"Why Windows is better than Linux"

[fangorn]

Have to put in my opinion here too

I do use linux since 1994 (Suse 4.x at the time, shame on me) and have been using Windows in parallel. After university I had a job as windows database application programmer and Hotline service for our software. This said is clear, I was called every time when someone who knew me had a problem with windows. Surprising how many people knew me.

Then I stopped using windows. I quit my job, got a new one, put everything I knew about windows into subcontious, and slept lighter. After a month or so of telling "I dont know a crap about windows any more." The late evening calls stopped. And in the meantime I can easily convert people to let me install a linux distribution (Ubuntu mostly) for them if they have a wiindows problem. I never had complaints about errors, problems, ...

Ok, these are people like my parents. They use the computer to write text, Email, surf the web for cooking recepies, sort and burn their digital images, ... Nothing special. They just never felt the urge to switch to something else than windows. The system was preinstalled on the computer, and they never intended to change something about it. And when there is a problem, you know someone who can fix it. I give them a system with all the functions they need easily accessible, all the mime-types connected, and no root password. The machines do ntp on startup, and for their purpose security updates are not that necessary.

I never had any complaints from this people. The machines do what is expected from them.

Sure, this user profile does not fit everybody. And not everybody has someone at hand, that can give him such a tailored installation. But if one of the majors started selling preconfigured linux PC's, these users could be as happy with it as with windows to say the least.

Ok. You cannot get the self called "Power Users" (short term for windows users reading the magazines and able and willing to hack in each and every tip published in them) that know "everything about Computers" and are just able to memorize 20 registry hacks, they can boldly forget when the next windows version arrives. But do we want these users in the Linux Community? I can live happily ever after, if these people are happy with their gameloader OS and I dont have to read their postings.

fangorn

[Fluenza]

I'll offer a funny little anecdote. I started using Linux because my Classic Mac OS machines were getting long in the tooth. There were just too many things that I wasn't able to do with Mac OS 9. Or, at the very least, there were too many things that I wasn't able to do well with Mac OS 9.

A friend of mine gave me an old Intel box to play with, and I toyed with the idea of using Windows 98. I figured that Windows 98 would give me the ability to do the things that I wasn't able to do in Mac OS 9, and I would continue to use my old Macs for everything that I didn't want to do in Windows. However, before installing Windows, I decided to give Linux a go. I first installed Ubuntu and was kind of impressed with it. Then I installed Debian and really got into it. I found that I could do everything that I needed to do in Linux, and that I could do it very well.

It's been about a year now since I started using Debian and I hardly touch my Macs for anything. I never did install Windows and I have no interest or need of ever installing it. I like the free software that is available for my Linux box and the operating system itself is a joy to work with. I found that my Gnome desktop could be just as pretty as anything that Apple or Microsoft offers. The applications that are available freely for Linux are just as good or better than many of the high-priced commercial offerings for the other platforms. But most importantly, Linux gives me something that's been missing from my computer using life since the mid-eighties: Linux brings fun back to the desktop.

I remember how frustrated I used to get as a kid trying to get things to work on my old 8-bit Atari computers. I also remember the glee and sense of triumph that I would feel after I finally managed to get something working the way I wanted. It was just fun. And Linux has brought that all back to me.

There is a learning curve that is a bit more involved if you really want to get into the whole Linux/Free Software experience, but the knowledge you gain and the fun and heartache you endure in making good use of your Linux box makes it all worthwhile. I would not walk away from Linux now if my life depended on it.

[Grifter]

Fangorn - I'm sorry, did you step out of my mirror? I could have sworn you were just writing about me...

;)

[jezebelus]

Windows was made by M. and thats the reason

[method9455]

Microsoft + established companies are on the verge of shooting themselves in the foot. It's the DRM stupid! People don't like being told what to do - but they need to realize what they are missing out on. So they don't realize that computers can NOT get spyware if you have the right stuff, or be secure (do people even know they are insecure?) or be customized (i would say most don't WANT to customize because they don't want to learn, which is fine I don't want to learn how to customize my TV I just want to turn it on and watch TV) but when you start taking things that were previously easy/allowed, and take them away, people will get mad. A simple example was my dad trying to rip DVDs onto his computer for business flights on airplanes. He bought the DVD's, went to CompUSA and spent $50 on a software package that everything on the cover said it could copy dvds to your laptop, "Perfect for business travel", came home, couldn't get it to copy DVDs to his computer. So I tried it, and couldn't get it, (which rarely happens), so called up the company and they said it couldn't copy any dvd's with DRM - which turns out to be about 90% of our DVD collection. We tried to return it to CompUSA and only have some seroius wrangling (and 4 trips) did they take it back. He was perpetually pissed off at CompUSA afterwards and never went back. People want to pop in a DVD like a CD and rip it to their computer - and don't want to hear about the licenses that prevent it. All this DRM protection is only going to make it worse, and piss more people off. I'm sure by the time the formats become more popular there will be plenty of Linux tools available to do it, for free, without visiting shady Warez sites and what not. That is what people will understand.

I'd also say that Linux will never crack more than 15% of people, maybe a bit more, but the choice is a negative to MOST people, they don't want to have to read about all these different options anymore than you want to know what the different kinds of rubber are that can be used in the tires for your car. Or better yet when you buy a plane ticket do you want to decide what landing gear to use? No you leave that up to engineers who take care of it for you so you can JUST GET THERE. Thats how people feel about computers - and Linux will never be standardized enough for that to happen. (Hell if it did, who of us would be interested?)

[Blyiss]

Microsoft made windows to fish money out of people. And it will choke with its power one day like it happened already many times. Great historical examples of this fall are Rome Empire and the USSR. People are lazy by their nature and slow to change things they got used to, but none of them wants to be fooled. They will turn to Linux as soon as they realize the benefits it offers.

[fangorn]

I said it before, but why not repeat yourself. The level of pain induced by using windows (devices stop working, windows losing settings of DVD-drive, ...) is not high enough to overcome the phlegma of most windows users.

And the People calling themselves powerusers (which means that they can start regedit and type in all the cool registry hacks posted in windows media) got so used to reinstall the Operating system every 1 or 2 months, they don't even ask themselves if this is necessary.

[thamarok]

Windows has endless annoyances.
Linux has sometimes problems with hardware and drivers.

Windows has a very wide (commercial) software variety.
Linux has a wide open-source software variety.

Windows is perfect for gaming.
Linux doesn't have any good blockbuster games.

Windows is perfect for music production.
Linux is the worst for music production.

Windows is commercial and even if you buy it, you still don't fully own it.
Linux is free as in freedom and you own every piece of it.

-------------------------------------------------------------
That's all that there is to say about Linux and Windows.

[Blyiss]

Windows has endless annoyances.
Linux has sometimes problems with hardware and drivers.

Windows has a very wide (commercial) software variety.
Linux has a wide open-source software variety.

Windows is perfect for gaming.
Linux doesn't have any good blockbuster games.

Windows is perfect for music production.
Linux is the worst for music production.

Windows is commercial and even if you buy it, you still don't fully own it.
Linux is free as in freedom and you own every piece of it.

-------------------------------------------------------------
That's all that there is to say about Linux and Windows.

That's true for now, but things can change. Linux people can't work harder than they do. But unlike Microsoft they made an excellent OS, the base for everything. And Etch is a great example. The more people will use Linux, the more programmers will be involved and the more software will be produced for Linux.

[Cope57]

Windows - So easy to use, a caveman can do it!

Sorry Geico

I miss the days when Windows 3.0 - 3.11 were used. Only geeks used computers.
It actually took knowledge about a PC to operate it, and Microsoft has made it so that everyone with or without technical knowledge to use it.

Even though I stopped using Windows back in 2003, I am still hounded by individuals with limited knowledge asking me how to do stuff in Windows.
The most popular one is I am asked is if I know how to fix it.
I have been quite helpful to those that "break" their Windows systems, but lately I just tell them "No I can not fix it, maybe you should install Linux."

Linux is user friendly
Windows is idiot friendly.

My opinion is just like everybody elses, it is just a opinion.

[Ingov]

Linux is user friendly
Windows is idiot friendly.

Windows is friendly for viruses and other malware.
I reinstalled XP and visited merely a couple of web-sites after which AVG antispyware detected an adware attached to Internet Explorer. Now, when I have to switch to Windows, I use Opera, which I don't like, +firewall + avast, but no router. I am as an obedient person as they can expect. It's just unbelievable that they want the users through away their older computer in flavor of Vista that is not compatible with the ones that have ram less than 500 mb and no DVD drive. Do they really think that people are so stupid? Why do I need this monstrous computer, if all I need is just to send a couple of mails and read some articles from Wikipedia?

No, no, Windows is not friendly at all. It's an illusion and a myth produced by Microsoft. Windows' friendliness is directly proportional the amount of money you are willing to pay.

[GMouse]

Microsoft made windows to fish money out of people. And it will choke with its power one day like it happened already many times. Great historical examples of this fall are Rome Empire and the USSR. People are lazy by their nature and slow to change things they got used to, but none of them wants to be fooled. They will turn to Linux as soon as they realize the benefits it offers.

Actually, the causes of the fall of Rome and the fall of the USSR are unrelated to each other and to MS.

Rome fell because a long series of incompetent (or outright crazy) rulers slowly weakened it, both economically and by encouraging corruption. The empire held on for centuries, overextended and weak, before Alaric's sack of Rome or Odoacer sending the Western Emperor's regalia to the Eastern Emperor. They simply could not field an amry capable of defending their borders anymore, and what officers existed were so corrupt that in one case, they refused to prevent the sack of a Roman city, simply because the city didn't offer to bribe them into it, despite taxes supporting the military.

The USSR fell for economic reasons. The move to communism decoupled incentive from productivity, so productivity (and consequently GDP) depressed to the minimum that each person could get by with. People gave what was required of them, not what they were capable of. So, the USSR slowly decayed from the inside, losing buying power as it went. When they finally gave up on communism to turn to a free market, they made the transition too quickly and rushed to privatize their industries. Contrast this with China's move to a market economy, in which the leadership remained strong throughout the transition, and they have slowly loosened control bit by bit. We can criticize their handling of domestic policy, but economically, they're making well-executed reforms.

Microsoft has not fallen, nor do I suspect it will. Not entirely. Many people have pointed out that Microsoft as it is now parallels IBM in the days that MS was an upstart, stealing IBM's market share. Their monopoly, however they gained it, led to several conditions common to monopolies. First, with no meaningful competition, prices do not fall to their natural rate. They're free to charge over and above that. With the lack of meaningful competition, it becomes in their best interest to continue to milk their monopoly rents, rather than improve.

In every profession, the exertion of the greater part of those who exercise it, is always in proportion to the necessity they are under of making that exertion... and, where competition is free, the rivalship of competitors, who are all endeavouring to justle one another out of employment, obliges every man to endeavour to execute his work with a certain degree of exactness... Rivalship and emulation render excellency, even in mean profes-sions, an object of ambition, and frequently occasion the very greatest exertions.

They've grown prematurely old as a result of their power. I think we're beginning to see the cracks in their monopoly with the rise of Ubuntu and the iPod-driven halo at Apple, which is helping to drive sales of Macs.

If all goes well, then Microsoft will be shaken by a market that has moved on from their now ossified practices. We'll likely first see losses on their 10-K reports, followed by a dropping share price. They'll be motivated to cut costs and become more agile by flattening their management structure (that is, firing off a bunch of middle managers). Ballmer may just get the ax, himself, as CEO's tend to get nixed when the losses become great enough. With that, they'll begin to be able to react more quickly and get new products out of the door with less red-tape.

The biggest problem with Microsoft, as I see it, is their culture. You can see it every time you run one of their products and every time anybody interacts with the business itself. I can't quite define the MS culture, perhaps somebody else here can. But it's driving the fact that they suck and that they don't even realize that fact. The culture of a company is largely driven by the senior management. If Ballmer ends up getting fired, or resigning, then we may begin to see a gradual shift in Microsoft's personality.

In the end, if they continue to follow in IBM's footsteps, they'll have diversified away from Windows and their other software into services, such as consulting, and will still be major players in the tech world, albeit in a lessened role.

[Blyiss]

Actually, the causes of the fall of Rome and the fall of the USSR are unrelated to each other and to MS.

Long and nice article. I won't argue because I myself live in the former USSR and I know the reason of its fall. Rome and USSR both fell because of a huge concentration of power they din't know where to apply to. It is not connected to Microsoft but I know a lot of people who are not satisfied by Microsoft products.

[DeanLinkous]

maybe it is *better*, heck maybe caviar really is better than cheez-whiz but cheez-wiz is what I like and so is linux

I miss nothing about windows. I feel no need to dualboot. I managed to have a good understanding of linux in half the time that it took in windows. Of course the closed nature of windows means you never understand more than half of it anyway.