What is your main OS besides the Amiga OSes and why?

[TeamBlackFox]

What OS besides the main OS options for Amiga do you use? Please answer the poll and post here about it.

I use two OSes outside of AmigaOS on a daily basis: the various BSDs and IRIX.

I admire BSD as opposed to OS X or Windows, or even GNU/Linux because like the original AmigaOS, they provide you with a well-tested, minimalist OS that you can expand how you want. BSD has three added advantages over GNU/Linux, including:

Better filesystems (ZFS is supported on Free and NetBSD)
Open licence scheme
More conservative and stable

I don't care that X11 has shortcomings compared to other display servers, because I use the bare minimum of graphical programs to run the system, and because of that I rarely experience crashes or problems because of it. Some users find the overwhelming configurability and command-line oriented control to be terrible, but I have used all other major operating systems as daily drivers and most of them have their own issues.

I used to use OS X but since 10.5 their quality control has given way on the desktop as they focus more and more on the mobile segment, plus I'm against the use of Mach as its performance is slower than a BSD-style monolithic kernel or the Amiga kernels on equivalent hardware, and it has become increasingly *unstable* with every subsequent release, requiring more and more hacks to run as I need it.

I also use IRIX for a lot of things because IRIX solved a lot of the problems with the 'UNIX Workstation' problem. While some may argue that the Motif toolkit is ugly, it looks quite similar to OS 3.1 to me, so it is the pot calling the kettle black. The lack of development for IRIX hasn't barred countless ports of various utilities and somewhat updated web browsers, plus XSGI is probably the best iteration of X11 around, with many of the problems that still plague X.Org fixed.

Windows is still used occasionally, mostly Windows 7, but only in cases of absolute need.

[TeamBlackFox]

Eh, Windows is fine, if the following apply to you:

You're a GUI-oriented user
You care about how pretty your stuff looks
You play many games on your computer

None of the above apply to me. I stopped using GUI-based menus and configurations when I learned how much time I was wasting ( I am a faster typer than using a mouse ) and I care for functionality and speed rather than looks. Finally, I simply don't play many Windows exclusive games. I do play the Elder Scrolls on my Windows installation, as well as PSO Blue Burst and Touhou. Those simply aren't enough for me to run Windows on a daily basis.

In addition I found Windows impossible to program for compared to UNIX, as the latter has a set of well-defined extensions to C that I can count on being part of the OS and not changing with each ABI/API release. This is a problem that Windows has, as Touhou 6, for example, won't run on the latest version of Windows, Windows 8, without a compatibility mode change to Windows XP SP3. While I'm familiar enough with how to do this, many Windows users don't even know what most of the definitions of the properties menus are for. On BSD, I can do many of the same things the properties menu does with a simple command change, rather than navigate, select, apply, ok. Example: Permissions on BSD:

% chmod 755 foo.tar.bz

Windows: Right click on foo, Click Properties, Security, Select Permissions, Apply, OK.

There was someone who called FreeNAS Debian based, that is incorrect, it is 100% FreeBSD and is funded by iXSystems, also the major fund source for PC-BSD, one of the most advanced desktop-oriented operating systems currently around. In fact, when one of the developers for FreeNAS wanted to make it Debian-based, he was kicked out of the project because his reasoning behind it was flawed.

OS X is a piece of work - it is Mach trying to masquerade as UNIX with the help of a few 4.4BSD-derived kernel enhancements and a brain damaged fork of the FreeBSD userland, with a custom GUI layered over the same thing. Problem is, there are significantly more compatibility issues with Mac OS between versions than even Windows: Mac OS Classic applications won't run since 10.4, PowerPC OS X applications won't run since 10.6. That isn't a problem for me, as I admire their willingness to break compatibility, as it is a waste of libraries, code and processor die-space for the latest version of 32-bit Windows to be able to run basic 16-bit DOS applications. I digress, because I've already harped on why I don't use OS X.

Finally I see Fats referring to the GNU/Linux as 'Linux' but this is incorrect, as Linux is just the kernel, and there are versions such as Alpine Linux which use a minimum of GNU software such as uClibc, etc. I use GNU/Linux to denote the differences between those, and non-GNU variants like Android and Alpine. I use Android, but I didn't really include it here as using a mobile based OS for a main OS seems pretty impractical. Again, as a Randian believer in philosophy, I disagree with the approach of the FSF/GPL/GNU project to licencing, as it stifles innovation and encourages monopoly and domination. Red Hat dominates the GNU/Linux cathedral what with its constant meddling, and as I've worked with them before, I don't have any desire to be part of the parade for which they're the drum majors.

Note I'm not criticising people here, but merely explaining my rationale for not using those.

[TeamBlackFox]

Or if all your customers uses windows and what you are developing is SW for your customers.

Windows is actually really easy to develop on.

Not for C, and not for people who dislike using GUIs or IDEs. Windows' lack of of a native, supported POSIX implementation forces a UNIX developer like me to use MinGW, which means I can't use a proprietary or BSD licence if I want to statically link my code. I don't want to rewrite code to use proprietary APIs, because that would effectively mean that I would have to fork my Windows implementations and divide my efforts. Use of proprietary or custom C library calls tends to introduce bugs and security issues into the code, as shown by the OpenSSL project. LibreSSL has been fixing this by returning to use of standard C library calls existent in almost every standard libc. However, I, like many other people, prefer to use the POSIX libraries since, besides Windows, Amiga and a few other platforms, they're moreorless universal, and the majority of implementations are open source.

[TeamBlackFox]

Yssing, it isn't even about GUIs the simple fact that Windows lacks open APIs and libraries makes it less secure and also less usable for someone who primarily produces BSD-style licence software. Encumbering myself with proprietary or copyleft licence restrictions is unacceptable.

Tone007, you've moved from permissions now to ownership, which under UNIX is a totally separate concept. In UNIX it is accomplished via chown, in the following syntax:

% chown user:group $file

Windows NT lacks the difference here, and it also lacks ASLR which means if I back a program, get it installed on a computer then as long as I have admin level privileges I can overwrite critical portions of the memory with no defence against that. In modern UNIX ASLR protects against this by randomising the layout of the memory address space making it significantly more difficult for an attacker to crash a machine.

ElPolloDiablo, I never have gotten RSI from typing, but from mice usage I have. I use Dvorak and also generally keep my wrists straight while typing to avoid RSI.

[TeamBlackFox]

No, ownership and permissions are separate in Windows as well.  CACLS manages permissions, TAKEOWN will allow you to manage ownership.

I researched, and you're correct. Few points I need to touch on: chmod is more useful because you can make a directory and everything inside of it inherit the same permissions, using the -R flag. CACLS lacks this functionality, and it looks like MS is trying to replace it with ICACLS which already has a severe security exploit against it in all known versions:

It ignores permission to change files (write protection) so if I hack a xomputer and am only running as a limited user I can potentially gain access to files that would otherwise not be readable.

These problems are because Winodws' NT line was never designed with security as a forefront, and in the interest of backwards compatibility with very old versions they have to tack on security at higher levels. It also was never designed to be used on the open web, only behind a local secured a firewalled LAN, because to this day there are RDP exploits on Vista and below, that assuming I know your IP, it is game over in terms of security.

This may not interest many people here but I'm an infosec enthusiast, and I keep my wits about me in regards to data security by using Windows behind PFSense firewalls, securing all of the insecure services turned on by default and I always am very careful about what I download and unpack on those machines.

>Solaris

I'm surprised to see that here! What do you use it for? And what version?

[TeamBlackFox]

Most of the stuff I do is under my name and I also have signed some NDAs so I'm limited on what I can say.

However I have assisted someone in development of a set of debug tools for a game console in the event of a crash. These are based on the NetBSD userland, with lots of functionality not needed stripped out. What I worked on mostly was the equivalent of busybox for the project. Since it was more of a question on how to trim the tools down for space constraints, rather than anything else, it was less involved with writing code more than cutting and hacking it down. I do not get paid for the work I perform in many cases, I prefer to simply go for the experience. I have a non programming job currently that enables me to pick and choose where I can contribute to. There simply isn't a target audience that requires a GUI for what I do, what is more important is for the code to be portable and not dependent on proprietary APIs or libraries.

[TeamBlackFox]

The latest computer I have purchased is an i7 laptop and it came with Windows8, which I absolutely hate.  I updated it free to 8.1, but it did not help any, and I am so tempted to downgrade to Windows7.

I use it mostly for one MMO game that I play with a few friends and family members, plus my CAD drawing software, but lately about half of my time spent on the i7 laptop is running AmigaForever, which it does very well.

What is really disappointing is that even with all of this power and RAM and hard drive speed, I still experience glitches during video playback occasionally.  The simplicity of Amiga (and Amiga inspired) systems is so much more fun and relaxing to deal with.  I am always trying to do more on my Amiga/Amiga inspired systems and less on my Windows/Mac/Linux systems.

I suppose you have a point here regarding AmigaOS's ability to manage memory fairly well, if relying on cooperative multitasking with a preemptive scheduler. I also think the message passing and overall efficiency with which the OS and hardware combined can do is something that many operating systems have failed to do.

However, there are severe drawbacks to using AmigaOS for a day-to-day which have prevented me from using it beyond as a novelty on the 3000:

Lack of any basic or advanced security mechanisms
Lack of task isolation and privilege separation, meaning malicious programs can run and lock up a system or send it into a Guru meditation
Lack of sophisticated filesystems with features like RAID, snapshots or crash-safety which I use and rely on every day
Lack of updated browser
Lack of 64-bit support ( I rely heavily on 64-bit math, pointers, and memory addressing for many programs which I run and have had hands in developing )


Also, on Windows, anytime it comes up in conversation these days I think of this immediately, since Android 19 runs Windows apparently with that voice of his: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fsx09hDU0Sw

[TeamBlackFox]

It is a little more complicated than that in my case, what I mean is I rely on a 64-bit CPU and ABIs that support the 64-bit features of the CPU. I do not currently code on x86, 68k or ARM32, I instead have supported and focused mostly on MIPS, POWER, and ARM64 and all of my programmes I have helped write require and are optimised for, 64-bit big and little endian CPUs.

Anyways the topic is seriously getting out of hand. Even if I had 64-bit capability I wouldn't be able to use it for everyday work. I don't work on systems that have no concept of memory protection or privilege separation.

[TeamBlackFox]

AmigaDave,

Glad we agree on that! Just to correct you there, Windows runs on just about any x86 or ARM hardware, NetBSD is by far more portable supporting over a dozen architectures in mostly usable state and about two-dozen that are in development.

In regards to the Windows and Mac discussions:

Windows is a complete ecosystem, like BSD, but far more constructed, so trying to remove anything that it comes with is mostly useless. BSD provides the bare minimum with which to build a complete system, and minimally constructed at that.

GNU/Linux and OS X have more in common with each other than most realise, considering they're both patchworks of various projects that can, but not necessarily will, work smoothly together. GNU/Linux at minimum has GNU providing the shell, the core command set, and the compiler suite, Linux providing the kernel, and various other projects including Systemd for startup and greater userland tools, X or Wayland providing display protocol, various windowing systems and desktop environments providing graphics. OS X has a Mach kernel, BSD kernel modules, a mix of GNU and FreeBSD command set and user land, launchd providing startup, and various in house Apple projects providing audio, display and graphics protocols.

One of my biggest gripes with Apple, and to a lesser extent MS and the NG Amigas, is the heavy reliance on vendor lock-in tactics. Apple controls hardware, software and everything in between so the consumer is left with a device that will only perform satisfactory until Apple decides to can support for it. MS relies on tactics like Secure boot, UEFI, and breaking ABI compatibility between releases to force users to upgrade software suites, and to control the hardware's usage. This is why I oppose moving to x86 for NG Amigas, because the general approach will likely be to using custom built devices like Apple to control the amount of support for hardware, as the  thousands of volunteers who code Linux drivers can't even support a third of the devices on the market, so the tiny Amiga community certainly will fail at that. At least with the recent OPENPOWER development there is a chance that once OS4 or MorphOS is feature complete and modernised, that various companies could provide hardware for them without patent encumbrance and allowing other open source projects like NetBSD or the Linux kernel would take interest since both have a huge interest in open hardware projects.

Anyways getting a bit off topic here.

[TeamBlackFox]

Yeah bash and binutils are from GNU.