Let me clarify - lets say my dad has an issue installing something. If he was using Linux, I would be the only person he could call for advice. Maybe he can't get online, so he can't get the Linux documentation he needs. If I am out of town, or at work, or sleeping, he is SOL. Period. He has no other options. Nadda.

If he is trying to do the same thing in windows, he has about 50 friends who might be able to help him through the issue, or point him to another resource, ect. Its just the facts, no matter how much you like Linux, you have to be able to see reality. Its like the Nitrogen, Xenon ratio in the atmosphere. No matter how much you like Xenon, it's still harder to come by.

EDIT:

And you can belaber the point as much as you want, but I am telling you I know real world computer engineers who love Linux, but just can't make it work on a corp schedule. So though they hate to do it, they have to put windows on their products.

Its just the facts.

I will try and be as unbiased as possible (Which means I will be flamed because most people think that MS is still on Widnows 98)

Windows
Pros:
-Very easy to use (Double click to install something can it get any easier? yeah the console is nice but its scary to non techie users and linux is still confusing to some)
-Very good for the corporate enviroment due to ease of use and rollout
-MS Office Suite is the industry defacto standard no matter how you cut it almost every company uses Office.
-Windows XP and Windows 2000 are arguably as stable as Linux if not more stable (Yes shoot me I said bad things I have been running the same windows XP install for a year now and it is rock solid stable I never had it crash once. my linux install however I have gotten firefox to crash several times in a matter of a single day)
-Drivers that are good
-Impressive amount of software available for it (no matter how you cut it windows has a huge software selection)
-Best OS for gaming. WineX cannot compete with the Windows Compatability nor native DirectX support.
-Windows Update simplifies installing security updates
-Can play DVD's "legally" (yes I know the MPAA is evil as is the DMCA laws but this may matter to some people)
-The Sound Card support is infintly better good if you use the fancier soundcards.

Cons
-It is so popular that its a giant target for Spyware, adware,virusses and hackers alike
-Requires periodic maintenance to to keep runnign smoothly
-Windows 9x and ME are horribly buggy
-It costs money to upgrade
-very Hardware demanding
-Not too customizable not on the level of the linux GUI
-Questionable support for code standards like HTML codign and C++ coding (What runs in VS may not run in a Unix enviroment right)
-Still not as simple as Macintosh X which in my book is practically idiot proof (Granted I am a big apple hater)

Linux
-stable and very secure
-very customizable
-free
-Can make your own Distro or fully custom linux
-Portable as hell
-Lower System Requirements (if you don't use KDE or Gnome)
-Good amount of Free software
-Not many adware or spyware or many viruses
-great for Coders
-Perfect Server OS

Cons
-More Difficult to use then windows
-Some software runs a bit iffy (Firefox)
-Can be seen as very daunting to some users
-less software then windows
-Lackluster Driver support from hardware manufacturers
-Lousy gaming OS
-Not preinstalled except on select almart machines
-No centralized Support-For some people they don't even know what a message board is but know what a phone is

Thats all i can think of. yeah I may get flamed but honestly i think its a fair assesment.

I do have to agree there. Unfortuanatly Computers and companies are like high school boys checking out girls, looks are everything.

Hi,
I really do agree with Zuggy : with Microsoft, it's get lost we don't even know you, with Linux and forums like these you can get answers and actually TRY something instead of wondering why the hell it happened to You of all people.

But that's just my opinion (yesterday I got help and it WORKED )

OK – there are at least two completely different things we are talking about here:
1-Supporting a significant business customer.
2-Holding the hand of anyone who may have just figured out how to turn on their computer.

Monopoly Software is a business. They are out to make money.

If you are HP or Dell or Intel and you approach Monopoly Software with a time table for EFI or ACPI 3.0 or USB security or the like, they will give you a schedule and road map. If you have a bug with their product and it will prevent you from shipping 300,000 copies of their preinstalled OS, do you think they will offer you some support? Yes, they will. Is it possible for HP or Dell or Intel to get any of these very important things from the Linux community? No, it is not.

If you are a 3rd party vendor and you want people to buy your hardware and be able to use it, Monopoly Software will provide you with the means for making your equipment compatible and test it for compatibility. Thus, you can be as reasonably sure as possible that your customers will be able to use your hardware seamlessly. Is it possible to get this from the Linux community? No it is not.

If you are and end user, HP and Dell and Intel and Monopoly Software will all consider you a noob. You are nothing but an expense and if they want to stay in business they will keep you at arms length. This is true and should be expected. Maybe this is Linux’s strength, there are forms and books and online documentation. However, for every Linux manual or forum or publication, there are 10 for Windows.

Its great that you can come to a nice place like this and get help with Linux issues. But don’t pretend that there aren’t similar communities set up around Monopoly Software products. Even if Monopoly Software itself refuses to help you, you have the same recourse and resources as you would with Linux.

Obviously, it is harder to get Monopoly Software source code, but the problems solved in this type of forum would not be helped by having access to the source. So this cool actual fact becomes basically moot.

There are bugs in all software, I could write buggy software for Linux just as easily as I could for Windows.

EXACTLY :-p Excellent point all take heed.

windows cannot decrypt css. you always need 3rd party dvd-codec. this is because microsoft wants to please their customers and doesn´t want them to pay twice for the decrypter (what a stupid thing this is). they manage to take a flaw in os and make it look like they are thinking the customer
this is in line with microsoft´s business strategies: they leave the os crippled in order to get lot´s of software companies to produce stuff on it. and customer pays huge fees just to get basic functionality.

so, if you make a clean install of xp, you cannot play dvd:s. you need to install some stupid winDVD or other similarily crappy piece of poo that works on every other boot to get dvd-support.

i´d rather apt-get install mplayer/xine/vlc, if i don´t happen to be on os x.

"...And you can belaber the point as much as you want, but I am telling you I know real world computer engineers who love Linux, but just can't make it work on a corp schedule. So though they hate to do it, they have to put windows on their products.

Its just the facts."

Yeah. "Get The Facts," huh?

TLDP.org, Distro websites, more boards like this than you can shake a stick at, newsgroups (Who actually runs only one machine at home anymore?), local consultants and vendors, community colleges and universities, local copies of documentation, LUGs..the list is endless. If you want help, you will look for it. If you want excuses to have somebody do something for you, you'll make 'em up out of thin air.

I know real world pedestrian-types who love Linux just as much, if not more than, the engineer-types that I also know, and corporate/small-business adoption is on the up-swing....the landscape is changing faster than I had anticipated.
Funny, corp scheduling is never the reason for a company's refusal to adopt Linux...not in my experience it isn't...it always seems to boil down to a decision-maker having "yea-or-nay" power over technology he doesn't understand--or a conflict of interest at play.

"...UNIX and LINUX will always have a problem with viruses..." ???
Yeah...in aggregate, something like all 70 or so of 'em, and very few of those are actually OS exploits.
Our problem (speaking of the Linux community) with viruses/trojans/worms is that there are so many compromised windoze systems out there, eating up bandwidth looking for the next windoze box to infect, that public network traffic sometimes comes to a near-standstill. No Apache exploit ever did a 10th of the damage a single windoze exploit did and, looking at m$'s track record since "trustworthy computing" became the latest buzz-word out of Redmond, it should be illegal to connect a microsoft box to any public network.

"...Windows NT (2k/XP) is as stable as linux..." ???
That's nothing but total-spin, and is usually an assertion that is indicative of an individual who has never performed a direct operating comparison between the two OSses at issue, on identical hardware, in identical environments. Then again, if you're talking about how stable the bits are, on the pressed CD media....you may actually have a point there. Most Linux installations are performed from organic dye CDs. Definitely not good for stable, archival storage.

nt/2k/xp hammers-out regularly.
I see enough crapped-out enterprise machines to know that *I* still have to re-build installations because some CIO owns ms stock and couldn't give a horse's patootie what's best for his infrastructure. Within the coroprate environment, nt/2k/xp is marginally-better than 3.x/95x/98/me, but it's still worth a bushel basket of lost productivity and wasted money.

I also have a staggering number of domestic customers who call me back, gushing about how stable their new Linux installation is. "Yeah, now you believe me."

Gee! If xp is "all that, and a bag of chips," they wouldn't notice any change at all, would they? But, no. They go on-and-on about how Linux is what they were told xp would be like and, "how come ms doesn't fix all those problems?" and it's so nice not to have to worry about the the latest exploit-du-jour...bla-bla-bla...and "why don't more people know about Linux?"
Easy answer there: m$ doesn't want the general public know that there's something better out there, and that they simply can't compete against it--in terms of hard-quality.

My latest panic-call came in last Tuesday from a guy who lost all the partitions on his primary master (6GB-NTFS) and slave (40GB-Secured NTFS) drives, and a secondary slave (80GB-NTFS secured) drive, because his "stable" xp installation decided to (yet again) BSOD on him--this time leaving him with no way to boot the machine, much less even get at his "crucial business data." He DDO'ed all the drives in an attempt to get at the data.

Since nobody in my area would take on the job, guess who got the drives handed to him? Yeah. My instructions?

Get the data back for him, and give him a Linux installation...because he's "sick and tired of the instability, crashes, lost data and all the viruses/worms/trojans" that he has to watch out for. What a surprise! His statements are almost identical to those of others who have asked me to get rid of windoze for them, and give them a Linux installation that's as easy as windoze to use.
Easy enough to do nowdays.

I hate to say it this way but, drooling-John-Q-Public says there's smoke billowing liberally from your posterior on the nt/2k/xp "stability" issue.
I'll say the same thing myself, since I just passed the nine-year mark with Linux, and I've NEVER had a crash (one of my home servers is getting ready for it's third 497-roll on uptime), and I use my machines hard. In contrast, typical observations of win-anything crashes run from around once a month (for a machine that's rarely used) to about 8 times a day (for an xp system that gets daily use).

Try this sometime:
On a Linux system with 1GB of RAM, and a 2GB swap, open 300 - 2.0MB, 1984x1488px, jpeg images simultaneously with the GIMP. Yes, 300 instances of the GIMP, and let it run. The machine will slow down and swap like a banshee, but IT WILL NOT CRASH OR HANG.
Try the same thing with Photoshop on an equivalent xp system...300 instances of Photoshop, let 'er rip, and see what happens.
Been there, done that. You get 3 guesses, and the other 2 don't count.
So much for "Innovation."

"...it's not the OS that's insecure, it's the junk on top of it..." ???
It is the OS that's insecure, along with every userspace process that doesn't belong in the w32/nt kernel, and the RPC mechanisms that scream of expensive, inept programming in the halls of Redmond.

Once you bring IE or WMP into the kernel, it just became--functionally-speaking--part of the OS itself. That could be corrected, but m$ is too concerned with killing the competition to be bothered with doing anything right--as long as they get their money, and can off-load support on somebody else, they're happy. I'm surprised that they have the cajones to charge for the stuff--indeed, how can they even walk around with balls that big?

"...So this cool actual fact becomes basically moot..."
Only for this forum. Not for the Linux community at large.

Onward to the OP:

Linux Pros:
Fast: Just about 2X faster than m$ on the same, or lesser capable hardware.
Stable: Never had a crash in 9+ years. None of my customers has identified a crash either.
Reliable: It does what it's supposed to, the same way every time, no matter what other process happen to be running.
Secure: Never a virus, worm or trojan. Never been cracked/owned.
Open Document Formats.
No vendor lock-in.
Easy installation, or roll-your-own.
Comes with everything I need on installation.
Excellent hardware support.
If I do need something more, I have it installed on my machine in less than 5 minutes after download (Synaptic, KPackage, alien, apt-get).
Better support than any proprietary vendor's product:
. More available.
. Faster turn-around to update/fix on any issue.
Configurable.
Customizable.
Nothing hidden.
Less risk of patent infringement than proprietary alternatives. (To dispute that, you need to compare the track-record of proprietary s/w vendors in court over infringement issues against them -vs- claims of FOSS infringement. Proprietary is far riskier.)
I can and have modified apps for my own needs.
Open Participation: I can give back to those who gave to me.
Reasonable licensing costs or, if you're a cheapskate, it can be "free as in beer."
Multiple, best-of-breed apps for any purpose.
I can and do run a business on nothing but FOSS OSses and apps--I lack nothing--and provide m$-compatible documents for those who still believe that they have to lean on that crutch.
Freedom of choice.
My equipment, data and personal information belong to me.
No pop-ups or ads in Internet browsing.
I can automate almost anything and everything I need to do.
My kids can't get at web sites that I don't want 'em to.
I had the fun of telling the BSA (when they threatened me over a refused software self-audit):
. That, despite the fact that I do have an MCSE-I cert, I run an all-FOSS shop.
. That I refuse to use software from their vendor sponsors.
. That my business is built around migrating customers away from their vendor sponsors' offerings.
. That they will need a court-order to set one foot inside my door.
. That they will pay all the costs of any purported audit, and compensate me for lost productivity.
. That they can "Shove-It and FOAD!"
. That they should have at least thanked me for the RedHat 9 Install CD set that I sent them.
The list is endless.

Linux Cons:
Crippled hardware, designed only to run with m$ windoze, can be a bit of a problem (Mustek, Conexant, et al.):
. Throw the $3.00 piece of garbage away, and buy only good hardware.
People spend an inordinate amount of time spreading disinformation about Linux, forcing one to set the record straight.
Relative to the above, Linux newsgroups and forums are a magnet for FUDsters, astroturfers, and m$ (et al) shills.

microsoft Pros:
It's what's already installed when you buy some piece of crap from Dell, but you sure do pay (a hidden cost) for it in the machine price.
It allows the illiterate to surf porn--keeping them off the streets.
m$ install CDs make decent enough drink coasters, after you microwave 'em for 5 seconds or so.
I can't think of anything else.

microsoft Cons:
Nothing useful comes with the OS.
Worse than crappy support. (xp sp2 was an illusion)
Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer and the rest of that overly-vociferous bunch of criminals.
MCSE's ("Pros") who don't know anything useful, but still claim to be network admins. Delete their MMC and see how lost they are.
As a strategy of dealing with superior competition: FAT filesystem patents, heavy lobbying for laws that further m$'s monopolyu position, and so forth.
All versions crash. Anyone who tells you differently is nothing less than a bold-faced liar.
Encourages the creation of crappy hardware (software DSP modems and so on).
DRACONIAN LICENSING TERMS AND PRICING.
NO WARRANTY.
NO CONSUMER RIGHTS.
NO QUALITY.
NO PRIVACY OF PERSONAL DATA.
In many (most) cases, patches introduce nearly as many bugs as they're intended to fix--if the patch even works as intended at all.
Patches and service packs hold a significant potential of breaking the machine to which they're applied.
The list is endless. Everything positive that Linux is, m$ windoze isn't.

Wow this thread is great!
Ill try compiling a list within the next few days from what we already got

Spoken like a true and blue fanboy. People can crash/ruin/destory any software and OS and PC given the chance. because a majority of people use MS WIndows most calls tech support will get will be for that. its a ratio things. If 90% of people drove fords and 5% drove hondas and 5% drove Volvo's a majority of mechanic repairs will be for fords due to sheer volume. The more instances of something you have the more often a problem may seem to occur.


All versions crash. Anyone who tells you differently is nothing less than a bold-faced liar.

And anyone who says Linux never crashes is a bold faced liar as well. I will never believe a piece of software that is as complex as an OS with as many ptotential issues it can run into will never crash. I just cannot believe that they are to compelx there are too many variable etc. Also I know from experience linux can crash and yeah I could make windows crash but they are both stable OS as stable as one can make an OS. So take off your rose colored glasses and come back down to earth.

Secure: Never a virus, worm or trojan. Never been cracked/owned.

I highly doubt that. Nothing is 100% secure not computer wise. Except for maybe the NSA code vault PC's which are not connected to the internet anyways. But any machine not connected to the internet is safe from all those things. But outside of that no. Any machine connected to the internet is vulnerable just a matter of how much. That and the fact you have a) linux freaks who are on some Holy Jihad agaisnt MS b) MS with 90% market hoenstly who woudl spread a virus around on 5% of the market? Who the hell is impressed with that? Granted yeah windows has its security flaws but I remember a few linux ones that poked their heads out a few times. into the news.

Reliable: It does what it's supposed to, the same way every time, no matter what other process happen to be running.

A computer is only as reliable as the end user. So if the end user is careful and knows what they are doign yeah it can be reliable any OS is liek that. if the end user is a doofus I am sure they can turn anythign to mush.

Better support than any proprietary vendor's product:
. More available.
. Faster turn-around to update/fix on any issue.

Why because of forums? Windows has that too? So I don't see the difference. You can find a forum for anythign relatively easily. Otherwise people who don't know what a forum is can typically call their PC manufacturer for support about their machien and OS. because mroe people know what a phone is then a forum.

No pop-ups or ads in Internet browsing.

And this has to what to do with the OS? THats a browser thing. Anyways If you install Service Pack 2 you don't have popups anymroe anyways. And yeah you do have ads using any browser unless you block all images and flash ads. Pop-ups are different cause you said OR lol.

Excellent hardware support.

Please you cannot honestly argue linux has better hardware support then windows? ATi has the most appaling linux support ever. ATi for windows des not. Sound cards in Linux fairly decent but no where near what windows can do Im sorry.

People spend an inordinate amount of time spreading disinformation about Linux, forcing one to set the record straight.
Relative to the above, Linux newsgroups and forums are a magnet for FUDsters, astroturfers, and m$ (et al) shills.

yeah you certainly set the record straight with your totally unbiased opions and facts. OH MIGHTY MIGHTY FORGIVE ME I SHALL NEVER USE THAT VILE OS EVER AGAIN!


I am not trying to bash linux but honestly people liek you tick me off because its just such blind faith. No thought no research just blatant fanboyism and sheer stupidity not like I am saying you are stupid either but gawd its like watching a fight between Nvidia fanboys vs. ATI fanboys and AMD vs Intel fanboys. throwing worthless and false claims at eachother acting like they have the one and only truth with totally unwavering unbiasedness.

Ah I didn;t know that. I figured software liek WinDVD and PowerDVD did this for you where as linux has to use "quastionable" means. But then its not linux fault that the MPAA is a bunch of retards.

but then comes the task un-setting it up and removing all the spyware that hp put on your already fucked-up computer.

with linux on the other hand, a livecd like knoppix/mepis/slax/whatever needs absolutely no setup whatsoever in most cases, and it still works infinitly better than windows.



pros of windows?

none, i think. every feature in windows can be replicated in linux, and most already have been. i can already get kde to look like longhorn with transparency and shadows, and with x.org its even faster. current longhorn alphas on the other hand are far from usable.

what features does longhorn have that linux dosent? none.

hardware driven transparency and shadows- x.org
transparent window borders- kde crystal theme
filename filter in explorer- already in KDE bug list and only a matter of time before its released
png support- been there, done that. but better
large thumbnails and icons- :yawn:
transparent start menu and start bar- 500 sheep, 501, 502...
advanced security features- nothing like a good joke to wake you up in the morning.
winfs- other than the fact that longhorn wont have this feature until a year after it ships(most likely for an additional fee), and that it was stolen from a BSD in the first place, ive seen a working prototype under kde. i never installed it and development has halted, but it is certainly doable.

other than that, there are no noticeable improvements in longhorn, other than hte added bloat and hardware requirements, naturally.

what linux NEEDS is to have companies support it better, but that is in no way linux's fault. and apt-get install nvidia-drivers is much easier than doing it in windows. but companies like ATI need a swift kick in the ass to hopefully get them to make halfway-decent drivers.

EnigmaOne and you (stabile007) are both entitled to your own opinions just like everyone else on this site. But the moment you stop talking about the different OS's and start attacking other users you ruin this thread. I think its clear that both you and EnigmaOne have done your homework and theres nothing that makes EnigmaOne or your opinion more valid(besides good resources). So please dont ruin this and stop the personal attacks and hey maybe take that energy and find proof to make your claims more valid.

No one likes a bully!

but if after you give the *solution* it only makes the problem worse, vs. actually fixing the problem, then the only thing that will look bad is you.

and MS support calls are like 40 bucks per call or something? mandrake with support fore a year only costs 30 dollars. which responible adult would you rather talk to?