Microsoft Training: Windows 7 Better than Linux

Status
Not open for further replies.

cryogenic

Distinguished
Jul 10, 2006
449
1
18,780
0
Well it's true, dunno what Microsoft said, but I definably believe myself that Windows is better than Linux (unless you're doing something Linux worthy like a web server or some cluster or anything).

For gaming, entertainment, day to day stuff Windows is better, has more apps, more options, and usually not a big deal finding drivers or configuring some weird stuff.
 

deltatux

Distinguished
Jul 29, 2008
335
0
18,780
0
Microsoft FUDs about Linux again, quite typical. Not really news anymore. It's true that Linux has limited software support but a good chunk just ain't true.
 

Supertrek32

Distinguished
Nov 13, 2008
442
0
18,780
0
Every other company does this type of marketing on a daily basis, I don't see how it becomes news when Microsoft does it.

...and with Core i5 released today you can't even say it's a slow news day...
 

rooket

Distinguished
Feb 3, 2009
1,097
0
19,280
0
screen shot looks true enough to me. I don't think wine is part of linux. It may be included in some distributions but it afaik is not built into the kernel. Also I lack knowledge of the other features but I would assume that limited on all that stuff is true. They aren't saying not supported for multimedia, just limited. Meaning that there are programs just not as many as for Windows which more than likely is true.

When I go to a popular download site such as download.com and search for software, the majority of the results are windows based. hence why it generally makes little sense to go out and buy a mac and rely entirely on mac osx (which is a modified beos, a type of unix). And yeah I know you can google for linux software. You guys writing this article think that most Windows/mac osx users would be able to install all the hardware and software they want? Think again, linux is not a newbie o/s and most people aren't going to put the effort in all the training involved in setting up linux. At least M$ isn't going on here claiming that win7 is a better solution than linux for use as a server o/s so I don't really see much point in why this article was written.
 

rooket

Distinguished
Feb 3, 2009
1,097
0
19,280
0
[citation][nom]AMDnoob[/nom]does anyone here use Windows Live Essentials?[/citation]
It was installed on my coworker's home computer but mcafee forced me to uninstall it. It seemed like a decent piece of software but between mcafee and ms live essentials I'd want to check other vendors besides those two. M$ has been a total slouch about their malware protection over the years and mcafee as well. Norton right now is the best one but even they don't catch everything.

And yeah I know the other features in live essentials such as automatic defrag and such. That stuff is cool and all but how often do you realy need to defrag a windows drive? once a day? no, I didn't think so. it is very rare for me to need a defrag and it generally has no performance benefit on anything I do it on regardless if the drive is 22% fragmented or 11%, once it is done defragging the PC runs exactly the same.
 

branewalker

Distinguished
Sep 9, 2009
1
0
18,510
0
I'd give Microsoft the benefit on gaming, but media playback is a wash, especially with MS incorporating new DRM in its operating systems starting with Vista. Windows almost always requires a codec pack, and without 3rd-party software, it's not easy to tell which codecs are installed and which are not. In Ubuntu at least (probably one of the more media-friendly distros) just add Medibuntu repositories, and you're good to go. Adding repositories could be more straightforward, but it's by no means "hard."
Other than gaming, the only thing keeping me on Windows is Adobe Creative Suite. I can't build and customize my rig if I go Mac, and that's the only other platform Adobe supports.

As for hardware, I've had more hardware troubles with Windows than with Linux. XP still won't find my Brother wireless laser printer. Ubuntu was happy to install it on both my desktop and laptop without complaint. Maybe that speaks more of Brother than of Microsoft, though. I'm not sure.
 

knight9413

Distinguished
Sep 9, 2009
8
0
18,510
0
This shows how much of a threat linux is to windows. I still think Windows is a better OS for personal use and single user mode. Linux is also very good, but it's free (the ones I used) which means a lot of the software is very unstable. In terms of features and stability, Openoffice.org still has a long way to go... but... it's getting closer and closer.
 

pacostrano

Distinguished
Aug 12, 2009
16
0
18,510
0
Is it me or maybe people does not know how to use Linux... there is some programs that you can play LOTS of windows games with Linux and btw Microsoft Used before Linux for their own server because they don't even thrust their own Win server security.
 
[citation][nom]Cryogenic[/nom]Well it's true, dunno what Microsoft said, but I definably believe myself that Windows is better than Linux (unless you're doing something Linux worthy like a web server or some cluster or anything).For gaming, entertainment, day to day stuff Windows is better, has more apps, more options, and usually not a big deal finding drivers or configuring some weird stuff.[/citation]
Wrong. Linux is great for every day use esp. considering how many viruses,etc are out in the wild aimed at Windows. If you use Torrents, Linux is the way to go.

[citation][nom]branewalker[/nom]I'd give Microsoft the benefit on gaming, but media playback is a wash, especially with MS incorporating new DRM in its operating systems starting with Vista. Windows almost always requires a codec pack, and without 3rd-party software, it's not easy to tell which codecs are installed and which are not. In Ubuntu at least (probably one of the more media-friendly distros) just add Medibuntu repositories, and you're good to go. Adding repositories could be more straightforward, but it's by no means "hard."Other than gaming, the only thing keeping me on Windows is Adobe Creative Suite. I can't build and customize my rig if I go Mac, and that's the only other platform Adobe supports.As for hardware, I've had more hardware troubles with Windows than with Linux. XP still won't find my Brother wireless laser printer. Ubuntu was happy to install it on both my desktop and laptop without complaint. Maybe that speaks more of Brother than of Microsoft, though. I'm not sure.[/citation]
Agreed. It's NOT hard to run Linux any more. With Yast2,etc the days of dependency hell are usually solved. I mainly use Linux for every day stuff now, only use Windows for gaming, CS4, SolidWorks,Inventor. And yes, I do run Windows 7 x64 and Vista x64 and XP x64.

[citation][nom]doomtomb[/nom]The only reason Linux is still afloat is because it is free.[/citation]
Again, wrong. Linux has much better security and low over head. Why do you think most web servers run LAMP? And FIY Linux does cost quite a bit to deploy on the cooperate scale yet people still do it due to the benefit.

 

jasperjones

Distinguished
Aug 15, 2009
96
0
18,640
2
[citation][nom]rooket[/nom]screen shot looks true enough to me. I don't think wine is part of linux. It may be included in some distributions but it afaik is not built into the kernel.
[/citation]
That's a moot point. Skype or AIM are also not part of the Windows kernel.

[citation]
Also I lack knowledge of the other features but I would assume that limited on all that stuff is true. They aren't saying not supported for multimedia, just limited. Meaning that there are programs just not as many as for Windows which more than likely is true.When I go to a popular download site such as download.com and search for software, the majority of the results are windows based.
[/citation]
No, most of those claims are flat-out lies. No authorized support for Linux? Tell that to Canonical, Novell, or Red Hat. Driver support goes both ways, too. My HP LaserJet 1012 worked out-of-the-box on Linux. On Vista? I couldn't get it to work for over a year until finally HP decided to release a driver. There are lots of older devices which vendors don't support under Vista/7 but Linux compatibility is provided by the kernel or by standard, open-source drivers.

[citation]
hence why it generally makes little sense to go out and buy a mac and rely entirely on mac osx (which is a modified beos, a type of unix). And yeah I know you can google for linux software. You guys writing this article think that most Windows/mac osx users would be able to install all the hardware and software they want? Think again, linux is not a newbie o/s and most people aren't going to put the effort in all the training involved in setting up linux.
[/citation]

Again, I disagree. I've set up a dual boot Windows XP and Ubuntu for my parents. It turns out my mostly computer-illiterate parents CHOOSE to use Linux for many tasks since they find it simpler.
 

MJRSnyder

Distinguished
Jul 15, 2008
21
0
18,510
0
[citation][nom]AMDnoob[/nom]does anyone here use Windows Live Essentials?[/citation]
I had to look it up to see what it even was.
 

jimbofluffy

Distinguished
Dec 17, 2008
10
0
18,510
0
[citation][nom]rooket[/nom]hence why it generally makes little sense to go out and buy a mac and rely entirely on mac osx (which is a modified beos, a type of unix). And yeah I know you can google for linux software. [/citation]

OSX is not based off of BeOS, it is based off of NeXTSTEP. NeXT was the company Steve Jobs co-founded after he left Apple, that was later bought by Apple instead of Be. Also, BeOS isn't even a type of Unix, NeXTSTEP was based off of Unix. Anyway, there are plenty of sites with Apple freeware and hardly anyone would Google for Linux software, that is what package managers are for.
 

vider

Distinguished
Jul 10, 2008
151
1
18,685
0
[citation][nom]rooket[/nom]screen shot looks true enough to me. I don't think wine is part of linux. It may be included in some distributions but it afaik is not built into the kernel. Also I lack knowledge of the other features but I would assume that limited on all that stuff is true. They aren't saying not supported for multimedia, just limited. Meaning that there are programs just not as many as for Windows which more than likely is true.When I go to a popular download site such as download.com and search for software, the majority of the results are windows based. hence why it generally makes little sense to go out and buy a mac and rely entirely on mac osx (which is a modified beos, a type of unix). And yeah I know you can google for linux software. You guys writing this article think that most Windows/mac osx users would be able to install all the hardware and software they want? Think again, linux is not a newbie o/s and most people aren't going to put the effort in all the training involved in setting up linux. At least M$ isn't going on here claiming that win7 is a better solution than linux for use as a server o/s so I don't really see much point in why this article was written.[/citation]

Is that a joke? You bet the majority will be for windows, Download.com has been a bloat ware site for Shareware based applications for which alternatives could be found (Most of the time) on http://sourceforge.net/. God, I found about download.com a long time after I first found sourceforge.net. Some one needs to learn how to use his internet in a better way.
 

randomizer

Champion
Moderator
There is probably more software for Linux than windows if you count the small projects.

Who would even expect Windows Live Essentials to work on Linux? It's a GOOD thing it doesn't work on Linux because it's a load of crapware anyway and there are much better GPL programs.

Linux does not have a lack of support for games, the games have a lack of support for Linux. The problem is the reverse of what the slide says. Wine is not Linux support. Wine is Windows libraries on Linux.

As for Authorised support, that's a load of rubbish. there are several commercial distributions with full support. Red Hat Enterprise Linux and SUSE Enterprise Linux come to mind.
 
Yes you can just run so many bloated windows applications on that netbook. Of course trying to use that running program is gonna be another story :D. Anyway I find it hard to imagine any netbook running WoW (much less any modern game) at any reasonable speed. As for the Windows Live Essentials bit, I can't imagine actually worrying about that when most default installs of Linux have much better alternatives.

Just so many things wrong with that training, ack, bull shit meter exploding (must be an iPhone App). As for the quip about different versions of Linux just how many different versions of Win7 do they plan to put out? As a web developer I'm pretty tied to Adobe Creative Suite more than is good for me. I've tried to wine it, but too many small annoyances really. Well that and games keep me glued to Windows more than Linux :D.
 

kato128

Distinguished
Feb 23, 2009
156
1
18,685
0
I don't see what the fuss is.

Windows live essentials is a windows only option.

Windows does support video on ALL major IM programs and linux doesn't (this isn't to say linux doesn't support it it just doesn't support all of them)

Windows runs just about every game natively without emulation and linux doesn't.

Most linux distro's use communities to provide support rather than a formal support regime and those that do exist have been pretty limited in my experience.

Hardware support for windows is by far better than linux. Ever had a device that wouldn't work in any version of Windows? I don't think so.

So is this really some big lie being spread? Because the only potential point of contention I can really see is the authorised support sections.
 

randomizer

Champion
Moderator
[citation][nom]kato128[/nom]I don't see what the fuss is.Windows live essentials is a windows only option.[/citation]As it should be. It's not exactly a reason why Windows 7 is better though. It's like saying Windows is better because it has a Start button.

[citation][nom]kato128[/nom]Windows does support video on ALL major IM programs and linux doesn't (this isn't to say linux doesn't support it it just doesn't support all of them)[/citation]This is quite true. Although you'd probably be using Skype for most video calls anyway.

[citation][nom]kato128[/nom]Windows runs just about every game natively without emulation and linux doesn't.[/citation]
This is not a reason why Windows is better than Linux per se. Linux is not the problem, the game developers and publishers are the problem. Of course, to the end user it looks like a Linux problem and Microsoft is preying on that ignorance here.

[citation][nom]kato128[/nom]Most linux distro's use communities to provide support rather than a formal support regime and those that do exist have been pretty limited in my experience.[/citation]
If you don't pay for the software then nobody is obligated to provide support. It's completely logical. If you want support you have to pay, whether that be commercial Linux distributions or Windows (or OSX for that matter).

[citation][nom]kato128[/nom]Hardware support for windows is by far better than linux.[/citation]
That is debatable. For some devices, like wireless hardware, this is certainly true. For other devices, particularly very old ones, windows no longer has support. Windows 7 has almost completely dropped support for my 6-year-old printer.

[citation][nom]kato128[/nom]So is this really some big lie being spread? Because the only potential point of contention I can really see is the authorised support sections.[/citation]It is more an issue of twisting the facts than blatant lies. Many points are true in select situations but Microsoft are proclaiming them as global fact.

Look at the other slides as well. http://quaoar.ww7.be/ms_fud_of_the_year/569458-microsoft-attack-linux-retail-level-probably.html
 
G

Guest

Guest
Of course Windows is better. I've tried Windows, Ubuntu, MacOSX(Hackintosh) and have 4 OS on my PC at one time. I've never used a MAC OSX in my life, but after 1 week, i totally fall in love with it.

As for UBUNTU, i've tried to like it and use it for a few months. In the end, the trouble is far more than what it's worth. It's hardly user friendly, looks crap and slower than a MAC OSX.

Eventually i throw it out of my PC forever. Linux really does suck. And i'm a techie. I can see why the average consumer just won't touch it.
 
[/citation]Again, wrong. Linux has much better security and low over head. Why do you think most web servers run LAMP? And FIY Linux does cost quite a bit to deploy on the cooperate scale yet people still do it due to the benefit.[/citation]


please explain to the class why its better to use it for everyday use. everyday you get roadblocks from webpages that use windows media player for links to videos, for internet when you have to install plugins you have to run complex scripts which can take god knows how long vs windows where it is just one install package. then there is office where microsoft office is used by 99% of the work and education world and with openoffice being free its not 100% reliable when it comes with compatibility. so your the one who is wrong and keeps clutching on to his free copy of ubuntu that you had to spend 5.99 to get in the mail

linux is only for everyday use for hackers and the hardcore nerds which is why viruses are not popular on linux.
 

kato128

Distinguished
Feb 23, 2009
156
1
18,685
0
@Randomizer: Yeah I see your point there. It looks like it's a tricky use of context. So while nothing is completely untrue it's not completely honest either and taking it as a global truth could be very misleading. Basically this kind of thing highlights the old adage "buyer beware".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY