Five reasons I'd rather run Windows 8 than Linux

Many of us use Linux every day. Thankfully, most of the people using Linux don't know they're using Linux.

My octogenarian parents, for example, have been using their TiVo DVRs for years, but have no idea that there's a variant of Linux running deep inside. The guy who installed my kitchen cabinets, who loves his Android phone but insists Facebook is hard to use has no idea he's using a variant of Linux....


Reason #1: As soon as you mention one distro, all the fanboys go insane claiming you've made the wrong choice.
You did it, didn't you? Just as soon as I mentioned Mint, a whole bunch of you started to foam at the mouth. Mint's not the distro-du-jour anymore. There's Bodhi. There's Xubuntu. There's the truly unfortunately named DouDou.

Read more at: Five reasons I'd rather run Windows 8 than Linux | ZDNet

 

[SteamGamer]

My question is, Windows has been around for over 20 years and YET there isn't one solid Linux distro that can actually meet or exceed the whole capabilities of Windows? If anything, it's not Microsoft's fault, it's the fault of people that feel like they should band together and do something about it.

UK's security branch says Ubuntu most secure end-user OS | ZDNet

Something unique about Linux is that you can mount windows partitions on it.
Linux can also virus check windows with avg, avast, clamav etc...

 

[lehnerus2000]

First comment response: How about using virtualbox to Install windows within Ubuntu.

I don't trust VirtualBox as it come from the same company as Java.

I use VMware Player in Linux Mint 16 MATE (64 bit).

Second comment response:
In linux you need a /root partion /home partition and a swap partition. These are configured automatically if you choose to make a full Ubuntu install or if you have enough space to install it alongside Windows.

Perhaps Ubuntu has an improved installer now.

Linux Mint still expects me to repeat myself, when trying to install it on my triple boot setup.

I've always had to select the partition for the OS, twice:

• I have to select the partition for the OS
• Tell it to install the OS on that partition

It's never been an issue with VMs, as I never create multi-boot VMs.

 

[mikeytg]

Perhaps Ubuntu has an improved installer now.

Ubuntu was dead easy to install. Just answer questions (language, time zone, etc.), like installing windows. When it is done it boots to a windows-like GUI and you are off and running. No need for a command line unless you want it. No, it won't run any of the zillions of windows programs out there, but many people today need little more than a browser, and Ubuntu comes with firefox.

 

[SteamGamer]

Perhaps Ubuntu has an improved installer now.

Ubuntu was dead easy to install. Just answer questions (language, time zone, etc.), like installing windows. When it is done it boots to a windows-like GUI and you are off and running. No need for a command line unless you want it. No, it won't run any of the zillions of windows programs out there, but many people today need little more than a browser, and Ubuntu comes with firefox.

Yes I agree it is quite easy to install Ubuntu and there is no need for the command line unless you want it. You might not be able to install every Windows Program out their but you can install a lot of them under Wine which I had mentioned in an earlier post.

Wine is a Windows compatibility layer available on Linux that will install any Microsoft Office programs, games such as World of Tanks, World of Warcraft etc...

Search to see if your windows program or game is available on Wine.
WineHQ - Wine Application Database

Crossover is also available to install windows programs on linux they are the makers of wine but do a better job making there end user product crossover.

Run Windows on Mac and Linux, easily and affordably - CodeWeavers

Wine is free .

Crossover costs 59.95 and may be able run more things more efficiently.

PlayonLinux is free and they should get an honorable mention because they make Wine run more efficiently.

Home - PlayOnLinux - Run your Windows applications on Linux easily!

 

[HerrKaLeun]

Whoever thinks Linux (which of the 200 distros?) is a real alternative, probably still is a student or lives in his parents' basement. If you are at a semi-professional workplace you will know that MS Office is irreplaceable (or who has an outlook alternative I can schedule through the entire network including my phone etc.).
Every major commercial software is tailored to run on Windows. They are made very specific to windwos versions and there is no way "wine" or other products would actually properly work.

The cost of windows also is irreelvant (for people that have jobs). If you keep an OS for 6 years, it will cost $30 /a in license fee. For my work software (all together have a purchsing price of close to $10,000) I pay almost $ 2,000 in annual subscription. I think it goes without sayign that they only run on windows and the $30 for the OS are totally not relevant. just employees having to learn one thing will cost more than the OS fee if an employee only loses 20 minutes every year..

All these windows and Office alternatives are fine and dandy whe you only use them at home, have a lot of time, and don't have to work with outside people. But if you go beyond browsing, some private emails and some private typing and calculating, you need MS products.

I'm not a fan of MS, and wish there were alternatives. But as soon as you do any sort of PC work, you realize MS is the lesser evil. Free is not free if your time is worth anything. If Linux was actually as useful as Windows, wouldn't you think 99% of the people would use it by now?

Linux is just before breaking through, the same way they were just before breakign through for the last 20 years. Just the fact that there isn't one or, maybe 5 versions of linux is a dealbreaker. Depending on who you beleive Linux has 1% marketshare. divide that by 200 distros and you see they don't even exist. Vista hasn't changed that, neither will W8. A professional software comapnay coudl never devote resources to develop a Linux versions since they would have to pick which one will be the newest fad. There barely is professional software for Macs, that have 5% marketshare. What makes you think any of the Linux distros will see professional software ever?

We will have electric vehicles, all renewable energy, and world peace before Linux is relevant outside the server world. Yes I know, Mac Os and Android are some sort of Linux, but they are bound to a device and are pre-setup to work on that specific device with applications approved by the respective manufacturer. Windows gives you the freedom to actually get MS-independent software.

 

[SteamGamer]

Whoever thinks Linux (which of the 200 distros?) is a real alternative, probably still is a student or lives in his parents' basement. If you are at a semi-professional workplace you will know that MS Office is irreplaceable (or who has an outlook alternative I can schedule through the entire network including my phone etc.).
Every major commercial software is tailored to run on Windows. They are made very specific to windwos versions and there is no way "wine" or other products would actually properly work.

The cost of windows also is irreelvant (for people that have jobs). If you keep an OS for 6 years, it will cost $30 /a in license fee. For my work software (all together have a purchsing price of close to $10,000) I pay almost $ 2,000 in annual subscription. I think it goes without sayign that they only run on windows and the $30 for the OS are totally not relevant. just employees having to learn one thing will cost more than the OS fee if an employee only loses 20 minutes every year..

All these windows and Office alternatives are fine and dandy whe you only use them at home, have a lot of time, and don't have to work with outside people. But if you go beyond browsing, some private emails and some private typing and calculating, you need MS products.

I'm not a fan of MS, and wish there were alternatives. But as soon as you do any sort of PC work, you realize MS is the lesser evil. Free is not free if your time is worth anything. If Linux was actually as useful as Windows, wouldn't you think 99% of the people would use it by now?

Linux is just before breaking through, the same way they were just before breakign through for the last 20 years. Just the fact that there isn't one or, maybe 5 versions of linux is a dealbreaker. Depending on who you beleive Linux has 1% marketshare. divide that by 200 distros and you see they don't even exist. Vista hasn't changed that, neither will W8. A professional software comapnay coudl never devote resources to develop a Linux versions since they would have to pick which one will be the newest fad. There barely is professional software for Macs, that have 5% marketshare. What makes you think any of the Linux distros will see professional software ever?

We will have electric vehicles, all renewable energy, and world peace before Linux is relevant outside the server world. Yes I know, Mac Os and Android are some sort of Linux, but they are bound to a device and are pre-setup to work on that specific device with applications approved by the respective manufacturer. Windows gives you the freedom to actually get MS-independent software.

I have heard this exact same argument before by paid Microsoft Bloggers.....



I got a laugh out of this dilbert comic.

 

[CountMike]

Well folks, I think that all boils down to software available to do what one needs to do. OS is a bridge between HW and SW and nothing more. You can hate or love it but windows simply has by far largest base of software out there (that's what made them most used OS, for PC devices in the first place).
I don't care if OS is called Windows, Shmindows, Lnux or Minux or whatever, just want enough software to do wide range of things I need / want to do on my PC, period. That's why I find all those fights about which OS is best, if software you use fits you, use it, whatever it is. If you can get by with free OS and what programs made for it can do, by any means, use it, if it's free, even better but please do not tell me that it is better or worst than other ones. if it works as advertised it's good enough.

 

[mikeytg]

Why so defensive? I was obviously talking about a casual home user. Of course most business users need to use Windows.

 

[4wd]

Well folks, I think that all boils down to software available to do what one needs to do.

Yes. Have tried Linux several times, could have lived nicely with the OS itself, but would have to say goodbye to some of my favorite programs, not an option.

 

[Mark Phelps]

Wine is a Windows compatibility layer available on Linux that will install any Microsoft Office programs, games such as World of Tanks, World of Warcraft etc...

Actually, NO, it won't run "any" Windows programs -- I know from experience about this, having used various Linux distros now for over 10 years. If you were to check the WineHQ link to look at app ratings, you would find more than half of them poor -- meaning, the Windows app, if it works, will barely work.

Plus, the two most frequently used Windows apps (Office and Internet Explorer) will only work in Wine with very old versions. In Office, some of Office 2010 works but you have to go back to 2007 to get a useful amount of functionality. With IE (and yes, LOTS of folks still use this ...) you have to go back to version 8 to get one that works.

Gaming is an even worse experience in Wine, largely because AMD has abandoned all but the most recent chip versions in providing restricted Linux drivers -- which are critical to getting good frame rates.

If you have to resort to Virtualization to get the Windows apps/games you need working well -- then, basically, you're not using Linux; you're using Windows.

 

[SteamGamer]

World of Warcraft running in Wine for Linux.

[video=youtube;PpZkUo4fDq0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PpZkUo4fDq0[/video]

 

[HerrKaLeun]

I have heard this exact same argument before by paid Microsoft Bloggers.....



I got a laugh out of this dilbert comic.


View attachment 36289

I wish MS paid me for commenting on forums.... Not everyone who disagrees with you is a paid agent. Maybe put on a second tinfoil hat so bill Gates can't read your mind.

Like 99% os users, I have a love-hate relationship with MS Products. Since 99% of businesses use MS products, do you think they are all paid by MS?

not sure if you are a kid, or soemone who has professional work, but once you get a job and work with a PC, you will dump Linux or your employer will dump you.

 

[SIW2]

If Linux was actually as useful as Windows, wouldn't you think 99% of the people would use it by now?

They do, but not necessarily as a desktop os.

Desktop is about the only place Linux has little presence (yet).

 

[SIW2]

windows simply has by far largest base of software out there (that's what made them most used OS, for PC devices in the first place).

It is the other way round. Because windows was the most used, software was developed for it.


Imagine if windows had been impossible to pirate. All those millions allegedly using it that way over the last 20 odd years would have been using guess what.

Then guess what would have attracted a huge amount of development.

 

[CountMike]

windows simply has by far largest base of software out there (that's what made them most used OS, for PC devices in the first place).

It is the other way round. Because windows was the most used, software was developed for it.


Imagine if windows had been impossible to pirate. All those millions allegedly using it that way over the last 20 odd years would have been using guess what.

Then guess what would have attracted a huge amount of development.

Can't agree with that. I have set up many, many "One App" computers where end users do not even see OS ( past logo on screen, eventually), as soon as it boots up user sees only one program and works on it, doesn't even has to know what OS is. Book keeping offices with tens of users running same program, fiscal terminals in stores, foreign language schools etc. where users do not get into contact with OS at all. At the beginning of PC era programs like "Visicalc" and "WordPerfect" are credited with starting whole PC era irregardless of computer platform but further development of "wisiwig" applications made ewerything easier and and more accessible to users so they did not even need to be bothered by technicalities of OS, "Computer " is all they work on and can't even say which kind or which OS is.
That's what started it and that's all it boils down too, to heck with the OS, for most it's just something in the background that just empowers user to run selected programs and do what is required, needed or wanted.
As the first OSs where most users did not get in touch with them almost at all, programs were those that mattered, only later people started to be fascinated with Windows etc where they can interact with them easier because of GUI and even later "looks" of it started to be important and only very lately some people started to choose OS by them liking the looks of it and not it's functionality, which I find utterly ridiculous.

 

[HerrKaLeun]

If Linux was actually as useful as Windows, wouldn't you think 99% of the people would use it by now?

They do, but not necessarily as a desktop os.

Desktop is about the only place Linux has little presence (yet).

The fact that Linux is underneath Android, Mac, chrome and in other devices is irrelevant in this discussion. Those also are examples of a device tailored to an OS and vice versa and both sold together.

Desktops we talk about are used for productivity and games. We can talk all day about if Linux or Windows have better RAM usage, GUI etc. Maybe some Linux distros are better, what do I know. But three are some unsurmountable thins speaking for Windows:
- there is an ecosystem (95% of all desktops and software) and all major software is available. From free to very expensive. Some productivity software cost $30k or more, the cost of the OS is irrelevant.
- Most employees already are exposed to Windows, so training them on Linux would be an added cost
- there is millions of hardware along with drivers, one can built his own PC, or choose from thousands of OEM. This keeps hardware prices low and allows the use of the latest hardware. I know Linux runs on the same x86 hardware, but driver support is... slim
- almost any idiot can install windows and other software and use the PC.
- there generally is only one Windows (besides home and pro versions). So the prospective buyer does not have to research for weeks which one to buy. For the better or worse, less choice simplifies. This I also think is Linux biggest weakness, the 1% marketshare are split in 200.
- the fact that Linux fanboys (same as mac fanboys) point out the option of dualboot to still use windows. This just proves my point that Windows is required. And how many people want that added expense, maintain 2 OS, and learn 2 OS. Also the use of wine or other software that runs "most" of the software is BS. People who use it probably never worked with software is very professional and even sensitive to the windows version. Between my wife's accounting software and my engineering software i bet most will have problems with Linux. And who pays me for the time to find out when soemthing doesn't work?
- OS are irrlelvant to most people, this is just a GUI to get to the actual software I actually have the PC for. Except some IT nerds that really just play with the OS, no one really cares about the OS. It just has to work with all the software people use, and is easy to use (which admittedly is debatable with W8 - but is Linux easier to use?). Most people don't even know what an OS is or does. they think windows is the brand of their PC. Most OS are used outside your parent's basement, to do actual work. this is also why windows RT failed, maybe it is not a bad OS. But who cares, it does not have an ecosystem. People don't buy a tablet to play with the OS, they want the "apps", which RT doesn't seem to have enough. Google for "VHS vs. Betamax" and you see why ecossytem matters, not necessarily the better product. Maybe Linux is the best OS in the world, but it doesn't matter, if it doesn't provide all the software people need.

 

[SIW2]

Highly relevant. Linux is all around. NASA wouldn't get far without it. Cars,washing machines. tv's amazon, google, it is almost everywhere. There is only one area it isn't really in. Everywhere else it is doing great.

 

[HerrKaLeun]

Highly relevant. Linux is all around. NASA wouldn't get far without it. Cars,washing machines. tv's amazon, google, it is almost everywhere. There is only one area it isn't really in. Everywhere else it is doing great.

If you haven't noticed, this is a thread about W8 vs. Linux, so this is for dektops, not the applications you mention. Unless my washing machine does accountng, writes letters etc. it is irrelevant what OS it uses. I'm not arguing that Linix is a good OS where it is used, but not on desktops. and facts say it is not used there unless you count 1%/200 distros as significant marketshare.

 

[SIW2]

I have said exactly that. It has little presence on the desktop.

Perhaps it will at some stage, perhaps not.

The difficulty for MS is they used to have 92% (allegedly) of computing devices.

Even if they stay on top in the desktop arena, they could end up with 30% of computing devices.

That still gives them monopoly power in that area, but is a far cry from what they had.

Much harder to push other stuff thorugh and make it the de facto standard, like they did with office.

Pretty hard to hold onto it as well. Others will be nibbling away at the edges and slowly taking bigger bites.

Hard to see Linux coming through soon as a big desktop player. More likely in the guise of android on tablets with keyboards. Good enough for most people. That is their "desktop". Maybe the oems will get together and support a full scale alternative. They should have done it years ago.

Highly relevant. Linux is all around. NASA wouldn't get far without it. Cars,washing machines. tv's amazon, google, it is almost everywhere. There is only one area it isn't really in. Everywhere else it is doing great.

If you haven't noticed, this is a thread about W8 vs. Linux, so this is for dektops, not the applications you mention. Unless my washing machine does accountng, writes letters etc. it is irrelevant what OS it uses. I'm not arguing that Linix is a good OS where it is used, but not on desktops. and facts say it is not used there unless you count 1%/200 distros as significant marketshare.

 

[HerrKaLeun]

If you include all electronic devices like cars and watches, Windows maybe has 1% market. No argument there, just not sure how that relates to this topic.