Strengths and Weaknesses of DOS, Windows, and Linux. |
May 4, 2015 |
A complete answer would require you to research Apple and Microsoft - Official Home Page but here is a top level summary to get you started: Advantages. Very stable: my personal Mac laptop has been running for 15 days (from when the last MacOS pa. Apple Newsroom is the source for news about Apple. Read press releases, get updates, watch video and download images. I am using Mac OS Sierra 10.12.1 and Safari 10.01.1 I have 8GB of Ram and a 1 TB hdd. This is my first venture into Mac, as I have always used windows, but found the virus susceptibility worrisome. I am asking for help here if there is any available!
- Mac OS Mojave 10.14.6. Benji November 1, 2019 at 7:15 pm. Was able to download the PC.exe file and get to play it using Wine Bottler. Will see if I can package w.
- Mac OS X has better security than Windows and you are much less likely to get your Mac infected than a PC. Mac OS X has a simple, easy-to-use interface perfect for the home user, and powerful enough for the programmers. Weaknesses: All that flashy secure reliable power comes at a price. Macs cost more than machines that run other operating systems.
An OS, or, operating system, is software that works as a manager for the hardware and software in a computer. The operating system is an important component of the system software in a computer. Application programs usually require an operating system to even function. For functions such as input and output, the operating system acts as a middle man between programs and the computer's hardware.
In this paper I am going to talk about the strengths and weaknesses of DOS, Windows and Linux.
Strengths of DOS
One strength that DOS has is the fact that it uses little memory. Because of the smaller size of this operating system it will boot faster than Windows. Another strength of DOS is it makes it much easier to write programs. Unless of course the program requires special graphics. With DOS you get direct access to hardware that you won't necessarily get with the other operating systems.
Weaknesses of DOS
DOS can't do more than one thing at a time. It's not a good operating system for multi-tasking. File names are limited. You can have 8 characters with 3 for the extension. Spaces in that will not be allowed. DOS can't use more than 640kb of ram efficiently either which is certainly a weakness compared to other operating systems out there. Also, DOS cannot effectively use larger hard drives.
Weakness Mc Potion
Strengths of Windows
One thing that could be considered a strength of Windows is the ease of use. If you used the older versions of Windows, you probably think the modern versions are comfortable considering use. It has the standardized look and feel mainly, with small changes. It may add a few features, or take some away with each version. But for the main part, that and the file system are presented in pretty much the same way. Software, utilities and games for Windows is definitely available because so many people are running windows. Because of the fact most computer users are running Windows, Windows has more support regarding hardware and most manufacturers of hardware will support Windows, so it would be close to impossible to build a home computer without hardware support that is offered with Windows. Another things than can be considered a strength of Windows is Microsoft Office. Although yes other operating systems have ways to edit text, or other word processing programs, Microsoft Office is most popular. It is 100% compatible with any document file
Weaknesses of Windows
Compared to Linux which is free, Windows is expensive. On top of paying for the operating system, most of the time, programs and/or utilities you may want to run on Windows will also cost you. Windows is closed source and most of their programs are closed source as well. This means their source code is not shared for the public to see or make changes to it. You can't just say, 'I don't like this about my operating system, let me take it and tweak it and make it my own.' Then use it and give it away. Another disadvantage of the Windows OS is they have poor/no support for older hardware, as in, Windows XP or 2000.
Strengths of Linux
Linux is an open source. Because of it being an open source, it is possible for users to write their own. To fix what they want to fix, to add what they want to add, and/or take away what they want to take away. Linux is compatible with most of the hardware platforms. Linux can run on a single user computer or on a network. Linux is usually a free operating system, so you don't have to pay what you normally would to run Windows. With Windows, you normally have to purchase any programs, utilities, or games you want to run. With Linux this is usually also free. Linux doesn't have a registry like Windows, so you don't have to deal with registry errors which can slow and bog down a computer after so long.
Weaknesses of Linux
Because things like the graphical user interface can be different with varying distributors, it can possibly make it more difficult to install and/or support. Another disadvantage of using Linux as your operating system is most Windows programs will not run with Linux OS. Like stated above, most computer users use Windows and most programs you may want to use are written only to run on Windows. Of course you could possibly find something similar for cheaper or free with Linux, it could still be considered a disadvantage. Hardware support is not readily available for Linux (Since again, most users do not run it) and the selection of drivers that will work on Linux is also much smaller.
I have discussed above the strengths and weaknesses (Advantages and disadvantages) of 3 operating systems. DOS, Windows, and Linux. Everyone has different things they may prefer when it comes to their OS and different people have different levels of knowledge regarding computers. What may work for one, may not work for another, and with the different weaknesses, and strengths, one user may find one operating system easier to work with and willing to go around the weaknesses whereas a different individual may just not be able to deal with the weaknesses of a certain operating system and still prefer something different.
To recap just a tad, DOS can't do more than one task at a time, it has less memory but has direct access to hardware. Windows costs more than Linux where Linux is usually free. Windows has more hardware support and more users use Windows. Most programs you may enjoy with Windows do not work on a Linux operating system, although, you most likely will find something similar for Linux, for free. Linux is an open source OS, so if you have the knowledge, you can take some of what is available, and add or take away depending on your preferences. There is much more freedom with Linux than there is with other operating systems.
My preference of operating system is definitely Windows. Not because I find it better than another OS, but because of the familiarity I have with Windows. When I first started using computers at a young age, we had Windows. Windows is familiar and easier for me to use because I am comfortable with it. I know the main aspects and I know most of the ‘getting around' when it comes to Windows. When newer versions come out, I find it easy to navigate and learn the new functions or new ways the version works.
Hidden Dimensions - A Major Apple Weakness Could Harm Mac OS X
by John Martellaro
January 2nd, 2007
Asteroid deathmatch mac os. You can never solve a problem on the level on which it was created.
-- Albert Einstein My blacksmith shop mac os.
We all know that Mac OS X is a superioroperating system. It's easy to use by novicesand experts alike. It has a modern infrastructurewhich includes seldom discussed items such aslaunchd and the Common Data Security Architecture.It has great attention to security, consistency, andminimizes tinkerability while meeting the needsof many business and technical professionals.
Apple makes a big fuss about Mac OS X. Regal tails mac os. Eachversion is eagerly awaited with great anticipation.We're all particularly excited about Leopard. And so we all hope that Mac OS Xwill reign supreme for all time.
Maybe not. What what if Apple, someday, were to lose some of theirfocus on Mac OS X? I'm not thinking about next year, but I amthinking about the not too distant future when the dust settles onApple's consumer electronic ambitions.
One reason I'm thinking about this is that, it seems to me, neverhas there been more of a gulf between the public perception ofApple and the core competency of Apple -- integrating computerhardware and an operating system. The other reason it comes tomind is an article I wrote previously about Apple and degrees of freedom. Apple doesn't like commitmentsto end users. They rarely partner with large customerorganizations. They will partner with companies like Disney andIntel, but only on the supply side.
In order to ask questions about Apple's long term commitment toMac OS X, one has to look at instances where Apple has made firmcommitments to customers. There aren't many.
A Tale of Two Stories
What started me thinking about all this was the combination of twostories here at TMO on Wednesday. The first was the blogfrom David Sobotta back on December 25th about how Apple show managers in Cupertino,clueless about the Federal Market, proceeded to do a lot of stupidthings at a federal computer show called FOSE, held every year inWashington D.C.
The second story was about a very technical technique for combining launchd and rsync to triggeran automated backup when an external drive is connected.
The combination of the two stories reminded me of the starkdifference between the technology of a UNIX operating system, thepublic perception of Apple, and how Apple manages its image.
Mr. Sobotta's Blog described an incident that was typical ofApple. It all started when a bright young fellow at Apple startedto work on an extensive security briefing document forpublication. As I recall, the original draft was on the order of30 pages and went into some very important fundamentals of Mac OSX's security architecture and features. But, of course, beforesuch documements can be released to the public, they must bereviewed by Marketing Communications with a fine attention todetail and image. In the end, after review, the security briefingwas a shadow if its former self and diluted in the extreme.
It requires some patience to find the final version of that paper.One reference, in fact, starts at the top of Apple's ITPro site but the link to the security tech brief is dead whichis rather confusing. It's probably just an oversight.
Another link is at the very bottom of Apple's Mac OS Xfeatures page. That link is active and will allow you downloadthe watered down 13 page paper.
When I recall the process involved, I am reminded that there is athick layer of insulation between Apple's technical people andtheir technical customers. This has been an irritation before, and itcould become a problem in the future.
A lot of the material that is directed towards these kinds ofcustomers is nothing more than links to stories about Apple asopposed to material created by technical professionals withinApple and communicated to end users. Even the Apple inspired siteMacResearch.org is simply aneffort to allow technically deep professionals to share theirknowledge with other users because Apple, fundamentally, isuncomfortable doing it themselves.
The reason is that Apple is a company that's all aboutimage, and they would prefer not to have technical professionalscommunicating directly with customers. In some cases, experiencehas shown that scientists and engineers don't have the skills tocommunicate certain messages in a desirable fashion. But Apple,as a UNIX vendor, carries that far overboard.
As a result, highly technical material is, outside of the AppleDeveloper Connection, either hard to find, watered down, ornon-existent. This was a typical complaint to me when I engagedApple customers in years past. It is a credit to a few verytalented individuals at Apple that a wealth of securityinformation related to Smart Cards, Common Criteria, securitycertifications, and encryption has been published in barelyacceptable detail. However, Apple is only one lay-off or two awayfrom completely losing this credibility with its customers.
The Two Faces of Apple
As we approach the release of Leopard, it is moreand more evident that the public fuss about Apple,its image building, its foray into consumer electronicswith the iTV and possibly an iPod that can make phone calls,is creating a larger and larger gulf between Apple's non-technicalconsumers and technical professionals.
A company that started out, in its first 25 years, making mostlyvery nice computers and operating systems, is on the verge of amajor shift in its focus and revenues. As more and more of Apple'srevenue comes from consumer devices, priorities will shift.Resources, which are always spread thin at Apple, typically get directedtowards the latest hot consumer project.
Lest we forget, going to war against Windows, while a formidablefoe, is easy in one very important way because the securityarchitecture of Windows is so messed up. Because a comprehensivefix is not forthcoming, Mac OS X will have significant edge in thatarea for years to come. On the other hand, the home theater marketand the cell phone markets are full of pitfalls, traps, and clevercompetitors. These markets, while a huge opportunity,will distract Apple.
One sign that a loss of focus is at least possible is that Apple goes outof its way to avoid long term relationships with customers.Products are abandoned without notice and replaced by new ones.Apple avoids long term business relationships with researchagencies and universities in advanced computation. What commitmentsApple does have are short term or easily broken. Apple spokespersons,those who are press-certified, are typically non-technical. Applehas few Ph.Ds on staff who are empowered to work closely withcustomers on long-term research projects. Apple declines tosponsor important events, technical TV specialsand conferences.
Mr. Sobotta pointed out in his Blog cited above that Apple doesn'tallow third party vendors in its booth at the largest professionalconferences. The very people who are most technically capableof demonstrating technical solutions on Mac OS X are denied boothaccess in favor of Apple volunteers who are not qualified todemonstrate the most capable and advanced software that appealsto conference attendees. (And industry analysts.) The Blog went on topoint out that Mr. Jobs forbids literature in the booths. Technicalprofessionals go home from a show loaded with dreams. They look atbrochures and technical data from companies like HP and Dell andstudy, analyze and dream their next computer project. But they getnothing from Apple to sit on their office desk every day, cry out in four colors,and remind them of their dreams.
The technical community in the U.S. only has so much patience.They require a dialogue with Apple, not a monologue. They requiresome very serious technical interchange with Apple engineers andscientists, but there are precious few hired by Apple who have thecharter to conduct collaborations. Technical documents comefrom Apple highly filtered and diluted, and as a result,Apple never feels a sense of partnership with its enterprisecustomers.
Don't misunderstand me. Mac OS X is a superior OS. It retainsa special status within Apple and makes their beautifully designedcomputers worth buying. Mac OS X is also the hub of Apple'sdigital lifestyle, making operations with video, audio, designand creativity a joy. Leopard will be terrific.
My concern is this. As Apple moves more and more into consumerelectronics, its tendency to favor image over substance andblock serious technical cooperation with enterprise customerswill become more and more at odds with what it takesto deliver a robust UNIX OS. Apple tends to hide behind theirMarketing Communications division, a group of people who shudder with fearwhen presented with technical material to publish. Sothey water it down until it becomes useless.
One reason I'm thinking about this is that, it seems to me, neverhas there been more of a gulf between the public perception ofApple and the core competency of Apple -- integrating computerhardware and an operating system. The other reason it comes tomind is an article I wrote previously about Apple and degrees of freedom. Apple doesn't like commitmentsto end users. They rarely partner with large customerorganizations. They will partner with companies like Disney andIntel, but only on the supply side.
In order to ask questions about Apple's long term commitment toMac OS X, one has to look at instances where Apple has made firmcommitments to customers. There aren't many.
A Tale of Two Stories
What started me thinking about all this was the combination of twostories here at TMO on Wednesday. The first was the blogfrom David Sobotta back on December 25th about how Apple show managers in Cupertino,clueless about the Federal Market, proceeded to do a lot of stupidthings at a federal computer show called FOSE, held every year inWashington D.C.
The second story was about a very technical technique for combining launchd and rsync to triggeran automated backup when an external drive is connected.
The combination of the two stories reminded me of the starkdifference between the technology of a UNIX operating system, thepublic perception of Apple, and how Apple manages its image.
Mr. Sobotta's Blog described an incident that was typical ofApple. It all started when a bright young fellow at Apple startedto work on an extensive security briefing document forpublication. As I recall, the original draft was on the order of30 pages and went into some very important fundamentals of Mac OSX's security architecture and features. But, of course, beforesuch documements can be released to the public, they must bereviewed by Marketing Communications with a fine attention todetail and image. In the end, after review, the security briefingwas a shadow if its former self and diluted in the extreme.
It requires some patience to find the final version of that paper.One reference, in fact, starts at the top of Apple's ITPro site but the link to the security tech brief is dead whichis rather confusing. It's probably just an oversight.
Another link is at the very bottom of Apple's Mac OS Xfeatures page. That link is active and will allow you downloadthe watered down 13 page paper.
When I recall the process involved, I am reminded that there is athick layer of insulation between Apple's technical people andtheir technical customers. This has been an irritation before, and itcould become a problem in the future.
A lot of the material that is directed towards these kinds ofcustomers is nothing more than links to stories about Apple asopposed to material created by technical professionals withinApple and communicated to end users. Even the Apple inspired siteMacResearch.org is simply aneffort to allow technically deep professionals to share theirknowledge with other users because Apple, fundamentally, isuncomfortable doing it themselves.
The reason is that Apple is a company that's all aboutimage, and they would prefer not to have technical professionalscommunicating directly with customers. In some cases, experiencehas shown that scientists and engineers don't have the skills tocommunicate certain messages in a desirable fashion. But Apple,as a UNIX vendor, carries that far overboard.
As a result, highly technical material is, outside of the AppleDeveloper Connection, either hard to find, watered down, ornon-existent. This was a typical complaint to me when I engagedApple customers in years past. It is a credit to a few verytalented individuals at Apple that a wealth of securityinformation related to Smart Cards, Common Criteria, securitycertifications, and encryption has been published in barelyacceptable detail. However, Apple is only one lay-off or two awayfrom completely losing this credibility with its customers.
The Two Faces of Apple
As we approach the release of Leopard, it is moreand more evident that the public fuss about Apple,its image building, its foray into consumer electronicswith the iTV and possibly an iPod that can make phone calls,is creating a larger and larger gulf between Apple's non-technicalconsumers and technical professionals.
A company that started out, in its first 25 years, making mostlyvery nice computers and operating systems, is on the verge of amajor shift in its focus and revenues. As more and more of Apple'srevenue comes from consumer devices, priorities will shift.Resources, which are always spread thin at Apple, typically get directedtowards the latest hot consumer project.
Lest we forget, going to war against Windows, while a formidablefoe, is easy in one very important way because the securityarchitecture of Windows is so messed up. Because a comprehensivefix is not forthcoming, Mac OS X will have significant edge in thatarea for years to come. On the other hand, the home theater marketand the cell phone markets are full of pitfalls, traps, and clevercompetitors. These markets, while a huge opportunity,will distract Apple.
One sign that a loss of focus is at least possible is that Apple goes outof its way to avoid long term relationships with customers.Products are abandoned without notice and replaced by new ones.Apple avoids long term business relationships with researchagencies and universities in advanced computation. What commitmentsApple does have are short term or easily broken. Apple spokespersons,those who are press-certified, are typically non-technical. Applehas few Ph.Ds on staff who are empowered to work closely withcustomers on long-term research projects. Apple declines tosponsor important events, technical TV specialsand conferences.
Mr. Sobotta pointed out in his Blog cited above that Apple doesn'tallow third party vendors in its booth at the largest professionalconferences. The very people who are most technically capableof demonstrating technical solutions on Mac OS X are denied boothaccess in favor of Apple volunteers who are not qualified todemonstrate the most capable and advanced software that appealsto conference attendees. (And industry analysts.) The Blog went on topoint out that Mr. Jobs forbids literature in the booths. Technicalprofessionals go home from a show loaded with dreams. They look atbrochures and technical data from companies like HP and Dell andstudy, analyze and dream their next computer project. But they getnothing from Apple to sit on their office desk every day, cry out in four colors,and remind them of their dreams.
The technical community in the U.S. only has so much patience.They require a dialogue with Apple, not a monologue. They requiresome very serious technical interchange with Apple engineers andscientists, but there are precious few hired by Apple who have thecharter to conduct collaborations. Technical documents comefrom Apple highly filtered and diluted, and as a result,Apple never feels a sense of partnership with its enterprisecustomers.
Don't misunderstand me. Mac OS X is a superior OS. It retainsa special status within Apple and makes their beautifully designedcomputers worth buying. Mac OS X is also the hub of Apple'sdigital lifestyle, making operations with video, audio, designand creativity a joy. Leopard will be terrific.
My concern is this. As Apple moves more and more into consumerelectronics, its tendency to favor image over substance andblock serious technical cooperation with enterprise customerswill become more and more at odds with what it takesto deliver a robust UNIX OS. Apple tends to hide behind theirMarketing Communications division, a group of people who shudder with fearwhen presented with technical material to publish. Sothey water it down until it becomes useless.
Weakness Across Shoulders
Apple's aloof approach, technical shyness, and reluctance tosupport long-term research with customers is one of itsbiggest weaknesses. In the long run, that will harm the bestUNIX OS ever conceived.
John Martellaro is a senior scientist and author. A former U.S. Air Force officer,he has worked for NASA, White Sands Missile Range, Lockheed Martin Astronautics, the Oak Ridge National Laboratory and Apple Computer. During his five years at Apple, he worked as a Senior Marketing Manager for science and technology, Federal Account Executive, and High Performance Computing Manager. His interests include alpine skiing, SciFi, astronomy, and Perl. John lives in Denver, Colorado.
Hidden Dimensions Archives.