If they have the same config as the others, you might concider using the others for adobe.goobimama said:Yep. Exactly why I'm not allowed to install Linux on two of the PCs in the office. Those are strictly for Adobe apps... The worst thing is, Ubuntu boots just fine on those two machines
For the umpteenth time, thats why you can never have comparison among OSes like Microsoft Windows, Apple Macintosh and Canonical Ubuntu. To have a fair comparison, you need to have only between OSes like Linux Distros, BSD Distros, etc.infra_red_dude said:^^^ exactly! The same case with drivers too. But then when someone says Ubuntu takes on Mac OS X for the OS of the Year, there needs to be some ground for comparison!
Yes, true. No wonder Mac is preferred by Freelancers (Coders, Designers, Writers, maybe even Bloggers), DJs, Musicians, people working in studios, etc. If you want to play games or have fun with Viruses, then buy a Windows Box. For normal applications, browsing, chatting, etc.. use *nix.Hitboxx said:@drgrudge, so what new are you saying? We all know that! don't forget the target audience, Mac is never meant to be the common man's OS, heck not even Linux has that distinction, only Windows qualifies for that position. Mac is tailor made by a company with the exclusive apps for the same. So how do you expect others to have the same?
In my opinion, it is totally absurd to even compare Linux with Mac or Windows much less be argued upon. The very fact that a community grown OS has managed to upset these so called big professional OS companies is in itself a testament to the evergrowing strength of Linux. And the future can only be bright