Microsoft Training: Windows 7 Better than Linux

[randomizer]

[citation][nom]abhik[/nom]@ the guy complaining that his printer doesnt work any morewindows 7 has not "dropped" any hardware. Vista drivers can be used with no issues. especially with printers (i know, i use an old lexmark)[/citation]
My printer has no drivers for Vista except those already integrated into the OS.

 

[enforcer22]

[citation][nom]randomizer[/nom]This article isn't even promoting what Microsoft said, it's just reporting on it. You fail at reading comprehension, just as you fail at spelling.
Linux is a single, frequently updated kernel. There is only one Linux, but newer and older versions of it.
Anything that can be compiled into the kernel, whether by the user, the distribution maintainers or the kernel developers can be supported in all distributions. There is no such thing as one distribution supporting more than another because at the core they are all the same.
Very fair point, and I totally agree. It isn't financially viable to do so. This is not a flaw in Linux however, nor is it a superior "feature" of Windows.
That depends on what computers you're talking about. Desktop workstations mostly run Windows 2000/XP, while the servers mostly run UNIX-like flavours such as Linux and *BSD.
You don't understand the concept of open source. Linux is not about free beer, it is free as in freedom (yes, very overused phrase I know but that's what it is). The lack of cost is a bonus. But the point of open source is to remove the need for lock-in propriety stuff, DRM and lack of community involvement. Open source is all about the community and freedom. You can change the software in any way you like to suit you, not wait until the development company thinks it knows what suits you. If there's a bug in the program, YOU can fix it, not wait for 6 months until a patch comes out. Of course most people can't compile their own programs, let alone fix up bugs in source code, but that's not the point. When you use open source software you acknowledge the fact that the developers don't owe you anything and don't have to provide support (they may, although it is usually community-based support). Microsoft owes you support because you paid for it.With regards to standardisation, that would destroy the point of having multiple distributions. They exist because many are based on certain philosophies with regards to propriety software. If you want out of the box support for DVDs for example, you wouldn't pick Debian because that's against their philosophy. Linux Mint on the other hand supports it. It's your responsibility to do research into what software suits your needs. If you need CUDA support you don't buy an ATI card. If you need propriety media codecs out of the box you don't get Debian or Ubuntu. Of course these can all be installed on any distribution.Remember the most important thing. Linux is not Windows. If you need to run Windows software then don't complain when it doesn't work on Linux because you're missing the point. No Apple user complains when iWork doesn't run on Windows. If you need Windows, use Windows. Also, you can't ever expect Linux to behave like Windows because, again, it is not Windows. Don't like it? Don't use it.The argument that Linux will never be mainstream is quite a pointless one. Linux doesn't need to be mainstream, nor is it trying to be mainstream. The Kernel developers have no need to gain market share, that is what Apple and Microsoft are doing.[/citation]


i think you totaly misunderstood me. I was mostly trying to explain to the people who want linux to be windows its not. sure you can compile drivers compile and edit the kernal and use 3rd party apps like wine to make it use windows apps. personaly i dont see the point in doing all this work for nothing when windows is already there and its like windows! people want to game on linux. ok well opengl is the only way. and seriously the only way gaming companys and software companys and such are going to go mainstream with products like they do with windows is to standardise it. i dont really give a crap if they do however i was just pointing it out.

But hell if i had a editer i could make windows do whatever i wanted also im not to keen on the compile a driver and kernal argument.

This is for matt_b though.

Your a dumb ass..... anyone who doesnt have any system security no matter what OS they are running is a dumb ass. Linux might be more secure perhaps. However not the reason yhou dont hear about it having viruses as much as windows. Its lack of popularity has alot more to do with its lack of viruses.

Anyways i forgot to mention i didnt hate linux i just dont see a point for anything i do. Its not going to make my life easyer or better to use it over windows so for me its a pointless venture.

bakcbydemand..

i saw one game on that list i wanted to play.

Wine is a poor excuse seriously for the you can game on or use windows apps on linux. I would preffer to see all OS's run this stuff nativly.

Saint19....

what does a movie being made in a specific OS have to do with anything? at all? ok well sure it likely renders movies better i suppose i dont actualy care but hell.

anyways im really not trying to bash on linux seriously.. just all these well people use linux for calculating the rotation of a solar body all the time and bs like that is annoying. who cares. it means nothing. when is that going to ever come up while playing a fps or typing a word document. btw those free office programs work on windows to for christ sake so how is that even a + for any OS.

Linuxs to me has always been and likely always will be a nitch market OS that is adapted to do all kinds of things and in that way will reach a popularity as a modual OS. its never going to be the next apple or windows OS. its going to run cell phones pda's mp3 players portable media stuff like that. yes and always likely servers. as for a replacement for the end user on thier home computer? highly doubt it. I dont even see a push to do so.

 

[jimmysmitty]

Well I think the biggest problem is that the writter of the article doesn't fully grasp what he is saying. Windows 7 has built in support for WoW. WINE can support WoW but you need to do more than just install the game.

I think its that Windows 7 itself has those features built in and free while Linux needs the products added or additional steps to be supported.

This is a pretty cleaver marketing strategy too. But I do prefer Windows over Linux unless its a firewall/server I plan on running.

Besides Windows 7 rules.

 

[randomizer]

@Enforcer: I probably did misunderstand you I agree with you, the people wanting to be able to game on Linux are barking up the wrong tree. They should be talking to developers and publishers, not bitching on forums about Wine not being good enough and Linux not supporting this and that. Otherwise they should just shut up and use Windows like any sensible gamer would.

I also find it difficult to find a use for Linux. I don't currently use any distribution, but I've downloaded heaps and am trying to find one I like that isn't *buntu. Windows does everything I need and that is why I still use it. If I was a SysAdmin I'd probably have more of a use for Linux.

I also agree that Linux will only serve a niche mainstream market (ignore the server market where it is quite pervasive), at least for the foreseeable future, because unlike Windows, Linux doesn't have massive marketing campaigns, nor does it need them. It is highly customisable, and it can do almost anything you want if you can code and you put in the time to configure it (something that isn't true for Windows where you're quite restricted in what you can do). But most people don't care about this and only want it to run a web browser and a word processor. Linux (and any OS) is quite capable of doing this, in fact it's arguably simpler than on Windows, but as soon as you require alot of Windows software you should give up and stick to Windows.

On another note, the average user (and I mean those who are barely computer literate) doesn't even know that Windows isn't a part of their computer, and haven't got a clue what an OS is. They just buy a computer and if it comes with Windows, it comes with Windows.

 

[backbydemand]

[citation][nom]truth_will_set_u_free[/nom]Any compatibility issues are a moot point: A netbook with Linux pre-installed has been tested to work with all of the hardware. Nobody is going to game on a netbook anyways, so that's also a moot point, and Linux is likely to come with all of your email, IM and office applications pre-installed, and free of crap-ware. Linux is flat out superior for netbooks, unless MS is going to sell Win7 + Office2007 for $5.[/citation]

Well, a netbook having such limited functionality it doesn't really matter if its runs Linux or Windows, with no optical drive an average netbook is about as fast and functional as my current mobile phone. Also, the first generation of netbooks with Linux have now been superceded by ones with Windows when Mr Joe Public brought it back to the store complaining that it was a pile of junk and none of his software would install on it. Big up to Linux, you had a chance to consolidate a position in a new and untapped market where Microsoft had no market share and you blew it. Plain and simple.

 

[matt_b]

[citation][nom]EnFoRceR22[/nom]This is for matt_b though.Your a dumb ass..... anyone who doesnt have any system security no matter what OS they are running is a dumb ass. Linux might be more secure perhaps. However not the reason yhou dont hear about it having viruses as much as windows. Its lack of popularity has alot more to do with its lack of viruses.[/citation]
Why am I a dumb ass? I said nothing about Linux not having viruses out there. There are anti-virus programs and firewall programs out there for Linux - and I use them! If anyone is a dumb ass, it's you for assuming and for being the second person for putting words in my mouth that were never said! I simply stated that for all of the system protection programs that apply to Linux, they are as the majority of them, free. If you call someone out, comprehend or at least take what someone actually wrote in context when doing so.

 

[jcknouse]

[citation][nom]K_bun2[/nom]Kubuntu 9.10 alpha5 is looking fantastic, it's a real Win7 killer, AND they also have a netbook remix out, although I suspect most netbooks will come with Ubuntu instead of Kubuntu. Check it out.[/citation]

I've been into using Kubuntu for more than 2 years. I didn't like the upgrade to KDE4, so I dropped it back on machines I put the newer Kubuntu onto to 3.5(?).

I have a buddy in CA who is a linux guru, and he has been telling me all the lies and half-truths about what you can/can't do with Linux.

I am just waiting to see Windows 7 performance vs Vista. If it's not improved or at least the same, I am going to just buy PCs/laptops in the future with an extra drive tray install Linux on a blank drive.

My only hurdle with totally leaving Windows has been games, and since Wine has been getting more stable I can see my way clear to go Linux and have to do a little work to run my games.

 

[backbydemand]

Marked as minus 2 just for pointing out that a netbook is a laptop with less functions and no optical drive? For saying my phone is faster and does more? Or for pointing out that Linux fails to appear on 2nd generation netbooks because Joe Public doesn't want Linux?

I reckon it's option 3 and I have been marked down for rightly pointing out that Linux is the preserve of the minority and most people dont want it. You can tell people till you are blue in the face that it is easier or more powerful but facts dont lie. Linux had market domination of the first generation of netbooks and now they dont. People have voted with their feet. It isn't a case of Microsoft stopping people moving away from a familiar prouct, people bought netbooks by the million with Linux, they tried it, they hated it, they went to newer netbooks powered by (of all the things to use) an 8 year old OS, XP.

So mark this post down again, minus 500 if you have to, all it goes to show is that democracy sucks.

 

[SAL-e]

[citation][nom]backbydemand[/nom]...So mark this post down again, minus 500 if you have to, all it goes to show is that democracy sucks.[/citation]
I am the one who marked you with -1. That is the statement that proves me right. Everyone has right on his/her opinion. Forcing your narrow view it is my reason. Anyone who is talking in terms of "us vs. them" has no concept of freedom and don't deserve freedom. That is why you not going to understand the fundamental difference between Windows/Mac OS X and Linux/FreeBSD.

 

[peanutsrevenge]

Most of that is untrue
Usually I'd agree that gaming is better on WIndows, but the way they worded it is stupid. I have a few friends whos gaming can be done on either Windows, Mac OR Linux without Wine ever being mentioned.

Software support, limited on Linux?? It's limited on Windows too, just not AS limited.

The company just gets worse by the year but their main product (Windows) is getting better. lol

 

[backbydemand]

[citation][nom]SAL-e[/nom]I am the one who marked you with -1. That is the statement that proves me right. Everyone has right on his/her opinion. Forcing your narrow view it is my reason.[/citation]

Idiot, I haven't forced any viewpoint on anyone, did I personally force all those people who tried Linux on netbooks to go back to Windows? No. The public made their minds up themselves, tried Linux and tossed it in favour of Windows. Personally I don't care, someone motivated and organised should have used this as an opportunity to advance and put Linux squarely as a dominant player, but they didn't, so it's not really a Linux fail, it's an organisation fail.

 

[SAL-e]

[citation][nom]backbydemand[/nom]Idiot,...[/citation]
Usually I don't respond to people who are using labels because it shows their immaturity. The only reason I am going to respond to you is because I hope that you going to grow if you give it a lite effort.
[citation][nom]backbydemand[/nom]I haven't forced any viewpoint on anyone, did I personally force all those people who tried Linux on netbooks to go back to Windows?[/citation]
You have very narrow view about the netbooks. The netbook never was envision as small and crappy laptop. I am going to challenge you to put a side Microsoft propaganda and think how the netbook could be used when your e-mail, calendar, documents, social networks and everything else is located on the web. Do you really need to install anything beside a browser?! Do you really need full blown Office on your smart phone? Do you really need a mechanical hard drive to store all of your data and loose it when hdd brakes (#1 failure in laptops) or when your computer gets lost or stolen.
The only reason why Microsoft is trying to re-define the intend of netbooks is because it has nothing to offer. The whole idea of netbooks goes against entire MS business model. They need time to adapt and they are going to use all dirty moves in order to maintain their market domination.
[citation][nom]backbydemand[/nom]No. The public made their minds up themselves, tried Linux and tossed it in favour of Windows. Personally I don't care, someone motivated and organised should have used this as an opportunity to advance and put Linux squarely as a dominant player, but they didn't, so it's not really a Linux fail, it's an organisation fail.[/citation]No. The public did not make their minds up themselves. And the public can not make it, because the public don't have the right knowledge to do so. The public is manipulated by Microsoft and their use of wide spread corporate corruption. The current article is example how it is done. Paying off the store consultants to spread lies. The BestBuy employees should listen to customers needs and offer the best solution and talk back to MS what people are looking for. That is why MS missed the trend and the need for efficient and light weight laptops and build monster like Vista that runs ok only on monster desktop replacement laptop.
I have to agree that it is organization failure. The big corporate business model fail. All OEM has vested interest in Windows and they are trying to protect their Windows investments and could not adapt their business models for Linux. The big companies are not capable to change quickly. That is why Intel, Google and others decided to step in an build their own OSes for netbooks. Intel started Moblin. Google is working on CromeOS. Canonical is working on Ubuntu Remix for netbooks. There are other small players like Jolicloud and others. Netbooks are here to stay in the near future. And Linux requires different business model and everyone who tries to copy MS or Apples business model will fail.

 

[back_by_demand]

[citation][nom]SAL-e[/nom]The public did not make their minds up themselves. And the public can not make it, because the public don't have the right knowledge to do so. The public is manipulated by Microsoft and their use of wide spread corporate corruption.[/citation]

Interesting, I wondered how long it would take before someone blamed it on the customer. So they are all too stupid to make up their own minds and you are gonna educate them?

Instead of blaming the low takeup of Linux by the public, or worse still the take up then dropping of, or blaming it on established organisations such as MS and all the hardware vendors that seem to be involved in the big conspiracy... why doesn't the Linux "community" realise that no matter how good their product is they will never get anywhere given it's current state of organisation. Blaming everyone else isn't the way to go. So who's fault is it that DirectX is required for nearly all games, the games developers?

I have heard all kinds of FUD from Linux people, some who say they can install anything, play anything, totally immune from viruses, easier to use. The true test of whether any claims of superiority are true does NOT come from regular Linux users, OR Windows users. It comes from people who have never used either, first time computer owners.

Despite the esoteric claims about what a netbook should be used for, actual people buying them wanted a simple net device, maybe with letter writing facilities, email, watching videos, etc. The comparison I made against my phone was valid, a netbook really doesn't need a heavyweight OS, the OS used on some phones would probably be sufficient and any familiarity with Windows shouldn't matter either, it certainly doesn't matter for the millions of people who use Blackberrys or other smartphones.

So here is the rub, MS has got an OS in both the PC and the mobile phone market. If MS is so active in bullying vendors, OEMs, software houses and brainwashing the innocent public, how come they haven't done anything like that in the mobile phone market?

The truth is simple. MS isn't evil, vendors, OEMs and software houses are not to blame. The public wanted an OS that was easy to use and the Linux that was put on first gen netbooks was not easy. Once bitten, twice shy. If they decided to go second gen netbooks with Windows XP then an 8 year old OS should be massively inferior, right? If so then the public will realise that it was a huge mistake and give Linux another go.

So this is the way you lost them, when you say that the public are ill-informed. You may as well say that they are stupid. Way to go getting the public on your side. That is how MS has won, they have made it easy for us and they don't call the customers idiots.

 

[randomizer]

[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]why doesn't the Linux "community" realise that no matter how good their product is they will never get anywhere given it's current state of organisation.[/citation]
Because as you clearly fail to understand, market share is not important. It doesn't matter if 90% of the people in your street don't use Linux, because Linux suits the people who already use it just fine. Market share does matter to Microsoft and Apple because they are trying to make money.

 

[back_by_demand]

[citation][nom]randomizer[/nom]Because as you clearly fail to understand, market share is not important. It doesn't matter if 90% of the people in your street don't use Linux, because Linux suits the people who already use it just fine. Market share does matter to Microsoft and Apple because they are trying to make money.[/citation]

If market share isn't important, why the hell are you all bleating about MS? Rubbish. That is the attitude that will see Linux be a 2nd rate has been. You should be kicking down doors and demanding more more more. Simply being satisfied with being a minority boutique OS will see it die a slow lingering death. If Linux is so much better than Windows then users everywhere should be screaming blue murder from the rooftops to everyone who will listen.

Get organised, get some advertising going, get some real spirit. The public perception of Linux is that it is not for them, it is for the geek minority and the attitude expressed in the above statement doesn't do the Linux community any favours.

Some would say that Windows 7 has only got to the stage it has because it has been pushed by competition from Linux and OSX, so it you get better and better so will they. Everybody wins. If you shrug shoulders and say, "I dont care, Linux suits me just fine" then MS has no incentive to get better.

Saying that, in the 14 years since Windows 95, have they really done so little? Be objective, even as a Linux user, what advances have they made since the bad old days?

 

[randomizer]

[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]If market share isn't important, why the hell are you all bleating about MS?[/citation]
Because they are making up crap. I would say the same thing if they made up crap about OSX. Marketing is lies, and it needs to be pointed out.

[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]You should be kicking down doors and demanding more more more.[/citation]
Who's doors? The people who are developing for free? Should I beat down the doors of charity workers because world hunger still exists too?

[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]Simply being satisfied with being a minority boutique OS will see it die a slow lingering death.[/citation]
Perhaps in the desktop arena, but not among servers. It is there to stay.

[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]If Linux is so much better than Windows[/citation]
Who told you that? You must have been talking to the fanatics.

[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]Get organised, get some advertising going, get some real spirit.[/citation]
Once again you fail completely by thinking that the Linux community needs to advertise. If you can't comprehend this simple fact then you shouldn't be posting about Linux.

[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]The public perception of Linux is that it is not for them, it is for the geek minority and the attitude expressed in the above statement doesn't do the Linux community any favours.[/citation]
That is incorrect. Many Linux users would prefer it if Joe Bloggs didn't force their OS to become diluted to satisfy the brainless. Of course, Ubuntu is seeking to go down that path, but there are also distros like Gentoo which even seasoned Linux users can struggle with. If there was standardisation then either the average user or the hardcore tweaker would lose. Standardisation is a double-edged sword.

[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]Be objective, even as a Linux user, what advances have they made since the bad old days?[/citation]
I'm not a Linux user, I'm a Windows user.

 

[back_by_demand]

Many Linux users would prefer it if Joe Bloggs didn't force their OS to become diluted to satisfy the brainless.

So what Linux users are saying is that Linux is so much better Windows, but they don't want it to be taken up by everyone because people are too stupid.

The arrogance is breathtaking.

 

[randomizer]

[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]So what Linux users are saying is that Linux is so much better Windows, but they don't want it to be taken up by everyone because people are too stupid.The arrogance is breathtaking.[/citation]
That depends who you're talking to. I have certainly heard people talk like that, but they are usually the "older" Linux users who remember the days where a CLI was the only properly functioning user interface. Most newer users prefer the easy way of doing things (easy is, of course, subjective, because someone used to Vi is going to find learning odd keyboard combinations like 'Ctrl+V' for paste hard when they're used to 'p').

You really need to stop twisting my words to suit your clearly anti-Linux agenda.

 

[back_by_demand]

Oddly enough I am not anti-Linux and I have used it myself as well, it runs my FTP and print server. What I am anti is the so called "older users"

I have seen them too the same as you have. Windows has the same kind of people too. Zealots that throw around their almost religeous fantasicm and seek to big-up their prefered OS by beating up of rivals rather than improving their own product.

If the Linux community wants a model for how to have a successful, free, open source product that will gain widespread acceptance they only have to look as far as Firefox. If they want to be consigned to dormrooms and aging dweebsters and viewed upon as something quirky then keep going. A lot of people won't want to even try it through fear of established Linux users snearing down on them whilst the word "n00b" rings in their ears. You know it happens.

 

[randomizer]

It really depends who you define as "a lot of people." If we are talking about the word processing, barely computer-literate person, they would probably have never heard the word Linux, let alone know what it is. They wouldn't care either way if they used Windows or Linux as long as they can get their work done.

Now if we're talking about people who understand that their OS is not a piece of the computer that comes with it and can't be removed but are not into tweaking performance, I agree, they probably know of the zealots or have at least heard of their existence. The community support forums for major distros aren't usually full of these fanatics though, and the Ubuntu forum even has a section where you can ask the most pathetic of questions without risk of being attacked by the holier-than-thou users.

Linux definitely needs to lose the geeks-only stigma. Making it like Windows is not the way to do that though, otherwise it might as well not exist (Windows is good at being Windows and doesn't need an alternative). The other stigma is that free means crap. Anyone who knows anything about FOSS knows that free doesn't necessarily mean crap. That plus the fact that in Linux terms "free" is not talking about money but about freedom and the lack of cost is just a bonus.

Firefox is a rare exception in the world of FOSS where market share now seems to matter (you've seen Mozilla bitch about IE recently I'm sure). There are other large-ish projects like VLC where the devs aren't complaining about WMP being installed with Windows. VLC is very successful as well (maybe not on the scale of Firefox), because unlike WMP it just works. Sure it doesn't look flashy but it's functional. Many programs will always remain small and are barely anything beyond a one man, spare time project.

I think a compromise would be healthy. Have one standard distribution that all software developers that want to get anywhere in the world ensure compatibility with. But don't remove all other distributions because then freedom is gone and Linux is a free Windows. The problem is that many "standards" are propriety and licensing issues exist when including it with free Linux. Now if these standards were open...

 

[backbydemand]

[citation][nom]randomizer[/nom]I think a compromise would be healthy. Have one standard distribution that all software developers that want to get anywhere in the world ensure compatibility with. But don't remove all other distributions because then freedom is gone and Linux is a free Windows. The problem is that many "standards" are propriety and licensing issues exist when including it with free Linux. Now if these standards were open...[/citation]

I think there is a common ground between everyone here. You also touched on a point that grinds my gears, standards are proprietary when included with free Linux. Someone always finds a way to take something that is free and find a way to make you pay for it.

Back to the original story though, I was reading it again and the context used. An average Linux user probably wouldn't go to Best Buy and the software they are talking about makes sense. If you pick up just about any software and look at the system requirements and they state Windows or Mac but Linux is absent the user is confused. Using WINE or other methods to install isn't officially supported. So when they state that less software works or less games run then that is true.

I had a weblink a long time ago for a wiki-site that gave listings for just about every piece of software made in the last 10 years and its compatability to Vista, I would be interested to see a side by side comparison with Mac and Linux for the same list of software. Maybe that piece of specialist astronomy software I bought in 2002 that doesn't run on Vista may work well on Linux and I won't have wasted $250.

 

[Guest]

I have used MS products from DOS to Windows 7. Through the years I have tried Linux LIVE CD's but felt it was impractical for my use at home until now. Interestingly enough, I have found that the latest bleeding edge distributions to be quite impressive. I recently purchased a new notebook and I was amazed at how much faster Linux (Variant of Ubuntu 10.10) runs my windows games! Wine and crossover handle the job well.

Also the LIVE CD set-up ALL of my hardware! I have never seen a Linux distro do that before. I can choose any desktop I want and it is in 3D! I am not stuck with the windows GUI. I NEVER HAVE TO REBOOT!

Linux is NOT Windows. Things are done differently and there is a learning curve, but it is not as steep as one would expect. Mr Google will point you to community pages where you will find answers quicker than you would get them from Microsoft's International call centre where they do not speak proper English!