Linux stack up to OS X as an operating system?
Having considered all this, I have some very definite thoughts and opinions about "OS X versus Linux for artists".
New Artists, Without Much Legacy Artwork A relatively new artist , one who doesn't have an extensive library of existing artwork in proprietary formats, would be an ideal candicate for a move from Mac OS X to Linux. Such an artist would have little or nothing to transport over to Linux with them, and thus could begin building their library of artwork using Linux tools from the outset. That would minimize the main issue in a Mac to Linux move, which is that existing artwork files are probably going to be unreadable on the Linux side (or would at least require extensive work to translate into a form Linux can handle). An artist without lots of legacy artwork would find Linux to be as capable as OS X for the vast majority of projects. Linux drawing tools are on par with Macromedia FreeHand (maybe better). Linux page layout tools are comparable to earlier Adobe PageMaker versions. Sound editing applications on Linux are at least as good as their Macintosh counterparts. Video editing tools may not be as intuitive, but they will accomplish the job and over time can be expected to become better. Linux itself does pretty much anything you need an operating system to do, though it does have some deficiencies in the area of software installation dependencies. Long-Time Mac Artists, With Much Legacy Artwork and Fonts Artists who have a fairly extensive collection of existing artwork in proprietary Mac formats such as Macromedia FreeHand, Adobe Illustrator, and the like, would have a more difficult time making the switch to Linux. There is very little overlap between the export formats offered by Macintosh tools and the import formats supported by their Linux counterparts. Over time, I expect this situation to improve, but right now it's not good. Artists in this category would likely also see some font translation problems, similar to those seen when moving documents between Mac and Windows. While these would in most cases be easily corrected, over the course of transferring a large library of fonts and images, this effort would add up. The artists where I work would find this the most grueling part of the switch, I think. While the graphical user interfaces (GUIs) in Linux and Mac OS X look radically different at first glance, they are actually quite similar. Most of what a user would do in Mac OS X to manipulate files, folders, applications, etc., would directly translate. While there is no "Dock" in Linux as in OS X, the taskbar offers essentially the same functionality, implemented in a similar manner. Mac users who really, really miss the OS X interface could download "themes" for Linux that would adjust the GUI to look only very slightly different from that of OS X. Long-time Mac users would find application management (installing, upgrading, and removing applications) on Linux to be "generally easy" but would at times find the process very frustrating. Mac applications are typically installed and uninstalled by merely dragging something into the Applications directory or running an installer/uninstaller. If an application needs a library or other component in order to function, they expect the application's installer to provide it. Linux often requires certain components to be present before or after installation, and the installer program may or may not make that very clear to the user. Even when it does, the tendency of Linux applications to be based on existing libraries, which in turn require other libraries, which may in turn require still other libraries could be immensely frustrating to users who just want to "install and use the darned software". Still, I found very little in OS X that didn't have an equivalent in Linux. This means that once a user has committed to making a switch from OS X to Linux, they shouldn't need to switch back if they just make an effort to stick with Linux. In the long term, I think they'll find the array of software choices for Linux to be intoxicating and be at least as productive as they were with OS X. Linux itself is also quite stable, like OS X (maybe better, actually). Linux can be run on older Wintel hardware, Mac hardware, or the latest and greatest, so investing in new hardware isn't required. Overall Comparison Results - A Quick Overview From the perspective of a Macintosh oriented artist looking to switch to Linux, here's how OS X and Red Hat FC4 compare at a high level (for more detail, see the earlier articles in this series);
Area
of Comparison
|
Mac
OS X 10.4 "Tiger"
|
Red
Hat Linux FC4
|
Notes/Comments
|
GUI Interface and Desktop
|
Desktop, Dock
|
Gnome and KDE Desktops, Panel
Bar, Launcher
|
Linux offers more desktop
choices and a much more flexible customization, including the ability
to mimic OS X's look in Windows and icons. The Panel Bar and
Launcher offer essentially the same functionality as the OS X Dock in
less screen real estate. A user switching from OS X to Linux
would lose at best a little "eye candy" and animation.
Functionality is more or less equal.
|
Dictionary Application
|
Oxford American Dictionary and
Thesaurus
|
KDict
|
Linux doesn't offer a thesaurus
by default, but its dictionary functionality is comparable in use and
functionality to Apple's. A user moving to Linux might miss this
functionality, but there are web sites offering this capability as well
as free thesaurus software for Linux.
|
Connecting to Servers
|
Connect to Server feature in the
Finder
|
Connect to Server feature in
Gnome
|
Apple's feature connects to
AppleShare, Samba, FTP, NFS, and other server types. Linux's
feature connects to Samba, FTP, NFS, and other server types.
Linux lacks the native ability to connect to AppleShare servers.
A user moving to Linux might have problems working in a mixed Mac/Linux
environment.
|
Changing System Settings
|
System Preferences
|
Desktop -> Preferences menu
and System Settings menu
|
Ignoring Apple-specific system
preferences like Dashboard, Expose, Dock, etc., the only significant
difference is the lack of a Linux "Energy Saver" control in its system
preferences area. While it may take a new Linux user some time to
sort out which Linux tool is comparable to which System Preferences
icon, the non-Mac-specific functions a user needs to change are all
available there.
|
Hardware Browser
|
System Profile
|
Hardware Browser
|
The OS X System Profiler is far
more functional than the Hardware Browser on Linux, even considering
looking at the hardware alone. OS X includes information about
networking and software that isn't available on the Linux
feature. If a user made significant use of this OS X feature,
they'd miss it on Linux. However, this isn't likely to be
something an artist would be overly concerned about, so it would be at
best a very minor barrier to moving to Linux.
|
Calculator Applet
|
Calculator
|
Calculator
|
The OS X calculator has basic,
scientific, and programmer modes. The Linux calculator has basic,
advanced, financial, and scientific modes. The Linux calculator
lacks a "programmer" function, but available free calculators for Linux
provide this if it is of much use to a designer. Thus, a user
moving from OS X to Linux is unlikely to find this a problem.
|
Music Playing
|
iTunes
|
Sound Juicer, Helix Player, CD
Player, and Music Player
|
iTunes can be used to play music
files in AAC and MP3 format, rip CDs to disk, as well as to order music
from the iTunes service. The Linux applications provide the same
player functionality as iTunes aside from music purchasing, and support
more audio file formats than iTunes. Mac users moving to Linux
might miss the iTunes shopping features, but there other ways to handle
this issue with available software for Linux.
|
PDF Viewing
|
Preview
|
KPDF
|
Both the OS X and Linux PDF
viewers seem to offer basically the same functionality and
support. Adobe also offers a PDF viewer for free for both
platforms. Thus, it's unlikely that a Mac user would have a
problem moving from OS X to Linux as far as PDF viewing is concerned.
|
Email Client and PIM
Functionality
|
Mail
|
Evolution
|
OS X's Mail client doesn't
include built-in Address Book and Calendaring, but these are provided
in specific bundled applications. Apple Mail supports Apples .Mac
mail service, POP, and IMAP servers. Evolution supports mail in
POP, IMAP, and Exchange Server 2000/2004, Novell GroupWise, and
potentially others. Apple Mail's only connectivity advantage
appears to be its support of Apple's proprietary ".Mac" mail service,
which is a questionable advantage for a "switcher" since a Mac user
moving to Linux would be unlikely to want to continue paying for that
service.
|
Disk/Volume Management
|
Disk Utility
|
|
Apple's Disk Utility allows a
user to partition, format, erase, restore, create an image of, develop
a RAID array, with, verify UNIX permissions on, and repair directory
corruption of a disk (and more). It's something of a
one-stop-shop for volume management on OS X. While Linux offers
(believe it or not) more disk management functionality than OS X, most
of that functionality isn't accessible from the GUI and therefore would
be uncomfortable for a Mac user to become accustomed to. This is
one area where a Mac user switching to Linux would find an obvious
deficiency in Linux relative to OS X.
|
Process and Activity Monitoring
|
Activity Monitor
|
System Monitor
|
OS X provides the basic process
and activity information a user needs for most troubleshooting
needs. Linux provides all that information and an almost
overwhelming additional volume of information. Since getting to
that information requires some extra clicking, the extra information
doesn't overwhelm a switcher from the Mac platform. If and when
that user's technical skills are ready for the additional data, Linux
will make it available. OS X, on the other hand, won't have it
available (at least in the GUI).
|
Printer Setup
|
Printer Setup
|
Printing
|
OS X's Printer Setup utility
supports locally-connected, Bonjour networked printers, BlueTooth
printers, SMB shared Windows printers, AppleTalk printers, and LPD/LPR
UNIX printers. Linux supports locally-connected, CUPS, LPD/LPR
UNIX printers, SMB shared Windows printers, NCP networked Novell
printers, and networked JetDirect printers. Setup is handled
through a wizard interface. While Linux doesn't handle BlueTooth
or AppleTalk printers natively, it handles the other formats supported
by OS X and a few extra. As long as a switcher wasn't interested
in AppleTalk, Bonjour, or BlueTooth printers, the functionality they
needed is available in Linux.
|
OS Update Tool
|
Software Update
|
Red Hat Network Update
|
OS X Software Update will let
users know when updates are needed to their software by appearing on
the screen when they login or reboot. Red Hat offers an icon on
the task bar that allows a user to see at a glance if updates are
available. The OS X Software Update process generally only
updates OS X itself, Apple-branded applications, and Java. Red
Hat Network Update handles Linux, bundled applications, and more.
A user switching from OS X to Linux would find that Linux actually
provides them with better service in this area.
|
File Browsing
|
Finder
|
Nautilus, Konqueror
|
OS X's Finder is often touted as
being elegant and easy to use. While the Nautilus and Konqueror
browsers on Linux are different, they provide essentially the same
functionality. Some of the OS X "eye candy" elements like
spring-loaded folders, CD/DVD burn folders, smart folders, and
graphical toolbars aren't present in Linux's browsers. However
the basic file-finding features exist on both platforms. A Mac
user might find Linux's file browsing to appear anemic at first, but
looking in the menus they would quickly identify things that Apple puts
in toolbars instead. There would be a moderate learning curve
here but little or no loss of functionality/capability.
|
Art and Design Applications
|
Various applications from Adobe,
Macromedia, etc.
|
Various free applications (and
some commercial ones)
|
With the exception of Discreet
Cleaner (a video cleanup and compression tool), every major commercial
Mac OS X application has a free equivalent on Linux. There are
also commercial applications for Linux that may provide additional
functionality not available in the free software. This is
probably the most significant difference between the platforms, since
Apple has a lot of commercial software and little free software (except
what has been ported from Linux) while Linux has a lot of free software
but not as much commercial software. Once OS X is running
"officially" on the x86 platform, it will be a trivial effort for
developers to port existing commercial Mac OS X applications to Linux,
and many may choose to do so.
|
Application Installation,
Update, and Removal
|
Drag and Drop Installs, GUI
Installers, Fink and Fink Commander, Manual Installs
|
"Unpack" installs, GUI
installers, RPM installs, manual installs
|
With the exception of
applications which need to be installed by downloading the source code
(and dependent libraries) and compiling them before installation, the
majority of OS X and Linux applications are more or less equally easy
to install. Because Linux distributions tend to include more of
the free libraries than OS X contains by default, those installations
requiring download and compilation of source code often are much easier
on Linux than OS X. All things considered, it is no more
difficult to install an application on OS X than it is on Linux, and
vice-versa.
|
Searching for Information and
Files
|
Sherlock, Spotlight
|
Search for Files
|
The "Sherlock" search
capabilities in OS X and the Linux Search for Files are roughly
identical in capabilities. The OS X Spotlight feature, however,
is far more capable than the built-in Linux search functionality.
Thus, a user who is dependent on the functionality of Spotlight in OS X
will find this to be a significant omission in Linux. On the
other hand, the "Beagle" project appears close to a stable release of a
search capability that is at least as good as Spotlight and perhaps a
touch better (based on its out of the box support for data types).
|
Someday... Apple has shown Linux developers that a UNIX-like OS can succeed on the desktop. OS X has done a good job of hiding the "UNIX-like" aspects of Darwin from the typical user, while leaving them accessible to power users. They've provided examples of some elegant interface designs, too. Linux, I believe, will learn these lessons and bring itself quite close to parity with today's OS X. And given that Apple must be putting considerable effort into making OS X work with x86 systems at the moment, this gives the Linux developers some time to catch up to it. In the longer term, I expect the traditional Mac software vendors like Adobe and Macromedia to port their Mac products to OS X on x86 hardware. I believe they will see that it's relatively easy to port OS X applications to Linux (just as it's been easy to go the other way around) and they'll do so.
Related Blogs:
Related Links:
|
