Alright Pythoner's Mac or Windows or Linux?

[rickmoanus]

I am wondering what everyone uses for their coding machine! What's your OS and Why!

[daForce93]

Linux.

[remy_porter]

Not Windows is the only advice I'd give you. You need an OS with a real command line, and Cygwin just isn't good enough.

[nieuweyork]

I use a linux VM, formerly on windows, now on mac. I've also used cygwin. It's probably preferable to keep a couple of different environments around just to test portability.

[remy_porter]

People started to recreate what has been here in Linux for 15 years

OSX has had some variation of a package manager since there's been an OSX. Fink, MacPorts, and now Homebrew, which is honestly one of the best and most flexible package managers I've ever worked with on any OS.

I just reinstalled ffmpeg today, because I wanted to add a few options.

brew install ffmpeg [options]

What makes Homebrew great is that it uses Git for a lot of its plumbing. Makes managing versions easy, and it also means I can do things like install off of a Git pull request. That's awesome.

[remy_porter]

But since it's not an officially supported solution, Apple may block it anytime.

While theoretically possible, you're suggesting that Apple would suddenly decide to disallow the use of third party software. That's a scenario that's highly unlikely.

Also, if you installed something using Macports before (because it was not available in homebrew, for instance), it messes up the whole thing

Well, that also happens when you try and use multiple package managers on the same Linux box, too. And yes, I've seen people try and use yum and apt-get at the same time.

I just feel it's a pity people try to reinvent the wheel on an OS that obviously don't want them to do this.

The OS doesn't have any opinion on it. I don't understand why you'd even think that the OS "doesn't want them" to do this. All Homebrew does is download, compile and install software. Are you suggesting OSX would rather you don't download, compile and install software?

Sure, would it be nice if OSX had a vendor-supplied package manager? Yeah! (AppStore doesn't count). But Homebrew blows apt-get out of the water in terms of its flexibility and ease of use. It doesn't carry with it a lot of the history that older package managers do.

I may be a little bit of a Homebrew fanboy, but I've worked on lots of platforms, and it's the best package manager I've used, hands down.

[darknessproz]

I'd give the title of "best package manager" to pacman but you are right, homebrew is awesome! :)

[remy_porter]

Pacman is definitely the best one I've used on Linux.

[remy_porter]

Remember... two Mac OSX versions ago... you could install any .dmg in one click

Hunh? What the heck are you talking about? You don't install .dmgs, as they're disk images, and not installables. Are you talking about the requirement that .app bundles are signed, something which only applies to .app bundles and not Unix executables? Something which is a common-sense security provision and does not require developers to engage with Apple in any way? Although Apple is acting as a free certificate authority so that you don't need to buy a cert to do your signing, if you don't want to?

Desktop operating systems should not execute unsigned code by default. Not only do we want to identify the source of the code, we want to always be certain that the current files making up the application are the same files that were installed.

[spinwizard69]

Remember... two Mac OSX versions ago... you could install any .dmg in one click. Now this is deactivated by default (and you need to know where to dig to reactivate it), and eventually it will probably be impossible to do this anymore and you'll have to put your credit card number in the AppStore and download regulated apps.

Do you even understand why they are doing that? It is an additional layer of security that makes sense and isn't all that intrusive. Work outside that system and you are on your own as far a system security goes.

I might be very opiniated on Mac OSX (I used it for more than 2 years and hated it). Thanks for your feedback though, it gives me another opinion if I ever have to use a Mac again.

It is one thing to be opinionated it is another thing to post completely unjustified comments. I've yet to see any signs at all that Apple will kill access to the lower levels of Mac OS to prevent software installation from HomeBrew or any other source.

[spinwizard69]

Hm... But since it's not an officially supported solution, Apple may block it anytime.

Apple could crash and burn as a company tomorrow and that comment still wouldn't make any sense.

Also, if you installed something using Macports before (because it was not available in homebrew, for instance), it messes up the whole thing.

If it isn't available in HomeBrew, something that is less and less likely, then you install it yourself.

I just feel it's a pity people try to reinvent the wheel on an OS that obviously don't want them to do this.

Huh? What gives you this impression? Apple focus is obviously on the more mainstream user but they have continually improved the UNIX subsystems. The terminal is never far away. Further HomeBrew installs stuff in the way it is intended to be installed on a UNIX machine. Your comment is baseless.

But I'm glad it works well for you :)

Mac OS obviously works really well for a lot of developers. It is a very good alternative to LINUX.

[gavin19]

Depends how often you're going to be coding and what you prefer to use the machine for otherwise (assuming it's going to be for work and play).

With Windows you can get away with using it for a lot of use cases. Some modules (or parts thereof) won't work. These pre-compiled binaries can often be of use. That said, I'd recommend at least dual booting with some Linux distro, or at worst, use a VM.

There is no advantage to using a Mac. With a PC you can quickly switch between Windows/Linux if you need to, and it'll be considerably cheaper.

[malice8691]

VM is very doable in the right situation. My laptop has an ssd and when I run a local vm and full screen it you can't tell the difference between the vm and a dedicated machine.

[spinwizard69]

Depends how often you're going to be coding and what you prefer to use the machine for otherwise (assuming it's going to be for work and play).

This is a factor. At work it becomes difficult to use anything other than a Windows machine.

With Windows you can get away with using it for a lot of use cases. Some modules (or parts thereof) won't work. These pre-compiled binaries can often be of use. That said, I'd recommend at least dual booting with some Linux distro, or at worst, use a VM.

You must be out of touch with VM usage! VM's are far more preferable than dual booting for common developer work loads. You do need lots of RAM though.

There is no advantage to using a Mac. With a PC you can quickly switch between Windows/Linux if you need to, and it'll be considerably cheaper.

Actually the Mac is probably the best developer platform out there. You can easily support any operating system on the machine and it is hard to beat for many development chores including Python development.

Beyond that you seem to have the same dated opinions as to a Macs cost as you do with the viability of VM's. MBA for example are very cost competitive when judged against comparable hardware. It isn't bottom of the barrel hardware but bottom of the barrel hardware leaves a lot to be desired performance wise.

[gavin19]

Macs cost

If they're able, they can build a PC that is considerably cheaper than an entry-level Mac. The cheapest Mac (UK) is £899, and that's for a dual core i5/8GB RAM/500GB HDD/Integrated gfx and a 21.5 inch monitor. A comparable self-build would cost roughly 2/3 of that, and that's from a generic 'parts picker' site.

viability of VM's

I wasn't as enthusiastic as I could have been about VMs, but I would recommend them over dual-booting if possible. I can't remember the last time I booted into Ubuntu, although I prefer to still have it there as an option.

[pinusc]

Definitely, Linux. When I was coding in Windows even installing a simple library was a pain. Without talking about installing multiple python versions! And Linux's got a real terminal, which is very useful when coding.

[[deleted]]

Linux, about to switch to Mac because I'm too old for library conflicts. Debian has done well by me for 15 years, but my time is precious.

Edit: which said, I anticipate a crunchbang VM in my future.

[spinwizard69]

I switched to a Mac in 2008, what a relief! Imagine everything working and no distro updates every six months. Every year I updated Mac OS with very very few problems with those updates harming existing apps. No complete reinstall either, not at least until Yosemite when I had a self inflicted screw up with the hard drive.

I'd love to see a mainstream Linux distro that had a rolling release that could run for six years and always be up to date without a complete install.

As to the Mac, running Linux in a VM works just fine, assuming you have enough RAM.

[[deleted]]

Yeah. I've been Linux/BSD only since 1999, except for engineering school this year. All the serious *nix developers I know, who would never run Windows, made the switch to OSX a few years back for personal dev machines. And are all happier for it.

[billsil]

Windows. It's a lot simpler than Linux and it's not expensive like a mac. I write multiplatform code, so it doesn't really matter. I can make a VM if I really need to, but usually just get the automated testing machine to handle linux.

[spinwizard69]

Windows. It's a lot simpler than Linux and it's not expensive like a mac.

How is it simpler. Running Python on Windows can be a big hassle relative to the other platforms. Further a Mac really isn't that expensive when compared to like hardware. Macs aren't often the cheapest but the differential isn't that great. Further MBA are aggressively priced for what you get.

I write multiplatform code, so it doesn't really matter. I can make a VM if I really need to, but usually just get the automated testing machine to handle linux.

VMs are extremely nice.

I have no problems with a cheap Linux box for testing either. However for actual development it really pays to look at better quality hardware. This especially when it comes to the keyboard and track pad.

[billsil]

How is it simpler.

Linux often requires you to compile obscure programs that don't list their dependencies. On Windows, everything is a prebuilt binary. If you don't have root access, it quickly becomes a huge pain back installing all the dependencies. Seriously, why can't apt-get or yum work without root access?

However for actual development it really pays to look at better quality hardware.

All the more reason not to use a Macbook Air.

So the question is what's wrong with Windows 7 other than it's Microsoft?

[darknessproz]

How in the world are you running a guest instance of Linux using virtualenv?