I found this while looking for a node to vent this personal thought: I actually prefer Windows.

The thing is, I am always bashing Windows and Bill Gates and his Evil Empire, and doling out the good words for Linux and Mr. Torvalds, but the reality of the situation is this:
I have been using an MS OS on my PC since I first owned an XT. I like the beautiful geek ethics involved in something like Linux, but the fact is that I must use Windows. I use Adobe Photoshop (yes, Mac would prolly be a better platform for Photoshop), I am a very heavy gamer too (yes, the games I prefer to play, Unreal Tournament and Quake 3 Arena are both supported on Linux), and I like to mess around with hardware and I'm on the internet for most of my time.

See, but I can't get all of those things individually with Linux or Mac OS in my opinion. Gaming in Linux would be something of an exercise, and for someone who has as diverse interests as me, I have no time to be dinking around with the OS and recompiling this and that, as much as the thought of being able to do so appeals to me. So yes, I could go on, I could give a list of reasons why I do hate Windows, and why I do love Linux, but at the end of the day, I'm sticking with Win98 on my PC. It crashes about once a day, but I am lazy and it balances fine with me that I can do the things I want to do.

To someone who is fluent enough in a UNIX such as Linux, the question of whether or not it is better than Windows is simply not an issue, and the superior choice is rather obvious.

Let's take a look at what Linux has to offer: Now let's take a look at what Windows has to offer for a power user: In other words, nothing. Sure, everyday consumers find it easy to use, but I said power users. And let's not forget that it's much more bloated and crashes often.

For some reason, whenever I use Windows 98, I feel about three times as heavy. Yeah, I'm dead serious. This is probably because of bloat and lack of low-level control through a flexible command line, which gives me stress.
Here are my experiences that I find both good and bad about Linux and Windows:

Windows:
As pointed above, great software and hardware support.
Easy interface.
Total reliance on the stability of the drivers.
Easy point and click installation.
Set's the standard on what programs should have.
I once had my c:/windows directory merged into 3 65+ meg files.

Linux:
Lots of docs to get things working.
Tech support(usually on IRC) actually knows what they are talking about.
Have to compile almost everything, and sometimes even that goes wrong.
If something crashes, the whole computer doesn't lock up.
Most programs are free.
Basicly every installation has to be more or less done by hand and you have to know your computer inside and out.
Very fun if you like tinkering with everything.


I like Linux over all because you get to manually do whatever you want, but the prob is that alot of programs are continuously being developed and lag behind the features of the windows counterpart. The reason why I don't like windows as much is the unstability and the fact that there is nothing you can do to fix a prob and also slow OS updates. While on linux there is generally a patch before you even find the error.

I prefer Linux because with Linux, you don't get a homogenized, sanitized, pasteurized, demicrobialized environment. You don't get a single (singularly bland) GUI straddling a barely competent command line. (In XP, the MS-DOS code has died the death. So Windows XP is 32-bit crappiness all the way.)

You get Perl, by Larry Wall.

You get Emacs, by Richard Stallman.

You get a ton of little applications written by real people, along with the source code they commented. Comments can be funny. This also creates a community: Linux users defend our own. We spread the world about our OS, because we are fighting together against the MS Machine, The Bloated Dragon, The Moron-Tyrant, The Idiot-Devil. We have the computer that doesn't crash. We don't have to reboot except to add hardware. We can share diff files to fix bugs in the code, because we all have (or can easily get) the source code to any important programs on our box. We can have fun and make friends and have a chance at meeting the people who wrote our favorite programs. Will I ever get to meet the people who crafted the MS Works Word Processor? No. They are strangers to me, no more real than the people who hew wood and draw water. Will I ever get to meet Larry Wall? Maybe. At least I have his name.

With Linux, using a computer is fun. It is a process of learning. I'm writing an RC4 implementation in Perl, because I got a great Perl interpreter along with my distro. I will release my code under the GPL once it's functional. I would have gladly paid upwards of a hundred dollars for that interpreter, but I got it bundled with an OS sold with an instruction 'Teach-Yourself-Linux' book I bought at Barnes & Noble for $50. Of course, the interpreter is free anyway. All part of the Linux philosophy.

I also have gcc, the GNU Compiler Collection. Again, free. Free of charge, free of restriction. Like Linux. gcc is a tool you could write an OS with. Hell, that's already happened.

Linux is liberated software. Anyone can use and change it. As a result, it has successfully been ported to PDAs, servers, embedded computers, and all manner of other geek toys. Geek toys that are now running the modern world, I might add. Microsoft has an imaginary monopoly. Linux has already done more than it ever will.

Gates is a tinhorn dictator, Linus is a great guy, and I am a hell of a rambler at 0340.

Log in or registerto write something here or to contact authors.