Advertisements
Mar 29, 2008:

While you all must be surprised about my sudden disappearance from the blogging zone recently, the reason you did not see me around was because I got lost into the Linux world and you have no idea how hard it is to make out of this virtual world safe and sound. But very amazingly I managed to do so without much effort.

ubuntu.png

Linux Ubuntu is one of my new ultimate operating system choice and trust me it is not for the faint of heart. Though I have not left Windows XP completely (I usually have to switch to it to play games and do some work) but after much determination and struggle I have managed to adapt myself in the Linux environment and it is very cool and challenging.

For those of you who think that Linux is terrible and Windows rocks, here is my say on why Ubuntu is better than Windows.

  1. No Viruses – Thats true! as Linux does not recognize Win32 Executables so the possibility of having a virus on-board is absolutely 0%
  2. Open Source – Unlike Windows, Linux distributions are open source and the source code can be edited and modified to the most to suit your needs.
  3. Better Learning – While Windows just teaches you how to install and run a program, Linux helps you do that using a Terminal. So if you fall in a situation where you don’t have a GUI, you can operate things well.
  4. Free Software – Every application and software on Linux is free and open source. You don’t need to worry about licenses anymore and you can always find a better and free Linux alternative to a Windows application.
  5. Easy to Use – This point may seem ironic but is true to a lot of extent. Linux Ubuntu is one of the most user-friendly and easy to use Linux distribution which even beats Windows XP and Vista in usability and ease of use.
  6. Ubuntu Community Help – Ubuntu has a very active support and help community where you can get answer to your questions and problems in minutes.
  7. Cool Desktop Effects – For those who think Aero in Windows Vista is damn cool! wait till you experience Compiz on Ubuntu which provides better 3D desktop effects with less resource usage.
  8. Easy Upgrade – You can upgrade Linux Ubuntu through the package manager and all applications can be installed/updated through it. There is no need to Google for freewares as the package manager helps you find all of them.
  9. Highly Customizable – If you like customizing your operating system without a billion registry and software hacks then Ubuntu is your ultimate choice.
  10. Experience Live – Linux Ubuntu CDs come with a pre-installed OS environment which allows you to run the OS without even installing it. Carry your Ubuntu Live CD with you and use it on any PC anywhere around the world.

This may not be all but still these are some of the strong points that tell you how powerful Linux Ubuntu is. It definitely has some bugs and issues but as long as you don’t mingle with commands and updates too much, there shouldn’t be a problem using it.

Comments

comments

{ 161 comments… read them below or add one }

Shankar Ganesh March 29, 2008 at 5:17 pm

Wow good post Dj.

I’ve been using Ubuntu for a few months, and I love it.

With every other release, there’s a lot of development happening and it’s really good to see Ubuntu evolving!

I too love the desktop effects and I think they’re really better, and customizable than that on Vista.

Reply

Rameez Remsudeen May 16, 2010 at 12:49 pm

Dude have u ever heard of MODDING windows
Windows is the best !

Reply

Akshay May 16, 2010 at 1:27 pm

rofl!! You know nothing about OS's do you?

Deekshith January 12, 2011 at 4:47 pm

I think you have never tried Ubuntu. If you have tried, then I advice to to use it for at-least a month so that you will soon realize why it is better than windows.

DS234 July 6, 2011 at 1:13 am

Can you mod windows to be open source? Didn’t think so. Can you mod Windows to not read the files that viruses are carried in, making Windows useless? Didn’t think so. Yeah, there is Anti-Viruses but on Linux 1. You don’t have to worry about your AV missing some threats. 2. You don’t have to run scans all the time. 3. You don’t have to spend over $100 to ensure your safety. No I don’t hate windows, in fact I love w7 and I am using it right now, it’s just that Linux is more secure.

Mayooresan March 29, 2008 at 5:21 pm

Yes…indeed! agreed bro!

Reply

Rameez Remsudeen May 16, 2010 at 12:50 pm

Nope windows is the best !

Reply

Kastneraustin July 26, 2010 at 7:19 pm

ubuntu is the best

Ct_engel_usmc August 19, 2010 at 4:55 am

Wow, great argument. You’ve completely changed my mind Rameez… I’m going to uninstall and throw away my Ubuntu distro and go spend a couple c-notes on Windows 7. Then a few more c-notes on some software, because it’s not available for free (which I hate by the way! Why get something free, when you can pay for it.) And THEN, pay a few more c-notes to upgrade my already bleeding edge desktop because Windows is so resource hungry. Then, once I have everything I need (and an empty wallet), I’ll sit back and wait a couple days before I have to shell out some more dough to buy an Anti-virus program to keep all my shiny new stuff clean and safe.

I hope you can sense the sarcasm… it’s not always possible (unless of course you’re using Windows… because there’s a $199.99 software program that automatically senses sarcasm in posts… nifty, eh?)

…Jack ass.

alifaan March 29, 2008 at 5:29 pm

Well done Dj Flush, nice post and it’s not all about nice, all words written here are true.
By the way I think that Ubuntu have 1 good thing more, and that is Ubuntu Brainstorm where you can give your idea about what should be change or added in Ubuntu, and also vote for ideas which been added from some Ubuntu users.

Reply

Nick March 29, 2008 at 6:16 pm

I totally agree with all of this, but you haven’t even touched on the fact that you can see and modify any source code! I suppose it’s only useful for developers, but it is truly awesome. Also, noticed that everyone seems to call it Linux Ubuntu. Linux is obviously the noun, while the distro should be an adjective, so it would either be Ubuntu or Ubuntu Linux. There is no Ubuntu BSD or Ubuntu Windows so that would make the most sense.

Reply

angelzofdeath182 November 2, 2009 at 9:41 pm

In this case, linux is a company and ubuntu is the OS. So, that's why they call it linux ubuntu. For windows, it's different; windows is the same as ubuntu. Linux Ubuntu and Windows Vista aren't the same in this case. However, Linux Ubuntu and Microsoft Windows are; same can be said for Ubuntu Karmic Koala and Windows Vista. Makes sense now?

Reply

cheatman093 November 29, 2009 at 4:59 am

I'm sorry but linux is the operating system and Ubuntu is the company. You can't really compare
Ubuntu linux to Microsoft Windows because the are very different things. Linux is the operating system not an extension to a company like Windows is to Microsoft. You could, however, compare Ubuntu linux with with Windows Vista. As for Karmic Koala, that would be like the release version for Vista.

Richard Chapman March 29, 2008 at 6:28 pm

alifaan, you gave me an inspiration.

Yes, brainstorm is a great idea and I strongly suspect it will help Ubuntu change for the better. But brainstorm is just one example of why Linux and Open Source is different from proprietary software from Microsoft and others. Open Source is totally accessible to the end user. We are involved in its development. Its only reason to change and evolve is to make it better for us, not to raise the stock price or grab more market share.

Reply

Pranjal March 29, 2008 at 8:04 pm

don’t say windows is bad! most of us use that and we can’t ignore that.

Linux can be better only when it can streamline the user interface. Someone should try giving linux a windows look and see how it works out. If everything goes GUI in linux most of the common people will be able to workout on it.

Reply

Tuxie December 12, 2009 at 7:59 pm

Are you nuts? Looks like you don't even know the abcs' of Linux GUI environments like GNOME or KDE capable of…

Reply

Emory March 29, 2008 at 8:10 pm

@Pranjal…you’re kidding right? It’s that kind of attitude that keeps so many people in the dark. You obviously have either “a” never tried linux, or “b” haven’t tried it in the past 4 years. Linux, and ubuntu especially has made leaps and bounds in the field of OS’s and user-friendliness. I’m installing ubuntu on my grandma’s first computer today because I am convinced that it is easier and more intuitive then windows. And there are tons of themes that make ubuntu or any other distro really look like windows, and yet it still operates better. There is a reason people say windows is bad, and that still holds true whether or not you are using it or not. It’s a faulty OS, a corrupt company, and a buggy environment. Go to ubuntu.com, download a live cd, and give it a try, I promise you’ll find it easy to use!

Reply

Reeves DeCuir April 19, 2011 at 4:21 pm

Linux will never be “easy to use” as long as updates break the GUI and cause me to lose valuable productivity searching for causes and solutions. Don’t get me wrong, I have used both Suse and Ubuntu-Mint and found them to be very well suited to my needs, but this happens quite often with updates. I want to use my computer for productivity, not tinkering.

Reply

Dak March 29, 2008 at 8:52 pm

I am so tired of seeing people say that there are no viruses for Linux. This is a total misnomer, as there are viruses and exploits for Linux, but not on the scale that affect Windows or Mac (yes, even Mac is vulnerable).

And to say that win32 executable viruses don’t impact Linux is another misnomer. As an experiment, I loaded Wine on my Linux box, and then executed a file that I knew to have a virus in it. Yes, my Linux became infected, but not like a Windows box. While the virus only affected Win32 executables, and not Linux files, the box was infected none the less.

By making such a statement, you are giving people a false sense of security. Ask yourself this, if Linux is impervious to viruses, why are their anti-virus products for Linux?

Reply

karim June 10, 2009 at 4:28 pm

actually linux antivirus programs exist because linux machines often serve windows machines.

Reply

Steve March 17, 2010 at 3:23 am

most people arent as stupid as that.
retard.

Reply

Gbowles June 25, 2010 at 11:27 am

1. Linux users only put av on their rigs to prevent windows users from effing themselves.
2. Wine emulates windows so viruses created for that platform will execute. After all viruses are programs just like Halo.

Reply

Joel March 29, 2008 at 8:58 pm

@Emory
Well, Linux might be good by its certainly not better than windows. If you say that its better than windows then you probably:
a. Hate Windows and Mr Gates :P
b. You are a die hard Linux fan

And well jus think about the software compatability dude. Without Windows we are almost handicaps! Linux ain’t bad but it needs a little more time to getter better.

Reply

Sumesh March 29, 2008 at 9:04 pm

If it weren’t for my EVDO wireless internet card that I use always, I’d have been on Ubuntu full time. I need only a browser and mail client, after all.

Reply

Oli March 29, 2008 at 9:15 pm

I don’t mean to be so inflammatory but don’t be such an idiot. You’re writing about stuff that you’re clearly not qualified to.

My proof for that statement?

No Viruses – Thats true! as Linux does not recognize Win32 Executables so the possibility of having a virus on-board is absolutely 0%

It’s just another programmable platform – of course it can (and does) have viruses written for it. Exploits too.

Some of the other points are a little flakey too. If you want a full critique, be prepared to feel special because I decided to blog it.

Reply

Akshay Bist December 13, 2009 at 5:41 am

Great blog Oli, factually correct & way better than this sorry-excuse-for-a-blog

Reply

Pranjal March 29, 2008 at 9:29 pm

thats the basic problem with Linux! not ever hardware manufacturer make drivers for it.

Reply

Keshav Khera March 29, 2008 at 9:42 pm

Great post buddy! And welcome to the Ubuntu World :D

@Pranjal @Emory @Joel
Well, i think no OS is good or bad. You cannot say that you cannot live without windows.. you can..just try it..being that you have all the sources and you know what you are doing with your linux installation. There are thousands and thousands of softwares available free of cost for ubuntu. All the servers and VPSs run on linux distros. Games are the only thing where linux presently lacks… and that that too will be going all well in the future.
If you say that you love windows and would not even touch ubuntu… i will be glad that i at least told you about the opportunities but you may have to repent later.
What I think is that you should try every OS, look at the advantages and disadvantages, enjoy the advantages and at least try to improve upon the disadvantages and not just fight over My OS is good and your’s is bad :D
And by the way who says that everything is not GUI-fied in Ubuntu? :|

Reply

Sumesh March 29, 2008 at 9:53 pm

Almost forgot – dugg.

Reply

Sumesh March 29, 2008 at 9:56 pm

DJ, I just found this post as one of the duplicates while submitting this post on Digg:
http://underheavenz.blogspot.com/2008/03/10-reasons-why-linux-ubuntu-is-better.html

It contains same content, though the image isn’t present. Its a scraper, and that post was submitted before yours. I’m reporting the post to Digg as duplicate – you should do it too.

Reply

Dwasifar March 29, 2008 at 10:01 pm

Regarding Joel’s and Pranjal’s comments, as well as a few things in the original article:

I see a lot of this kind of objection to Linux, and it boils down to Linux Is Not Windows. Which, of course, is true. But people expect to be able to jump from Windows to Linux without a learning curve or any technical barriers, and that’s just unrealistic. How long did it take you to learn the ins and outs of Windows? It took some time, right? Well, Linux also requires some time and learning commitment, so it’s unfair to condemn Linux because your existing Windows skill set doesn’t make you an instant Linux expert.

When I first started playing with Linux I just wanted to learn; I never thought I would be switching away from Windows. And the first couple of months were a challenge. Where is Control Panel? Where is the Program Files directory? Where is the registry? Where is the D drive? At first it seemed like Linux was needlessly complicated to learn. But I worked to keep in mind that just because it was unfamiliar doesn’t mean it is wrong. And gradually I got accustomed to the differences and began to see the reasons for them. By the time Vista came out, I was a complete Linux convert.

This part is specifically for Joel: once you get really familiar with Linux, the issues that seem to be impediments turn out not to be, and that can make you a die hard Linux fan – not just for no reason, but because you really see WHY it’s better. And that in turn can turn you against Microsoft, because once you’re no longer tied to that platform it’s frustrating to see a technically inferior product still pretty much own the market. It’s not that people like Linux because they hate MS; it’s that Linux people grow to scorn MS because they’ve experienced better.

I also don’t know why people get so down on Linux because you can’t run every piece of Windows software on it. I don’t see people ragging Windows because you can’t run Mac software on it. I don’t see people ragging Mac OS because you can’t run Linux software on it. Why is Linux singled out for special criticism for not being able to run software designed for a different platform – especially since Linux’s Wine project has made greater steps in that direction than any of the competing OSes have? I run DVDFab HD Decrypter, DVD Shrink, IrfanView, and QuickBooks regularly on my Linux boxes, and I have seen WoW, MS-Office, and even Internet Explorer successfully installed on Linux, just to name a few. Can Windows run that much Linux software? Of course not, so why is this considered a failing? And in terms of interoperability, again the Linux open source applications have the edge. OpenOffice can read and write MS-Office proprietary file formats; MS-Office can’t do the same for OpenOffice’s formats, even though they are free and open standards. And yet people somehow conclude that this makes MS-Office superior. Why? I can’t imagine.

Anyway. Linux Is Not Windows. And that’s a good thing, because if it were, there’d be no advantage to it. But it isn’t, and there is, and if you’d give it the same chance you gave Windows, it would be more apparent.

Reply

Dj Flush March 29, 2008 at 10:31 pm

@Sumesh

Thanks for the heads up. Looks like the guy has been copying all of my posts lol. I have reported him through Google Adsense as a case of copyright infringement.

Reply

Madhur Kapoor March 29, 2008 at 11:24 pm

Great points buddy.Even though Linux is good, we just cant remove Windows from our daily work. Anyways, i will be trying Linux when my college ends and you will help me set up.

Reply

Bob Rose March 30, 2008 at 12:08 am

Security is the main reason I will only use Ubuntu livecd to surf the internet. I disconnect the hard drive, install firestarter (firewall) and my computer is now practically impenetrable. If I have to download something, I just use my 4 GB flash card.

Reply

innercr June 20, 2009 at 2:47 am

Whoa! Bob, you’re that paranoid about security? You think you’ll get hacked or Dos-attacked? Why the freak anyone would want to use live CDs just for that purpose? Lock yourself up in the closet..

Reply

Hierro LeBokov March 30, 2008 at 12:20 am

Great post, I feel the same with your points. I have been using Linux Ubuntu for 2 years as my daily working system. No viruses is the biggest advantage especially for the computer technicians as they have to deal with so many virus cases. If I am using Windows OS as my work station and use it to troubleshoot my customers’ PCs, then I will probably need to format and reinstall my Windows every week. It is true that hardware compatibility is a problem in Linux, but as a computer consultant, I get to advice and pick the hardware for my clients so I can just pick the those that will run on Linux.

Reply

Joe March 30, 2008 at 1:04 am

I’ve been living without Windows for one and one-half years.

Windows is dead to me and as a web developer I have found everything I would need provided by Ubuntu.

Reply

Ambleston Dack March 30, 2008 at 1:12 am

While Windows is not going anywhere for the moment, I agree with a lot of comments here about open source and the way it will play a bigger part in our futures. I have been using Ubuntu since its early days as my main distro and all I can say is that it keeps getting better. As for Brainstorm, well that is one example of how open source works, if you have an idea you just submit it, can you imagine MS with this kind of input…

Na, me neither, lol.

If you have a programming bent, then you can download the source code, modify or add bits and then submit it back (under the rules of the GPL (I think)). Again, can you imagine if you were allowed to modify or improve Windows…

Sorry, hurt my self laughing too much with that one ;)

Reply

Lantesh March 30, 2008 at 8:10 am

I for one can’t even comprehend why the average user wouldn’t want to use a Linux distribution instead of Windows at this point, for the simple fact that it, along with all the open source applications are provided to the end user free of cost. An equivalent Windows setup to my Ubuntu setup would cost me over a thousand U.S. dollars. The Ubuntu community provided it to me free of cost. This is on top of all the other wonderful benefits the Linux community offers. Windows fanboys should really get a clue.

Reply

Aubrey March 30, 2008 at 1:05 pm

I have been a dedicated Ubuntu user for two years and have never even felt like going back to windows. Mostly for the reasons you cite in your article. I do agree that the security issue is not black and white. Yes there are vulnerabilities in any OS, but Linux is genuinely more secure than Windows XP and at least as good as Vista. I find the “Linux way” – the way things work and the general approach to software design – to be way more user-friendly than the MS (or OSX way). It would be a great pity, IMO, if the core of Linux made too many concessions to Windows users. There are plenty of distros, Ubuntu included, that give users a lot of hand-holding and simple gui tools. People should try Linux Mint or PCLinuxOS if they feel that Ubuntu doesn’t suit.

Nice article.

Reply

immy00100 March 30, 2008 at 4:48 pm

very very true, linux is always better than windows the best of linux over windows is that its FREE :D

Reply

coen March 30, 2008 at 6:26 pm

thank’s that for information.
I think Ubuntu is very good and has a good diplaying.
Especially in that compiz, and by using Ubuntu we can find virus from our flash disk or from our hard disk and we can delete it.

But in windows, we can’t do it…

Reply

Bill March 30, 2008 at 7:37 pm

I stopped reading at #1 because that’s possibly the dumbest statement I’ve read on the net this month.

Reply

Ahmed Eltawil April 4, 2008 at 12:13 am

What’s the minimum requirements for running Ubuntu?

Reply

Fnadde42 June 11, 2009 at 7:10 pm

You need this to install Ubuntu 9.04:*

A blank CD and the ability to “burn” blank CDs
A modern Intel or AMD compatible computer
At least 256MB of RAM

*Copied directly from Ubuntu site. Link; http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/download

Reply

Dj Flush April 4, 2008 at 4:45 am

@Ahmed

I don’t know the exact PC requirements to run Ubuntu but lets just say that if your PC can smoothly run XP then its definitely going to rock Ubuntu.

Reply

Syahid A. April 7, 2008 at 10:11 am

IMO, the best part of Ubuntu is that they have been successful in creating a Linux distro that is newbie-friendly. Nice set of points man.

Reply

aifaan April 8, 2008 at 2:26 am

check out this Why Linux is Better

Reply

Vilenski April 10, 2008 at 8:03 pm

Linux vs Windows

What i can say is that everyone is entitled to their opinion. What suits you better is what you will use. Windows has its flaws, so does Linux. I am still new to Ubuntu & i must say i am impressed. It needs a little bit of improvement, but so does windows. Let the companies compete, why don’t we chose which one meets our needs. But then again criticism is motivation in disguise.

Reply

Liviu April 11, 2008 at 3:05 pm

I must add something about viruses: indeed there is a number of Linux viruses, but they need root access to do their spread out, which in most cases do not have, and even more, in Ubuntu the root account is disabled – no one has root privileges, not even the system administrator (and can be enabled, if you really need it).

And why there are antivirus programs for Linux? Mainly, such programs are not installed and used on Linux workstations, but on Linux servers, for (guess what) Windows systems that are connected to the Linux servers. And sorry for the unwanted typo mistakes that I made, as I am not from an English-speaking country.

Reply

Vidyut April 14, 2008 at 10:55 am

Welcome to the convenient and safe life. I use ubuntu myself and can’t imagine returning to the expensive, unsafe and slow experience I have left behind. Unfortunately, having spent money on softwares like Dreamweaver (for example) which have no real alternative, I have ended up keeping the Windows as well as a rarely used optional boot.

Reply

Jacob Steelsmith April 25, 2008 at 1:21 am

All good points.

There are viri that can affect Linux, but they’re few and far between. A virus has a tough time with Linux mainly because:

1). The user doesn’t generally run as administrator.
2). Most Linux distributions are different enough that it’s difficult to write one virus that will infect them all.

Rootkits are more of a threat to Linux boxes, but bugs that allow exploits are generally closed up sooner and more efficiently with Linux than Windows, especially in distributions that use a package manager such as apt, where core and add on vulnerabilities are fixed during the same update procedure.

I think the main difference between Windows and Linux or Mac has very little to do with software.

Microsoft is a behemoth, an absolute financial giant. Microsoft is not in the business of creating a quality product. Microsoft is in the business of making money.

Open source projects such as most Linux distros are in the business of making a quality product, not for making money. People tend to equate money to a superior product, but it’s really time and dedication.

Ubuntu, Linux and open source will always be better than proprietary, financially driven products because of the end goal of each side, the final product or money.

As a side note, one of the many reasons the open source model is better is becoming clear to many who don’t know or don’t care. Microsoft has announced they will be pulling Windows XP from retailers and hardware distributors, causing somewhat of an uproar. Many users feel as if XP is great and do not want to switch.

If Windows XP was open source, it could be community developed and supported for as long as there was a demand. Because it’s not, the users are at the mercy of Microsoft.

Reply

supernatendo April 25, 2008 at 10:59 am

For those of you upset that he said no viruses, get over it! I have been running ubuntu for about a year and a half while dual-booting XP. In that time, I have never once seen my system crash, slow down, or have any sign of viruses whatsoever. As for spyware, Firefox with adblock and noscript and safe internet practices followed by frequent cache and cookie cleanings, and a good firewall should keep 99.9% of the spyware off your ubuntu partition, which is about 50 times better than what I can say for windows.

Yeah, you could run an infected exe in wine and mess up wine’s libraries, but why would you do that? Also, by nature, unix systems are harder to infect since the libraries are randomized and only root has full access to system files. I have installed everything I need to using the add/remove programs feature, and while some more specialized peices of software might force someone to use terminal there is really little need to leave the gui.

The gui really isn’t THAT much different from windows, and in my honest opinion the differences that do exist far surpass what windows has to offer. People who claim linux gui needs major improvement probably have not tried it for themselves.

Seriously, unless you are a corporation that has windows specific business software you have already spent a fortune on or you are a super high-end pc gamer, ubuntu is fine for anyone. The filesystem itself is more stable, no lengthy disk-defragmenting required, and overall it utilizes disk space much more efficiently.

Reply

Chris April 29, 2008 at 9:36 pm

I been using ubuntu since it first came out. I just upgraded to the latest version of ubuntu 8.4 and it rocks! I will never ever go back to windows, because of their poor security.

Reply

Shantanu Goel May 1, 2008 at 12:18 am

I wrote my own compilation of 5 Reasons I Like Linux (And 5 Why I Dislike It) here:
http://tech.shantanugoel.com/2008/04/20/5-reasons-i-like-linux-and-5-why-i-dislike-it.html

Reply

Mike May 2, 2008 at 12:08 am

@ Bill – How is it? Linux has no viruses in the wild. Every OS has its vulnerabilities and weak points, but due to the design of Linux and the wonderful permissions system, a virus is the least effective way to exploit these, as they can’t spread (or even touch system files) without root priviledges.

Reply

ikt May 6, 2008 at 7:23 am

Linux having no viruses is not realated to not recognising w32 executables.


The reason that we have not seen a real Linux virus epidemic in the wild is simply that none of the existing Linux viruses can thrive in the hostile environment that Linux provides. The Linux viruses that exist today are nothing more than technical curiosities; the reality is that there is no viable Linux virus.

http://librenix.com/?inode=21

etc

There is a difference between a typical virus and malware.

Linux is not immune to exploits etc

Reply

HabsQ June 6, 2008 at 11:28 am

I think everyone should also read Oli’s post on his blog. It’s a good start to avoid misperception.

Reply

spike July 24, 2008 at 6:27 pm

Yes, you are right. linux is not infected with viruses(.exe or .dll) since it cannot be executed. Even if u try to execute .exe files using wine the nature of virus is to get the root access which is not possible in linux without your knowledge. So DJ flush and dak. don’t be still kids. Come to this world.learn new things. try to differentiate between what is worth and money saving. You thing buying a windows xp from a store is worth than using this linux for free. You people never change? Linux and its flavours are only for developers like us who try to ponder upon the new technologies. If you are a new user or a windows admirer please don’t post. Just read our suggestions or tips.

Reply

Björn Lundahl August 2, 2008 at 9:08 pm

The truth

1. That Ubuntu is not plagued with malware is of course true.
2. This is also true. Most Windows users do not care, though, about open source. The average guy just wants the applications to work and would not know anyway how to modify the source code.
3. I have not seen a program in Windows that does not have a GUI. In other words there is no need of a terminal in Windows. This is one of the great advantages with Windows.
4. Obviously you can not always find a better application in Ubuntu than in Windows. Some programs are better in Windows and are also easier to use and are more complete. Some applications in Ubuntu does not even have a GUI. That some programs are better in Windows than in Ubuntu is also the reason why the author of above article still keeps Windows in his PC. Most applications, also, in Windows you can find for free (that does not cost any money).
5. It is probably true that Ubuntu is the most user friendly operating system that Linux can offer. It is also true that it is user friendly but it is not more user friendly than XP or Vista. I would say that all of them are in this regard about the same.
6. Most applications in Windows are supported by the companies which provide them.
7. The XP and Vista GUI is nicer and more sophisticated than the Ubuntu layout.
8. The package manager is a good thing. The problem is that you will not always find a good alternative to Windows programs (read above).
9. I do not know anything about this.
10. Ubuntu live CDs are a good thing. No need of “Windows live CDs”, though, as Windows are usually installed anyway. Quite often Ubuntu live CDs are not compatible with the PC machine. There is frequently something importantly missing.

I have run Windows machines for years and they have not crashed. With antivirus software, Firefox, McAfee Site Advisor and java script forbidden, your Windows machine does not need to crash because of malware. Malware is something you can to a great extent control.

Reply

Johnny August 14, 2008 at 8:55 pm

Yes Ubuntu is very nice. So is Fedora, as are so many different distro’s. There is so much more to free and open source than Ubuntu. There is far more than meets the eye. I switched to Linux back in the 90′s and it’s been a real pleasure to watch it grow into what it has become. I used to sit around with a table of ham radio enthusiasts and station engineers listening to them tell me it was only a flash in the bucket and it would not last. In the ensuing time period up to the current, I have witnessed Linux move from the cmd line, to x windows, to CDE, KDE, Gnome, and now onto Compiz and the variants. Conversely windows has become a morass of technological suffering. While windows has done well to keep up with technology, the commitment to the very user who keep them in their fine lifestyle, has failed. The computing community has so much to offer, but nobody at Microsoft is listening. With that said, I hope Ubuntu keeps the good work and their fine contribution to all of us.

Reply

MOin September 2, 2008 at 2:41 pm

a nice brief and satisfactory post, and for sure linux is better than anything.

Reply

Bunny Boy September 10, 2008 at 8:17 am

I’m seeing a lot of interesting discussion here, but the main point I haven’t seen addressed is stability: all Microsoft OS are inherently unstable. Many people do not know this. They think that frequent crashes, hangs, and reboots are just par for the course with “computers.” Nothing could be further from the truth, but MS has buffaloed so many people into using their horrible software that these sort of expectations pervade our culture. I have run many MS systems, both as user and sysadmin, and they have all been nightmares compared to any linux distro I have tried. For example, when I ran NT4, purported to be the most stable OS from MS, I had to contend with daily crashes and network lock-ups. Contrarywise, I have been running Ubuntu for over two years without a single glitch.

Reply

Mayank September 25, 2008 at 6:39 am

Only reason Linux has no viruses because people who creates virus wants to damage as many computers as possible, The day people will start making viruses for linux it will go through the same.

Linux is not easy to use its tough for ordinary person where Windows so easy to use that’s why it has some flaws.

Its free yes but still 90% people in the world prefer to spend $100 on Windows which is quite remarkable.

Linux does not support as many softwares and games like windows. The day you put as much load on linux as we put on Windows everyday Linux won’t even start.

Linux can not help in PC sales growth. WHere Windows set the platform for it.

All in all there are thousands reasons why Windows better than Linux.

Reply

joekirby February 15, 2010 at 4:40 pm

Linux cannot help in PC sales growth? for what we want to make it growth? Linux is good enaough… save a lot of money. People should then find the other business rather than supporting microsoft. I'm not hating bill gates or anybody involved… But in this centuary we are looking about choice with the economy downturn.

Yeah it's true not many software supporting linux, but in the future this problem would fixed as many software engineer nowadays start developing software running on linux already.

Plus All open source software support both windows and linux… and most of open source software is the best software ever.

Reply

mike March 17, 2010 at 8:41 am

please pull your head from your rectum.
sheep.

Reply

chvnx November 6, 2008 at 6:59 am

I’ve been on Ubuntu for less than 24hrs and I’m loving every second of it. I have it installed via Wubi, so it’s actually running on my WinXP machine without having to make a partition! It’s just a simple executable that allows you to choose between Windows or Ubuntu (or Kubuntu or Xubuntu) at startup.

To get back to your windows OS, simply restart your PC and choose to boot Windows from the log in screen.

It’s great, because if it allocates a portion of your disc without partitioning and that was very important to me.

I can still access my Windows files through Ubuntu, too. I have full access to my images, mp3s and videos still.

You can get Wubi @ http://wubi-installer.org/. It only takes about 30 minutes to install, so go grab a cup of coffee, read a blog post and check back in a bit.

Also, since it’s only an executable that is installed through Windows, you can easily uninstall Ubuntu if it’s not something you want on your computer. To do that, you just need to double click on the uninstall file that comes with Wubi.

It’s all very simple. If I can do it, you can do it. Trust me.

Open source FTW!

Regards,
CHVNX

Reply

Bman November 23, 2008 at 7:18 pm

@Mayank

Enjoy paying $100 dollar Windows…lol I hear Windows 7 should be coming out soon to replace the failed Vista. Good Luck with that!! lol

I’ll stick with Ubuntu…

Ubuntu = Free and Fast

Windows = Slow and Costly

Reply

Dan Harvell December 15, 2008 at 7:10 pm

I switched to Ubuntu for nearly a year. I eventually went back to Windows. Why? Not because I like Windows better, but simply because Linux is NOT a do-all. Still no software that supports my digital camera (which happens to be my livelihood), still no ability to print to 99% of printers… Though software exists as an alternative to MOST Windows-based software, there are still too many holes that need filled before Linux becomes a viable option.

And the fact that you said that there are 0 viruses for Linux is just laughable-at-best. There are thousands. Literally thousands. The difference is, since Linux is not in vast distribution, those viruses just are not in the wild as are Win32 viruses. If you switch everybody on Earth to Linux, guess what… all of a sudden, you will see all of these viruses in the wild. Why? Because people will attack whatever the popular platform happens to be. It’s the nature of the beast.

Nice ideas you posted, but all wrong and obviously not researched very well.

Linux is great, but Windows still has a stranglehold on us. Perhaps soon, we will be able to print through Linux, but until that day, it is all but useless.

By the way, those of you who’s argument is to just buy a printer that is Linux compatible… you may wish to get a clue. Hardware shouldn’t adapt to Linux… Linux should adapt to the hardware that already exists.

I really hope Linux gets there. I would love to go back and ditch Micro$oft for good. But until Linux can run my hardware, I’m stuck with it.

Reply

Signal January 11, 2009 at 8:27 am

@Mayank
I must say I was a average Joe Windows user (as in getting the damn PC to work) three months ago, and I thought Windows was really easy to install.

After I tried installing Wubi, I got through the installation process with no problems and 15 minutes later I could instantly e-mail, check webpages, edit a Word file, listen music and getting aMSN from the repostitories, which, by the way, are even easier then .exe files, without doing anything nerdy ;-)

The reason why people choose Windows over Linux is because they are mostly (more or less) vendor-locked. Programs like Microsoft Office, MSN, Photoshop, Internet Explorer, and Itunes are mostly causing this.

They only see what is in the stores, what their friends are using (Word files)/find hip (iTunes) *that* is the problem. You see, if you are using programs long enough, you only want to use those programs. Which makes sense, but not if you think that Microsoft Office can be replaced by OpenOffice, MSN by Pidgin/aMSN, Photoshop by Gimp/Inkscape, Internet Explorer by Firefox, all for free.

Though the examples I used can be debated forth and back, these are mostly the main uses for the Average Joe. These programs can be installed all for free. The main problem is that these products aren’t for sale, so people will never hear about them because they are used to run to the store and buy software.

Most software and games running on Windows are proprietary. Wich is forbidden to change and redistribute. Most software have decent/better replacements though. But then again, it takes much time and work by many volunteers wich makes 99% of the programs possible under Linux.

Linux Ubuntu definitely holds up against my use of an operating system, whereas Windows does this very slowly (this also depends on how many programs you are running under Windows and that explorer.exe and his friends are always eating my CPU power, even when I had just started the PC).

On the coincide, you heard more about XP than about Vista if people could choose. Mostly not because everything shipped with Vista. Yay. The funniest thing was you didn’t have an option to choose XP and if you did put XP on the PC/Laptop, good luck finding drivers that work with XP.

This really is a blessing, specially when you read about the positive comments about Vista.

In fact, I wasn’t so happy about being forced to use Vista, everything took twice as much time to do (XP did it twice as fast). I haven’t got a positive thing to say, even XP wasn’t so bad, in fact I think it was their best operating system ever.
My point is, I would like to choose what I want to use. Microsoft is denying that opportunity to me and instead shoves Vista down my throat. I sure didn’t recall asking for Vista.

Linux is different in that way, you have variety in the broadest sense, and you can choose which operating system (distro) you want to install, that’s what I’m loving about Linux: it’s free to try/use and you can choose and test as many flavors as you like. If not, you are (sarcasm here) to use Windows as you like :)

@Dan Harvell
Linux can adapt to the hardware that already exists. You can print using “cups” under Linux:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Unix_Printing_System

That Linux won’t run with some hardware is more due to the fact that most of the hardware is controlled by proprietary drivers and their respective proprietary companies. Some of these companies even create proprietary Linux drivers.

Sure, you think, if proprietary drivers work, it’s fine, right? Well, if they stop the line of hardware you’re using and you still want to get it to work but the last driver gives errors or is removed just as the entire website, you are bound to get new hardware if you like it or not (wich I don’t like, because hardware can rather be expensive).

Proprietary meaning closed-source. Meaning that the Linux community can’t (offer) help or rewrite faulty drivers for the hardware.
This can change if the proprietary hardware drivers are open source, the Linux community then can provide drivers, fix errors and help (frustrated) users having problems. This also goes for software.

The most recent happings (Atheros going open source) show that drivers can be open source, even by the big companies like Atheros.

Then again, Linux Ubuntu is really on the way of becoming a really good alternative for Windows although both have their flaws, and mind you that Linux Ubuntu exists four years until now (even Windows wasn’t that far in four years) and gets updated every six months with a central theme like 8.10 had internet and 9.04 gets faster and better startups for the operating system.

I think it’s doing a great thing for me, to each their own :)

Cheers.

Reply

axle March 17, 2010 at 3:44 am

perhaps YOU should get a clue.

every computer i have installed ubuntu on, recognizes the printer right away with no problems.
another one with his head in his rectum.
wake up or shutup windowsboy

Reply

Urekiur December 17, 2008 at 12:34 am

Wow. Thousands huh? You seem to state many things with no proof. Right now the market share of Ubuntu isn’t big enough to have thousands of viruses. Maybe hundreds at most but I don’t have any facts to back up my claim, so I’m stuck in my opinion just like the douche bag who claimed thousands before.

Also the thing is, everyone who doesn’t know shit thinks that making viruses for Ubuntu is essentially the same as Windows. Guess what? It’s not ;) . Ubuntu is basically the Linux kernel with Gnu software on top. If you would go on to make a virus for Ubuntu then they easily go on and change some different settings and boom. Done. Virus can’t find the necessary parts to do any harm. Also Linux distros are much safer by Windows by nature. Truly, where do you see noobs posting “Omg! I got a virus” in Ubuntu? Nope. Anyways a message to all the Windows idiots, keep paying for an OS that’s shit compared to Ubuntu and jump off a bridge :D

Reply

chethan January 20, 2009 at 10:28 am

Ubuntu Rocks truly, I’ve ditched windows and using only Linux OSes its really much better

Reply

George Paul January 21, 2009 at 9:36 pm

Ubuntu is not better than XP in many cases, you just try to select screen savers one by one your system hangs.Also some programs crashes.DVdisaster is no substitute for ISO buster.Thunderbird is good alternative to OE. OO spread sheet is not better than Excel

Reply

Supernatendo February 16, 2009 at 11:07 pm

Oh really? XP is better because of excel and ISO buster? So George, tell me when Microsoft started bundling a full, non-trial copy of the latest Microsoft Office Software with XP for free? I’d really like to know because the university I work at would love to stop wasting thousands of dollars for software they could be getting from M$ for free!

Sounds like you need to learn how to use your video card if your screen savers keep messing up!

there are plenty of other better programs for free than DVdisaster.

Also, to the people saying Linux is worse because some of the command line programs that it has still do not us GUI, and that there are no XP programs that do not use a GUI, tell me where has Microsoft been hiding the GUI for ipconfig, tracert, ping, whois, fdisk, netstat, netsh, telnet, etc… for all of these years?

Spot the difference in the following sentences:

Most applications in Windows are supported by the companies which provide them.

All open-source applications in Linux are supported by the coders which distribute them.

by the way, the OP of the first sentence was wrong, instead of provide, it should be steal/sell.

Reply

Praveen shukla February 7, 2009 at 7:30 pm

Ubuntu is not good if you want to make some call using InterVoIP or doing Skype with videos

Reply

Techie Zone February 21, 2009 at 7:39 pm

Even me not a fan of Microsoft but as I am a user of Microsoft Windows and in my day to day life I use it on my desktop and Laptop, Windows is the bread earner for me. So for the same reason I do not want to say anything against Microsoft and Windows.

Saad, if you check the stats of your visitors…how many do you see actually using Linux? So even if Linux is better then Windows, why people are still not shifting outwardly to Linux and stop using Windows even though it is free. And I am sure whoever have posted comments above must be using Windows too…

Reply

Saad Hamid February 21, 2009 at 8:03 pm

Actually Linux is meant for the cult mass and in terms of security, it still beats the hell out of all Windows versions including Windows 7.

Overall usage on an individual basis is not a measure of whether or not an OS is better than the other one. It all depends on the core architecture and facilities provided by the OS. There might be a 100 more reasons in which Windows is termed to be better than Linux but when it comes to the 10 points that I have mentioned above, Linux takes the lead.

Reply

Björn Lundahl February 22, 2009 at 1:28 pm

Talk is cheap!

1. Naturally, Microsoft could change the “architecture” of its OS but why does it not do that? Because millions of applications already made would not work. Obviously has this been taken into account and conclusions have been made that the costs for users would be greater than the profits they would gain if such a change would be made.

2. I do believe that there are more free software available for Windows than Ubuntu (free defined here as no cost for users). For Window users there is a great supply of free propitiatory software (freeware) and open source.

3. A lot of Windows software are better than the counterparts in Linux. In many cases there are no software available in Ubuntu/Linux at all.

If the OS cannot satisfy your needs, it is no good yelling about how many viruses your PC could get if it is run with Windows. It is like telling people that they should stop crossing the streets as there is a risk that they would be run over by a car.

Reply

Björn Lundahl February 22, 2009 at 4:22 pm

Talk is cheap!

1. Naturally, Microsoft could change the “architecture” of its OS but why does it not do that? Because millions of applications already made would not work. Obviously has this been taken into account and conclusions have been made that the costs for users would be greater than the profits they would gain if such a change would be made.

2. I do believe that there are more free software available for Windows than Ubuntu (free defined here as no cost for users). For Window users there is a great supply of free proprietary software (freeware) and open source.

3. A lot of Windows software are better than the counterparts in Linux. In many cases there are no software available in Ubuntu/Linux at all.
If the OS cannot satisfy your needs, it is no good yelling about how many viruses your PC could get if it is run with Windows. It is like telling people that they should stop crossing the streets as there is a risk that they would be run over by a car.

Reply

Dilbert dogsbody December 11, 2010 at 8:02 pm

Quote
” 1. Naturally, Microsoft could change the “architecture” of its OS but why does it not do that? Because millions of applications already made would not work. Obviously has this been taken into account and conclusions have been made that the costs for users would be greater than the profits they would gain if such a change would be made. ” Unquote

Oh Please, think before you type.

When microsoft released windows XP and windows vista, loads of software failed to run, that previously ran fine on the previous version of windows (even in the so called “compatibility mode”).
And thats that.

This cost companies and home users hundreds if not thousands of $.

Upgrading (software and hardware) is an endless and thankless task of any microsoft OS user (be that business or home user).

IT has always been the same and always will be, it’s the microshaft way ;0)

Try buying a Laptop computer without windows pre installed on it in any shop ?
You will have a very difficult time finding one, the reason is, microsoft has knobbled the markets manufacturers / retailers, and insist that all laptops be sold with windows pre installed or else the retailer could lose it’s ability to sell microsofts product line !

so because windows has the market lead most retailers capitulate under the pressure of potential lost sales.

It’s all tied up by microshaft, they say they give you choice, yet all the while they remove choice, remove freedom, and refuse to compete fairly on an even basis, it’s BUSINESS, it’s $’s, and to hell with the users rights, ever tried getting a refund from microsoft ?

GL if you ever try that ROFLMAO

Microsoft are a terrific “company”, wall street love them, they know how to sew up the market and railroad the market they are in, thats what they do and they are extremely good at it.

Their OS’s are extremely widely used and therefore more applications are written for them, but don’t forget the majority of application’s are written by people outside of microsoft, and they could just as easily write applications for Linux as for windows.

I’m sure people in the Linux world would welcome this, even if the applications were to cost some $’s, providing the applications were written in rock solid code, and were excellent quality.

Remember Windows XP, well that is just windows NT with a few bits of games playing ability grafted on to it, in essence ;0)

And even windows NT was not a microsoft original, but I won’t go into that here LoL

Reply

Matej Postolka May 7, 2009 at 12:08 am

100% Agreed! I recently migrated from Vista to Ubuntu and I love every bit of it! The only problem I ever had were a few issues with drivers but I solved that relatively quickly.

Reply

GDI June 3, 2009 at 8:56 pm

I am becoming very curious about Ubuntu and I definitely want it on my next pc. Vista crashes consistently and applications I use in Vista tend to freeze up and crash and I hear that is not an issue with Ubuntu Linux and the open source applications like Open Office and Evolution.

Reply

Dave July 2, 2009 at 2:29 am

Linux is NOT for the faint-of-heart. Linux, based on Unix, is not natively user-friendly. Thanks to Ubuntu, Linux has come of age. Unix/Linux was typically used as a server platform, but now serves as well as desktop, laptop, and other platforms. I have converted all of my machines to Ubuntu Linux. Configuration and utility are limitless. Forget the FUD (Fear Uncertainty and Doubt) factor microsoft relies on. My learning curve was about 100 hours, but now I have regained the control of my computers I lost in the change from Windows 3.1 to Windows 95. My entire operating systems are on 16 GB Cruzer memory sticks. If the stick is in, I boot Ubuntu. If the stick is removed, I boot Windows. I no longer boot Windows other than to update a bloated OS.

Reply

mikedk July 16, 2009 at 11:55 am

been using ubuntu since 5.04 but that was only for a few weeks then breezy badger 5.10 came out.

finding ubuntu very nice for an OS and is my prefered OS now, have it installed on 5 laptops and 1 desktop now, not using m$ anymore

nice post btw

Reply

mikedk July 16, 2009 at 4:55 pm

been using ubuntu since 5.04 but that was only for a few weeks then breezy badger 5.10 came out.

finding ubuntu very nice for an OS and is my prefered OS now, have it installed on 5 laptops and 1 desktop now, not using m$ anymore

nice post btw

Reply

hehheh July 18, 2009 at 9:53 am

Windows is good, but ubuntu is better!

Reply

Matthew Spinks July 29, 2009 at 9:59 pm

11. Linux hard drives do not have to be defragmented.

Reply

tet August 4, 2009 at 6:31 am

I installed Ubuntu a few days ago just to try it out and I haven’t booted into windows since then.

Ubuntu is faster, doesn’t crash, no need to re-start whenever you install something, the visual effects are so freaking awesome it’s unbelievable (windows would crap itself), all my hardware just works without me having to do anything, it’s way easier to install stuff (you just tick whatever you want from a huge list), etc…

I still need windows for music production but for everything else I’m gonna stick with Ubuntu.

Reply

Dilbert dogsbody December 11, 2010 at 8:23 pm

Quote
“I still need windows for music production”
Unquote

Really, there are some very good music production applications available under Linux.

Take a look in the repositories for your flavour of Linux ;0)

Linux multimedia station (LMMS) is just one of many.

Reply

gjraven August 13, 2009 at 7:11 pm

I am doing a survey ubuntu 9.04 vs. windows xp

Reply

Everett September 2, 2009 at 10:39 am

I have been using Linux for over 10 years as a desktop operating system. I have dual boot pc but I probably cannot even remember my XP password. After using this version of Ubuntu 9.04 that is I do not see any reason to go back into the Windows OS unless I am really bored and just want to run some updates reboot run some more update and reboot again so i can install service packs reboot again more updates reboot AV updates reboot again clean temp files clean Internet Temp Files reboot again identify update that causes problem uninstall update opps blue screen find install disk boot up forgot password only 3 tries get linux disk wipe out windows password reboot use repair disk buy more software to clean registry then some more software to defrag opps buy some more for spyware get spyware by going to wrong website computers down again. I just get tired of even thinking about it.

Reply

sleepyseven September 15, 2009 at 4:04 am

Ubuntu blows away xp, put that down on your suvey.

Reply

gjraven August 14, 2009 at 12:11 am

I am doing a survey ubuntu 9.04 vs. windows xp

Reply

iTheBadGuy September 9, 2009 at 9:04 pm

I used Ubuntu 9.04 for about 1 weeks before i decided to go back to windows 7 (RTM is released, pirated FTW!). I was having a really bad time with the terminal, i’m one of those people who just want things to be easy.. a click here, a click there, and BAM! it’s done. I hate having to type in so many damn commands to do something that can take me a few clicks in windows..

It’s my opinion, but when Ubuntu decides to be somewhat like windows; Not obligated to use the terminal, then i’ll be more than happy to use it. But the whole typing in terminal just spoils all my fun =/

Reply

iTheBadGuy September 9, 2009 at 9:21 pm

Oh and almost forgot to say, I've never bought a Windows (95 to windows 7). I've never bought a software for windows.. And i always get the updates from microsoft, download anything i need from there page without any problems. So my windows is free, and every program i use for my windows is free as well ;) .

How you like them apples? (lol).

It might be illegal.. but when has that stopped anyone from doing it?, I'm in mexico too.. so seriously i don't care ^_^

Reply

sleepyseven September 15, 2009 at 4:02 am

Ubuntu is the best Linux operating system I have used bottom line. Linux is alive because of its huge supporting community constanatly evolving its existence.

I do not hate Bill Gates, or Microsoft. (*joel)
I am not a master Linux user and or programmer.

As for software compatibility, what do you need to get done and you can do it Ubuntu style. Games? You can run WINE and it will emulate the most popular GamesSoftware available to be used on your Linux operating system. It all works.
I do know computers and I know Linux, with the help of Ubuntu, Red Hat, and a few others Linux will be the new system. Its just BETTER.

I suppose there are always Users, and Creators. In linux you are either one or the other.

Reply

Conway Crunk September 21, 2009 at 7:17 pm

I have had a long interest in Linux simply because its entirely free and open source, and when I upgraded to Vista it gave me one too many headaches so I got a copy of Ubuntu and never looked back. Ubuntu definitely shatters all the myths about Linux being hard to learn and use, granted it takes a bit of learning but the curve is small. Granted Linux is not for everyone, the average desktop user has no reason to switch to Linux, but for tech savvy users I would definitely recommend Ubuntu over any other operating system out their.

Reply

stampedfoolest September 28, 2009 at 6:13 am

I had the same experience with Ubuntu, its too cool , you should try Kubuntu also , it has got more graphical stuff and my graphics card installation worked like a charm in it.

Reply

Akshay Bist October 26, 2009 at 1:48 pm

1. No viruses – not true! yeah granted that win32 executables can't run in Linux, but where does it say that a virus has to be a win32 executable file. Yeah, most viruses are, but that doesn't mean that Linux can't have viruses. Its less likely, but possible.
4. Free Software – not all software available for Linux is free or even open source for that matter, though most is free & open. If you're really big on free & open source software, then there is an option in Ubuntu which doesn't allow any non free software to install on your machine.
3. Better Learning – Ubuntu won't make you learn anything unless you want to learn yourself, well in most cases anyways. Unless you have driver issues & need to install from tarballs(tar.gz & the likes) you can use Ubuntu & never have to use the CLI. If you want or need your OS to force you to learn then you're better off using something like Arch Linux.

Reply

EmpathyMan November 28, 2009 at 11:19 am

I totally agree with you!

I have been using Ubuntu for 2 days and I must say I am surprised with the speed, compatibility of the OS. It's really easy to use, it looks better than XP and works great!

If you have a Windows computer I would recommend installing Ubuntu in dual boot, it's free open-source and fast! The installation process was extremely simple and it's really fast.

So, thumbs up for Ubuntu!

Reply

sahandasanthamagalarachchi December 25, 2009 at 2:17 pm

I've been using Ubuntu in this month,it is very fast,I love Ubuntu so much.

Reply

umar January 9, 2010 at 5:56 pm

yeah, It's true.. I'm a technical person… i'm using linux ubuntu so far, facing no problem, No virus….

Reply

joey nutballio January 22, 2010 at 10:40 pm

everyone talks a lot about ubuntu? ubuntu is fantastic but xubuntu is even better. no one seems to know about it. i know very little about computers so i just started burning linux OS's to cd's and installing them on a bunch of old computers. xubuntu is the best, followed by ubuntu and pclinuxos. puppylinux is also fabulous for reeeaaalllyyy old computers. xp pro service pack 3 is good too but not as secure as linux stuff. most of my computers are 6-7 years old with a half a gig of rdram.

Reply

Ehtisham Haq January 27, 2010 at 12:40 am

Ubuntu is good. I have started using it.Do you know any Real Player alternative for Ubuntu.

Reply

joekirby January 27, 2010 at 1:29 am

Yeah ubuntu is free and fast because the technology used is different from windows.

Windows built under windows kernel
ubuntu built under unix kernel…. same as mac.

and it's not possible to got virus.

anyway ubuntu make your hardware last longer.

so if you dont have money to buy mac…just install ubuntu… not bad.

Any altenative real player in ubuntu?

Just use VLC player

go to terminal

and type this command

sudo apt-get update

sudo apt-get install vlc vlc-plugin-esd

sudo apt-get install mozilla-plugin-vlc

good luck!

Reply

Linuxgeek January 27, 2010 at 9:46 pm

Ive been using linux for over 14 years and would not use windows for anything its total crap

Reply

Linuxgeek January 28, 2010 at 2:46 am

Ive been using linux for over 14 years and would not use windows for anything its total crap

Reply

aintnothang February 15, 2010 at 4:11 am

ubuntu actually works for me with my new computer but even windows 7 was always crashing and vista

Reply

ping pong March 21, 2010 at 2:02 am

@dak…do you understand what did you say?

the best is BSD…free bsd…

Reply

ping pong March 21, 2010 at 7:02 am

@dak…do you understand what did you say?

the best is BSD…free bsd…

Reply

Joe Selvy April 18, 2010 at 1:08 am

I know this article is old, but what a giant fail.

1. Just because linux doesn't run Win32 Exes that doesn't mean there can't be viruses.
2. About 0.000001% of people would know/care about modifying their OS
3. I'd say Windows is “better learning” – it teaches you what people use in the real world
4. No, every application is NOT free, and there are certainly many Windows applications that don't have a better Linux alternative.
5. Who says it's easier to use than XP/Vista? I bet if you gave it to 100 random people who know nothing about computers their responses would suggest otherwise.
6. Windows has a larger communities
7. There's a compromise between usability and “ohh fancy effects”, compiz falls into the latter category.
8, 9, 10. Well done, 3/10 of your points are valid.

I use both Windows / Linux (Ubuntu) but I really feel fanboy articles like these with inaccurate and/or blatant misinformation hurt the community.

Reply

joe kirby April 18, 2010 at 2:56 am

windows should be free as well… because no quality at all. go MAC! MAC rules!

Reply

Akshay May 16, 2010 at 1:27 pm

rofl!! You know nothing about OS's do you?

Reply

econty June 11, 2010 at 9:47 pm

I am deeply sorry for those like like windows better, you are morons, windows is based on DOS, a worthless piece of junk that does virtually nothing, on top of that you have a Crappy GUI that was bought from apple back in the '80s. Plus windows has virtually no command line usability, and alone as an operating system it is worthless. Windows is like a rickety pallet that you pile all kinds of crap onto until it breaks (every 2 weeks or so)

Reply

Guest September 6, 2010 at 3:51 pm

(Your post is most likely flamebait but I’ll reply anyways so people are informed.) Idiot linux fanboys like you are what make people not want to try out linux. You people (the hardcore fanboy jackasses) always say stupid things along the lines of: it’s software is free!, it doesn’t get viruses!, it’s easier to use! etc. then you try to bring down windows users with false claims about how it’s stuck in the 80s. Hello! have you even SEEN or TRIED the new Windows 7. It’s the best OS on the market today. It’s got great compatibility, any free software on linux is already on windows (ie openoffice etc.), you can customize it to your liking and contrary to your Moronic beliefs it does NOT break every two weeks or so. If you are breaking windows every two weeks then YOU ARE THE IDIOT. This is coming from someone who has used Windows, OSX, and Linux. Windows seems to be the most superior os for NORMAL PEOPLE.

Reply

Dilbert dogsbody December 11, 2010 at 5:57 pm

OH Please, this is just more ranting and raving.

I have been using computers since the 1980′s, and I can assure you of one thing.

Micro$haft (as I call them), have never invented anything !
They have copied (and then out marketed), bought, or tied up through the courts until
the competition went bust, every litlle program or company that even had a hint of being competition to them.

Even now the same old microshaft continues to battle google for the competition in the search engine market, sorry microshaft, google has loads a money too !

the very term “windows” or gui was a stolen idea by microsoft, (they shafted ibm) when it was supposed to be a joint venture.

Please stop telling me microshaft is great, wonderful and the best thing since sliced bread.

Put simply microsoft’s business model is to lock in its customers, kill anything that looks like competition, and generally use it’s place in the world to abuse all at maximum effect.
Just keep the $’s coming and to hell with the customers.

I still use microshaft windows, and I use Linux too, they are installed on seperate machines, and never the twain shall meet.

It’s not about which OS is best, to me it’s about ideology, Linux is on the moral high ground, and microsoft is down in the quagmire of downright dirty tricks and schemes.

Take windows XP, you do a nice clean fresh install, during the install routine you get asked to create a user, most would create the user, and all is wonderful you think and off you go.
However, by creating that user, you have also hidden the “owner” user and that “owner” user has no password protection, and totally without your knowledge, and whats more it’s hidden from you, even as administrator !

Windows XP was also originally shipped with raw sockets enabled !
Ask any security concious expert what that means to a pc hooked up to the internet.

Linux is not perfect, nor will it ever be, because it is evolving constantly, that is it’s nature.

so, given a choice which is better ?

Neither……. both……..either LoL

But I know which I prefer, (how I don’t know, but I still have an ethical and moral sentiment alive and kicking even after all these years)

All the best and enjoy your operating systems whichever you choose, I have a sneaking preference for Pclinux os

Eric August 2, 2010 at 9:32 am

I made the switch to Linux over six years ago and will never look back. I manage a Windows Network all from my Linux machine. Have not had any slow downs on my machine, no disk defrag to worry about, no expensive upgrade costs, no virus. The List could go on forever why I love it so much!

Great Post!

Reply

Inlibertywetrust September 9, 2010 at 11:30 am

There are a lot of free software to windows both commercial and open source. If Ubuntu was more popular, there would also be commercial freeware available to that OS. Actually, a lot of proprietary software to buy as well (like Photoshop). Linux fans could then not argue that all software to Ubuntu is free. IOpen source can not satisfy all needs. I think that open source and proprietary software are both needed. Let the demand decide.

By the way, there are a lot of high quality free antivirus software available to Windows. Even Microsoft offers one for free (Microsoft Security Essentials).

Reply

dude2210 September 21, 2010 at 6:36 pm

im using Ubuntu right now.it has no av scanner no slow downs and starts up faster than any windows machine

Reply

Pdx247 December 5, 2010 at 6:00 am

BS.

1. No Viruses – There are less viruses written for Linux because less people use it. It’s as vulnerable to viruses as Windows and yes, they DO exist 2. Open Source – Technically true, but do you really plan to modify the OS?
3. Better Learning – No, it doesn’t help you use the terminal. You must learn this if you want to use it. Just like the Command shell in Windows, you must learn it.
4. Free Software – No, not all applications are free, some cost, some don’t. Just like Windows 5. Easy to Use – It’s not bad, but it’s not quite as easy as Windows.
6. Ubuntu Community Help – This support seems better on Linux, but it exists in both.
7. Cool Desktop Effects – Don’t know, don’t care.
8. Easy Upgrade – Yeah, this is better in Linux, but Windows upgrades just as easily, it’s the 3rd party stuff that’s better.
9. Highly Customizable – Nope, there’s just as many settings and it’s not easier. 10. You can do this in Windows, it’s just not as easy.

Reply

Ranjith Siji December 19, 2010 at 5:24 pm

@PDx247
I am a Hardcore Linux Programmer :

1. There are Viruses :- But no one is capable of shattering your OS like windows. If one user affect the virus then it remain there only. Not to the OS.

3. In current Ubuntu [10.10] No terminal needed. Your pointing Devices, Finger Print readers, Webcams, Mobile Phones [No PC suite Needed] and printers will work fine without installing that socalled drivers and restart of PC.

4. All the essential softwares are Free. There are alternatives. OK windows get great programmes but costs great!!!. You can Open docx files in openoffice and save tooo – You just try using Office 2003 or Office 2000. You fail. and Built in PDF export for every programmes.

6. Yes Community is existing for Both . For Better help in windows you need to Pay.
7. If you need Then there is . If you dont want then you get a lighting fast system with everything done. Updates of latest technology in every 6 months dont want to wait for [5-6 years ]

8 – OS Update is Ok in windows . If you try to upgrade your Softwares like photoshop or Corel Draw or any thing ? Can you update without uninstall the previous version. In Linux you can do.

9 – Yes You can customize. it is possible. You can install in Your nettop,laptop,PC, You can make your own super computer with this. Can you try on Windows ? Things are easier in Ubuntu.

10 – Even You can install a whole windows inside linux.

Things that dont find in any windowsPC

1. MP3 Preview – Just put your mouse over an audio file it start playing
2. Tabbed Browsing in your File Browser – If you want to open another location like D: or E: just press cntrl+T you will get tabs like in firefox. Press F3 will bring side by side pans to copy and paste.
3. Integrated Social Networking – Just click on system tray your twitter,facebook,MSN,google talk account in coming no need to install any additional software.
4. Multiple Network Connection – If you are connecting to multiple internet connections in wired line, wifi, mobile internet it is all easy in linux. The One network manager will take care of you.
5. Built in Universal Clock – The system tray Just add a location You will get the local time and weather of all over the world.
6 – Multiple Desktop Workspaces – So many windows you can use multiple desktops for multiple applicaitons. Switch them with a mouse click. You can Edit your office and you can browse and you can play a song and switch between them without minimizing just switch workspaces. everytime you will get fresh uncluttered desktop
7 – No Defragmentation – Never need a defragmentation.
8 – No money matter. You dont want to pay anything to try a linux. It is as easy as just put a cd on your drive and boot to a linux. Start using also view your windows files and repare your virus affected windows system.

So just consider it.

Reply

Smokinxp December 31, 2010 at 2:17 pm

1) MP3 previews – um you been able to do that wuith Windows for a few years. so next
2) Tabbed Browsing – never heard of Alt+Ctrl?
3) Intergrated Networking. Big woops. there are alot of programmes that intergrate all the social network software into one
5) That clock doesn’t update if you aren’t connected to the internet, so it’s no better then WIndows clock, as for weather. well once again big woops. here’s a tip, look outside or just open a browser and have a MSN/hotmail/Yahoo/Google account you can personalise a whole mini website to include any info you like.
6) Multiple Desktops. been able to do that since Vista was in beta. so thats no longer Linux only

7) No Defrag ever, how do you know you don’t need it, if the OS doesn’t provide the ability to monitor? oh and SSD’s don’t need defragging ever either so if you have those it’s irrelevant what OS you are using.

8) You don’t need to pay for Windows support. Countless free sites with help forums and it doesn’t cost a cent to post on microsoft sites anyway. Only costs if you decide to ring them

9) Don’t need to necessarily uninstall previous versions to update, thats a fault on the software developers side ones that don’t uninstall properly etc.. but a hell of a lot of programmes update automatically or will atleast uninstall the previous version b4 installing a new one.

10) Once again you can customize windows if you have the know how, are an atist or better yet go to the countless sites where people already have done the work for you, hell i had Ubuntu’s cubed desktop theme on my XP computer.

Smokinxp December 31, 2010 at 2:02 pm

1) No Viruses – False, just cause it can’t run Windows Exe doesn’t mean it can’t get infected by a virus from any source. Unless you don’t connect to the net and don’t share disks with other people. The reason it may seem virus free is that few people use it so why would a virus creator bother when most of the world uses Windows or Mac OS.

2) Open Source – OK so anybody can alter the script, how is that a totally good thing? so anyone can alter for the worse aswell as the better.

3) Better Learning – um if you bothered to learn u can do stuff in windows command prompts just as easy. or better yet if you want to do anything you don’t have to type in lines of code to get it to do simple things like install a driver.

4) Free – OK i concede on that one :) Linux wins out there, but you are getting what you paid for too.

5) Easy to use. pffft Windows is easy too when you learn the basics. I will give it having most of the software available at a touch is a good thing

6) Highly customizable, um so is windows, so is Mac OS

7) Experience Live – At a severely gimped performance. But yes this is something you more or les can’t do Windows

8) Hardware support is still low, cause developers refuse to support it when all there business comes from Microsft and to a lesser extent Apple systems.

Reply

Eggbertd5 January 6, 2011 at 8:19 pm

try upgrading your motherboard/cpu/hard drive with windows 7, oops no longer valid copy of windows !

what’s that about ?

complete loser, end of story.

Look at it this way,
I payed for every component in this machine, I own it, I Built it, it is mine.
If I want to upgrade it, that is my concern and no business of any operating system.

But the way Microshaft see it, it’s their machine and they can dictate to me what I can and can’t do !

I have changed a piece of hardware and now it’s a different machine !
Therefore the License is no longer valid !

So sod em is my attitude, they can keep their nose out of my business, period.

They say it’s about protecting their operating system revenue from piracy,

Bah Humbug, it’s about control, it’s about controling the end user.

With Linux I can upgrade my machine in any way I want, at any time I choose, and don’t have any concerns at all, no phone calls, no having to explain anything to big brother Microshaft,

Take the new wonderful Idea of cloud computing (not just a microsoft idea), on the surface it’s great.

But look at it from a cracker’s point of view, hack one single cloud server, and get access to how many peoples information ?

one crack does it all baby.

Ah the future is bright indeed, and microsoft is guiding every windows user down the path headlong into cloud computing.

Where’s outlook express in windows 7 ?
don’t exist mate, it’s windows live mail, online email, again crack one and get all.

Ho Hum, keep it real people, and be safe ;0)

Reply

Eggbertd5 January 6, 2011 at 8:43 pm

At the end of the day,
You pay’s your money and you takes your choice.

Windows is better for some things, and Linux is better for others.

You can keep throwing up arguments for ever, the end result is a lot of wasted time.

The real question for anyone is………..

Have you tried anything else other than Microsoft operating systems ?

If not, why not ?

There is nothing to fear, you managed to learn windows, right ?

so whats stopping you learning something else ?

Linux, Mac, Unix, BeOS, Bsd, the computing world is not only Microsoft !

Try something different, you may like it, you may not, but at least you have tried.
Better than never knowing anything different even exists right ?

It’s all about choice, something which is becoming less and less these days.

Or to look at it from a different angle……………………….

What would you rather be, an Individual, free thinking, human being, or a sheep ?

Guest August 20, 2011 at 5:46 am

I couldn’t have said it any better myself. I also built my machine. It’s MY creation, not microshafts. It’s MY choice and MY business if I want to change a piece of hardware on it. Therefore, I am using Ubuntu, although I still have Winblows XP installed…but that’s only until I find a way to work around a few other things, such as streaming video on Netflix.

Eggbertd5 January 7, 2011 at 12:00 am

Quote “8) Hardware support is still low, cause developers refuse to support it when all there business comes from Microsft and to a lesser extent Apple systems.” Unquote

As I explained in an earlier post, this is down to “FUD” (fear uncertainty and doubt), about losing Microsoft sales.

Microsoft apply pressure to companies not to support other OS’s.

Nvidia have supported Linux with native drivers for years, but ATI refused.

However, ATI noticed that Nvidia were selling lots of graphics cards to Linux users, because the Linux world appreciated the Nvidia native driver support, they were dropping ATI, and making it publicly known they were dropping ATI in forums and bulitin boards around the net.

Now ATI do native Linux drivers, I wonder why ? LOL

Linux is a growing Market, and companies are becoming more aware of that fact.
It is a slow process granted, but given time, more and more companies will make Linux support available, they will have to, or lose too many sales.

ATI graphics cards were losing out, maybe not a huge market now, but it is growing, and a growing market creates it’s own pressure, and the greater that pressure becomes, the less fear Microsoft can throw around.

IT will take a while yet, but most hardware is supported already under Linux, mostly it’s the odd ball esoteric hardware which is problematic.

ON the subject of hardware see below.

Reply

Ppp January 19, 2011 at 9:19 pm

Lenovo S10 DVD play via VLC is great on XPP32 but sucks with Ubuntu .. why?

Reply

Kerrimae February 3, 2011 at 3:07 pm

Well buddy, I’m gonna let ya know that number 1 is not true. While the virus worries of Ubuntu are minimal there are viruses that target Linux systems. Care must still be used. Best to have ClamAV or something there just in case and be sure a good firewall is running. Other than that, good post.

Reply

Vlad February 17, 2011 at 3:39 pm

Linux destroyed my hard disk!!! I cannot access my Windows files any more!!!

Linux sucks so much!!! :( (((((((((((((((8

Reply

Wanker March 20, 2011 at 2:23 pm

Linux sucks so bad

Reply

Ben Laden April 8, 2011 at 7:30 am

I only have 5 reasons:
1. Windows XP is the best productivity desktop
2. Windows 2003 Active Directory Service is the best directory service
3. Windows DNS is the best internal DNS server
4. Exchange 2007 is the best groupware application platform
5. Windows has better hardware support with vendor-supported drivers
If you can’t understand any of these 5 reasons, i can clarify each for you

Reply

Ben Laden April 8, 2011 at 7:38 am

OK Benny Laden has decided to do it anyway:
#1 Windows XP is the best productivity (and gaming) desktop – If you want an OS that is stable, fast, supports every hardware device you are likely to need/want, runs the best games, works well with broadband or other Internet connections, and had the best applications, Windows XP is your choice. It just freakin works. This is why it is also the most popular desktop OS on the market. Not because of slick marketing or predatory practices. Most companies have standardized on XP because it offers superior productivity for their user community. Apple and Linux fill niches, but for general purpose desktops, XP is the way to go. Here are a couple of “killer apps” that make XP the choice for most businesses:

Office Suite – Microsoft Office is the de facto standard. Sure there are alternatives, such as Open Office, but they are cheap clones that do not offer the power, ease of use, or compatibility with the rest of the world.
Best-of-Breed Specialty Applications – Photoshop, Illustrator, Project, Visio, AutoCAD. This is but a short list of products that professionals know are the best tools for the job. They all run best on Windows XP, although some might argue Photoshop runs better on a Mac. Again, there are *nix alternatives, but they are clones, not best-of-breed. You can run many of these using Wine, Cross-Over, or VMWare, but why emulate the best product when you can run the best product?
Wireless & cellular Support – I have yet to find the wireless network I cannot connect to with XP, but I’ve had plenty of problems under Linux. For Christmas, I got a shiny new Asus EeePC. It is a cool toy, but out of the box, it doesn’t support WPA2 encryption. There are a variety of hacks available, but they all stink. I also just bought a Cingular cellular card for my laptop. Works great under XP, but not under Ubuntu. The problem with wireless support is two-fold: 1) Manufacturers are lazy, so they only produce drivers for the market leaders, Windows and Apple. 2) Manufacturers want to keep their Intellectual Property to themselves, rather than release it under GPL. As a consumer, I don’t care. It works under XP, and sucks under *nix.
VPN Support – The major VPN hardware manufacturers support Windows, but not Linux. Again, their are hacks, work arounds, etc., but if you want to install it and know it will work, XP is the better choice.
Windows XP = more powerful applications and lower end-user support costs. In IT, that is what we should be focused on. Not what is cool, “free,” or “not-proprietary.” Note I did not say Windows Vista. Vista has some cool features, but is filled with bloat, and should probably die the same death as Windows ME & Microsoft BOB. The general rule of thumb for Microsoft desktop OSes is you should always skip a generation. Windows 95 was a good concept, but it was buggy, but Windows 98 was solid and stable. Windows ME was terrible. Windows 2000 professional was OK, but Windows XP is solid. It will probably be another 3 years before I upgrade away from XP, giving me a solid 10 years on the platform. Not bad for a desktop OS, and well worth the $100 the license cost me.

#2 Windows 2003 Active Directory Service is the best directory service – Single sign-on is a big deal in most IT shops. Windows 2003 ADS is the easiest, fastest, most cost-effective solution for building a a directory service for all your users, all your desktops, and all your applications. And because ADS is based on LDAP, and the Internet Authentication Service (IAS) supports RADIUS, ADS can also provide single sign-on for all your *nix servers and your network gear. ADS also includes a bunch of features that make it suitable to support even the largest organizations; the two most important being administrative delegation, and multi-master replication. Administrative delegation allows you to push specific tasks, such as password resets to lower-paid, lower skilled helpdesk people. It also supports compliance initiatives such as Separation of Duties (if you’ve ever been through a SOX audit, you understand). Many companies use this to delegate tasks such as user creation and deletion to Human Resources. The MMC GUI interface lessens the learning curve for delegated administrators.

Multi-Master replication is almost as cool, and in some ways far more useful. In ADS, all domain controllers act as a master. This means that you have no single point of failure, since any one server can die. It also means that changes can be made on any server and they replicate out to all others. If you have admins in London and Tokyo, they can each work on locale servers and receive each other’s updates. Setting up a new domain controller, once the OS is installed is a single command function: DCPROMO. Once the new server is promoted, the entire directory gets replicated. Of course there are additional considerations that Windows Admins must make for everything to work properly (sites, OUs, FSMOs, etc.), but the fundamental architecture is simple, secure, stable, easier to use, and more powerful than any other directory server on the market.

#3 Windows DNS is the best internal DNS server – When it comes to hosting your internal (non-internet facing) DNS, the best tool for the job is Windows 2003, Active Directory (ADS) Integrated DNS zones. If you are not using Windows 2003 to host your DNS service, you are working too hard and should switch immediately. There are several reasons for this:

Your Windows Domain needs Windows DNS to work properly. According to every market share statistic out there, the chances are high that you already have a Windows domain, and therefore a Windows DNS infrastructure, for your desktop users. If you use a separate set of DNS servers to support your Unix/Linux servers, or your e-commerce infrastructure, you have to ask yourself why.
Windows ADS-integrated zones support multi-master replication out of the box. Ok, so I repeated a feature from #2, but applying it to DNS is even cooler. Multi-master DNS is especially useful when operating multiple data centers, that occasionally cannot communicate with each other, either as a normal operation or during a disaster scenario. Multi-master ensures changes can be made anywhere, and will replicate to all other DNS servers. Multi-master is possible on *nix BIND servers, but it is a pain to setup and maintain. Setting it up on Windows is trivial.
ADS stores DNS records in a database instead of a zone file. This makes it easier to query and update individual records. It also means that when a host record is updated, only the single changed record gets replicated to other servers, rather than the whole zone file. For large zones, with thousands of records, this can have a significant performance boost.
Windows supports Dynamic DNS (DDNS) and integrates with Windows DHCP. As clients are assigned IP addresses, DHCP registers the new IP with DNS as A & PTR records.
Like all Windows functions, DNS can be administrated by a simple MMC GUI. This lowers the skill and cost of administrating DNS records.
Windows also offers a powerful, scriptable command line interface to DNS: DNSCMD. DNSCMD is part of the Windows 2003 Support Tools. Need to create 500 host records, both forward and reverse, in different domains and subnets? DNSCMD can do it with a 1-line script (see my next blog article for an example). There is no *nix alternative that is this simple or powerful.
#4 Exchange 2007 is the best groupware application platform – Exchange 2007 & the Outlook client may be the single best product suite Microsoft makes. I specify groupware and not e-mail, because the true power of Exchange goes beyond mere messaging. If all you want is e-mail, IMAP will do. Exchange/Outlook is a collaborative suite which includes messaging, shared calendars, shared tasks, public folders, and a built-in workflow engine. Add to this wireless activesync and you can take the power of Exchange with you in your pocket on a Windows Mobile phone, or a Blackberry. Exchange also supports custom forms that are self-contained, self-distributing applications that unlock its true power. In addition, Exchange includes full-text indexing of messages and attachments, compliance journaling of messages, integrated local and global clustering, a full featured web-mail interface, and a unified messaging system. Lotus Notes, Oracle Collaboration Suite and Novell Groupwise simply don’t measure up.

#5 Windows has better hardware support with vendor-supported drivers – One of the most frustrating things about the *nix world is lack of vendor hardware support. This is true for both desktops and servers. The major Unixes are proprietary, because the vendors want you to buy their hardware. And while Linux can claim to support more hardware than Windows, the drivers are usually reverse-engineered hacks that the manufacturer doesn’t support, or wrappers around Windows drivers, such as NDIS. Because Windows is the most popular and universal OS, every hardware manufacturer writes its drivers for Windows. And since Windows doesn’t carry the GPL penalty, manufacturers are free to innovate and keep their intellectual property to themselves. The end result is that under Windows XP and Windows 2003, hardware just works. That is the power of market share.

To be fair, the same thing cannot be said of Vista or Windows 2003 64-bit. It will take a few years before the manufacturers have re-written their drivers for 64-bit, but Unix and Linux have the same issues. 32-bit Linux supports more hardware than 64-bit. The same problems occurred when we changed from 16-bit to 32-bit in the mid-90s. The key is vendor support. If I had a nickel for all the times a vendor told me they didn’t support a given flavor of Linux, or a specific Kernel revision, or the number of times a kernel *upgrade* broke some functionality, I’d have a lot of nickels.

So that’s my list. I could probably come up with 20 other reasons. I also have a long list of reasons why Unix is better than Linux, and an equally long list of ways Linux is best. The point is there is no one OS to rule them all. It’s a complex world out there, and we are better off choosing the right tool for the job, rather than letting prejudices blind us to the possibilities.

Reply

Atheist May 9, 2011 at 9:18 am

Lol, it’s people like you that make me ashamed to be associated with Linux. First off, in the into, you say it is challenging, but then say it’s easy later own. Shows your idiocy right there.

1. It is completely possible to get viruses on Linux, it’s just not as common because a) There’s no .NET framework to make coding a virus that can affect a lot of people easy b) There isn’t as big of a moronic (although it is growing, clearly shown by the fact you’re using it) user base that is dumb enough to get a virus in the first place c) Linux is more secure, however not completely secure.

2. Not all Linux distros are or have to be open source.

3. That isn’t necessarily apart of the Linux process.

4. LOLWUT! Where the hell did you pull that from? That isn’t even remotely correct and i don’t see why anyone would ever assume that.

5. Already stated how this is a contradiction.

6. So does Windows. Windows is probably better too because more people use it.

7. That’s Compiz not Linux, although you do have a point. It would have been better to say that you can choose your desktop environment, window manager, and window decorator (along with your command line interface) in Linux, unlike in Windows.

8. Windows also helps you manage updates.

9. In either one you have to either get a separate application not natively installed on the OS, unless you happened to find a distro that came with lots of tools, ubuntu doesnt by the way. If you don’t do that you do some deep stuff on both.

10. That is a valid point.

Yes, you are an embarrassment to the Linux community.

Reply

Atheist May 9, 2011 at 9:18 am

Lol, it’s people like you that make me ashamed to be associated with Linux. First off, in the into, you say it is challenging, but then say it’s easy later own. Shows your idiocy right there.

1. It is completely possible to get viruses on Linux, it’s just not as common because a) There’s no .NET framework to make coding a virus that can affect a lot of people easy b) There isn’t as big of a moronic (although it is growing, clearly shown by the fact you’re using it) user base that is dumb enough to get a virus in the first place c) Linux is more secure, however not completely secure.

2. Not all Linux distros are or have to be open source.

3. That isn’t necessarily apart of the Linux process.

4. LOLWUT! Where the hell did you pull that from? That isn’t even remotely correct and i don’t see why anyone would ever assume that.

5. Already stated how this is a contradiction.

6. So does Windows. Windows is probably better too because more people use it.

7. That’s Compiz not Linux, although you do have a point. It would have been better to say that you can choose your desktop environment, window manager, and window decorator (along with your command line interface) in Linux, unlike in Windows.

8. Windows also helps you manage updates.

9. In either one you have to either get a separate application not natively installed on the OS, unless you happened to find a distro that came with lots of tools, ubuntu doesnt by the way. If you don’t do that you do some deep stuff on both.

10. That is a valid point.

Yes, you are an embarrassment to the Linux community.

Reply

Atheist May 9, 2011 at 9:18 am

Lol, it’s people like you that make me ashamed to be associated with Linux. First off, in the into, you say it is challenging, but then say it’s easy later own. Shows your idiocy right there.

1. It is completely possible to get viruses on Linux, it’s just not as common because a) There’s no .NET framework to make coding a virus that can affect a lot of people easy b) There isn’t as big of a moronic (although it is growing, clearly shown by the fact you’re using it) user base that is dumb enough to get a virus in the first place c) Linux is more secure, however not completely secure.

2. Not all Linux distros are or have to be open source.

3. That isn’t necessarily apart of the Linux process.

4. LOLWUT! Where the hell did you pull that from? That isn’t even remotely correct and i don’t see why anyone would ever assume that.

5. Already stated how this is a contradiction.

6. So does Windows. Windows is probably better too because more people use it.

7. That’s Compiz not Linux, although you do have a point. It would have been better to say that you can choose your desktop environment, window manager, and window decorator (along with your command line interface) in Linux, unlike in Windows.

8. Windows also helps you manage updates.

9. In either one you have to either get a separate application not natively installed on the OS, unless you happened to find a distro that came with lots of tools, ubuntu doesnt by the way. If you don’t do that you do some deep stuff on both.

10. That is a valid point.

Yes, you are an embarrassment to the Linux community.

Reply

Atheist May 9, 2011 at 9:18 am

Lol, it’s people like you that make me ashamed to be associated with Linux. First off, in the into, you say it is challenging, but then say it’s easy later own. Shows your idiocy right there.

1. It is completely possible to get viruses on Linux, it’s just not as common because a) There’s no .NET framework to make coding a virus that can affect a lot of people easy b) There isn’t as big of a moronic (although it is growing, clearly shown by the fact you’re using it) user base that is dumb enough to get a virus in the first place c) Linux is more secure, however not completely secure.

2. Not all Linux distros are or have to be open source.

3. That isn’t necessarily apart of the Linux process.

4. LOLWUT! Where the hell did you pull that from? That isn’t even remotely correct and i don’t see why anyone would ever assume that.

5. Already stated how this is a contradiction.

6. So does Windows. Windows is probably better too because more people use it.

7. That’s Compiz not Linux, although you do have a point. It would have been better to say that you can choose your desktop environment, window manager, and window decorator (along with your command line interface) in Linux, unlike in Windows.

8. Windows also helps you manage updates.

9. In either one you have to either get a separate application not natively installed on the OS, unless you happened to find a distro that came with lots of tools, ubuntu doesnt by the way. If you don’t do that you do some deep stuff on both.

10. That is a valid point.

Yes, you are an embarrassment to the Linux community.

Reply

Atheist May 9, 2011 at 9:18 am

Lol, it’s people like you that make me ashamed to be associated with Linux. First off, in the into, you say it is challenging, but then say it’s easy later own. Shows your idiocy right there.

1. It is completely possible to get viruses on Linux, it’s just not as common because a) There’s no .NET framework to make coding a virus that can affect a lot of people easy b) There isn’t as big of a moronic (although it is growing, clearly shown by the fact you’re using it) user base that is dumb enough to get a virus in the first place c) Linux is more secure, however not completely secure.

2. Not all Linux distros are or have to be open source.

3. That isn’t necessarily apart of the Linux process.

4. LOLWUT! Where the hell did you pull that from? That isn’t even remotely correct and i don’t see why anyone would ever assume that.

5. Already stated how this is a contradiction.

6. So does Windows. Windows is probably better too because more people use it.

7. That’s Compiz not Linux, although you do have a point. It would have been better to say that you can choose your desktop environment, window manager, and window decorator (along with your command line interface) in Linux, unlike in Windows.

8. Windows also helps you manage updates.

9. In either one you have to either get a separate application not natively installed on the OS, unless you happened to find a distro that came with lots of tools, ubuntu doesnt by the way. If you don’t do that you do some deep stuff on both.

10. That is a valid point.

Yes, you are an embarrassment to the Linux community.

Reply

Atheist May 9, 2011 at 9:18 am

Lol, it’s people like you that make me ashamed to be associated with Linux. First off, in the into, you say it is challenging, but then say it’s easy later own. Shows your idiocy right there.

1. It is completely possible to get viruses on Linux, it’s just not as common because a) There’s no .NET framework to make coding a virus that can affect a lot of people easy b) There isn’t as big of a moronic (although it is growing, clearly shown by the fact you’re using it) user base that is dumb enough to get a virus in the first place c) Linux is more secure, however not completely secure.

2. Not all Linux distros are or have to be open source.

3. That isn’t necessarily apart of the Linux process.

4. LOLWUT! Where the hell did you pull that from? That isn’t even remotely correct and i don’t see why anyone would ever assume that.

5. Already stated how this is a contradiction.

6. So does Windows. Windows is probably better too because more people use it.

7. That’s Compiz not Linux, although you do have a point. It would have been better to say that you can choose your desktop environment, window manager, and window decorator (along with your command line interface) in Linux, unlike in Windows.

8. Windows also helps you manage updates.

9. In either one you have to either get a separate application not natively installed on the OS, unless you happened to find a distro that came with lots of tools, ubuntu doesnt by the way. If you don’t do that you do some deep stuff on both.

10. That is a valid point.

Yes, you are an embarrassment to the Linux community.

Reply

Atheist May 9, 2011 at 9:18 am

Lol, it’s people like you that make me ashamed to be associated with Linux. First off, in the into, you say it is challenging, but then say it’s easy later own. Shows your idiocy right there.

1. It is completely possible to get viruses on Linux, it’s just not as common because a) There’s no .NET framework to make coding a virus that can affect a lot of people easy b) There isn’t as big of a moronic (although it is growing, clearly shown by the fact you’re using it) user base that is dumb enough to get a virus in the first place c) Linux is more secure, however not completely secure.

2. Not all Linux distros are or have to be open source.

3. That isn’t necessarily apart of the Linux process.

4. LOLWUT! Where the hell did you pull that from? That isn’t even remotely correct and i don’t see why anyone would ever assume that.

5. Already stated how this is a contradiction.

6. So does Windows. Windows is probably better too because more people use it.

7. That’s Compiz not Linux, although you do have a point. It would have been better to say that you can choose your desktop environment, window manager, and window decorator (along with your command line interface) in Linux, unlike in Windows.

8. Windows also helps you manage updates.

9. In either one you have to either get a separate application not natively installed on the OS, unless you happened to find a distro that came with lots of tools, ubuntu doesnt by the way. If you don’t do that you do some deep stuff on both.

10. That is a valid point.

Yes, you are an embarrassment to the Linux community.

Reply

Atheist May 9, 2011 at 9:18 am

Lol, it’s people like you that make me ashamed to be associated with Linux. First off, in the into, you say it is challenging, but then say it’s easy later own. Shows your idiocy right there.

1. It is completely possible to get viruses on Linux, it’s just not as common because a) There’s no .NET framework to make coding a virus that can affect a lot of people easy b) There isn’t as big of a moronic (although it is growing, clearly shown by the fact you’re using it) user base that is dumb enough to get a virus in the first place c) Linux is more secure, however not completely secure.

2. Not all Linux distros are or have to be open source.

3. That isn’t necessarily apart of the Linux process.

4. LOLWUT! Where the hell did you pull that from? That isn’t even remotely correct and i don’t see why anyone would ever assume that.

5. Already stated how this is a contradiction.

6. So does Windows. Windows is probably better too because more people use it.

7. That’s Compiz not Linux, although you do have a point. It would have been better to say that you can choose your desktop environment, window manager, and window decorator (along with your command line interface) in Linux, unlike in Windows.

8. Windows also helps you manage updates.

9. In either one you have to either get a separate application not natively installed on the OS, unless you happened to find a distro that came with lots of tools, ubuntu doesnt by the way. If you don’t do that you do some deep stuff on both.

10. That is a valid point.

Yes, you are an embarrassment to the Linux community.

Reply

Atheist May 9, 2011 at 9:18 am

Lol, it’s people like you that make me ashamed to be associated with Linux. First off, in the into, you say it is challenging, but then say it’s easy later own. Shows your idiocy right there.

1. It is completely possible to get viruses on Linux, it’s just not as common because a) There’s no .NET framework to make coding a virus that can affect a lot of people easy b) There isn’t as big of a moronic (although it is growing, clearly shown by the fact you’re using it) user base that is dumb enough to get a virus in the first place c) Linux is more secure, however not completely secure.

2. Not all Linux distros are or have to be open source.

3. That isn’t necessarily apart of the Linux process.

4. LOLWUT! Where the hell did you pull that from? That isn’t even remotely correct and i don’t see why anyone would ever assume that.

5. Already stated how this is a contradiction.

6. So does Windows. Windows is probably better too because more people use it.

7. That’s Compiz not Linux, although you do have a point. It would have been better to say that you can choose your desktop environment, window manager, and window decorator (along with your command line interface) in Linux, unlike in Windows.

8. Windows also helps you manage updates.

9. In either one you have to either get a separate application not natively installed on the OS, unless you happened to find a distro that came with lots of tools, ubuntu doesnt by the way. If you don’t do that you do some deep stuff on both.

10. That is a valid point.

Yes, you are an embarrassment to the Linux community.

Reply

Atheist May 9, 2011 at 9:18 am

Lol, it’s people like you that make me ashamed to be associated with Linux. First off, in the into, you say it is challenging, but then say it’s easy later own. Shows your idiocy right there.

1. It is completely possible to get viruses on Linux, it’s just not as common because a) There’s no .NET framework to make coding a virus that can affect a lot of people easy b) There isn’t as big of a moronic (although it is growing, clearly shown by the fact you’re using it) user base that is dumb enough to get a virus in the first place c) Linux is more secure, however not completely secure.

2. Not all Linux distros are or have to be open source.

3. That isn’t necessarily apart of the Linux process.

4. LOLWUT! Where the hell did you pull that from? That isn’t even remotely correct and i don’t see why anyone would ever assume that.

5. Already stated how this is a contradiction.

6. So does Windows. Windows is probably better too because more people use it.

7. That’s Compiz not Linux, although you do have a point. It would have been better to say that you can choose your desktop environment, window manager, and window decorator (along with your command line interface) in Linux, unlike in Windows.

8. Windows also helps you manage updates.

9. In either one you have to either get a separate application not natively installed on the OS, unless you happened to find a distro that came with lots of tools, ubuntu doesnt by the way. If you don’t do that you do some deep stuff on both.

10. That is a valid point.

Yes, you are an embarrassment to the Linux community.

Reply

Atheist May 9, 2011 at 9:18 am

Lol, it’s people like you that make me ashamed to be associated with Linux. First off, in the into, you say it is challenging, but then say it’s easy later own. Shows your idiocy right there.

1. It is completely possible to get viruses on Linux, it’s just not as common because a) There’s no .NET framework to make coding a virus that can affect a lot of people easy b) There isn’t as big of a moronic (although it is growing, clearly shown by the fact you’re using it) user base that is dumb enough to get a virus in the first place c) Linux is more secure, however not completely secure.

2. Not all Linux distros are or have to be open source.

3. That isn’t necessarily apart of the Linux process.

4. LOLWUT! Where the hell did you pull that from? That isn’t even remotely correct and i don’t see why anyone would ever assume that.

5. Already stated how this is a contradiction.

6. So does Windows. Windows is probably better too because more people use it.

7. That’s Compiz not Linux, although you do have a point. It would have been better to say that you can choose your desktop environment, window manager, and window decorator (along with your command line interface) in Linux, unlike in Windows.

8. Windows also helps you manage updates.

9. In either one you have to either get a separate application not natively installed on the OS, unless you happened to find a distro that came with lots of tools, ubuntu doesnt by the way. If you don’t do that you do some deep stuff on both.

10. That is a valid point.

Yes, you are an embarrassment to the Linux community.

Reply

Starofradiance May 31, 2011 at 3:26 am

I have my XP machine modded to the max, but even so both Ubuntu and OSX are far more secure.  If I go on a know bad site, XP in Chrome, Firefox or IE will always acquire something forcing me to go into SafeMode to repair it.  The same sites on Ubuntu and OSX?  I have to close and restart the browser.  That is all.

Reply

Oblivion July 23, 2011 at 7:20 am

I see there are again two camps of thought here, so let me pitch in:

I:
- use Ubuntu → have for the past year,
- have WinXP and Ubuntu dualboot,
- used DOS and Windows since I was a kid,

I
am no programmer, so the transition was slow and painful but as I
slowly learned my way around Ubuntu I saw that, in terms of being an OS:
- Linux was much more customizable (from DE to setting key specific functions and installing or compiling software)
- Linux is far more stable (I once “over-cleaned” my system and I repaired it with a single command line)
-
Linux is greatly flexible in adapting to other platforms (you can
export in “alien” formats or install and run MS programs on Linux)
- Linux is more efficient (see below)
- Linux will survive if an irregularity occurs during update (ex: black out)

Safety of the OS:
- say what you want, but the majority of viruses don’t work on Linux yet and that *is* an enormous plus as the reason I switched to Linux was because a virus bypassed my 2 AV
- most Linux distros don’t come with a 15 year old back door “error” (which still persists) that randomly turns your computer on in the middle of the night and yes, I saw that happen.

In terms of simplicity and user friendliness:
-
it is less aggresive(it will not force you to do anything (Like MSN 7.5
forced users to update to Live or they could not use the service and
for no real reason. likewise, when Vista came out the number of BSOD in XP went up by 30% after the next update)
- the community is a “bit” harsh to newcomers as my first impression was that “just compile your own code man” was the most I will ever get from them.

Updates and upgrades are
- found automatically by the OS
- frequent (every week or more often)
- selectable (you can choose which packages to install and which to ignore)
- small

About efficiency:
- Programs are smaller:
((MS)Office2007 = 2 GB while OOO3.3 = 100-200 MB)

((MS)Maya 3D (2005) = 2.5 GB or (MS)3DStudioMax10 = 700 MB while Blender
2.5 = 23 MB) – go and check the numbers if you don’t believe me
-
stable program versions are stored in central repositories on the net
from which you can de/install packages at any time as long as the
distribution is supported (18 months min)

- if a program lacks a package it will identify which exactly and prompt you to download it

- Linux uses less computer resources and (consequentially) power to run (even with special effects)

- computer hardware can be managed(CPU per core, memory and heat functions can be monitored and controlled seperately)

Having
used both types of OS in the past and therefore at least basically
knowing what I am talking about Blondel’s comment in his post somewhat
offends me. What the Linux community “proves” or aims to prove is that
you can achieve the same end result you would with an MS OS and (in my
experience) with far less complications(upgrades/installs/repairs),
expense(software) and risk(piracy).

I will say, however that there *are* times when I would like to push
Linux out the door. The latest problem features an inability to enter
BIOS, Though it usually has to do with the computer deciding the
settings in the OS should be reset or changed. Still, I realize that
that is because my computer was built specifically for Windows OS and MS
have a tendency to release “universal” code and architecture that
surprisingly only works on their systems (.docx).

As for the comparison between Windows 7 and Ubuntu… let me quote two strangers:

“My Win7 shuts down in 13 seconds!”

“Congratulations, my Ubuntu has shut down in 7 since forever.”

~Oblivion.

Reply

Sdonatasuk September 26, 2011 at 8:36 pm

Bullshit… I’ve used ubuntu for 6 years now, Windows 7 is superior to linux. Why? Because differently that you assume, some people want to concentrate on acctual content – example articles, scientific/creative programs, any other information. if i’m disturbed in ubuntu with suddely not working sound or tickling sound, or crashes, thats not learning for me, but distractions… This would be learning only for person who pursues knowledge in computing e.g. server configuration, software developing etc (not in all cases). In any other case its a waste of time and a lot of false hype. I can say only one thing, the good software development product is when you simply need to know how to install program and run it, thats it. Otherwise these distractions will spoil your work, and you won’t be as good as others who use windows ir mac os X more productivelly. In other words what you are trying to say (methaphoricaly) is – this building is great (ubuntu), even if it is leaking water from the top and walls are made from cardboard. Sometimes this cardboard would collapse, but thats fine, because this way I can learn how to biuld new walls and modify house. Well, me and most I believe people without false illusions need a house, which would simply stay in its shape, be rubust and would allow its occupants to concentrate on whataver they do.. Its only a good scenario if you are a construction student, or in another words software developer.

Reply

Cfa77 October 7, 2011 at 10:32 pm

I just want to state that Ubuntu, with unity now, is just playing stupid. The OS was good as it was. And they had to change the inner philisophy subjacent to the Ubuntu OS. Unity really sucks. That’s all I have to say…

Reply

Mszoee October 31, 2011 at 7:56 am

Cripes for 35 year old technology they ought to help you switch

Reply

suraj July 18, 2013 at 1:45 pm

he has been paid by
=

Reply

Paul F. December 5, 2009 at 10:12 am

Actually, Linux is the kernel, Ubuntu is the Operating System (built on Linux), and Canonical is the Company.

A map might look something like this:

Registry -> Windows -> Microsoft
Linux -> Ubuntu -> Canonical
Linux (!) -> OSX -> Macintosh

Reply

George N. August 18, 2010 at 11:52 am

Paul F. The kernel of Microsoft Windows is the NT kernel. Mac OS X is actually made by a company called Apple and does not run on Linux, but rather a BSD derived kernel called Darwin.

Reply

Kerrimae February 3, 2011 at 3:13 pm

Ubuntu is the operating system, Linux is simply the kernel, and Canonical is the company behind it… I love how people post and dunno what the hell they are talking about.

Reply

Guest September 6, 2010 at 3:35 pm

So linux’s best argument is that it’s free? well thats what I gather from the article and your post. All the other points depend on the user and most if not all the free apps on linux are on windows as well.

Reply

Dilbert dogsbody December 11, 2010 at 10:37 pm

I should rephrase one bit in the above post, microsoft DID NOT steal the “windows IDEA / WORK” from IBM, they just didn’t tell IBM that they went live with it, and cut IBM out of it.

There was a big court case that went on for ages back then.
So, unscrupulous maybe, thieves no, not on that count (sorry for any miss-leading).

And an apology to Microsoft from me for typing that in the first place.

I would have edited it out, but unfortunately there is no edit function here

Reply

Dilbert dogsbody December 11, 2010 at 10:43 pm

“oh please think before you type” …………………… LoL

That applies to me too, SEE BELOW

DOH ;0)

Reply

Smokinxp December 31, 2010 at 2:19 pm

oops sorry i made a booboo, Tabbed Browsing is ALT+Tab not Alt+Ctrl. which has been intergrated in Windows for a longtime, just better utilised in Vista and 7.

Reply

Eggbertd5 January 6, 2011 at 10:12 pm

One Last Comment,
I know that all my previous posts, make it look like I hate Microsoft and or Mr gates.

I do not hate either,

I respect Mr Gates, he built an empire, made loads of money, and gave loads to charitable institutions, malaria cure research etc etc.

(which is all a heck of a lot more than I can claim).

Microsoft as a company brought home computing to the masses, made it all affordable, and easy to use.

If they hadn’t done that, then where would we be now ?

All I have hopefully done, is illustrate to all the “windows is best brigade”, that Microsoft windows is not the be all and end all, it has flaws, it has made some tremendous mistakes.

Linux is not the be all and end all either, it is a viable alternative for some, if not most home users, it has it’s own problems, and flaws too.

Reply

Blondel January 20, 2011 at 6:19 pm

disclaimer : informed, but non-nuanced opinion ahead.

* I tried Ubuntu and took an instant dislike to it.
* I really like Arch
* Linux for anything beyond the command line sucks and will continue to suck.
* Building LFS was fun
* Dos and Windows before XP were a PITA
* XP has worked fine on my home PC and did what I wanted it to do.
* Administrating anything up to and including Server 2003 was no fun at all.
* I quite liked Vista (with SP) on my home PC
* Windows 7 is a very good OS
* Server 2008 R2 takes some getting used to, but I’m starting to enjoy working with it
* PowerShell is cool and gets cooler the more I work with it.
* The best Linux distros are the ones that are most unix-like and are usually aimed at server use.
* Both the modern Linux kernel and basic tools and Modern Windows flavors have advantages and disadvantages in various situations, but both are excellent when used for what they’re good at
* All arguments that supposedly ‘prove’ Linux ‘is’ better than ‘Windows’ are either bullshit, or are only valid if a certain aspect applies to you, but this doesn’t extend to universal truths : Like a load of computer users, I have no interest at all in spinning icons or 3D desktops. The presence of lack of such features do not make a system better or worse than another unless you happen to care a lot about it.
* People who pick either Windows or Linux as their single solution for everything are naive, dumb and have obviously never done anything serious with computers.

Moreover : FOSS is a set of ethical rules without any ethical/moral _system_ on which it is based. Politically motivated opinions on FOSS are in desperate need for some basic knowledge about philosophy.

In conclusion :
* Linux zealots are in severe need of getting some real hands-on experience with multiple OS-es in multiple scenarios.
* Anyone who is politically uninterested with regard to OS-es and software, and who has more than basic experience with working with and administrating systems will agree with me that the thought alone of picking one OS as _absolutely_ ‘better’ than the other one is philosophical, linguistic and experiential bullshit.

Cheers, Conzo (sysadmin, with extensive experience with all kinds of OS-es)

Reply

Computer's Best Friend September 18, 2011 at 9:25 pm

Agreed. Windows is still making fat stacks because of the hordes of dumb-asses out there who know NOTHING about computers and see that Vista and 7 are pretty and easy to use for *BASIC* applications. Anything in-depth is almost never free, mind you. Had somebody even taught how to use Linux in high schools, we wouldn’t be stuck on blogging sites arguing about which is better.

I prefer to use both 7 and Ubuntu (until my mom made me take it off my family’s computer) for their own respective jobs. 7 has more and better Adobe and Flash support whilst Ubuntu specializes in being:
1.) Open-source/free
2.) Supportive of the concept of FREE apps
3.) Almost virus-free
4.) Easily modified and adapted for personalized use

Having said that, I hope I supported your point, DS234.

Reply

Leave a Comment

{ 9 trackbacks }