Choosing Windows Vs. Linux - Which One & Why & What Lies Ahead !
 

Choosing Windows Vs. Linux - Which One & Why & What Lies Ahead !


Hello everyone...

With the arrival of Windows Vista , lots of people are looking for alternatives. And Linux has emerged as the best contender.
As i have used Windows XP and Linux for last 5 years, and Vista since its release, i thought why not write an article for the people who may want to know/use/switch to Linux from Windows.
This article is about :

1. Things you may want to know about Linux, being from a windows background.
2. A comparison between windows & Linux.
3. Whether you should start using Linux or not or be comfortable with Windows XP or Vista.
4. And if yes, what you need to do for that.

I hope this article will help people in knowing about Linux and Windows. And those who are already using Linux, i hope it will be a good read for them also.


AND YES, THIS IS NOT AN ANTI-MICROSOFT ARTICLE AS YOU MAY BE THINKING. (Since most of Linux users tend to bash Microsoft when they talk about Windows. Though i have written some facts which may make Windows Lovers feel Bad. ).

So here it begins...

1. What is Windows ?
Do i even need to answer this question ? All of us are born in Windows world, and understand and know using computers with Windows be it 98, XP or Vista.

2. What is Linux ?
Though it will itself take an article to tell you about this, in short :

"Richard Stallman working at the MIT AI-lab - during the time he studied for his BA in Physics from Harvard - became part of a programming group at the AI-lab. These guys were all working and sharing in a very friendly way. The arrival of the world of commercial software development, and things like non-disclosure agreements, basically meant the end of that era. That is, if it wasn't for Richard Stallman.
A non-working laser printer (and a few other setbacks) in the 1980s had triggered a one-man coding spree and the creation of a completely free operating system. Free to use and copy. Sounds familiar? It should. That's Linux...
The one-man coding spree quickly turned into a project known as GNU, pronounced as guh-noo. Richard Stallman basically wrote a complete operating system from scratch, a free Unix operating system. Luckily he has gotten quite a bit of help in his endeavors. But if it wasn't for Richard Stallman, there wouldn't be a GNU/Linux and we'd all be using Windows now. In the process of creating the GNU project, he also made a software license allowing you access to source code (the original files) and the right to copy its software and share it with your friends. This copyright license is called GPL, the GNU General Public License.
During the late 1980s and early 1990s, the GNU project set out for a kernel (the car's engine) for the operating system. The decisions that were made for this kernel were the correct ones at the time. This state-of-the-art kernel, called GNU Hurd, however proved tricky to build. So the GNU OS wasn't quite completed when Linus stepped in and created his kernel which was designed somewhat easier. And there you have it. The creation of GNU/Linux.
Many people however don't call GNU/Linux GNU/Linux. They call it Linux, totally ignoring the fact that it couldn't have been made without the GNU tools and it couldn't do anything without the GNU operating system around it. Sounds a bit unfair doesn't it? It is. To make matters worse, at one point Richard Stallman and his Free Software Foundation actually received an award for his work, and rightly so. But the award was called "The Linus Torvalds Award". Which is not only ironic, but somewhat insulting.
The Brief History of Linux: Linus invented the kernel, Richard and his Free Software Foundation invented GNU. "
(Taken from PCLinuxOS wiki)

To know more, just Google it.


3. Why Should You Use Windows & Not Linux ?

1. Ease of Installation & Use.
( Odd statement but true practically, reason being again same, "We are born in Windows World", where we see people around us installing and using Windows, so we just consider Windows as being the only way of using computers. But in fact, both Windows & Linux are equally easy to install & use.)

2. If you are so lazy enough to bring a change in the way you use computers, and consider that learning/using/switching to [L/U/S] Linux is new & difficult than you use Windows.
(Let me tell you [L/U/S]Linux is no doubt different from Windows, but not a bit difficult or new. Just ask yourself, "Did you know how to use Windows when you had used computers for very first time ?")

3. If you can't use computers without the official support and help provided by Microsoft & other companies producing Windows softwares.
(No doubt, Windows & softwares come with really good technical support & guarantee, but even with Linux, you have extensive support and help available from forums, and even technical support from companies who charge for this support like Novell, Red hat.)

4. If you work with some software which is either available only on Windows or is the best on Windows.
(This is true. Some softwares on Windows are really good. But there is always a good enough corresponding software available on Linux, though it may require you to make some compromises in functionality or require some learning.)

5. If your computer doesn't fully support Linux.
(What i mean here is that there may be a chance that one of your computer hardware component may not work on Linux. Most frequent culprits are Modems & Graphic cards.
There is a reason for this :
Since Windows occupies 90 % of desktop market, most of hardware manufacturers make driver for their hardware only for windows because developing drivers is a tedious and money requiring task, and these manufacturers don't see the need or demand for producing driver for Linux also. But he scenario is changing :

(a.) More & more hardware manufacturing have begun supporting their hardware on Linux
(b.) Lot of big companies are coming in support of Linux. recent examples, Dell, Lenovo. And some big ones have always been like IBM, Intel, HP etc.

(c.) Linux developers keep on working to support most latest hardware's available as well as the older ones. In fact Linux is the most widely implemented Operating system, on various platforms, other than desktop, such as Servers, Mobile Platform, Supercomputers etc. This proves the wide applicability of Linux.

{This should clear the misconception that the fact "Windows XP Supports All Hardwares Out of Box" is something not attributable to Microsoft. Rather it has been the biased attitude of hardware manufacturers, responsible for this}

6. If you don't have an Internet connection.
(You must be surprised by this statement. But i will explain. On Linux, software installation usually require installation of various dependencies (files required for installation of a particular software). Its not like windows, where you simply double click an EXE file and your software is installed. So if you are not connected to Internet, it becomes a difficult task (namely compiling) to install software on Linux, though not impossible all the way.
I feel Linux developers should work on this. And in fact, there was a discussion on this aspect in some previous Linux developers meetings & summits.

7. If you consider Linux insecure, as there is not much discussion about anti-viruses and anti-spywares available for Linux, then my friend, Windows is definitely your choice.
(You must have got your laughter dose here.)

4. Why Should You Choose Linux & Not Windows

1. Free (Or technically speaking, Open Source) in contrast to Windows.
(But paying for softwares does exists in the Linux world, in the form of getting official support and help from various companies, or their enterprise softwares , like Novell, Red Hat.

{This may not be an issue with people using PIRATED WINDOWS & SOFTWARES.}

2. Very fast development cycles, so you remain updated with the latest, most efficient software technologies available.
(This is sharply in contrast to Windows, because Windows development is done only by Microsoft, while Linux development is something,done by thousands or even million of Open Source developers and now even the support of so many companies coming on Linux front (I mentioned previously). Consequently Linux updates come on a very regular and short period, while Windows development is undoubtedly slow. )

And yes, in Linux update is for whole system, rather than just operating system. So you don't have to update each of your applications.
One more Linux magic, Linux doesn't require you to REBOOT your computer after updates, even if you update the whole Linux Kernel(the very base of any operating system. In windows, you never get a kernel update during updates.)

3. Most of Linux operating system (or Distos, so called) come pre-installed with :
(a.) Your hardware drivers. (unlike windows where you have to install them later from your driver CD).
(b.) Open Office Suite. (Microsoft Office has to be bought separately, at a cost even higher than your Windows.)

4. Linux comes in various forms, so called distros, which are produced by different people / companies by combining Linux Kernel, GNU Softwares, and their own specific softwares. Each distro is good and better than other on some fronts, and less good at others. Some famous ones are :
PCLinuxOS, Ubuntu, OpenSUSE, Mandriva, Linspire, Knoppix etc.

These are just the most famous ones. There are thousands there !!! Even you can produce you own distro if you know how to do this.

This is in sharp contrast to Windows, where the whole world has the same thing on their computer, and you can't change a thing in Windows if you find something bad, or feel like adding something.

So, using Linux is like having attending a grand party where you can choose what to eat from various dishes or order something new (i mean make your own distro), while using Windows is like attending a prison where you have to eat what you are served.....

No Choice, Poor Fella !!!

5. In Linux you can not use any anti-viruses or anti-spywares, whatsoever.
(Reasons for this:
(a.) There are very few anti-viruses or anti-spywares available for Linux.
(b.) There are no viruses against Linux in its very first place, reason for above point.

So you don't have to buy (or crack) anymore Norton or Mac-fee or AVG anti-virus or anti-spywares or COMPLETE PROTECTION SUITES.
This also help saving your system memory for other worth of you work, than nurturing these memory hogs.

6. As i talked of various distros, even on a single distro, you can use different Desktop Environments (DE) /Desktop Manager(the whole graphical interface you interact use to use your computer), unlike Windows which has never changed since Windows 95 to Vista even today.
(Different DE serve different purposes. For example:
- KDE is meant for all round, highly configurable, powerful, and flashy(like Mac) interface.
- GNOME DE is meant for simplicity.
- XFCE and Fluxbox are meant for low end configurations computers.

7. And finally, 3-d Desktop.
(You must have been stunned hearing and seeing the too hyped "THE AERO" Interface and "LIVE THUMBNAILS " of Windows Vista. Then just wait for the lethal dose of Linux.

Linux has the whole 3-d desktop available for you. Called, Beryl and Compiz, you have you whole desktop working 3-d with such stunning and awesome effects that above said GREAT Vista features are literally nothing, NOTHING, in front of these.

Here is more.
To run these GREAT Vista 3-d feature, you need 2 GB RAM, and a Separate Graphic card.
Did you hear that !!! 2 GB RAM.... I mean how many people have that. And even if you have or buy, what do you get, these two kiddish effects.
And Linux 3-d desktop, on my own old Laptop, with total 512 MB RAM, with 128 MB Shared Graphic Memory (Intel 915 chipset) runs like killing any vista user.....

Just check out some videos on you-tube, by searching for Beryl, Compiz or Compiz Fusion. Don't blame me now, if you already bought Vista....)

8. You may say Vista is highly Stable and Secure.

a.) I agree on this Stability point, specially when you compare it with XP. In Vista, Microsoft has introduced clear-cut distinction between services and processes. An now when you kill some hanged process or service via Ctrl-Alt-Del, it doesn't cause your system to crash unlike Windows XP.
But Linux had this thing right from origin. Linux doesn't crash if you kill some task. It has never done so......
(b). About security, no doubt Vista is more secure, BUT more than XP, not than Linux. What Microsoft has done in Vista today, has been in Linux right from its very conception. User Access Control Rights(or something like that, i am not sure), in Vista is a feature ripped from Linux, and in trying to make it look like a new innovation, Microsoft has implemented it in such a way that it becomes an annoyance rather than of comfort. You are confronted with this to do even very small things in Vista.

And still, what more, You still have to use an Anti-virus or Anti-spyware.... Microsoft still recommends to use these security softwares to its users...... Now that's called confidence in ones security.......
{I want to share one more major innovation By Microsoft in Vista. Vista claims to have system wide search feature in vista, in which you can search for anything on your desktop, or web, from vista search menu. Guys this is a feature ripped from Mac OS X. Mac has this feature, from last 3 or 4 years. But Microsoft has done innovation, & that is , instead of putting search menu on top right like Mac, they have put it on bottom left. Wow !!!}
{Did you know Mac OS X is a Unix Like OS like Linux. Just for ur knowledge.}


5. Then Why Has Windows 90 % Share In Desktop Market If Linux Is So Superior ?

Good question. Well only few reasons i see:

1. Very Aggressive Marketing Strategy :
Microsoft right from start, has been marketing its product on a very big scale using every medium, be it newspapers or television or Internet lately, while Linux marketing has traditionally been by means of User to User spread. Microsoft, has great earnings from its softwares right from start, whose very little fraction is enough to market any product deep down the brains of people of this world, while Linux developers were not charging for their products. They were developing these softwares, just for the spirit of humanity, the spirit of Open Source. They were not businessmen like Microsoft or Apple guys. So they didn't give attention to marketing strategies, neither they had money & resources to do that. This was one of the major stumbling block in Linux adoption.

But the scene is changing now. With the entry of big companies on Linux front, Linux is gaining popularity.

2. Microsoft's alliance with computer manufacturers, to persuade them sell computers, pre-installed Windows.
This resulted in most people having their first experience with using computer on windows. And i believe, this also somehow resulted in a "chain reaction" of people telling others about Windows, and thus creation of a "Windows World", being supplemented by the fact that Linux Developers were not telling people about their operating system by marketing their products.

This is also changing now. Dell, no. 1 Computer manufacturer in US, has decided to sell computers pre-installed with Ubuntu. Lenovo, the Chinese computer manufacturer has also joined the line. More are coming. HP already officially supports Linux developments. Acer has been selling command line versions of Linux.

3. Microsoft aggressive strategies to weed out the competitor from market.
Microsoft has always adopted vigorous competition policies, sometime forcing closure of its rival business. Very famous example, include, introduction of Internet Explorer with every Windows since 98, to weed out Netscape, Other are Windows Media Player against Real Player. Such strategies have gained Microsoft many anti-trust cases in US courts and other European countries.
Similar things have been started by Microsoft, seeing the prominent arrival of Linux against Windows. Recently, Microsoft claimed that Linux violates Microsoft's 235 patents, without giving any detail of such violation. This was intended to frighten people and companies who are considering or have started adopting Linux.
When asked by Open Source developers about details of patent violation, so that they may correct if any whatsoever, Microsoft denied giving any details, saying it will disclose details directly with companies ready to make agreements with Microsoft. Thus fulfilled its target of shoving away people from Linux.

4. Microsoft Agreements With Various Governments.
Microsoft makes agreements with various countries to encourage adoption of Microsoft Windows & softwares in govt. infrastructure, thus promoting its products in the whole country. While there is no such one agency to support and make such agreements. There do exists Open Source developer groups and promoters, but they are scattered.

5. Microsoft uses its influence to implements its document formats as World standard.
There is a very current example of this. Microsoft is pushing hard to make its Open XML document as second standard beside Open Document format which already is there.
Microsoft is influencing smaller countries to make them vote in its favor.
No other company has software to deal with this format, and if this gets adopted as standard, people who use it (& they will have to use at sometime, being this standard), will have to buy Microsoft softwares.


6. Conclusion

Vista arrival has opened new avenues for Linux. As most users find themselves unable or unwilling to switch to Vista, for reasons outlined above, they want to change, (and they will have to, as Microsoft & Windows Software developers will stop supporting Windows XP Within 1 or 2 years.
And there has been no better time for Linux than today. More and more companies are coming in support of Linux, list of Linux developers keeps getting long, resulting in an extremely fast acceleration of Linux development.
Mark Shuttleworth (Ubuntu Founder) of distributing free Linux Cd's to whole world and increase in broadband connectivity, and Linux vendors is giving a major thrust to wide spread adoption of Linux across the globe.

7. So Should You Use Linux & If Yes How ?

Well definitely you should start using Linux, except if you have any one of reason i gave above "To Use Windows & Not Use Linux".

To start, i will suggest, you should install Linux along with Windows (so called dual-boot), because :

(i) It will make the process of learning/using/switching Linux gradual thus comfortable. If you completely replace Windows with Linux all of a sudden, you will have problems, which may make you dis-believe in power of Linux & Open Source.

(ii). It will allow you to use Windows for some of purposes which may not be served by Linux. (depending on individual case, like Internet connectivity, any specific software or other reasons i discussed).

You may find good tutorials on Internet describing "How to Install & Use Linux" for new users. Simply search on Google, and read carefully.
Or best way is to ask from someone who is already using Linux, be your friend, brother, relative.


8. Which Linux Distro To Use & How to Get Installation Cd

For a new user, i will suggest PCLinuxOS 2007. You can download it from an Internet. (Google PCLinuxOS 2007 Download). Or you may find it in one of Computer magazine.

If you can't do above two things, then you can use Kubuntu. You will get it freely delivered at your home.(For this, search in google, "Kubuntu Free CD Shipit")

Final Words

Hope you liked this article. And will benefit from the things i wrote.

Moved: This thread is more suitable in <General> and has been moved accordingly to help your thread/question get the exposure it deserves.

I couldn't see a question part, so General seems a better
place for this ..

you lost me from there on :confused:

It's really hard to say "never" and "always" when talking about software =)

Vista's security model goes much further than UAC. There's also ASLR (Address Space Load Randomization), which is similar in ways to the PIE portion of PaX. Basically what these technologies do is randomly position executables within memory (much like shared libraries) so that finding offsets for exploits is difficult. What's worse, every time the executable is run, the random positioning changes (well, with Vista it's based on 64K blocks, so it isn't truly random...and I don't know PaX well enough to comment on it here).

Unfortunately, NEITHER one typically comes with this protection enabled (Vista only comes with it if you get corporate or Ultimate, and Linux typically doesn't use PaX for "common" distros that aren't security minded (that I'm aware of...please correct me if I'm wrong))...hence the quote at the top of this post. If you spend $400 on Vista Ultimate, and you compare that to the most user-friendly Linux distro you can find, you might be surprised at what you find (look for virtually ANY Microsoft-funded study for Vista security...you'll find that they compare to Ubuntu, typically). If, however, you compare Vista Basic to say, Hardened Gentoo (personal preference) or virtually any *BSD flavor, the results will swing back in favor of Open Source considerably.

Vista also has a few other "enhancements" to security that aren't all they're hyped up to be...but don't let me dictate what you think (you != the OP...you = you reading this post)...google Vista security and read up on it yourself.

You came up with another method to feed people on PCLinuxOS 2007? :confused:

Especially after you previous attempt didn't go far! http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...d.php?t=576550

This article seems to have some good points, but is VERY hard to follow. The numbering seems to re-start at least 5 times. I would have someone edit for grammar and spelling and then get it onto a website (maybe here) where it can be formatted with headings, etc.

This snippet is not good:
You eventually get the story straight, but this lead-in is very wrong.

This also needs work:
SOME people are looking for alternatives--most are maybe just staying with XP
"best"? Who says? Many of the disaffected will just get Macs.

You don't need an active internet connection to download dependencies. Get them via sneakernet when you get the main program. As well, a lot of apps packaged with .DEB do contain their dependencies with them.

do you ever know before installing a deb, the dependencies required for that particular deb. and even if you knew, its very difficult to get all the related dependencies satisfied manually.

and very very few debs come pre-packaged with dependencies.

mr. srikant whether you agree or not but the fact remains true "PCLOS is best distribution for a new user".

Just try it with a mindset of newbie, and you will realize.

and i think, you didn't see that i also suggested Kubuntu.

and i deliberately did not give link to my previous article, but unfortunately you have done so. so don't blame me now.

What Planet
 

OMG! Can't we please let this thread die the quick and final death it deserves? If a 2 post troll doesn't alarm you, it certainly does me.

Stating things as a "fact" is going to provoke all kinds of flak from people--and not just here. Your statement above does not fit even the loosest possible definition of the word.

Before trying to re-emphasize your view of the facts, how about responding to the various examples of where you have your facts wrong........

By the way, I really LIKE PCLOS. I can understand your enthusiasm.

That's based on your view of "new user" and your idea of
what a "best distro" should be like for them. That's not
even CLOSE to a fact. OVER and OUT!



Cheers,
Tink

he should rewrite that passage ...

get rid of words like "rip off" , "<whatever>-like" , "<whatever>-world" , "<whatever>-are placed on top" , "<whatever>-are placed at the bottom" and things like that ... concentrate on how you are going to sell linux to your family , your neighbor and people under the same roofs of your churches and temples ...


//my take ...


.

That's not a fact, that's an opinion. Not an altogether good one at that.

Oh please..., do some research.

PS: their's even a web interface to check and get all dependencies.
You don't need to like Debian, but claiming it doesn't beat every single RPM distro when it comes to dependencies is simply ridiculous.

Why do newbies keep bringing that up anyway?
Do you you fully understand both DPKG and RPM?
They're almost exactly the same (DEPs being faster though).

I think virtually all distros have a web-based mechanism for checking package dependencies (I could be wrong, but that's how it seems to me).

Even pkg_add on many *BSD systems pulls in package dependencies automatically...I can't see this being an argument still...(haven't used RPM based distros in a while, though).

Well, I honestly doubt their exist a better web interface as the one from debian (and it's rather old).
Example for Amarok:
http://packages.debian.org/stable/kde/amarok
(It has an FF plugin as well)

From all BSDs, I mostly like OpenBSD.
Sadly it's still using CVS (IMHO, cvs just sucks).
It's dependencies handling is indeed not bad at all.
A GNU/BSD Debian under a GPL license would rock, but it will probably never happen (and I don't really like the _lets_give _everything_away_without_ever_asking_anything_back BSD-style license).

Thing is, the OP seems to think their's some huge difference between DPKG and RPM. That's just wrong.

I've never used Debian, honestly. I've played around with a few of the Debian derivatives (Knoppix, Ubuntu, Mint, etc...), but I don't think I've ever actually used Debian. I'll have to check it out...heh.


I love OpenBSD. I know there's a Gentoo/BSD project going now, and it's forked into FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD camps...might be worth a look:

http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/gentoo-alt/bsd/index.xml

I'm a huge fan of portage. With tools like the gentoolkit package, (including equery and revdep-rebuild), package maintenance is a breeze.

As long as the package management system you're using allows you to add packages (pulling in dependencies as well), remove packages completely, and modify package install/remove options, then you really can't go wrong with it =) (Beyond that, other options such as security checks (glsa-check or the FreeBSD vulnerability database check in ports, etc...), compatibility checks, etc... are all just icing on the cake).

At that point, it's just a matter of preference...and spamming your preference as the set-in-stone factual "best" is hogwash.

>> "As long as the package management system you're using allows you to add packages (pulling in dependencies as well), remove packages completely, and modify package install/remove options, then you really can't go wrong with it =) (Beyond that, other options such as security checks (glsa-check or the FreeBSD vulnerability database check in ports, etc...), compatibility checks, etc... are all just icing on the cake)."

if there are any package management that act and behave like apt-get then the fact is that not only they are good but they are also all the same ... if anything goes wrong ... than you just have to start learning something or simply stated -- anything ...

>> " ... but I don't think I've ever actually used Debian. I'll have to check it out...heh."

as the old saying goes ... competition are all very good ...


.

Holy Hell!!!!!!!

Its the MEGA "This has been posted a thousand times and I should have done a search thread"

:)

Long post..wow.

Shortly said, why not use them both, since most of the users of any operating system do find some tasks that would be easier to perform on another operating system? Now that virtualization makes life easy, especially for those with high-end hardware, there is hardly a reason to do self-torturing just because you "should only use one - the best - operating system". If you can't afford it, the answer is clear, and if you can afford, you should use them all.

Vista has right now big problems because it's so "incompatible" with everything older than itself, but in 5 years or so hardly anybody remembers the time before it. Not sure if MS is still around then, but anyway. It still doesn't mean people couldn't use it and something else.

i donno why ... its just that having vista is fun ... ^_^


.

Well, most Windows users are hypocrites.
I do have a Vista copy as well, but its installer just doesn't work properly.
Before it installs anything it asks you to agree with an insane agreement.
Since I'm not insane I always press the "no" button, but that sadly stops the installation as well.
It's really an unfixable bug.

For me, it's mostly a moral decision.

honestly speaking , i havent gone into that part yet ... i'm still holding to the original copy on the disk and really really donno what to do with it ... way too much choices of "incompatible" systems ... !! ^_^


//and i'm not saying vista is a bad system ...


.

Bug?? BUG?!?

That, my friend, is an undocumented feature that they worked YEARS on!

To quote an unknown individual..."Microsoft has come up with many new innovations...unfortunately, their legal department is responsible for them all..."

As someone who daily uses Windows, Linux, and Macintosh OS/X (Unix), I would simply offer the opinion that this is a specious, irrelevant argument. Let me explain ...

"A computer is a tool that you buy, probably at a home-electronics store, to solve a problem." Like all tools, from your family car down to your toaster, you mostly care that it works, not how it works. You purchase the tool, not to (have to) focus upon the tool itself, but rather to solve the problem. And, like a car, you basically expect years of faithful service from the thing even if you do nothing at all to it. (A computer probably achieves that, much better than a car.)

The problem is solved by your chosen application, and the application runs on a particular operating system which runs on a particular type of hardware. But "the problem" is at the top of the heap, and "the application" is immediately behind. The operating-system is a very-distant third: it is nothing more than a means to an end.

Now, I grant you, "this is a Linux forum," and presumably we're expected to be "Linux fanboys" ;) ;) ... but I think we all need to acknowledge that Microsoft is damn good at what they do. Perhaps you don't like the latest version of Windows (and neither do I, and that's why I am not running it yet...) but that's no valid justification for discarding Windows; let alone for replacing it with Linux. :eek:

I run Windows because, and in the cases where, it suits the needs of a particular application. The same is true for Linux, and for OS/X. Each system is distinctly different, and each one has (imho) no cause to "draw its legitimacy from, or at the expense of," any other.

I do believe that, it is nothing less than imperative .. vital(!) .. that, if you call yourself a professional in this industry, you m-u-s-t become familiar with Linux!! However, you should do this alongside, not instead of, any Windows installations that you can continue to business-justify.

It is not .. it is never .. an "either/or" argument. You need to wear three(!) hats! All three systems stand, on their own merits. None of them depend for their success upon the demise of the other.

While I'm quite happy with
I can't see a justification for
... I'm a professional in 'this industry' whose sole job is
to work with Linux and Solaris systems. No need to for me
to get proficient with windows, and at the moment I only have
to use it in a VM session because of our silly time-tracking
and HR software.
And I find
arguable :} ... it *may* be that Macs and Windows installations
have some benefits to you; for me they're obstacles, Macs in
particular are rather painful in heterogenous environments.

The statements definitely don't belong in one paragraph,
though, since they're unrelated ;}


Cheers,
Tink

While I'm quite happy with
I can't see a justification for
... I'm a professional in 'this industry' whose sole job is
to work with Linux and Solaris systems. No need for me to
get proficient with windows, and at the moment I only have
to use it in a VM session because of our silly time-tracking
and HR software.


And I find
arguable :} ... it *may* be that Macs and Windows installations
have some benefits to you; for me they're obstacles, Macs in
particular are rather painful in heterogenous environments.

The statements definitely don't belong in one paragraph,
though, since they're unrelated ;}


Cheers,
Tink