Why Microsoft Windows Is Better Than Open Source Operating Systems

One of the biggest questions in the world of Operating Systems is, will Open Source Operating Systems ever be able to compete Microsoft Windows operating systems or even come reasonably close to it, in terms of popularity?windows ubuntu Why Microsoft Windows Is Better Than Open Source Operating Systems

The debate is never-ending. While open source advocates talk endlessly and the Windows vs Linux discussion will go on for ever, about why Linux is superior to Windows, here are the reasons why I feel  Microsoft Windows wins over Open Source operating systems.

Linux vs Windows Comparision

1. No operating system is as user-friendly as Microsoft Windows. No one wants to write numerous lines of code if he/she can get the same work done by a few clicks. The user interface of Microsoft Windows is much better and easy to adjust as compared to the Open Source Operating Systems. This is due to the fact that Microsoft Windows is designed in such a way that even the most basic users can adjust to its interface.

2. Windows commands a market share of around 90% while Linux is still languishing at around 1%, even today. Due to its large user base, Microsoft Windows has a wide ecosystem and supports a large number of software which provides its users an opportunity to select software programs as per their need – many of it being free software too. Open Source operating systems also have a huge collection of supported software but in comparison to Microsoft Windows, they lag behind; seeing that most of the software programs are built while taking Microsoft Windows into consideration.

3. Open Source operating systems like the server editions based on Linux Kernel are often called the most secure operating systems. If not better in this regard, Microsoft Windows Server Editions are equally secure and they are constantly being made better day by day. The fact is because Windows is used by most people around the world, malware writers find it more profitable to attack Windows, hence it is hammered at more often. Nevertheless Windows Servers are known to recover faster from Security attacks than Linux.  If  Linux or Open Source was completely secure, would it have been possible to hack the Linux website itself? One has to understand and accept that, as the popularity of any OS increases, it too tends to come under the radar of malware writers, as we have seen in the case of Apple Mac also in recent times.

4. Microsoft Windows supports a wide range of hardware and most of the hardware manufactures support their hardware in Microsoft Windows due to its larger user base. On the other side, Open Source operating systems have a comparatively smaller user base and hence only some manufacturers support their hardware in Open Source operating systems like Linux.

5. It is a hard task to find support for Open Source operating systems as they are not used by majority of the population though some resources are available on the Internet in the form of Discussion Forums, eBooks and Community driven websites. In comparison, Microsoft Windows includes its own help section and there is a vast amount of resources available on the Internet and many books are available in the market for reference.

6. Starting with Windows 7, final release of Microsoft Windows usually have a negligible amount of bugs as it is tested by highly trained professionals at the Microsoft Corporation, its Beta testers and MVPs, and it goes through various test stages before its release. Microsoft is also usually quick to releases fixes if any are required. Open Source operating systems are also tested by professionals and they have both alpha and beta releases before their final release, yet they do have some bugs which are fixed by the updates and upgrades.

7. Then there is the questions of costs. Now this is one area where Windows loses out! Almost all of the Linux flavors are either free of cost or are available at a much lower price. Whereas for Windows you have to pay! While for the desktop version it may not matter much to many, in the Enterprise segment this becomes important. Maintenance cost of Linux is said to be rather low as compared to Microsoft Windows. This is therefore one of the fields where Microsoft Windows is facing a tough competition from Linux Flavors, esp in the Server segment.

You may also want to check out this webpage from Microsoft on Windows Server vs Linux  (UPDATE by Admin. 8th Nov: Thanks to a comment by Michael Carter, we now learn that this webpage/link has been taken down by Microsoft Canada, after posting this article) for further reading.

Please let us know your views also on this subject.

Posted by on , in Category General with Tags
This post has been submitted by a Guest Author. If you would like to submit a guest post, you may contact me on the mail ID mentioned in the About page.
  • Askubuntu

    @Abhinav : This server is running Linux + Apache not Microsoft IIS.

    Ask this website’s Admin why he is using an open source server OS (Bad Linux according to you) + WordPress (Open Source).

    BE HONEST WHILE WRITING.

  • Jim

    Why does this site like to promote inaccurate/fictitious MS hype rather than just write about the facts?

    “It is a hard task to find support for Open Source operating systems…” PLEASE! Have you tried to get anywhere with MS Support these days? Unless you speak one of the many middle-eastern dialects and actually find a service rep who cares about actually doing their job….MS Support is as useless as tits on a boar hog.

    “Windows Servers are known to recover faster from Security attacks than Linux.” True…but only because they have been built to recover quickly from security attacks rather than actually prevent them in the first place. BTW….Linux web servers far outnumber Windows web servers because Linux IS more secure.

    “If Linux or Open Source was completely secure, would it have been possible to hack the Linux website itself!” NOTHING is completely secure…ever. So to make a broad based statement like that only demonstrates a profound lack of knowledge and an intentional attempt to distort actual facts.

    Windows Club seriously need to get some contributes that are willing to write honestly rather than simply spout MS hype and BS….just sayin’

  • http://www.thewindowsclub.com Anand Khanse

    Ha Ha – I knew someone would mention this. Actually I am hosting this site on my friends server – and operating system was never a consideration. But yes – it is cheaper to host on Linux, no denying that!

  • http://www.thewindowsclub.com Anand Khanse

    When any MS tech related site promotes MS products – it is hype. But when any Linux related site promotes open source, it is fact! – Not fair. ;)

    When Windows gets hacked its is full of holes, but when Linux gets hacked – ‘Nothing is secure’! – Not fair again! :)

  • Caleb

    Can you Linux lovers explain to me, why if Linux is SO good, is only 1-2% of the world using it? … Anyone???

  • r0lZ

    Most of your arguments are either exaggerations or totally wrong.

    1. You have probably not used a Linux OS since many years. Currently, Linux is as easy as Windows, and even easier in some aspects. (For example, you can do ALL your software updates with a few clicks. In Windows, only Windows and M$ programs can be updated with Windows Update.) Also, with Windows, when you have to change something that is not officially supported by a control panel or program, the nightmare begins. I prefer to have to edit a config file from time to time than to edit the Windows registry!

    2. M$ has less than 80% of the market today, and Linux more than 5%. And if you add all “boxes” containing Linux Embedded (such as almost all modern DVD players, all routers and many media centers, Linux comes close to Windows. Of course, they are not full featured computers, and they do not need any software market, but it’s a fact that you should not ignore.)

    3. It is true that since Windows7, the security is correct. But it was so weak in previous versions of Windows! You cannot compare it with Linux! It’s mainly because Windows was so easy to attack that the cyber-criminality has dramatically increased during 20 years!

    4. Right, although most hardware is well supported under Linux.

    5. Support for many Linux flavours is much better than the extremely bad automated support found on the M$ site. (You can often find answers such as: Not currently possible. Workaround: do not try to do it!) Thanks to the open source community, it is ALWAYS possible to find the answer to a question about Linux. (And don’t forget that if you are a programmer, you can also analyse the source code.) Due to the black box philosophy of M$, it is only sometimes possible to have a partial answer to a question regarding Windows.

    6. Windows 7 is still full of extremely irritating bugs, and nobody at M$ seems to care! Vista has been the worst OS ever! It was so full of bugs that it must be considered as a pre-alpha release of Windows 7. But it has been sold! Yes, sold! And it was very expensive. How is it possible?
    There are much less bugs in Linux, mainly because it’s a simpler OS, and that everybody can contribute to fix the bugs.

    7. Absolutely correct! ;-)

    That being said, I use Windows 7 most of the time, just because there are much more programs available for W7 than for Linux. And that’s true also for free programs. Open source programs (such as Open Office) originally written for Linux are usually also available for Windows, and Windows has a billions of additional little freeware programs that have usually no equivalent in the Linux world. IMO, it’s a pity, but it’s a fact. And it compensates more or less the price you have to pay to buy the Windows license.

    I switch to Linux when I need to automate complex tasks. Computers are made to automate repetitive tasks, right? With Windows and the “mouse only” philosophy, it’s often impossible. A good reason to prefer Linux. (But I agree that automating tasks under Linux requires some knowledge.)

    The Windows/Linux war is stupid. You may prefer Linux or Windows, it’s a matter of taste. They are, globally, equally good. Writing articles like this one is useless, and IMO misleading. Only an equilibrated debate is valuable.

  • Brian Garrett

    I find it interesting that you’ve completely ignored everything Apple has done with the Mac OS – after all, Windows almost universally accused of copying the Mac OS and winds almost every shootout when it comes to “user-friendliness” – so Point 1 is misleading based on this omission.

    Point 2 also misses its mark. The Mac and iOS ecosystem is nearly crushing anything MS is putting out these days. Apple continues to have record quarters upon record quarters with double-digit growth in both hardware and software. If you go back in time, most of the major software packages of today came into power on the back of the Mac platform. Certainly there are other apps that have always been MS only that have done well, but again – to not mention Apple anywhere in this conversation and limit the OS choices to just Windows and Linux is far from a balanced evaluation. Head off to a college campus somewhere, or a developers convention and Apple represents at least 50% of the crowd. Head over to the mall in the middle of the week in the middle of the day. The Apple store is typically packed wall to wall with people where all the rest of the retailers are standing around looking for customers to talk to (if there are any).

    Point 3 finally mentions Apple, only as an excuse for the reason why MS Windows was such an afterthtought of security. It wasn’t until Windows was being crushed by spyware, malware, virus’ and other nefarious software that they redirected their efforts to come out with Windows XP SP 3 and fixed a good chunk of their issues. Yes I agree the Mac OS has its share of security issues which frustratingly Apple hasn’t done (in my opinion) a good enough of a job to address. But Windows of yesteryear was a magnet for virus activity. I once read a study that was done where Windows, straight out of the box, with no security on it could be infected in less than 20 minutes of being hooked up to the internet with no user interaction. That’s been fixed since (thank GOD), but even today users can get infected on Windows without their knowledge. At least on the Mac you have to actively agree to do something bad to infect your computer. Marketshare doesn’t mean you’re a target, it just means you have plenty of security opportunities.

    Point 4 – you’ve got me there. Mac OS and iOS runs on Apple hardware – period. But on the flip side, if it is built for the Mac, it literally “just works”. It has never been the case on Windows. I’ve spent literally hundreds of hours over my career hunting down drivers, patches and fixes for all this variable hardware. While Apple may age their hardware out with OS updates (you can’t run OS X on certain hardware models) – this can be a benefit and a curse. I can go out and buy a brand-new Intel-based hardware and run DOS on it if I want – however there won’t be any drivers to speak of much less any I/O devices that will probably work with the PCI architecture inside. So MS is stuck continuing to have to hang onto legacy parts of their OS in order to be backwards compatable to an extreme. Case in point – I really doubt that USB would be anywhere near as integrated today if it hadn’t been for Apple showing the way by ditching the floppy and ADB ports in favor of USB and CD-drives. But at least the hardware is less expensive.

    Point 5 – Your argument here is somewhat circular. For Linux you state that”some resources are available on the Internet in the form of Discussion Forums, eBooks and Community driven websites.” But then you talk about Windows “vast amount of resources available on the Internet and many books are available in the market for reference.” You mean this is the same Internet the resources are for Linux and Windows uses? And when was the last time you went to a book store? There’s TONS of books and resources out there for Linux and their respective applications – and I would dare say there are more resources for Linux than there is for Windows. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had a problem with something on Windows and found just the same amount of crazy forums on the web with the same person having the same problem with no resolution. At least with Linux you stand a chance of actually getting an email back from the developers or the group developing it. Oh – and also, I thought you said Windows was the easiest to use of the OSes? Why would you need a help function?

    Point 6 – Wow – so you’re going to judge an OS being better than another based simply on bugs? Interesting, but o.k. I agree Windows 7 is one of the best implementations MS has done. But Vista was absolutely horrible. So which version of Linux are you going to chastise for being buggy? And what are you determining to be a bug? Basically this whole point is one giant generalization.

    Point 7 – No argument here on the costs other than it will truly depend upon the organizations needs. If we’re talking servers, then that cost is going to rapidly come down as we move to a cloud-computing based environment. Granted the companies running the hosting companies will have to tangle with the costs in their pricing structure, but the end-users won’t ever see them. Most folks who get Windows get it with their new hardware. They use the hardware until they can’t take it anymore and then buy a new computer with an OS. A Linux user is more likely to tinker all the time. But until Linux can pass my “Mom-test” it won’t be viable for the masses. Now the Mac on the other hand passes the “Mom-test” and runs everything one would need to function in today’s world.

    Bottom line – this is a nice advertorial piece for Microsoft and Windows and not a real true analysis of what makes Windows “better” than Linux.

  • r0lZ

    Probably because when you buy a new PC, it is bundled with Windows! (That’s an unacceptable method to promote a product IMO!)

  • Shayanmansuri

    Are you sure there would be a winner or looser at all? If your OS of choice has more market share does it mean winning of the game? When this game would end?! because winner or looser determined at the end of the game?

    After all these philosophical facts, I’m happy with my windows 7, Linux mint debian and Gentoo linux operating system. Because I use them in their right place. I do expect linux to my new windows. Linux is linux not an equivalent of windows.

    My router, My server, My phone and My backup system are based on linux not windows. Does it mean that windows is a looser? I don’t think so. I don’t think linux is winner eather.

  • Caleb

    Oh really – then why aren’t new PC’s bundling Linux?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_4QYEH3JOXTDMTF2FPZCOOATM4M AsylumWarden

    “No operating system is as user-friendly as Microsoft Windows”

    Apple may disagree :-)

    Not a fanboy; just saying.

  • redk9258

    Didn’t Walmart try selling PCs with some form of Linux not to long ago? I guess it didn’t work out to well. I built my PC. I purchased and installed Windows.

    Linux isn’t very user friendly. There are only about 1000 different builds to choose from. That really helps. I’ve tried Ubuntu and Kubuntu. I don’t really care to use either over Windows.

    Of course they are more secure – hardly anyone uses them. Why would malware target something that is hardly used? The biggest security threat to Windows users are themselves.
    Don’t open unknown attachments.
    Don’t download crap you shouldn’t be downloading.
    Don’t click on any popups.

  • Jim

    Did he really just didn’t play the “Not fair” card like a 12 year old on the playground?

    I keep for getting that in the world of MS…exaggeration and lying are considered good marketing strategies.

  • Jim

    Because so many simple minded souls by into the BS/Hype spouted by people like Khanse.

    BTW…I am a Windows user. I just dont kid myself about its capabilities…especially in the area of security. Nor do I allow myself to be snowballed by “fluff” articles like the one above.

  • Joeschmoe2008

    “…The fact is because Windows is used by most people around the world, malware writers find it more profitable to attack Windows, hence it is hammered at more often. Nevertheless Windows Servers are known to recover faster from Security attacks than Linux. If Linux or Open Source was completely secure, would it have been possible to hack the Linux website itself?…”

    There needs some correction here. MS is attacked so often because 1. the OS is so popular and 2. there is the ability to successfully attack Windows. Part of the reason for this is that Windows prior to Vista was incredibly insecure. Another reason is that there is a difference when Linux downloads come from secure repositories while Windows downloads can come from essentially anywhere. Those two reasons are not exclusive, obviously. Android phones are very popular and many of the apps come from repositories (for non rooted phones). There are very few Android malware/variants considering the total number of Android OS in use.

    I don’t think it helps your case to speak about an operating system’s security based on whether a web site has been hacked since there are two totally different concepts in use.

  • H.Mahajan

    I don’t think that we exaggerate or lie at TWC for marketing. We are here to just present our views from our own perspective. You guys have your own perspective and that is perfectly fine with us but don’t make false accusation on TWC

  • Abhinav

    I don’t see why would you blame TWC authors. We have given our view on the topic and have not criticized Linux or any other Operating System. In fact, Linux too has been praised in the above article. Please refer to the point 7.

  • Uthea2011

    Get over it people I have 7 machines going in my home 24 hours all of them have both on them windows xp pro, win vista , 3 machines win 7home prem-ultimate-pro, win 8 beta, win me, and linux ubuntu, or kubuntu and mint or dual booted on all except the win me machine. So dual boot or shutup the only difference is windows cost more and is really not worth it am now trying a new mac air just soon as delivered this week.

  • Jim

    Point 7 is the ONLY point in the entire article wit any truth to it…the rest is a load of crap.

  • Jim

    The entire article is an exaggeration…and saying Windows is more secure than Linux is a flat out lie.

    Windows has NEVER been more secure…except in the fantasy world of MS fanboys/TWC writers.

    But I digress…it’s not like you can win a debate with a fanboy.

  • Domimik Hertel

    @Jim: You’re not helping Linux either with that attitude. I agree with you that the style of the article isn’t neutral but read the title of this website. Also it’s not clear if the untrue claims in the article come from ignorance, incompetence or just bad research on the topic (I suspect the latter). Also look at some pro-Linux comments here… there are false statements as well, eg. you couldn’t do automated stuff on Windows. There’s Powershell for that (which is much more capable than, say, bash imho) and a host of other scripting languages… Heck, there’s even windows binaries of the GNU software distribution, python, perl and whatnot.

    Personally I prefer Windows on the Desktop for very simple reasons:
    - Notepad++ – gedit is too simplistic for my taste, kate sometimes has issues with code folding and other stuff and vim or emacs have a too steep learning curve for my needs (though I might dive into it in the future when I’ve got some time on my hands)… I’ve yet to find an editor under linux that uses the scintilla engine as good as notepad++ does (go away with scite!)
    - MS Office – OpenOffice doesn’t stand a chance since Office 2007, let alone 2010… it’s sad, but it’s true… Also I HAVE to be able to process office 2010 documents without a fuss at work
    - Games – I played WoW in WINE a few years ago because pings were far better than under Windows and I could watch TV in another window at the same time. Nowadays I don’t play as excessively as then but I still play games regularly and I just don’t want to reboot just to play a game – especially because my desktop usage includes leaving a lot of stuff running at the same time that I would have to reopen/restore etc.

    At least at work I could mitigrate that issues by running an instance of windows in a VM, but regularly working with ms office in a VM just isn’t fun (let alone setting it up in WINE)

    That said I think the article wasn’t worth the read but so were most comments.

  • Domimik Hertel

    @Jim: You’re not helping Linux either with that attitude. I agree with you that the style of the article isn’t neutral but read the title of this website. Also it’s not clear if the untrue claims in the article come from ignorance, incompetence or just bad research on the topic (I suspect the latter). Also look at some pro-Linux comments here… there are false statements as well, eg. you couldn’t do automated stuff on Windows. There’s Powershell for that (which is much more capable than, say, bash imho) and a host of other scripting languages… Heck, there’s even windows binaries of the GNU software distribution, python, perl and whatnot.

    Personally I prefer Windows on the Desktop for very simple reasons:
    - Notepad++ – gedit is too simplistic for my taste, kate sometimes has issues with code folding and other stuff and vim or emacs have a too steep learning curve for my needs (though I might dive into it in the future when I’ve got some time on my hands)… I’ve yet to find an editor under linux that uses the scintilla engine as good as notepad++ does (go away with scite!)
    - MS Office – OpenOffice doesn’t stand a chance since Office 2007, let alone 2010… it’s sad, but it’s true… Also I HAVE to be able to process office 2010 documents without a fuss at work
    - Games – I played WoW in WINE a few years ago because pings were far better than under Windows and I could watch TV in another window at the same time. Nowadays I don’t play as excessively as then but I still play games regularly and I just don’t want to reboot just to play a game – especially because my desktop usage includes leaving a lot of stuff running at the same time that I would have to reopen/restore etc.

    At least at work I could mitigrate that issues by running an instance of windows in a VM, but regularly working with ms office in a VM just isn’t fun (let alone setting it up in WINE)

    That said I think the article wasn’t worth the read but so were most comments.

  • rodken

    Why Windows is better? Software! enough said.

  • Suck

    You are a xxxx idiot who likes to xxx xxxx xxxx.

  • http://www.thewindowsclub.com Anand Khanse

    Jim: Stop calling yourself a fanboy! :D

  • linuxdude1

    Why is Ubuntu/Linux better? Wine! enough said.

  • Michael Carter

    The one thing I always find that comes up in the Windows vs Linux debate is out-dated information. “No one wants to write numerous lines of code if he/she …” I haven’t found this to be true in years. Actually have my mother (in her 60s) using Linux and she’s no programmer. … and if your going to say “ya but you can support her” the questions I get are no different then the windows questions. Really the only lines of code I write these days are the NetBoot configuration so I can install install several computers at once without user intervention. (can even run the OS right from the network)

    Let’s have a look at Gnome-Shell 3.2 (Fedora) vs Windows 8 vs Unity (Ubuntu) vs KDE 4.7 (Fedora spin). Then let’s talk about “user-friendly”. In my opinion it’s getting harder and harder to pick a “best”. I stopped reading after point 1… Would be nice to see these “comparisons” be a little more objective.

    Oh and by the way seems Microsoft has taken down this link http://www.microsoft.com/canada/windowsserver/compare/reports.mspx

    I was actually looking for it which brought me here.

  • Michael Carter

    My 2 cents… according to http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp it’s 5.1%… As for why… my take it’s almost impossible to buy a computer that doesn’t come with Windows (what I call the $100-200 windows tax). Linux is free, so futureshop, walmart, etc aren’t going to make any money by giving away the OS.

    The line that Windows is better because it’s +80% of the market share is like saying one race is better than another because the breed faster… But that’s just my opinion.

    Personally I like being in the 5% It settles telemarketing calls and online scams real quick… “… I don’t have a start button…. regedit says command not found…” ;)

  • Michael Carter

    Very true… but as I’ve asked others… what software you running. Most people I talk to say firefox, chrome, or something like that… Those run on Linux too.

    So how true is that these days?

    I can understand if your running AutoCad, or iTunes to power a AppleTV… (Both my father and I access windows via RDP) But 95% of our needs are met with Linux which in our circumstantial Linux is much faster and easier to manage.

  • linuxdude1

    I will agree that wine doesn’t run all Windows software, but it runs a lot for me. And I don’t use chrome or any other browser inside of wine. I use wine for games and other applications “exclusive” to Windows. And just in case, I have a dual boot pc, so if I absolutely need to, I can run the software on my Windows partition. But I haven’t had to boot into Windows ever since I switched to Ubuntu, and I hope I never never have to again!

    Besides, I have found a free alternative to every exclusive Windows app on Ubuntu. Plus, Ubuntu is much faster than Windows 7 for me.

  • http://techeverytime.com Ankur

    This is quite unfortunate that Windows gets a pro just because it is more popular. This does not mean Linux is not good.

    Is it Linux mistake that manufacture’s dont make drivers for it?
    I am huge fan of windows too but this not mean I would say its ” better ” .

    Also, I agree to some of your point but definitely not that hacking point of linux website. If Linux people start talking about hacking windows server, then it would put it to shame as there are much more examples for windows hacking.

  • Jesse Litton

    Because Microsoft gives the OEMs the operating system for less than a tenth of what MS will charge you for the first upgrade. OEMs perpetuate the MS lock-in because they know most people (like the author of this article) don’t know anything about non-Windows operating systems and their relative merits.

    The simple fact of the matter is that unless you’re a Windows gamer, Linux is every bit as good as Windows – even better in a lot of areas, and not run by company that has continually acted in an anti-competitive anti-consumer manner. If you are a Windows gamer, then you probably want Windows.

  • http://twitter.com/fondoflinux Shankara Narayanatry

    I am using linux and only linux from past 5 years. I have added( very easily in deed) new printer( using driver from the printer vendor). Many of my friends and colleagues are using it in their laptop and netbooks( they are using wireless adapter to connect to internet). Just see the community page of any linux distribution for supported hardwares. You will see the fact.

    Ubuntu( like this there are plenty of distributions) can be installed with 5 mouse clicks. Can Windows be installed like that? Ubuntu(like this there are plenty of distributions) can be used with live cd or a pendrive. Can windows be used like that?

    Android is becoming very popular and it’s kernal is Linux. Total market share will change to Linux’s favor.

    @ Pint 6. Windows releases updates quickly? , lol. Being open source linux gives updates very quickly after finding the problem. There are many developers who scan the code. In windows only Microsoft employees see that and their resource is limited compared to Linux’s.

    I am complaining Microsoft’s business model. It was good and it made them great. Now, this is time for change. Open source business model is better then closed source model in certain categories and operating system is one among them.

  • Killing4sports

    well i tried ubuntu and i think it looks nice, and its real easy to use just up until the point when you want to change something. then it gets real complicated. like adding chrome flags to disable disk cache and media cache. in win7 it’s one right click and typing the flag. in ubuntu i’m suppose to install unity launcher editor which then complains that i havent told some launchpad my login? or when i want to see what’s on c: and what’s on d:, i go to the file manager, nautilus i think it is, and i only see folders but not what drive they’re on? or that stupid envelope on the unity panel, i deinstalled all the connectivity stuff, since i don’t need ubuntu one, or that messenger it comes with, but the envelope just stays their. what i did like is that chrome 64 bit scored around 20% higher on peacekeeper than 32 bit chrome on win 7 64bit. hope google moves chrome for win to 64 bit too soon.

  • uther4

    how much you get paid to say all that good stuff about windows and tear down linux, because personally I would never buy another windows os esspecially win 8 , i been using linux versions for 7 years and will keep using it and now will no longer be checking this site out everyday since you are all this about windows and downing linux software wait till i copy all this info you said onto my linux blog maybe other people will quit reading here.

  • Ancalagon

    Wine is a joke! I had many problems trying to run Windows programs on Wine.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZHFO7OHXNKT563VSU2SQMGUF4U Ivan

    Ubuntu is getting locked down worse than Mac and most certainly not a representation of diverse Linux market. It is still far more flexible than Windows™ Debian based systems are statistically more stable and ‘user friendly’ but ‘user friendly’ is a subjective term. Changing a variable from 0 to 1 versus navigating through GUI. Linux assumes by default you know EXACTLY what you’re doing while Windows™shapes your knowledge. User market share is defined by convenience and your average user. To simplify it’s like changing your own oil vs taking it to service station. In both cases there are set of benefits and drawbacks. Linux was never meant to be a commercial and widespread OS simply because majority of people don’t think in code.
    as for server space, cost, flexibility and scalability always win over convenience. I will not touch security as it’s probably more subjective than ‘user friendly’

  • Peter

    Money money money. I prefer to say that Windows is being sold with PC’s, in stead of bundled. Shops aren’t gonna install Linux just for the consumer when they can’t charge for it.

  • http://spookscentral.com/ Kurt Barlow

    lmao this article is amusing. Just so you know, ive single handedly converted over 35 people to linux right at the moment their windoze machine had a virus, crash, or myriad of other common windoze problems. Im off to add yet another later today. To answer the much asked question “would you like to reboot now?” NO. I dont want to reboot. I want to use my ******** computer, thanks anyway.

  • Xwindows

    LOL you are a stupid idiot asshole. you never know how much effort those developer done to make wine. idiots motherfucker.

  • WindwosXD

    And you pirate software I know XD. Even I bet you are running a pirated windows OS.

  • Bitwize

    Effort does not equal quality.

    Wine does work, but it is not nearly as good as just using Windows (I have used Wine many times, and always find it lacking somewhere [sound, video, even getting a Windows program to install]).

  • Bitwize

    I have used Linux off-and-on for over 8 years. I can say that Linux is not ready for normal, non-tech savvy people.

    Until the day where Windows users can use their software and hardware on Linux without much if any trouble, Linux will not get anywhere close to Windows.

    (If stores sold all Linux computers, then they would probably hear from many many customers about problems they have encountered.)

    Windows is more user-friendly in my opinion.

    Windows is used by a ton of people, hence almost everyone will know how to use a little bit of it.

  • Ancalagon

    You lousy piece of shit! You have absolutely no idea how much trouble I went through trying to get them to work properly on Wine.

  • Human Being

    1. No operating system is as user-friendly as Microsoft Windows. No one wants to write numerous lines of code if he/she can get the same work done by a few clicks.

    I myself find Linux Mint much more friendly than Windows.

  • Guest

    I have used Windows off-and-on for over 8 years. I can say that Windows is not ready for normal, non-tech savvy people.

    Until the day where Linux users can use their software and hardware on Windows without much if any trouble, Windows will not get anywhere close to Linux.

    (If stores sold all Windows computers, then they would probably hear from many many customers about problems they have encountered.)

    Linux is more user-friendly in my opinion.

    Linux is used by a ton of people, hence almost everyone will know how to use a little bit of it.

    —-

    Interesting how the operating systems could be reversed in your comment and make just as much sense…

  • Bitwize

    Linux is not user friendly. If it were, then why would so many people use Windows?

    What is more user-friendly to the average user (i.e. someone’s grandma) in Linux than Windows?

    If I installed Linux on all my family and friends computer, they would be calling me up all the time asking for help, something does not work, my new printer/scanner does not work, my new camera does not work, my dual-monitor setup does not work, all (or probably most if using Wine) my Windows software does not work, my new video game does not work, etc.

    Until the day where Windows users can use their software and hardware on Linux without much if any trouble, Linux will not get anywhere close to Windows.

  • Guest

    1. Whether Linux is user friendly is rather subjective. If one really looks at both OSes, the day-to-day stuff that most users do (email, web browsing, music, run the occasional application) is pretty straight forward in both operating systems. So I’m having a hard time believing that one is easier than the next. If anything, the vast majority of Linux distributions have a repository where a user can search for software and install it with little effort (I’ll use Ubuntu here for examples for consistency).

    2. It’s not an issue of *more* user friendly (which I might argue is true regardless), but is Linux good enough for the average user? I believe that it is: the kernel is monolithic, with the vast majority of hardware already supported (ie. no driver installs or hunting hardware manufacturer’s websites to find the right driver while using a ‘broken’ OS); software is easily installed with packages like Ubuntu’s Software Center or Aptitude; plus, there is a plethora of available software–far more free, open software than Windows.

    3. Perhaps this was the case 5+ years ago, but the current state of Linux is very usable for the end-user. I have a dual-monitor setup in Unity which was instantly recognized on install, printers have made leaps and bounds improvements with support (even including wrappers which can support Windows drivers for the really pesky devices). Essentially what I’m attempting to say is that the hardware support is much better under Linux for many devices than Windows.

    I had an older Wifi card which only had drivers for Windows XP not that long ago. Windows 7 *would not* use the old drivers, however there were drivers in the Linux kernel which were pre-installed by Ubuntu which allowed it to work just fine. Despite searching for hours, I was not able to get this card to work on Windows 7…I was forced to replace it with a newer model.

    As for Windows software not working on Linux…well, what do you expect? It’s a different operating system. Would you argue the same for a Mac? 25 years ago, there were multiple different ‘PC’ architectures like Amiga, C64, IBM PC, and Apple with no interoperability of software between the two; this is nothing new. Take this another way: I want to run Gnome on Windows 7. Can I? Nope. It’s for UNIX-based systems only. But I should be able to…right?!?! Microsoft needs to fix this!

    To address the difficulty of Linux point, I have put Linux on computers of computer-illiterate family members, given them a short tutorial, and away they went. There were a few hiccups when it came to running Flash videos and some proprietary formats like DVDs, but those were easily resolved by a quick email with detailed instructions. And before you jump on that, those things are left out of the default install on purpose–they are proprietary formats and are not able to legally be installed along with the OS (even Windows doesn’t install Flash out of the box. DVD codecs require a licence, which Microsoft pays for each install of Windows).

    4. Again, I don’t buy this argument. It has nothing to do with hardware and software being able to be run on Linux, it has to do with public perception and marketing strategies by a for profit institution versus the perception that Linux is ‘hard’ by the public and spreading via word of mouth and the efforts of a company like Canonical which is nowhere as big as Microsoft and hasn’t been ingrained in the PC market like Windows has.

  • Bitwize

    1) Most people go to the store and/or shop online for software. Probably 90% of that is Windows only.

    Also Linux may not have software that the customer needs to use or is used to using.

    Trying to change someone over from using a program (like Photoshop or Microsoft Outlook/Office/Excel]) on Windows to something on Linux is not going to be real easy in my opinion.

    2) Linux does not support devices like printer and scanners very well. Try to buy a new printer from Office Depot or Best Buy and see if it works out of the box in Linux without much hassle. Windows, most of the time for me, works with little or no hassle at all when installing drivers. Hence, for me (and many other people) Windows is more user-friendly in this regard.

    3) I cannot say that all dual-monitor setups won’t work with Linux, but since I (and I assume you) have not tried all the monitor hardware on Linux.

    Linux runs smooth when it is used for basic things.

    However, in my opinion, most people would hit road-bumps when they start using Linux for anything other than web browsing, word processing (without trying to print or scan), e-mail, maybe instant messaging, etc.

    I do not disagree that Linux can run several pieces of hardware out-of-the-box. However, for devices like printers, scanners, video cards, maybe even sound cards you would probably want a driver from the manufacturer (which even if they do have a driver, it might not be compatible with your Linux distribution, unless you compile from source, assuming they give you the source code) and if it is compatible with your Linux distribution, it would probably be a 50/50 chance of it installing smoothly.

    However, Windows can also run several pieces of hardware out-of-the-box (I would still recommend installing the drivers from the manufacturer though; drivers for me 98% of the time are very easy to install).

    I would have much more confidence in buying a printer, video card, or even a dual-monitor setup with using Windows.

    Also, even though there are proprietary things that Linux leaves out for legal reasons, no average user is really going to care. All they see is “it does not work right away like Windows” (or even Mac OS X). Which this makes that distribution of Linux not user-friendly.

    4) It does have to do with hardware and software. If Linux would run every piece of hardware almost flawlessly and almost every Windows software flawlessly (using Wine or had good equivalents), then you would have a massive amount of people switching to Linux.

    People want things to just work, not having to worry about “will Linux ‘approve’ of my setup”.

    I know there are alternative programs in Linux to replace Windows programs, but a professional photo editor would probably prefer to keep using Adobe Photoshop, instead of Gimp (which he probably has either not heard of before or never used before even if he has heard of it).

    People want to use software they know work and are comfortable with (there are many people who would switch to a Linux alternative if it was a real alternative, not something that is just not-that-polished unlike the Windows program.

    People would except to use all of their software they paid for, not having to find free alternatives to replace all the software they spent money for (and some they found that worked well and is free on Windows).

    I would like to run my expensive video card with the assurance that nVidia will do their best to write drivers that will work well with Windows.

    No company would want to shovel out a lot of money to pay programmers to write drivers for Linux that has no real company or person behind it (it is a free-for-all OS).

    In the end, Windows and Linux are operating systems that run tasks for people. It is up to you, me, and others to choose what each of us like best. There is no one correct answer to this.

    Windows allows people to just do several things without a lot of hassle most of the time. Linux allows people to run a lot of stuff for free and to tinker with the OS (while, in my opinion, it can be easily used if only doing basic stuff). There is nothing wrong with either of them. They both satisfy the needs of people.

    P.S. I don’t just-not-use-Linux (I use it on my home router and use it to help me run web-server performance tests), but I just prefer using Windows.

  • Alberto Chavez

    Linux also have bad users… and guess what happens when somebody opened an unknown attachment, downloaded crap that shouldn’t have downloaded or click on popups?
    Let me tell you “Permission denied”

    What happens when you do the same thing on Windows?
    Pop ups all over your computer telling to download emoticons.

  • Alberto Chavez

    I don’t think you’re right. The other day I was trying to install a Printer in my Aunt’s computer and I couldn’t do it without the drivers, and there was no internet connection available to download them. I told her: “Let me plug the printer into my laptop” because she really needed to print something, and the printer worked right away… no configuration.

    She wondered why? I told her because it’s linux and it works out-of-the-box there’s no need to tweak or code anything if you don’t want to.

  • Alberto Chavez

    people don’t buy things because of its user friendliness… it comes built-in that’s why it has a huge market share. Microsoft convinced (paid) companies to accept this deal. Apple is way more user friendly than Windows by far.

    Also… most phones, DVDs, GPS and other embedded devices come with a flavor of Linux installed. Did you know Sony allowed to install Linux on the PS3? Why Linux? why not Windows? Because Linux is better.

  • Bitwize

    People may not always buy things because of user-friendliness, but once they try Windows and Linux, they more than likely will find Windows to be much more user-friendly.

    Linux being chosen to be put on the PS3 does not mean that Linux is better than Windows.

  • Bitwize

    You got lucky. Try buying two or three different printers from Best Buy or Office Max and see if they work out of the box (with the scanner working too if it comes with the printers).

    A lot of hardware works out of the box with both Windows and Linux. If I bought a brand new nVidia graphics card, it would more than linkly run much better on Windows than Linux.

    Don’t think I hate Linux, but I really prefer using Windows.

    http://scalibq.wordpress.com/2010/10/04/linux-unix-bsd-what-does-it-all-mean-and-where-does-windows-fit-in/

  • Bitwize

    Really it is the user’s fault if they open up unknown attachments.

    If more Windows users would run Windows without Administrator privileges by default (UAC in Windows does help, but I doubt it is full proof), there would be less OS mess-ups.

    The best thing for a Vista/7/8 Windows user to do is make themselves a separate limited user account. Then when they need to access something that requires Administrator, they type in their username and password to gain access to Administrator privileges.

    UAC is like an instant sudo. However running an account with limited privileges, is like running accounts of off Linux.

    Running Windows XP as Administrator (not limited account) was like running Linux in root all the time.

    If more users would have run limited accounts, there probably would have been fewer compromised/messed-up Windows XP computers.

  • Kurt Barlow is an asshole

    Ah, shut up, you lousy Linux zealot! Go crawl back under your rock.

  • http://spookscentral.com/ Kurt Barlow

    Wow, what a compelling comeback. Why dont you scan for viruses, and reboot or something.

  • http://spookscentral.com/ Kurt Barlow

    Because Microsoft has a monopoly and the general public is completely unaware there is a better way.

  • http://spookscentral.com/ Kurt Barlow

    This is completely false. I experience quite the opposite. When I set someone up with linux, I never hear from them again about problems. Stop with the FUD.

  • http://spookscentral.com/ Kurt Barlow

    Yes, they can charge for linux installations. You misunderstand the situation.

  • http://spookscentral.com/ Kurt Barlow

    Dont download crap you shouldnt be downloading, attachments or popups. lmao

  • Bitwize

    With all due respect, Windows is more user-friendly than Linux (Ubuntu is one of the more user-friendly Linux distributions).

    Linux is not overall user friendly for most people. I pretty much can guarantee you that if I setup Linux for my family member’s computers, they would be coming to me frequently asking me questions about how to do different things.

    Why does my printer not print or scan? Why does Microsoft Office not install? Why don’t all my games work fine under wine? (I have gotten games to work under wine, so it does work, but the success rate is not very high)

    I am not spreading FUD. I have used Linux off and on for over 7 years. I know I can make due with Linux if I had/want to, but, in my opinion, a lot of average computer users would not like to use Linux.

    It’s 2013 and Linux still hasn’t gotten far (it is getting better, but not perfect) with user-friendliness. If all the Linux programmers (and anyone else working on Linux) would
    work together to make one distribution, we might see faster improvement in the
    user-friendliness department (since everyone would be focused on one distribution, not 50+ distributions).

  • http://spookscentral.com/ Kurt Barlow

    This is such a non argument. It takes no special knowledge to use a computer running linux. These arguments that are being made make it seem like 1997 in here. They are invalid. Grandma can use linux and does.

  • Bitwize

    Doing basic stuff with Linux is easy. However, when you start needing to look for that driver (for your printer and/or scanner, camera, game controller, gaming keyboard [not your typical keyboard], etc.) because the device ends up not working out of the box, you can have trouble (like no Linux driver at all or no driver for the distribution of Linux that you are using) then you are stuck (unless you want to make a driver for it yourself).

    From my experience, Linux just is not ready for the public (Android is a great example of Linux working well for the public, however a comapny, Google, is behind it (similar to Microsoft behind Windows and Apple behind MacOS X).

    Windows succeeds, not because Windows does everything better than Linux (like acting as a router for your network and Internet), but because the user can actually sit down and 90% of the time stuff will work out of the box, or they just have to pop in the CD/download the drivers off the Internet and install them, then the device(s) start working or the device(s) may work even better than the generic driver(s) that Windows gave you.

    I would say, a lot of companies would not want to shovel out a lot of money to pay programmers to write drivers for Linux that has no real company or person behind it (it is a free-for-all OS, more than one company supports their version of Linux, unlike Windows and MacOS X which have one company that mainly supports them).

    In the end, Windows and Linux are operating systems that run tasks for people. It is up to you, me, and others to choose what each of us like best (and even need to use).

  • Ed

    Linux > Windows because its free. Unless of course it doesn’t work. Then the $600 cost of win server looks pretty good compared to the team of 3 $100 an hour techs that you have to bring in to fix the linux setup for the week.

  • http://spookscentral.com/ Kurt Barlow

    Drivers. Device drivers are included in the Linux kernel. When you install Linux, you immediately have a working computer. I submit that it is easier to install Linux because of this. Its to the point where I find windows a huge pain in the ass to use. You spend more time babying it to get it to keep running with viruses scans, etc.

    Popping in the CD that is 99% of the time nowhere to be found just is not that convenient when you have no driver for ethernet. Im not talking about myself or yourself because I know that you and I know where our CDs are.

    Windows has succeeded in the past because they have monopolized the market with their inferior software. Windows 8 is the most ridiculous release I’ve ever seen, and I believe it is the beginning of the end for Microsoft. Granted, they may well be around another 10 or 20 years, but they do not innovate on the level that open source does.

    I could go on and on with this tired argument, but yes, in the end use what you want. I am just very well aware of the differences, and I really am unable to use microsoft any longer due to the way it works compared to Linux. I wish that people were not so afraid of the word Linux. It is kind of sad really. It is nothing to be afraid of and really is better in the opinions of us who know.

    Maybe we need to change the name from Linux to Happy Butterflies.

  • Bitwize

    [Please note that I mean no disrespect with my replies.]

    Remember that not every single device driver will be included in the Linux OS (the same applies for Windows as well). Of course, a lot of typical devices will be supported out of the box (with the main exception of printers/scanners).

    Windows has worked, for me, almost everything I have plugged into the computer. Of course, I would want (for the exception of my on-board audio device), use the manufacturer’s driver(s) for my device(s).

    Sure, my video card would work ok with generic Microsoft drivers, but nVidia’s drivers work better.

    If I bought a $200.00 capture card, and the only drivers that were available from the manufacturer were Windows (and maybe MacOS X) drivers, would I be happy? Nope. Would I want to search the Internet for one driver that *might* work? Nope. Would I have to use Windows? Probably (unless I “struck gold” finding a compatible driver).

    Yes, of course, it is always a good idea to find out if the device you are going to buy will work with Linux, but who wants to do that?

    ————–

    “Popping in the CD that is 99% of the time nowhere to be found just is not that convenient when you have no driver for ethernet.”

    True! However, I have *very* rarely had *on-board* Ethernet not work out of the box in Windows or Linux. However, Windows will need a driver for a PCI Ethernet card, or a wireless card (at least that was the case for me every time I used PCI Ethernet/Wireless cards on Windows; may not be the case for other people).

    Linux I know will work fine (in my experience) out of the box with both PCI Ethernet cards and wireless cards, but how do I know that the driver Linux is using to run my PCI Ethernet card/wireless card is making the most out of my hardware (probably will be a generic driver).

    ————–

    “Windows has succeeded in the past because they have monopolized the market with their inferior software.”

    I don’t disagree that Microsoft has taken over a lot of the desktop market, but I would not call all Microsoft software “inferior software”.

    Windows works well for many people. Why would someone want to switch from something that works to something else that may not work for them? Don’t fix what is not broken!

    I like the fact the Windows uses ACLs (Access Control Lists) for managing permissions. ACLs allow you to be more flexible in setting security permissions, unlike the Read/Write/Execute permissions on Linux. Linux can use ACLs too, but I have never come across a Linux distribution that used ACLs by default (instead of the Read/Write/Execute permissions).

    Quote from a blog comment (source link below the quote):

    “Jed, one of the points of ACLs compared to
    traditional unix user/group is that it’s a fair amount more flexible (not just with the actual permissions, but also the specific users and groups) – and it would seem that even *u*x users agree, since there’s work on supporting ACLs for both Linux and BSD (they were rather limited
    last time I checked, though). And it’s not like this is some new and evil MS/Windows creation, the idea was adopted from VMS.

    The way security is implemented on NT also lets you *drop* rights, something that afaik isn’t possible with vanilla posix (but eventually the linux guys Saw That It Was Good(TM) and implemented special APIs for
    it…).

    You don’t just SET permissions on created objects, controlling which entities can access them, you can also specify the permissions you need
    when *opening* an object – so even if your process was exploited, you can mitigate how much damage can be done.

    It’s also baked into pretty much every part of the NT kernel, everywhere you deal with objects… there’s a LOT of APIs that take a SECURITY_ATTRIBUTES.”

    - Source: http://scalibq.wordpress.com/2011/06/25/os-xsafer-by-design/#comment-279

    http://www.suse.de/~agruen/acl/linux-acls/online/

    Quote from blog post (source link below quote):

    “As for Windows vs linux… The above has shown that Windows is still the OS to beat when it comes to graphics/gaming. And Direct3D is still outperforming OpenGL. And if you’ve been using Windows as a serious desktop system, you were probably already aware of its rather aggressive scheduling of applications, which makes the system very responsive. I
    have recently gotten some Mac Mini G4 machines, at 1.42 GHz, with OS X 10.5.8 on them. And I quickly got annoyed by how unresponsive they became when you tried to do some serious stuff. Clearly OS X is not as
    good as Windows when it comes to priority boosts and such. I’ve used Windows on much slower single-core systems than a G4 1.42 GHz, but the responsiveness was certainly better than on the G4s. My experiences with desktop linux and FreeBSD were much the same as OS X: the OS does not seem to put a lot of effort into making the GUI responsive. As they say: you don’t know what you’ve got until it’s gone.”

    - Source: http://scalibq.wordpress.com/2013/07/19/linux-the-dunning-kruger-os/

    ————

    Well, let’s go and enjoy the operating systems we use!

  • rjh58

    Also, I remember when MS strong-armed all OEM’s into having to have windows on every machine they sold, if they wanted to be able to sell MS on any machine what so ever. That was back in 95. I also remember some of the scare tactics MS used and incorporated in their older OS’s to frighten people away from any alternatives. Very poor, but effective practices. Why couldn’t they win on excellence rather than deceit? I also worked at Wordperfect back in the day. MS was very underhanded in their stealing of technology developed by others. For some reason, they really had a hard time coming up with innovations back then. They had to steal the best idea’s cuz they floundered in that arena. Sad :(

  • Jason

    Is this a troll website? 6- bugs, bugs, and more bugs – why else would Windows constantly have to update? What’s more, it does so in the most annoying way possible- constantly bugging you and shutting down randomly regardless of whether you’re doing something. With linux, you control when you update, and the software you update is stuff you actually see…like firefox. That, and it updates everything. With Windows updates, it’s always some weird security hole in the OS that gets repaired, and each program has to ask you to update it independently. 5 – tons of forums, wikis, etc, which are actually useful (unlike MS forums- where the mods don’t even know what a kernel is) + call centers for Suse and RedHat and a few others; 4 – You’ve got to be kidding me. I have linux on my iPhone, my Playstation 3, all of my computers (from 95 to 2013!), and my ARM tablet. I can’t find a single MS port for any of these (save the computers)…;3 – less than 50 viruses over all time for Linux vs over 100,000 for Windows….and most servers run Linux (around 58% (conservative case) compared to Windows’ 38% (high case)) – including a much stronger majority of Fortune 500 servers, so if anything Linux should be a bigger target; 2 – there is much more software for Linux than there ever will be for Windows – and it’s more easily accessible and reliable than stuff you have to find floating on the internet since it can be taken easily from package managers and trusted repositories; 1 – a recent study showed that nursing home patients who’ve never used computers found Ubuntu more user-friendly than Windows.

    It’s honestly hard to believe that this website and this forum isn’t made by people who want a good laugh. Anyone with any familiarity between the two operating systems can see the falsehood in everything here except number 7.

  • http://www.thewindowsclub.com Anand Khanse

    Enjoyed reading your post.

    No, this is not a troll website, but you do sound like one! Windows gets attacked, because it is used by around 90% of the users. Now that Mac share is touching 10%, you suddenly have a lot of Mac malware reports and security companies launching antivirus software for Mac. After all, who would want to attack an operating system which has a market share of just 1-2%. :D

  • Gnu

    I installed Linux Mint to my grandma’s computer. She is calling me and asking for help, mostly because she doesn’t know where to type “facebook”. Often, she forgets to hit Enter and wonders what went wrong. In other words, all problems she has on Mint are computer-newbie problems she would have on Windows too.

    Curiously enough, only thing that isn’t always working properly on her computer is Skype, which is, incidentally, maintained by Microsoft.

    Microsoft software is generally poor. All market share they have was won by a few great business decisions and insane amounts of marketing. And they kept abusing that influence ever since in order to keep the monopoly.

    There is very little truth in this article. Points number 2 and 7 are valid, but do some research on the rest, because I’m too lazy to dismiss them one by one.

  • Mike Chambers

    Why didn’t Sony allow Windows to install on the PS3? Erm, maybe because there’s no PowerPC version of Windows? Stupid argument.

  • Mike Chambers

    Well that’s the exact opposite of my experience.

  • Tristam

    I don’t care about all the hype-it’s everywhere, in every OS forum. What I care about is the UI- Windows 8.1 vs PickADistro(no 3rd party apps). Winner: PickADistro, cuz every distro has better UI than Windows 8.1. And BTW, the Windows login screen is a LIE – the OS is still loading after u sign in. File copy is also a lie – Windows keeps copying files in the background, even after the operation is complete (but Windows is smart enough to normal-copy on USBs and portable drives – have you noticed the faster USBs copy slower than internal HDDs?) Don’t get me started on security: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_malware a little info about malware on Linux; some info of the “latest and most dangerous LInux virus” http://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/view/34349/hand-of-thief-trojan-has-no-claws/ ; if you use Windows, u MUST have heard about PCWorld – one of the less hyped magazines. So take a look at that: http://www.pcworld.com/article/202452/why_linux_is_more_secure_than_windows.html . Enough? Glad to hear it. Have a nice day!

  • rizz2pro

    I loved number 1. “Nobody wants to write code when you can get things done in 1 click”.

    Windows if for techs who dont want to have to think..go through install wizards and have their hand held without really having to learn how things work.

    Oh crap..a bug..I guess ill just wait for an update from Microsoft…oh look now I need to reboot…darn. Downtime.

    A smart linux tech will look at the code and if hes smart enough, fix it himself and then spread the word. Collaboration beats waiting for Microsoft to come around whenever they please.

    I thought it was funny how this site runs iff Linux too. For an end user at home, ill give it to windows. As far as servers go, no way Windows can win. Just no way.

    I didnt make it to your #2 point I am afraid to see whats next. Lol

  • rizz2pro

    Omg I couldnt help myself but read some more.

    “Windows supports more hardware platforms than Linux”

    Ok im done. Im out of here.

    Wow.

  • Recent Comments