Everything I want to do is available on Windows,if it's not broke,dont need to fix it. I keep things simple,period.
I think people's gripes aren't so much with Windows per se as it is with Microsoft's actions that "force" people to use Windows. People don't have a real choice of OS because they have to accommodate programs they need. The majority of people online would be using Internet Explorer right now if the vast majority of websites only worked if being viewed from Internet Explorer. This doesn't mean everyone picked IE as their browser of choice--it was done from necessity. Some people will pick IE as their choice; that's cool. But it's nice to have a choice and to be able to run Chrome, Opera, or Firefox if you want and still have full access to the World Wide Web. The situation with OSes and program/driver compatibility though is similar to websites only working with Internet Explorer. See what I mean?
That's what I used to think when I used Internet Explorer and wasn't interested in even trying another browser. Then I experimented with Firefox and ultimately decided Internet Explorer is broke--I just didn't realize it.
I just like Windows better overall. Windows for me is more intuitive than Linux, especially when something goes wrong; with Linux it's usually wading through piles of cryptic terminology trying to figure out the problem, whereas in Windows I can usually navigate my way through the problem enough to figure it out. Yep, I agree.
I like Ubuntu better in some ways but find Windows' usability better overall Linux is quite amazing for a $0 OS though.
Yep, I agree. I have experimented with linux for a few years now, tried most of them, and in the end, I always return to Windows. I just like it better overall. I still think linux has somewhat of a quality control problem too, which puts me off as much as anything else. I'm pretty much done with linux at this point. It's Win 7 for me....
With Ubuntu vice Windows, Wilders wouldn't be nearly a much fun. Also, I have found that a goodly number of Ubuntu gurus I have encountered on other forums seem to be rather haughty when dealing with newbies.
I find Windows easier to spell, also Ubuntu sounds like a derogatory remark that I'd direct toward someone doing something stupid.
Sudo this...Sudo that... No way. I tried Ubuntu, but I returned to Windows. If I want something different from Windows, I will go to Macintosh; not Ubuntu/Linux.
The first Linux variant I tried was Red Hat (back then there was no separation between the "official" version and community version, now Fedora). I liked it, but I must say that one of the main things that made me not proceed was the programs installation process, among a few other things. I believe that if I insisted, I could get the hang of it. For some reason, I did not insist with it. From time to time, I do try once more with Fedora , but I always feel compelled to lose it. And, to be honest, it would require me a learning curve I'm not interested in. It took me a long time to come where I am, regarding Windows... I won't throw away all I've learned for the sake of Linux. I'm as safe with Windows as I'd be with Linux; I can make use of the programs I want, without any issues... why would I want to trade, right?
Even with all the progress Linux has made in the last year or so, it is still not nearly as user friendly as Windows. The average mainstream computer user would have a very difficult time using it. There is quite a learning curve from Windows to Linux.
i like Windows bcoz 1. user friendly 2. my programs only run on windows 3. more malwares... 4. can try a lot of softwares. 5. can waste a lot of time with windows
Now I myself favor Windows for the same reason as most, we've invested a lot of time into it. But the average user doesn't care about how things work. They just want to play their Facebook games, check e-mail, search Google, and upload their YouTube videos. Well the average user always manages to get infected while doing this (on Windows)! So, lately when they cry for help, I've been installing Ubuntu while I fix Windows for them. After a few minutes of showing them what's up, they can do everything on Linux as they did on Windows and safer. I try to educate them as much as I can about social engineering and that's it. They don't get infected anymore, and if they must, they can still boot into Windows. Without my help (except for the initial setup) these average PC users can print, import pictures and videos (via Shotwell), edit videos for YouTube (via OpenShot), use and edit documents (via OpenOffice), and everything an average user does. They don't call me for help and they even claim there's not much difference? And they also say everything's faster. Granted these users don't use iTunes, but that's why I set them up for dual-booting. Regards, Chris
From a user perspective both are just as easy to use once they are setup. most users want to check their email,browser the web,listen to music etc and all are just as easy on linux. how is clicking on an icon in a menu on linux any different than windows? the average user wouldnt know how to install and setup windows so linux would be just as hard. ubuntu has better hardware support on the machines ive tested it on. most of the time when i do windows reinstalls for clients the standard install from the manufacturers windows disc i have to use another machine just to download the ethernet card driver for the most common ethernet cards.. ehternet cards should be supported out of the box even if most hardware isnt. on a few of the machines i have run ubuntu as a live cd and all hardware is detected and usable. it isnt hard for manufacturers to intergrate drivers in to the supplied windows discs. the only reason i still use windows is that some of the software i use only works on windows due to the monopoly microsoft has. linux distrobutions are better operating systems IMO so I will switch as soon as i can. Goverments and companies are slowly switching to linux due to certain benefits such as lower cost and higher uptime. I can understand that most developers only write software for windows due to the huge amount of market share especially in a reccession. Im still not sure which linux distribution I would use when I switch most likely ubuntu or debian.
A very nice post lodore, full of facts and truth. Ubuntu (or any major distro today) has come a long way from where it was. It is "more or less" easy for the average user to do what they need. But not as easy as it is in windows IMO. Linux roots in Unix, which is much different than windows, at least in how it is presented. M$ only presents portions of thier code, which tends to create universal ways of doing things. Linux being open allows so many variations, thus so many distros and so many different ways to do things in each distro. If there were but one distro, it would become refined most likely to the point of being much like windows. There would be a GUI for everything, you could get 1000 hits on a search engine all telling how to do something you cannot figure out. As it stands, from a power users perspective, Linux is nice and all, but so much more complicated than windows is. Perhaps because of familiarity. As one who normally messes with things most people don't in an OS, Linux requires a lot of learning to do the same things that in windows just seems easier to do. Linux has its place, and that place is expanding. But I am on the bandwagon also that thinks there are too many distros. I also don't think Linux today, such as Ubuntu or other major distros, has no speed advantage "overall" over a windows box. Frankly, I am shocked at how bloated it feels. I will say this, if you are a power user in windows and a know a lot about Linux, you definatily have an advantage, or you will in the not so distant future, as more government/business switch to that platform. Sul.
So, for a long time I thought the same, and I hated the command-line. But I lately understood that it enables to customize your - Linux - OS: if I'll pass to Ubuntu, I'll learn to use a bit the command line.
I liked this poll. It showed me that i'm not a minority in my reasons for not using Ubuntu for my primary OS. Most of the programs I use on a daily basis will not work on Ubuntu. I tried Wine with some of them, but did not have any luck. I do like Ubuntu though, and have it on one of my dual boot machines.
I won't even take the time to tell my reasons to use Windows instead of Ubuntu as Sul pretty much summed near all of them. That said, I do run Ubuntu sometimes, with Wubi.
Mostly because Windows works well (no reason to switch), and because games don't run on Linux/Ubuntu. I also write C#, which would be impossible on Ubuntu (no .NET framework).
For me, most of the reasons given in the poll apply to some degree. The biggest one is just how different Linux is from Windows. I spent/spend a lot of time working with DOS and 9X. Linux command line feels completely backwards to me, almost to the point of having to throw out everything I already know. I actually think Linux would have been easier for me to learn if I hadn't learned DOS and Windows. Given enough time, I could probably learn Linux syntax and how to make the OS do what I want of it. That said, it probably won't happen for 2 reasons: 1, I don't see any real benefit to it or anything to be gained. Cost is not an issue as I run older versions of Windows. 2, I don't have that kind of time to spare. That's not just the time it would take to learn the OS. It's also time spent finding drivers and software to replace what I already have.
There seems to be a common theme among those who are apt enough to migrate to Ubuntu/linux but don't. Maybe the better question is, what do you really gain over windows by moving to Ubuntu/linux? Disregard speed and stability in a desktop, as the mileage will vary and is no longer a valid argument IMO. I can make my xp or win7 box be as fast and as stable (talking bsod etc) as the many linux flavors I have tested. But what is it that the more "permanent" adopters have in linux that really turns the tide for them? Sul.
I'm insulted by the title of this thread. I run dual boot Windows Vista/XP on my laptop & netbook. But I spend at least 95% of the time using the PCLinuxOS [LINUX] partition on both. 5% only because it takes so long to update the Vista & XP OSs. And all the nonWindows programs therein. Many people after getting their feet wet in the Linux pool. Yes usually with Ubuntu. Switch to another Linux distrobution. In closing it is not a choice between Windows & Ubuntu. It is a choice between a few Windows versions and hundreds if not thousands of other OSs. And 99.9% precent of those other OSs are FREE (as in beer) for personal use. You can see a few hundred of those other OSs at http://distrowatch.com/
