what is the main diff bet microsoft and linux.

Availability of source code with all that that thing implies, including all the philosophical stuff.

Try reading this.

The main difference is that one is free and one is commercial, but I guess you want more detail than that To be frank there are many important differences so its hard to pin down a "main" difference that gives any sense of the scope of difference. if that makes any sense.

Not really. There are lots of commercial linux distros. I also preffer the term "open source". Most people assume "free as in beer" when you say "free", so the term is not concrete and can mislead people.

First, "Microsoft" is the name of an American corporation. "Linux" is the trademark for an operating system kernel. The trademark is owned by Linus Torvalds, but the Linux kernel is not owned by anyone.


Perhaps you meant to ask the difference between Windows and Linux....

In my view, the main difference is the business model: The difference between proprietary and open-source code, and the approaches to make money from each.

Microsoft is a software company, and Linux is an operating system.

The biggest difference can be summed up in a single word...choice.

Well, you create file1 with "microsoft" in it and file2 with "linux" in it. When you run diff on the two files you'll find that they have nothing in common.

This answer is certified not to help the OP in any way

Comparing an OS to a corporation is pretty futile. One difference between "linux" (not a linux distribution, but "linux") is that Linux is a unix-style OS kernel and Windows is an OS with lots of other bits, included as a monolithic whole.

A Linux distribution is something different, and there are several major layers to this. One is the Linux part (the kernel), one is a whole pile of utilities and libraries and another layer is GUI's, apps (and yet more libraries).

What all this gives you is choice - if you don't like Linuxfeeble you can migrate to WonderLinux without abandoning linux. Maybe this is more choice than you can handle, but it is choice. And, if you can't handle that much choice, just choose a popular distribution and stop worrying.

Its also more transparent; if you think that a particular GUI stinks (and I can't think of one that does; I can think of ones that I'm not comfortable with, but not ones that actually stink, but maybe I'd get more hardline if I was forced to live with one that I don't like) you can just avoid it. With a big, monolithic lump like Windows, you can choose Vista. Or not. Vista gets security fixes, I'm not sure where MS is on its vacillation with support on XP, but it can make a commercial decision to cut off support to older versions at any time.

"Linux" can't do this. A big distribution could drop support for something older, but you can find smaller distros which still support olders kernels, and even if they didn't, you could do it youself. Maybe if the world was full of like-minded individuals, there would be a business there...

And Linux distros are ready to get things done. With Windows you get an OS. With Linux distros, you get enough to actually do something rather than a framework that would allow you to buy things that could let you do stuff. Sometime you might find this wacky (specialist firewall distros, specialist NAS distros, specialist security distros if they are not your thing), but someone has that problem and for them it can be a lifesaver. For the rest of us, a word processors, spreadsheets, mind mappers rss feed readers are the very stuff of life. Err, as are DNS servers, caching programs and networking utilities.

evil empire vs freedom, that is the fundamental difference.

Hi,
Not to get into a pissing contest but.

Someone has to buy the 'beer' as in 'free as in beer'. Be it from a distributor or bathtub the 'beer is not free'.

Never did like that analogy!

Open Source beer, now that would be 'free'.

someone has beaten you to it
http://www.opensourcebeerproject.com/

(beer recipes under the GNU FDL i think)

That's cool, I think everyone new to linux should be made to read that before even laying a finger on a live CD.

Seriously though asking what is the main difference between windows and a linux based OS, is like asking what the main difference is between an orange and an apple - except more complicated... and less fruity.

Oversimplified:

1) Linux is free.

2) Windows is better for 3d stuff like games.

3) Linux is great for nearly everything else.

Come on, aren't you sick of metaphors like this one yet? Remove microsoft - and you'll get Apple. And if you'll get Apple instead of Microsoft, I bet you'll want Microsoft back. All this isn't about "\"evil empires\" vs \"freedom\"".Install windows - you'll get one kind of problems. Install linux - you'll another kind of problems. You only decide which kind of problems you want. There is no need to iconize Linux or demonize microsoft - it's just wrong kind of thing for that.

2 of 3 statements are incorrect.

Which means that you can copy/modify operating systems, but doesn't mean that you won't have to pay for it.

WRONG. There are more 3d games for windows. But this doesn't mean that it windows is better for 3d stuff.