Mortal OS Kombat: Linux versus Windows 7



+ Add a Comment

Mary Mac

PCs NEED Linux

"The Trojans are using an AppleScript called ASthtv05 and/or may be bundled as an application. You must download and execute the file for your Mac OS X system to become infected."

Perhaps such simple minded people such as yourself do not understand what that means.

4 to 5 conscious actions to contract a trojan or a virus. Which means what? The virus or trojan will be localized, not wide spread. Therefore is unsubstantiated. Prove it! 

Mean while there are something like 60,000 Windows viruses.

Let's say you are correct about a Mac virus or trojan. I'll take that comparison any day! 


Plus the Application or Applications  that it claims to be bundled with are more than likely bootleg copies. However it doesn't exist! Period.

You could say the same for a Linux system.

2 words for you

Unix executable.


Please do some research before you post a comment based upon your opinion and not Facts. 


Good luck. 


Mary Mac

PCs NEED Linux

Look this is a fact! Mac does NOT have any virus. Certainly not on Snow Leopard.

Has Mac ever had a virus, of course! However they have not for years.

There have been some unsubstiated rumors such as a virus being associated with a pirated copy of something, but still NOTHING!!!

I have one word for you UNIX!

The sooner major PC manufacturers seriously back Linux the better for everyone. That type of a response from  PC manufacturers would in return cause programers and software developers to follow suit.

They would actually be able to compete with Apple. 

(Incase you are unaware Yes Mac has been the number 1 sold computer to college students for quite a few years now.)

There would be no more bragging by Mac that they don't have viruses and Windows does. You don't hear them attacking Linux. Linux is about as susceptible to viruses as OSX. PEROID.

Plus it would make people like me happy be cause healthy competition tends to bring down prices.


Linux (Fedora or Ubuntu) is competition for Mac. Windows quite simply is NOT. 





 yup June 2008 was YEARS ago

and that was a simple google.

Also Mac and unic are vunerable to the same Acrobat veunerabilites as PCs

The only reason mac's don't have wide spread virus infection is no one wants to make a virus for mac's 12% market share.

Coming soon to --Tokusatsu Heroes--
Five teenagers, one alien ghost, a robot, and the fate of the world.



well that might be true about apple gaining grounds but apparently did not take long to have a virus on a pirated copy of iworks. This is where it all starts. As of MS goes i think the new people in their HQ has caused the company to be aware of whats going on. MS is not stupid. Whether this monopoly was a bad thing or not i never have problems with alot of their products. Especially in the gaming front.



In the past 10 years windows has grown and windows has become better and more mature. I am not excusing things like Windows ME, or that craptastic pre-SP1 version of Vista, and let us not forget how much XP sucked hind quarters before SP2 either. Looking at the overall picture things have improved, driver support and development happens faster, bug fixes come on sooner, and functional issues seem to get resolved more rapidly than with past releases. I can only imagine this will get better with windows 7.


All that being said, Microsoft had better be listening to the consumer base and realizing that their time on top will not last forever. Mac OSX is making huge strides to increase user base in the younger crowd and as we all know once we learn to use something no one likes to change. Get them while they are young and they will stay. Same thing goes with linux and other opensource projects; does anyone really think that the younger generation is being catered to by a windows product? Nope, geeks and yuppies rule the younger crowd and in 10 more years we will be telling our grandkids about the company that made this operating system that one time...



Is this argument considering netbooks only?  Even so, what is there as far as gaming on linux?  I play all sorts of old games on my low powered poratable, and linux just wouldn't cut it for me.  Also, netbooks with Linux instead of windows are tyupically just $50 cheaper...  I am not sure the price difference is that important.



Whatever OS people want,they'll get.  F.O.S.S. is not a revolution,it's an evolution.

As people find computing as a normal part of their lives,some will stick with windows,others will be a tad more adventurist.

Example: a group of computer users learn email,surfing,and IM.Some of that group will learn more esoteric skills such as CAD. Some will go on to learn Sysadmin.Some will learn programming.

 A percentage of that group will not want,or even need to progress beyond the simple email/surf/IM.

 There is no fight here. There are only possibilities,and choices. 



oh oh i forgot to tell you guys the virus writer has prepared a thousand viruses for win7 and i told them please i beg you make a virus for linux. and they said shut-up it useless to write a virus for linux its hard to sabotage becoz no one will give you money and even we succed then what still nothing happens. M$ has prepared a lot of  money to give and were happy to write too..hehehe....ok guys are u ready to live with it?




windows 7 :

lower selling point ($50?USD) - cmon MS u made $500 per crappy sale of ultimate....

more stability

Win 7 opensource souinds like it would help



needs to become computing for the computer illiterate, much like windows CAN BE

and... well thats it...


ive played with linux here and there but it never managed to stay installed over a MS product.. reason being is that nothing in Linux is User friendly. Sure i could learn all the little "im a linux nerd" commands and nuances for how i have to spend 6 hours installing somthing that dosent work or itsnt recognized (network cards, vid cards, games, etc) or spend an squally boring 6 hours trying to figure out why it should work but it dosent however it works perfectly in the OS built to start and run...

But id rather be using my computer for more productive or entertaining things. If i was to learn a whole new thing i would learn some programming language instead of Linux commands


If MS can sell thier ultra killer of OS'es at a pricepoint that makes it worthwhile then great, all the better for them. Till thenn.. well... its like they cheated for 1st place and should be holding a silver medal. However Linux holds that silver medal cause no one understands what it did and why and would rather go about thier day doing what they do... computing.


teh 1337 haxxor

Actually, Ubuntu is quite easy. I've found it extremely easy to use. I set up printer sharing with an XP computer, gotten Steam and steam games to work, among other things, ALL WITHOUT OPENING THE CONSOLE ONE TIME.

As far as i'm concerned, Ubuntu is far easier to use than windows. For some reason, everything "clicks" with how I think. Everything seems obvious and accessible to me. I think that Linux will soon overtake Windows if MS keeps pulling stupid shit like they did with Vista. I would also like to see game developers releasing Linux compatible versions of their games. (As for Photoshop, the Gimp is nearly as good, its free, and works on multiple platforms.)



on the price poitn i disagree. the OS is the heart upon which all other aplications sit. So it should be the most expensive. bu i draw the line at 3x ($150)


Now adobe on the other hand....


Sorry chargiong me $400 for photshop whihc needs Windows to even run, thats dirty pool. Photoshop is not more important that the OS



 Aside from ny opinion that MaximumPC is a great mag/site regarding hardware but falls way short on software and ^especially^ when it comes to operating systems, I can find very little in this article to fault.

  First, the "very little":
    Bottom Line - Windows is no longer "easier to install, easier to use", simpler to configure.  The trends laid out in "Cathedral and Bazaar" and numerous other books and articles arguing why Open Source can and eventually MIUST win out are beginning to be shown true.  There are many other values but the main one important here is that propritery software developed by a large corporation simply cannot change as fast as Open Source community developed and evolved software, up to and including the OpSys.  Just compare the original goal set of Windows, even viewed as a whole through releases since 1998 (so we can talk about a 10 year period) to what actually ends up in the final release OpSys and then factor in just how fundamentally little has changed in the last 10 years with windows and then look at what Linux was 10 years ago and compare it to now.  It is so dramatically different I'll even throw in that you can choose whatever Linux distro you like and don't have to just compare to Xandros, Linspire, SuSe, Fedora (RedHat), or especially the variants of Ubuntu.  Even Slackware, the oldest distro still in use and still written to appeal mostly to hackers and geeks, has changed dramatically even if all one considers is kernel changes, and the kernel is the bottom line.

  Now the basic truth of the article:
    The greatest problems Linux faces are inversely proportionate to adoption.  The single greatest advantage windows has is widespread support, both hardware (drivers) and software (primarily games, but also apps such as a few  Adobe products).  This already shows it is improving with the Linux adoption rate since it is not only older hardware that Linux supports right-out-of-the-box, but increasingly newer and even newest hardware as well.  In fact 64 bit is *better* supported in Linux than it is in Windows and ram addressing alone can make that a huge issue starting now.  Linux is gaining.

  While kudos are certainly due to BARTPE and it's clones (there is too little difference to call them offspring) there is simply no comparison possible to Linux-based LiveCD's especially on thumbdrive.  The latest Live distros have excellent hardware detection and auto setup and drivers and software of all kinds can even be added on-the-fly.  The value of these distros is almost impossible to quantify since they have so many uses, from simple diagnostics and repair maintenance platforms, through non-commital test trials for newbies that give a good idea of what to expect to would-be converts (no comparable windows feature exists or can exist without paying first) to incredibly portable on-the-go system.  Once you've setup a bootable thumbdrive with the latest Ubuntu and tried it on several computers, you will see the future and your jaw will drop.  Linux is gaining.

  As for the main thrust of the article it cannot be faulted because despite the ongoing Windows vs/ Linux feud, the fact remains that Linux is indeed already gaining and as the article points out, tight economy equals more pressure to at least try it. These are both unarguable accomplished facts. More gains.

  Meanwhile, back at The Feud:
    Another situation changes with adoption rate and that is consumer perception of The Feud itself.  All one has to do now, and it will only get easier and more compelling as time goes on and Linux changes more quickly to respond to user needs, is try a modern distro for a month and it will be obvious that the overwhelming majority of Linux lovers have used Windows extensively while the majority of windows hold-outs have not given Linux a fair trial.  They either tried it a long time ago (2 years is a long time in the Open Source Linux world) or they didn't try it long enough to even begin to properly compare, considering how many hours everyone, evem granny, has invested already in learning Windows.  A sizeble proportion of Windows users began with Windows 95 or at the very least XP, which is now nearly 9 years in, so they have years invested in Windows.  One week or one day of dual booting is hardly a fair comparison, at least without over-the-shoulder supervision.  Still, despite the noisy Luddites, Linux is gaining.

  The Ultimate Bottom Line:
    Computing is now and will ever increasingly become far too important to leave in the hands of one or even two companies.  Software is far too important to be dependant on platform.  Changes come far too fast for corporations to respond quickly enough.  Therefore: Open Source, and that presently means primarily Linux, must win.  Period. 



They should make Windows available as open source and compile a package once in a while to sell for pro applications.


This way, they would have 1000s of free programmers and still be able to sell corporate licenses, then just sell warranties to home owners that need them, the tech savies, nerds and others who can take care of themsleves could use the OS for free, as with any other open source projects.


Larry Lee

I have tried several Linux distributions over the years.  Ubuntu and Mandriva (formerly Mandrake) are my favorites simply because they install themselves quickly and easily.  My pet peeve with Linux is hardware detection and non-proprietary graphics card drivers.  Ubuntu and Mandriva both failed to correctly detect and configure the built-in wireless card in my 3-year-old Dell laptop.  I was forced to use ndiswrapper to get an internet connection so I could apply all the bug updates.

Fortunately the ATI Radeon X1400 mobile graphics card has a Linux driver available on their website, otherwise I would have been stuck with no 3D acceleration and 1024x768 resolution.  I do not have much free time to learn console commands, but I did manage to learn how to install packages from the console.  I like Ubuntu and Mandriva because their package managers do all of the work and take care of dependencies very well. 

Having said all that, I have a dual-boot XP Pro/Mandriva-KDE4 OS, but I play games on XP Pro because I don't want to invest the time it takes to learn how to use Wine when I can simply reboot into XP Pro to play a game.  Otherwise, Mandriva Linux is perfectly fine for everything else I do on a computer, and Linux is definitely a rock-solid and fast OS.  My two cents.



I've used Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7, and a few flavors of Linux over the last 4 months, and I am impressed with how advanced they all have become.  Installing Vista or 7 is as easy as installing a friendly Linux distro.  They are all very worthy operating systems.

My take: 

-Linux is the best version to run on netbooks and notebooks.  It boots fast (20 seconds or less with some distros), it runs fast, and it needs less RAM.  It is also ideal for people who just want to surf the web and have older peripherals.

-XP is best for most homes and busineses.

-Vista/Win 7 is great for homes but not ready for business yet.



Things are a little backwards in the article -- it seems that the Linux argument is a "johnny-come-lately" approach instead of a more balanced "look at the actual time-lines and real offereings.

 "Windows 7 is easier to install" -- not yet -- it doesn't EXIST yet.  There's a Beta out there, but they do warn that this shouldn't be used with REAL data, or anything you want to keep.  Heh.

"and is the operating system for PC gaming, period" -- Unless you're running games that run under Linux.  Or under Wine.

"... also catering to admins with its tough little PowerShell
utliity... ...allows
administrators to remotely mess with machines via a console-based scripting environment" -- like existing *nix ones?

"Proponents of Linux argue that many of Windows 7's eye-catching feature ... have been available in the open-source community for years."    "Argue" implies "try to convince".  Substitute "point out, factually,".

"desktop environments like KDE are almost picture-for-picture clones of the new direction Microsoft has taken Windows 7" -- Eye candy for Linux (i.e., KDE) was here long before W7 (beta) was released, so Linux DEs cannot be a clone of "new" Windows 7. 

Please pardon me if I am re-stating the obvious.


Lord Omega

Linux is a great OS but it scares people away because they think you have to use command prompt on it all the time (I use it only when needed and because it is easier than flipping though a gui). Most of the time one can find a gui alternative to something you can do in the terminal. Even if you need to use terminal, I just copy and paste what is needed. So far, I have had few if any problems with linux. The ones that I have had were caused by myself messing with stuff. But once you get it going, Ubuntu, or any othe version of linux is rock stable. even with no updates my system ran great. Lets see windows do that!


Lord Omega

Linux is a great OS but it scares people away because they think you have to use command prompt on it all the time (I use it only when needed and because it is easier than flipping though a gui). Most of the time one can find a gui alternative to something you can do in the terminal. Even if you need to use terminal, I just copy and paste what is needed. So far, I have had few if any problems with linux. The ones that I have had were caused by myself messing with stuff. But once you get it going, Ubuntu, or any othe version of linux is rock stable. even with no updates my system ran great. Lets see windows do that!



Every year some idiot reporter writes an article that this year, unlike last year, is the year of the Linux desktop.  Never mind that last year we said that it would be the year and didn’t happen because this year will be the year.  And for the point that people will choose the cheapest just because it’s cheaper will may I suggest a few business/marketing classes before using that reasoning (and yes, don’t worry, I DO have an MBA) because when consumers aren’t sure what to purchase that will go with what is safe, even if it costs more, than what is risky (please note the cheaper American cars in this tough economy are being outsold by the more expensive Japanese models because consumers know the Japanese cars are a good investment).  So David, while I would never debate you on the merits of an ATI video card over an NVidia card please leaving the business side to the professionals.  Wouldn’t want you to get hurt.



How is this author different from the countless "financial professionals" who keep saying "this is the year the economy bounces back!" Leave the business side to the professionals? You mean the same ones who completely dicked over the U.S. economy with their greed and unrealistic financial models? Your MBA gives you about as much trustworthiness as a pencil mustache and polyester suit do.

Back to the discussion, Linux adoption has grown by leaps and bounds. Dell, HP, ASUS and other PC manufacturers include Linux on many of their desktop, laptops, and netbooks. Splashtop, which is Linux-based, will allow laptops and netbooks to boot in under 10 seconds without a solid state drive. Ubuntu alone has over 8 million REGISTERED users. People will pick the cheaper alternative if it's a lot better than the more expensive alternative; this is the same reason why more and more people are becoming atheists! Linux won't take the world by storm overnight, but it will evolve to that point because things like this take time. "This is the year" merely means that this will be another year in which Linux takes another big bite out of Big Brother's market share.



Oh no, wait!  Windows 7 killed itself, and lies defeated in it's own pool of blue blood of death?





Linux may not be the best for games, but hey, throw together a $300 PC, install Xubuntu on it, and leave a blank window of Firefox open for grandma, and presto! No more mid-raid interruptions for those who want to drop in at an ungodly hour to check their damn eHarmony profile or what's playing next on Kasey's Countdown.



But there are so many distros to pick from, so much free crapware, so much bugged garbage, that I'll stick with my windows xp until I get to try windows 7. As for the linux aspect, I've tried it. Didn't like it because I can't do JACK SHAT on it. I'm a gamer. I don't want to run some slimey little piece of shit API(wine, cedega anyone?) to run my games. End of story. Linux = FAIL for me because I don't run servers, and I could care less about "open source blah blah blah", I don't want to write my own code, I want my stuff to WORK out of the box. I'm very fluent w/ computers and coding, but guess what, I have limited free time and don't want to spend it making some piece of crap OS work like linux.




I have no doubt that Linux will continue to make head way in to the desktop area.

 I have been using it exclusivly at work and home for about 4 years now, the ONLY thing I can't run at I might want to re some Windows games (i.e the ones that dont run / don't run well through wine) 

I find Linux fasterand more stable than any version of windows (vista is the most buggy piece of poo ever)

P.S - I'm working in an office in the UK where people can choose which OS to run - about 80% are running linux...



" I have been using it exclusivly at work and home for about 4 years now"...

" I find Linux fasterand more stable than any version of windows (vista is the most buggy piece of poo ever"...


I still can't figure out why so many people, like this guy, who have not spent any SIGNIFICANT time  on windows in four years or more(even admitting it at the beginning of his post), think they have any sort of an informed opinion on Vista or otherwise.


On what do you base your incredibly detailed review of Vista? What you've heard and/or read? Try to refrain from sharing your opinion on things until YOU ACTUALLY HAVE AN OPINION. 

thank you.



I had a 1000h Eee for less than a month.. that thing was awesome.. only wish it would have had a better video card and as it was I was playing WoW on it... that was awesome... But those lovely casual games work great on a little system like that... Yeah my Eee got stolen.. the only reason I bought it was for portability, my last laptop was a 17" toshiba, yeah I plan on getting a 13.3 Asus next. I even dual booted it with Ubuntu that was the coolest thing ever running XP and Ubuntu. I wonder what M$ is gonna do to the whole 7 I dont know what everyones problem is with Vista. I have been using it since I bought it in Feb after it came out... Not a single problem here...




Wow this is a random post... Hope people get something intelligible from it...



comparing windows 7 to Linux is like comparing apples to oranges. They have completely different purposes, features, and goals. 



Why does anyone care who wins market majority. As a consultant I support, install, and recommend all three operating systems every day. I have the same complaints everyone else has about each system but each one has its own strengths and should be used accordingly.

If you are building a small embedded device or a massive cluster you would be nuts not to use Linux. Linux represents choice and by doing this introduces complexity that some see as a strength and others would rather avoid. 

If you want to play games or maintain compatibility with the last 20 years of the majority of software it is Windows. Windows offers good hardware support and large library of legacy applications but that has lead to security issues and certain amount of complexity itself.

If you don't have any legacy requirements and want the least amount of system administration then it is OSX. OSX, being BSD Unix based offers some choice but the closed nature of the platform limits this on the hardware side. On the up side everything can be tested and thus leads to a more stable system.

Everything has its place and there is no point in arguing over it. In fact I am happy the competition is there. Would window 7 ever get a decent command shell if it wasn't for the other two? Would it have the areo interface improvement if it wasn't of OSX and compwiz on Linux? Probably not. Would OSX and Linux be as cutting edge if they weren't trying to gain market share from Windows?

As end users and technology advocates we only benefit from this perceived mess so I for one am thankful. It only makes my business stronger.

I think that the only thing we should be concerned with is access to our data. All the opertating system can coexists pretty seemless these days. What cause most of my problems is data locked up in proprietary applications. Things like moving Word files to non MS systems or translating wierd database file formats.  This is what we should harping on.




Here's a pretty good Windows 7 Review.



It's a might as well have a kid who wants to be an olympic athlete race an olympic athlete right now before he matures.

This kind of arguing is too little too soon to be worth fussing about.

My own take: Sit on the fence with popcorn and wait.



POPCORN?! Can i haz some?



The bloomberg article being cited for the 30% marketshare estimates is from November.  There is a newer article  with OEM representation from Acer and Toshiba commenting that windows XP variants of their hardware are selling at 90%.    It also hints, at least in AU, that retailers aren't stocking the linux variants.

I am a strong supporter of linux, I personally use nothing but linux on the computer systems I own, and wage war at work to see systems migrated to open platforms at every chance I get. I do not think its a foregone conclusion that linux with stabilize as high as 30% of the netbook market... because we really don't know what sort of market it is it yet. The market is still maturing, and people are still figuring out what they want to use these things to do.

If consumers want to use these things as light weight replacements for more traditional laptop use..with traditional laptop applications...consumers will prefer an MS version even at $100 higher price point.  Think business travellers who do a lot of flying and want to get work done on the plane.  For those people, a windows netbook is a very compelling a way that linux will have a harder time competing with.  Even with wine to help you run MS applications, its still a hard sell in the marketplace if what people want is MS Office to work on crappy powerpoint presentations running on a small form factor laptop.  $100 price differential to ensure compatibility with your co-workers around the conference room table isn't a significant price to pay.  

If on the other hand, if consumers want to use netbooks primarily for information gathering from the internet, linux has a real chance...because in that usage scenario the operating system is just a commodity piece of software that runs beneath the web browser powered applications that you really care about. If all the collaboration and social interaction that you do is happening over the web brokered by service providers in the cloud, then traditional clientside application support isn't as compelling a factor for you and that $100 price differential will weigh heavily on your purchasing decision.

HP's linux based Mini MI  is a very interesting effort to define a usage scenario for their mini 1000 netbook. Leveraging the Elisa project from Fluendo heavily for its interface, its trying to market a linux based offering meant for a narrow task focus, instead of a general purpose computer. Its far more pda or smartphone like, than desktop-like. It's not a general purpose linux distribution on a netbook...its a linux based interface tailored for a set of tasks.  If this sort of narrowing of usage focus works for HP, this could indicate another market segment for the netbook formfactor where linux could really shine because it leverages the ability for OEM's to tailor the software to enhance the diversification of OEM offerings in the marketplace.

The other development is of course the fact that ARM based netbooks appear to be in the works. OEM's who will be looking to use ARM processors are going to come at the market touting very good power consumption hardware as a diversifying feature. But these OEM's won't be able to offer windows XP or windows 7 side-by-side with linux like the current intel based netbook manufacturers are doing.  They will have to put their full support behind linux to see hardware sales compete.  They may have the sort of need to see linux succeed to innovate how a linux based device is marketted. But the current MIPS based OEM's aren't doing so well at the moment. The ARM based OEM's when they show up will need to make a significant marketting push I think as part of their roll out. Quitely putting ARM based devices out in the market, isn't going to give them the market beachhead they'll need against the Intel based OEM's in a mature netbook market of late 2009.





I bought an Eee 900A at Best Buy that came with Xandros Linux. It was immediately unusable the first time I took it home and connected it to the net--and here's why: as installed, it uses UnionFS and keeps the original configuration and versions of packages in a read-only partition, and overlays a read-write partition on it, so that the original is always still around. A neat idea, makes it easy to hit the panic button and go back to the original factory state in case of emergency... but the 900A as I bought it came with a 4 GB SSD, so that read-only partition was the vast majority of the SSD space. Downloading a dozen updates, which it did automatically when I was connected to the net, ate the rest of that space, rendering the system useless.

I'm not Joe Average... so I looked around on the web, found out that Ubuntu Eee works fine on the Eee and doesn't go the UnionFS route. A download, wipe of Xandros, and install of Ubuntu Eee, now called Easy Peasy, later, and I am a happy Eee user, with over 700 MB free on the SSD.

Joe Average, on the other hand, would find it unusable... or worse yet, his offspring excited at getting a computer for Christmas, would find it unusable. He'd stomp back to Best Buy, where he'd get upsold to a full notebook or a netbook with more disk space, almost certainly with Windows--when I was there, the 900A was ALL that Best Buy had with Linux preinstalled--and be assured that, by golly, this was a real computer! He'd blame Linux for ASUS's mistake of using UnionFS with a far too small SSD.

If I wanted to make Linux look bad, that's a great way to do it, while still being able to protest that you were giving Linux a chance. I have to wonder whether that's exactly what ASUS or Best Buy intended.



Asus gets credit for getting out in front and creating the consumer market demand for the form factor.  Did they think all the usability issues through?  Probably not.

Now we are seeing other OEMs like Dell and Toshiba rolling into the field with Ubuntu based netbook installs. There is hope that by partnering with Canonical, Canonical will be able to do a better job getting the usability right than Xandros did with Asus. Canonical does position itself as a usability leader.  But if you read that ITWire article Toshib's linux variant isn't necessarily fairing well in the marketplace compared to Toshiba's XP offering.  

 Hopefully HP will be forthcoming with its Mini Mi approach to a linux offering, as its quite different than what've we've seen up till now.







Fatality....Linux Wins....


Flawless Victory

(sorry couln't resit)



I've been trying different versions of Linux since 1997 and I'm still just using Windows. Linux just isn't for home use. It's great for embedded systems (all of our input terminals at the plant I work at are Linux based), and servers and the like. But for the home segment and even in the business world (non-server use), Windows is the best. Sure it may have it problems, but its still easier to fix/use than Linux based systems. And since most people at home use Windows based systems, it just makes sense for businesses to use the same OS, as it is familiar and since its familiar it takes less time (and less money) to teach new workers how to use the companies systems and software.

Linux has its role in the world, but its role is in the support systems in the background (servers, back-up systems, web servers...). Sure there are some that use Linux on a daily basis at home, but those people are the techie types, that don't mind jumping through hoops to get their systems up and running. I've been there done that and now I want something that just works, and Windows just works.



i love linux and windows xp/7 they are similar in many ways but with a linux os i have choices galore and nowadays a linux os is simple to use and understand without touching the terminal and believe me when i say i have tried almost all of them for the past eight years my  main favorites are puppy linux(for speed on older computers),grub boot disk(for repiaring my boot sector) and linux mint for multimedia. i will buy a netbook just to test these and many others.



Security.  Nothing pisses Gran off more than spending $100 to get her computer cleaned up, only to be assaulted by antivirus 2009 a week later.  There is a whole huge segment of the netbook buying populace who are utterly incapable of protecting themselves, and no matter how patient you are with them they never will be.  We may talk about them like they are muggles, but hey, I don't know how to knit and I really don't care to learn either.  Same thing goes for Gran, she doesn't want to know how it works.  All she wants to do is send email and look at the web, and an Asus Eee with Ubuntu does that right out of the box.  She won't have to mess with drivers, or install video card breaking updates, because she will never need to update it period.  That's the kind of person this article is talking about, the same people who call you once a week because they can't find the taskbar.  There are millions of them and they are all better off running Linux.



This really is the most yawn-inducing article of recent days.  No company in their right minds is going to sacrifice Peter to pay Paul.  Give the consumer Linux on a platform that might require even the slightest upgrade or addition of peripherals, and their support costs go through the roof... and that's not even counting the negative press.  Can you imagine - Dell asking its customers to go to Google and figure out a series of indecipherable command-line comments to get something working?  And with most of the Linux gurus online being such arrogant b**tards it's enough to make you go "sudo rm -rf *" on the lot of them.  Linux taking over in the server market?  Maybe, but just wait until people realize that file copy performance is 2x better with the latest versions of Windows (SMB2) and see how long that will last.  My take: people still want something that works out of the box and is going to work with 99% of the hardware they throw at it.  The "sorry, the fglrx driver really isn't that reliable on certain series of ATI cards, why don't you get a new graphics card?" just isn't going to cut it.



So this company must be lying through its teeth, then...

"So the decision to migrate to Microsoft was a no-brainer, especially when we ran the numbers and did a return on investment (ROI) analysis. We found that by consolidating on Microsoft Office, Microsoft Dynamics AX and Microsoft SQL Server across both our depots and offices we stood to save one million pounds within five years. That was pretty compelling."




Yeah right...good luck with that...I've used a few versions of linux.  I couldn't stand it because there is no real support for it...try asking a linux guru for help and he's gonna tell you to RTFM.  I'd rather fork out a few hundred dollars and be able to play a game.  And no, I'm not interested in "Netbooks".  If I'm going to own any kind of portable computer, it's gonna play the latest games.  Yes I know that's expensive.  The laptop I own now is 3 years old and has a dedicated 64 meg x700 with a 17 inch widescreen.  Plays Oblivion at max settings almost hiccup free.  Won't get another one till I can spend $1500 on another one with a dedicated card.  LOL it's the only ATI video card that I've owned that actually worked right.  I will be looking for an Nvidia setup tho.  ATI sucks turds.



i was with you when you mentioned "lack of support".  i too am willing to pay extra to "just have things work"  (que the M$ sucks / Windows actually works? jokes, hehe).

 but you didn't stop talking there and you basically just illuminated the fact that you didn't understand the point he was making about Linux and the value it brings to a netbook.

just because it's not valuable to you doesn't mean there aren't tons of people out there who want a cheap computer.  and by cheap i mean the least expensive.  there is, and always will be, a market for low cost alternatives to things people want. it's the type of shopper that Wal-Mart thrives on.

price is more important than performance to plenty of people out there and in the case of netbooks the Windows can equal 20% of the total cost as opposed to a relatively paltry 5-10% on a desktop rig.  Linux based netbook A is 400.  with identical hardware, netbook B is $500.  which one would you buy for Grandma or for the living room/kitchen?



It's about me.  It's about what I want.  Screw everyone else and what they want on their machine.



Linux scenario: Oh, sorry, Gran, that your email isn't working.  Just go into the command line by going Alt-T, then type sudo su followed by your password.  No, Gran, it's not my sister Sue - it's just "ess you".  Yes.  Now type in your password.  What do you mean you don't know what it is?  etc. for the next 15 hours.  Sorry about the fglrx driver, Gran, you're going to have to write a patch.

Windows scenario: Log in to Gran's PC using LogMeIn Free, fiddle with a couple of settings, and then call her and tell her it's working.



You've never heard of SSH? Connecting to a Linux box remotely is considerably easier than Windows.

My painfully computer illiterate mother is using an Ubuntu box I built for all her email & web browsing needs. No complaints. I occasionally SSH into the box to run system updates -- something which I could easily script or allow Ubuntu to run atomatically if I chose to.

Personally, I have no problem with Windows as a gaming platform. I run it myself on my main gaming rig. However, Linux just makes more sense on light duty/low power machines. My laptop is dual-boot XP/Linux, and these days I find less and less reason to boot Windows.

Every OS has a purpose. Well...except for OS X. I have yet to figure out what that's for.



being Cool


OSX IS the"coll kids OS"



A MacBook and a Che Guevara t-shirt = the official uniform of hipster tools everywhere.



Say what you want, but my 63 yearold dad runs Linux Mint 4.  I have had maybe a question every 6 months.  They only problem he had was nic card went bad.  Hardly Linux's fault.  When he was running windows, I would get calls almost weekly (and sometimes several in a week) for support.  Either windows ate itself, or virus or some malware attacked his system.   He loves linux.  In fact I offered to install xp back on his computer if he wanted and he refused.  Mom says Linux Mint was easier for her to understand than windows.  If linux is such a bitch, then why the two most untechie people i know prefer to work with linux?  Nowdays, you never even have to touch the command line. So FU all you linux bashers... unless you actually try it, STFU! Personally, I use Linux Mint 6 on a Dell D620 that everything just works... including wireless as my work laptop.  I have a Vista SP1 that i use for gaming.  Even though there are a lot of great OSS games out now, unfortunately Windows is where it is at if you want to game.  But if you dont game, windows buys you nothing.



But I like Linux.  Ubuntu.  I installed MythTV and (with the requisite number of tons of CO2 wasted on Google searches) even got it to work.  I modify and re-compile MAME from source code on Ubuntu and on Xandros (eeePC).  Websites I build are hosted on Linux boxes.  Great stuff!  But just because some people only use the basic stuff doesn't mean that everyone does.  My mother might be able to get away with it (though Exchange-based email doesn't work THAT well in whatever the Linux mail client is called the name escapes me for a sec), my father would absolutely not be able to cope - peripherals, light gaming, etc.  I can just see it now - "excuse me, Canon, but my multi-function fax/printer/copier/tea maker isn't working, can you help me fix it?  Sure, what OS are you using?  Linux.  <click>".  It's not just games - it's hardware compatability too.  I bash Linux when it deserves to be bashed!!  And I do the same with Windows just as often, just not in this thread.  Anyway, more than any of that: HP is the root of all evil - their support for devices under any operating system is next to nonexistent, they can't write drivers worth a damn, and if you have a legacy device... well, phone up support and all you'll get is <click> as they hang up on you.



Then you are not using the right distro.  I just installed an hp multifunction scanner/printer on my dad's linux mint 4 box.... with even hp drivers i downloaded from where else?  He can scan, print pictures, print anytjhing with no problem.  Mint 6 is even easier.  I can install a hp laserjet 4 and deskjet 550c (!) on mint... I have no issues with any hp printer i have ever used... btw... hp seems to be the only printer that everplace I have worked have used.  I have never had to call hp for support.  Hell, linux supports more printers than windows it seems.


About hardware compatibility, what ARE you talking about:  Out of i dont know how many boxes from new to old that I have put linux on, the only thing i have ever not been able to get working is my soft modem in my laptop, but with wireless working (yes it works flawlessly), I have never missed it.  I dont think i have used a modem in 5 years or more.  Hell, even the latest graphics cards are supported.

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.