This is very true. The Windows software market is colossal, and the ability to run software from decades ago is a feature not found on any other OS group (Linux + OSX included).
I know we all like to think and strangely wish that we could replace Windows server with Linux boxes and Windows desktops with Linux desktops but the sad truth is that there is no good replacement for Exchange or Active Directory (and the myriad of extensions that you can install into it; even writing one isn't that hard), including all the mobile OS support for mail on it (and calendars), nor is there a Linux desktop that would be instantly comfortable and navigable to 90% of Windows users. My mum would be lost, for certain. I would be lost under Unity or GNOME3 (only with blind rage I feel).
It's a bit of a pipe dream, or very unrealistic. And I say this as a fan and user of all the major systems (and having been Linux and Windows sysadmin in the past).
Well, as far as Active Directory goes, I think it is possible to run a "Windows" domain using Samba.
But apart from that, I tend to agree. I still want to believe it is possible to get Windows users comfortable on a Unix desktop, it works with OS X, after all. But practically speaking, you are right.
You can run the domain but I don't think Samba implements Users and Computers plugins etc. does it? I wrote one (the version 2 SDK was unfathomable, the SDK version 3 in C# was much better). It let us add extra fields into AD (just like any LDAP implementation) and then present extra tab sheets within AD users and computers for configuring additional external services that we had written (we wrote some middleware to communicate with Cisco Call Manager etc. so they could configure their phone system from Active Directory, very useful!)
The clever thing with OSX is that it is Unix but 95% of the OSX users don't know it is, nor do they care, nor do they know what UNIX is. OSX is Stealth Unix. Clever.
> You can run the domain but I don't think Samba implements Users and Computers plugins etc. does it?
Do you mean mmc.exe snapins? I have to admit, I never tried.
> OSX is Stealth Unix. Clever.
The integration of X11 into the desktop is pretty poor, and I miss a decent package manager like apt-get or yum. Apart from that, I completely agree. Apple has managed something quite impressive by building an operating system that is a Unix to techies and a comfy, user-friendly desktop to the rest (and to the Unix people).
The X11 integration is really bad. Now that they don't bundle it along with the default installation (XQuartz instead, that you must fetch yourself), how can I run xclock after installing OSX?
In truth, the lack of cmd-tabbing support to X11 apps is irritating, as is the menus on the windows being in the wrong place. I can see why they didn't fully support it though - X11 just doesn't fit in with their Quartz system. If you turn on Quartz Debugging and do things like "show tracking rectangles" X11 windows are a complete unknown to Quartz.
Just out of curiosity, don't you consider homebrew "decent" or do you want official package manager from Apple? (App Store effectively being Apple's solution?)
I use MacPorts which works well enough, but it would be nicer if something comparable came as part of the base system.
Specifically it is annoying that the compiler does not find headers and libraries installed through MacPorts by default. Yes, you can tell the compiler to look for those headers and libraries easily enough. But compared to the experience on, say, Debian, it is slightly annoying.
Having said that, let me point out that I have owned a Mac for ~19 months now, and while my initial plan was to give OS X a quick try, then install Debian, I have not done so.
Also, if somebody has experience with both homebrew and MacPorts, I would appreciate if that someone could tell me about the differences and the respective pros and cons of both.
I know we all like to think and strangely wish that we could replace Windows server with Linux boxes and Windows desktops with Linux desktops but the sad truth is that there is no good replacement for Exchange or Active Directory (and the myriad of extensions that you can install into it; even writing one isn't that hard), including all the mobile OS support for mail on it (and calendars), nor is there a Linux desktop that would be instantly comfortable and navigable to 90% of Windows users. My mum would be lost, for certain. I would be lost under Unity or GNOME3 (only with blind rage I feel).
It's a bit of a pipe dream, or very unrealistic. And I say this as a fan and user of all the major systems (and having been Linux and Windows sysadmin in the past).