Why Unix-like systems are superior? Why there's only one

THEY ADHERE TO A STANDARD THAT ALLOWS FOR EASIER DEVELOPMENT SINCE COMMANDS, ENV VARS, ETC WORK IN FAMILIAR WAYS. THIS ONLY REALLY MATTERS IF YOU ARE A PROGRAMMER OR LIKE TO TINKER AROUND WITH BASH, THOUGH.

>>57787781
I'm taking the bait.
>Why Unix-like systems are superior?
u kék, not even UNIX authors considered it superiour.

>Why there's only one commercial choice (macOS) if they are superior?
>Solaris
>HP-UX
>AIX

Because standardized shit hinders innovation.

>>57787810
Why do Windows is so "programmers un-freindly"?

>>57787835

If so, why solaris are so unpopular among Dekstop OS?

>>57787843
CMD has completely different commands and syntax from BASH. You also have to set environment variables in a shitty way (set them through some gui, then you have to restart for them to take effect). It's also much harder to get packages that you need for things.

Though this all may be different now that windows 10 has bash. I haven't used it personally.

>>57787953
So, we only need to wait until Linux-on-Windows10 become popular?

>>57787965
Windows 10's anniversary update adds bash (similar command line to linux). Just install windows 10 and update fully. I'm not sure how ingrained it is, though. If it's like cygwin or whatever, that shit was garbage.

Do programmers use macOS because it's the only choice for programming?

>>57787781
>Why Unix-like systems are superior?

They aren't on a technical level, just on a price and "any recreated can contribute" level.

File: 1480287170425.jpg (50KB, 625x353px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 625x353px

>>57787781
UNIX was always shit, but it was the majority marketshare back in the day, thus if your shit was compatible with UNIX, that made it more functional.

Trying to be UNIX compatible in 2016 where desktop is 99% Win/Linux, servers are 100% Win/Linux, and phones are 90% Win/Linux is just retarded.

>>57787869
It's supposed to be a workstation os. You can find it some place.

>>57787781
>Why there's only one commercial choice (macOS) if they are superior?

Red Hat Enterprise Linux, Oracle Linux, SUSE Linux Enterprise Server

OS X isn't commercial. it's free.

>>57787781
>Why Unix-like systems are superior?
They're not perfect nor are they necessarily superior to any other OS family they just have a rather large amount of existing software and being compatible with *nix means you get access to that existing software. Unix-like OSes are like crowd-sourced OS development. It's the only notable family of OSes whose software is largely free and can be modified and redistributed by anyone.

>>57788266
I think servers are still split between three markets: Windows, Linux, and "Other"(typically commercial Unix derivatives and the BSDs)

>>57788076
What can we calle the best on technical level?

>>57790840