> Is this missing a "/s" flag?

Nope.

I don't care how "nice looking" the distros are. I care about consistent, well though out design guidelines that users can rely on across many applications. And yes, OS X is better, hence they're not in the list.

They do have significantly better security features (that has been true for a while now). See my answer below for details.

Apple is one of the most secretive companies we have on this planet and I, a Apple user, am not happy about that. (Yann Lecun complained about this in a recent Facebook ad too.) All parts that matter are closed: Kernel stuff, device drivers, core libs/frameworks, the Swift compiler, etc.

Ignorance is bliss.

I hear you on "I care about consistent, well though ought design guidelines that users can rely on across many applications" that is a pain point for many linux distros. Nothing is more frustrating than having 80% of your apps looks similar and then 20% stand out like a sore thumb. It's probably one of the top reasons that I pick OS X over linux, I think people work better on things that look better and all fit together well.

> They do have significantly better security features (that has been true for a while now). See my answer below for details.

You must still be responding to bigstumpy so I'll wait for that reply and respond in that thread.

> Apple is one of the most secretive companies we have on this planet and I, a Apple user, am not happy about that.

I hear that but I'm going to pick the best platform that let's me do my job best and for now (and for a while now) OS X has been that platform. I don't think I could ever go back to non-unixy OS (read: windows). I can survive on Linux (All of my code runs on Linux and I work with Linux servers) as a desktop OS but where it really shines IMHO is server OS's.

> All parts that matter are closed: Kernel stuff, device drivers, core libs/frameworks, the Swift compiler, etc.

As someone who would only care about the Swift compiler and possibly core libs/frameworks I guess this just doesn't bother me personally as much. I'd love if it was all OS for other people's benefit but it don't affect my day to day life really.

> Ignorance is bliss.

This is true but OS X let's me do my job better than Windows/Linux so call me ignorant cause development on OS X (for me) is bliss.

> I hear you on "I care about consistent, well though ought design guidelines that users can rely on across many applications" that is a pain point for many linux distros. Nothing is more frustrating than having 80% of your apps looks similar and then 20% stand out like a sore thumb. It's probably one of the top reasons that I pick OS X over linux, I think people work better on things that look better and all fit together well.

It's not just looks. Almost every Windows application has the same keyboard shortcuts. How many X-based Linux applications is that true for? Even classic command-line utils are wildly inconsistent (look at dd, for instance).

OS X has some great things about it but there is so much software that is only on Windows that I want to use that it ends up being hard to use other OSs for desktop (I've used both Linux and OS X for several years before coming back).

> Almost every Windows application has the same keyboard shortcuts.

I don't use keyboard shortcuts as much as some people may but I've never experienced issues with hotkey differences between apps in OS X. The one's I use are always consistent.

> there is so much software that is only on Windows

I don't have this issue either. For every daily task I do I have a native OS X app that performs without issues (often looking better while doing it than their windows alternative/equivalent). There is 1 single windows app that I need to use 1-2 times a month that a vendor provides and I have a VirtualBox VM for that. I do understand that different sectors/professions will have different experiences but OS X does everything I need it to do and I've never felt restrained.

I agree that Windows and OS X are roughly equal (maybe OS X is a little better) when it comes to UI consistency, consistent keyboard shortcuts, etc. That's not true of Linux applications, generally (which is why I said "X-based Linux applications," not "OS X applications").

As far as your second point, I'm glad for you, but it wasn't my experience and I got really sick of jumping through hoops trying to emulate a Windows environment for various software that was not available in OS X.

> OS X blows Windows UI out of the water.

I'm sorry but this just isn't true. I've used a MBP the last few years for my webdev work and spend most of my time in terminal, Chrome and ST3 avoiding the OSX interface whenever possible. Because the moment I open Finder and try to navigate, I wish I were using File Explorer instead.

Then I give a presentation, detach the HDMI cable, leaving my MBP screen unresponsive until I am forced to reboot, and I sigh.

> I'm sorry but this just isn't true. I've used a MBP the last few years for my webdev work and spend most of my time in terminal, Chrome and ST3 avoiding the OSX interface whenever possible. Because the moment I open Finder and try to navigate, I wish I were using File Explorer instead.

Can you expand on what is so egregious about Finder? Also in terms of apps on each platform I don't think you can really make a point about Windows beating out OS X. On average I've found OS X apps to be leaps and bounds over Windows equivalents.

> Then I give a presentation, detach the HDMI cable, leaving my MBP screen unresponsive until I am forced to reboot, and I sigh.

I've used an HDMI cable at work with my Mac weekly if not more often and I've never had that issue. As well as my extra monitors (one runs on HDMI and the other on Thunderbolt).

Daily Linux user here. I love the Windows 7 UI and would kill for the polish and consistency of the Windows UI in say KDE. I own a Mac too and I wouldn't even consider the OS X UI in the same league as Windows anymore, but it was superior back when XP was relevant.

The things I like better in OS X aren't really design features so much as, well, I don't know what you call them. App bundles are so much better than whatever MS has in store. The help in OS X is beautiful. I can still remember the day I gave my mum an old MacBook and showed her that she can basically search for a button she can't find in realtime and they'll point a huge arrow at it. The Windows help (still is?) really just a huge manual.

OS X help is amazing.... if they have what you are looking for. But this is a problem in all OS's and I do think that the "Show you where what you are searching for in the menus" is a huge UI/UX improvement over anything else. It's leaps and bounds above Windows "Here is a manual, good luck".

> App bundles are so much better than whatever MS has in store

Hm? The dmg files that you have to double-click on, manually drag into your app folder, then manually unmount from the desktop? Why do I still have to do all that busywork in 2015?

App bundles are folders with a file extension and a binary at a specific place. Folders that you can double click (and then some!) That's pretty great.

DMG files are a way to ship app bundles (or other files). They're basically images with compression and checksumming added on top (I think). Images are useful (compared to, say, a zip archive) because you can mount them (e.g., over a network). That's useful for all kinds of sysadmin-y things. (Compression and checksumming are obviously useful as well.)

I used Win7 extensively and I really don't agree. I think OS X is much more polished as well as better looking apps being available for OS X compared to Windows. As far as "kill for the polish and consistency of the Windows UI in say KDE" I agree, that's a huge pain point of mine on Linux desktops which is why I use OS X to get a unix-y environment with a beautiful interface.

I think Gnome in its recent versions is extremely polished and consistent. I know a lot of Linux users do not agree, but I really feel it's the best desktop out there currently, at least to my taste.