What is Linux missing that you would require to complete get off Windows?

[TheOmegaCode]

UNIX like operating systems are not Windows, they never will be. They are a viable alternative. Alternative does not mean the same, or similar, it means different. If you know what you're doing (I usually don't) then of course Linux is ready for your PC and/or desktop...

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

You mean it doesnt suck enough for you?

Oh Linux sucks more than enough for me.

Great. So does everything else in every thread I have seen you post in.

Or that the company that doesnt exist that owns it doesnt rip you off every two years or sooner?

I'm not sure what the hell you're talking about but I'm sure your imagination will soon try to explain its reasoning.

You think Micrososft shoudl charge more for that barely beta quality software they sell?

Or the fact that there is a choice as to which OS you can use?

If Linux is a real choice and alternative to Windows then why does Windows have a 95% market share?

Market share does not make Windows the better system. Betamax was supposedly the better system technically.

If Linux is so good why aren't people simply wiping their HDs and downloading the free distros?

They are.

Or could it be that it's only a valid alternative for elitist pricks who consider themselves above everyone else and lift their noses at everyone using Windows?

Im not sure who you are talking about here. I dont actually use Linux at home.

Just look at yourself: I made one comment about how essentially I don't like Linux because it's not Windows and you absolutely went beserk about it.

You offered a trolling comment with nothing technical.

Not everyone has the time to read hundreds of sh*tty man pages just to find out how to do simple things like access a floppy disk drive or install a printer.

But they have time to download a huge number of bug fixes, rebooting between each one? Oh wait, most people dont do that. Thats why I still get CODE RED alarms. How about going through a wizard to get something installed? Well, thats great when the wizard works. Where is that wizard off hand? Buried 10 stages deep in some buggy gui!

Some of us prefer to get work done

Like myself.

rather than proving ourselves to be "better" than the rest of humanity using Windows.

I dont look down on you because you use Windows. In fact, I respect a number of the Windows users here.

Back your tolling, crap talking comments up with something, stay in GH where there are people that will actually listen to your sorry ass, or STFU. Please.

OK monkey.

 

[Moonbender]

Eeek. Somebody piled up some steep hyperboles there. Ah well.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Back your tolling, crap talking comments up with something, stay in GH where there are people that will actually listen to your sorry ass, or STFU. Please.

OK monkey.

Oh my!

Disclaimer

The term "OS Monkey", was not meant as an insult. Think of it as a cute, friendly, and admiring nick-name.

 

[sandorski]

BFG asks a question that seems too good. So far no one seems able to answer it. Why aren't people dumping Windows for Linux?

Well, here's my experience with Linux:

Last year I downloaded the latest(for then) version of Mandrake. Prior to this I spent a few days reading up on issues and install tips/issues. Feeling confident, I pop in the cd and after a few selections Mandrake installs. After 15-20 minutes my system boots successfuly from a floppy. I like the Gnome desktop and prefer it to Windows, but anyway I began exploring Mandrake and the various apps installed with it. NS 6 fired up nice and quick and worked fine. Much to my surprise the other 2 Windows systems on the network, were able to access the internet through my system, even though I hadn't attempted to setup the network or even inform Mandrake that my sys was the local ICS server. Cool!

I then proceed to try out some other things. Fire up an mp3 player, damn, no sound. Try a few other media players, no sound from them either. Eventually I discover that my sound card isn't installed, I go to some Linux websites to find out why. There I find some drivers and instructions. The instructions were straight forward enough to make me comfortable, but it begins to become apparant that Linux is going to force me to learn much more than I may want to. So I begin punching in the commands and the first couple go according to the examples I saw, but then 1 command seemed to start working, then it began producing errors. I go looking for help, I learn then that I "forgot"(didn't know about) installing the doohicky(I forget). So I re-install Mandrake making sure to install the doohicky, then proceed to once again install the soundcard drivers, errors! I went for help, did what was said, errors, went... After 2 weeks of fiddling around I was able to get sound for 2-3 seconds before the system would hard lock. I said "screw it, I'll live with it". This is largely a compatibility issue, but during that whole failed attempt I probably learned more about Linux than I had ever learned about Windows.

All this time I was dual booting Mandrake and Win98SE using a floppy. So I decided it was time to setup the dual boot so it booted off the hard drive. I follow the directions for setting up LOADLIN, but it locks up. I go for help, do what I'm informed to try, and it still locks up. Grrrr! (thank god for fdisk /mbr) I tried over and over, re-installed Mandrake numerous times, had to "fdisk /mbr" more than I remember, but the result was the same, LOADLIN would hardlock. I decided to stick with the floppy.

After a few weeks I gave up all hope of using Linux for anything except for net surfing. Within a month I got tired of dual booting and just used Windows. Eventually(approx 2 months after initial install) I just wiped Linux off my drive, I needed the disk space. On a more positive note, I really liked the various desktop interfaces included with Mandrake. Soon I had tracked down and started using Litestep.

The problem with Linux(as stated in my previous post) is that it has too steep a learning curve for most users and for all the learning one goes through, Linux is incapable(from lack of) of doing what most home users want(games!!). Add in spotty hardware support/compatibility and Linux becomes a potential nightmare for the unwary average user. Now, if most users had their own Linux OS Monkey to install, setup, and support a Linux install, then deleting Windows would be a viable alternative.

Basically for me it boils down to this: I don't use Linux for the same reason I don't have a Mac, it doesn't do what I want it to. I could go on, but after a couple hours of pondering this post, I think I'll leave some more comments for later.

 

[TheOmegaCode]

If what you want is a piece of software is easy to install, and does everything for you (including more than what you want), then why doesn't everyone go out and install AOL? The fact of the matter is that Linux obviously serves a purpose, otherwise it wouldn't be here anymore. Some people do find it to be everything they need. I personally need both FreeBSD and Windows, neither do everything I need. I need Windows for my Clie, games, and something to fall back on. I need FreeBSD for scalability, security, the ports collection, and job security It's nice being the only person at work with UNIX-like experience under their belt. Like I said before, Linux/BSD's will never be Windows (no matter how hard Michael Robertson wants it to be), but variety truley is a beautiful thing...

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: TheOmegaCode
If what you want is a piece of software is easy to install, and does everything for you (including more than what you want), then why doesn't everyone go out and install AOL? The fact of the matter is that Linux obviously serves a purpose, otherwise it wouldn't be here anymore. Some people do find it to be everything they need. I personally need both FreeBSD and Windows, neither do everything I need. I need Windows for my Clie, games, and something to fall back on. I need FreeBSD for scalability, security, the ports collection, and job security It's nice being the only person at work with UNIX-like experience under their belt. Like I said before, Linux/BSD's will never be Windows (no matter how hard Michael Robertson wants it to be), but variety truley is a beautiful thing...

Yes, it serves a purpose no one is denying that. The question was why doesn't everyone delete Windows and use Linux? The answer seems to be: That Linux is only usefull for a small segment of the PC(IBM/x86) market.

 

[TheOmegaCode]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: TheOmegaCode
If what you want is a piece of software is easy to install, and does everything for you (including more than what you want), then why doesn't everyone go out and install AOL? The fact of the matter is that Linux obviously serves a purpose, otherwise it wouldn't be here anymore. Some people do find it to be everything they need. I personally need both FreeBSD and Windows, neither do everything I need. I need Windows for my Clie, games, and something to fall back on. I need FreeBSD for scalability, security, the ports collection, and job security It's nice being the only person at work with UNIX-like experience under their belt. Like I said before, Linux/BSD's will never be Windows (no matter how hard Michael Robertson wants it to be), but variety truley is a beautiful thing...

Yes, it serves a purpose no one is denying that. The question was why doesn't everyone delete Windows and use Linux? The answer seems to be: That Linux is only usefull for a small segment of the PC(IBM/x86) market.

That's an easy question to answer: People are lazy. There is a reason I have a mechanic, I absolutley hate to look under the hood of my car. I do it sometimes, but I loathe every minute of it.

The same holds true for Operating Systems. The days of "only hackers own computers" are long gone. Computers are getting faster and cheaper. So much so that a vast majority of the population (US, and other developed countries) own at least one computer. They just want a standardized computer that allows them to check their mail, chat online, browse the web, and download whatever (viruses ). If you don't use Linux are you a stupid or a bad person? Not necessarily. The reverse is also true, if you don't use Windows are you a masochist or an elitist? Not necessarily.

I see it this way, everyone in this thread at least tried Linux once, or still uses it. I figure even if everyone isn't ditching Windows for Linux, more and more people are at least taking a vacation from it...

 

[sandorski]

Lazy? Nope.

Do you use a microwave or stove? Does that make you lazy because you didn't go out and chop down a tree and make a fire? Is it lazy to take a car to a garage to get it fixed? Are you lazy for using a ready made browser, mp3 player, or even OS when you could learn a programming language and write your own? Nope, laziness has nothing to do with it.

Most people want a computer to bring efficiency, not to decrease it. Use Linux if it works for you, but stop looking down on those who can't or won't.

 

[TheOmegaCode]

Lazy? Nope.

Do you use a microwave or stove? Does that make you lazy because you didn't go out and chop down a tree and make a fire? Is it lazy to take a car to a garage to get it fixed?

Yes! Well, at least I think so

Are you lazy for using a ready made browser, mp3 player, or even OS when you could learn a programming language and write your own? Nope, laziness has nothing to do with it.

I use Windows, and I don't use the ready made browser, in fact I hike up ALL the security settings on IE and use Mozilla. I don't use the ready made mp3 player (if you're referring to WMP), I use winamp. As for the programming reference, Linux is a much more programming geared OS.

Most people want a computer to bring efficiency, not to decrease it. Use Linux if it works for you, but stop looking down on those who can't or won't.

I don't look down the nose of anyone. I'm defending both Operating Systems. I am a FreeBSD and Windows user...

If you are a true user of Windows, I don't think it's all that much easier than Linux. I don't just mean someone who can hit enter 10 times to install it, I mean someone who sets up Windows servers, or customizes the GUI like the people in the Friday Desktop Thread, etc. Windows may look simple on the surface, but it is by no means a simple OS. Under the hood it's as complicated as hell, which is the exact opposite of Linux. I think that Windows and FBSD are equally difficult when it comes down to it, just for different reasons...

 

[Moonbender]

The problem with Linux(as stated in my previous post) is that it has too steep a learning curve for most users and for all the learning one goes through, Linux is incapable(from lack of) of doing what most home users want(games!!). Add in spotty hardware support/compatibility and Linux becomes a potential nightmare for the unwary average user. Now, if most users had their own Linux OS Monkey to install, setup, and support a Linux install, then deleting Windows would be a viable alternative.

Lindows, Lycoris and last but not least, Knoppix. Granted, and as mentioned often in this thread, games support is not there, but apart from that, Knoppix offers everything a typical home user wants (web browser, email, IM, office suite, media player) out of the box, without so much as requiring an install. Add in an extremely Windows-like environment, very good hardware autodetection and you've got a quite viable alternative.

 

[Haden]

I like Linux but there's still some things missing for workstation system:
Fonts - True Type look best on screen, why not use them by default? I know you can install... but it seems to me like lots of trouble to do it.

Why can't drivers be dependent to kernel version only? Is kernel between distros so different?

 

[sandorski]

Omega: A ready made browser, mp3 player, or whatnot is exactly that. An app that was made by someone else and you now have a copy. IE, Netscape, Mozilla, Opera, Winamp, WMP, Sonique, OfficeXP, Photoshop, Quake X, Windows 9x/NT/2k/XP, Linux, etc are all "ready made".

 

[TheOmegaCode]

By ready made, I thought you ment something that came with the OS, as in prepackaged. I guess technically, since you called Linux ready-made, even the programs you compile from source are ready made...

 

[BFG10K]

Great. So does everything else in every thread I have seen you post in.

If you wish to continue in this mud slinging then I'll have no alternative but to continue as well.

You think Micrososft shoudl charge more for that barely beta quality software they sell?

I still see your previous comment as nothing more than a blatant troll. Again I ask, would you care to explain to me how Microsoft "owns and rips me off every two years?"

Market share does not make Windows the better system.

Well I'd have to agree that market share isn't the only measure of popularity but with a 95% share there's a pretty good argument at least partially for it. After all, it must be doing something right if it works well for the majority of people. If it was as bad as you try to make it out to be then people would have done something about it a long time ago.

They are.

Obviously not the general public and obviously not enough people to make it significant. IIRC even the OEMs that offered Linux pre-installed have stopped because nobody was buying the machines.

Im not sure who you are talking about here.

I'm talking about the attitude of your comments when I explained that I like Windows better than Linux. If Linux is the best tool for you then fine, by all means use it. But don't try to convince the masses about the error of their ways because for most people Windows will work better (myself included).

You offered a trolling comment with nothing technical.

It was not trolling in the least. If you could read between the lines you'd know that what I was essentially saying was that I like Windows better than Linux as a whole package, not necessarily because of specific features.

But they have time to download a huge number of bug fixes, rebooting between each one?

Uh, no. With Windows update Windows will automatically and without user-intervention download and install the necessary updates, by itself. Which Linux distro offers that feature and is officially supported and continually updated by the company?

Also, don't even try to pretend that security updates, bug fixes and weekly kernel rebuilds do not exist on Linux.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Great. So does everything else in every thread I have seen you post in.

If you wish to continue in this mud slinging then I'll have no alternative but to continue as well.

You think Micrososft shoudl charge more for that barely beta quality software they sell?

I still see your previous comment as nothing more than a blatant troll. Again I ask, would you care to explain to me how Microsoft "owns and rips me off every two years?"

Bug fixes and miniscule new "features" for the wonderful price of $300 every two years isnt a rip off? Atleast Apple includes big features with every new release of X so far.

Market share does not make Windows the better system.

Well I'd have to agree that market share isn't the only measure of popularity but with a 95% share there's a pretty good argument at least partially for it. After all, it must be doing something right if it works well for the majority of people. If it was as bad as you try to make it out to be then people would have done something about it a long time ago.

They are.

Obviously not the general public and obviously not enough people to make it significant. IIRC even the OEMs that offered Linux pre-installed have stopped because nobody was buying the machines.

You can still get a Dell or an IBM machine with linux installed.

Im not sure who you are talking about here.

I'm talking about the attitude of your comments when I explained that I like Windows better than Linux. If Linux is the best tool for you then fine,

Its not, thats why I said that.

by all means use it. But don't try to convince the masses about the error of their ways because for most people Windows will work better (myself included).

Thats fine. Windows has its place. (notice no comments about where those places may be, I dont want to add some sarcasm to the thread and throw anyone off ).

You offered a trolling comment with nothing technical.

It was not trolling in the least. If you could read between the lines you'd know that what I was essentially saying was that I like Windows better than Linux as a whole package, not necessarily because of specific features.

You said it wasnt Windows. Wow. How enlightening. I guess variety isnt something that makes you happy...

But they have time to download a huge number of bug fixes, rebooting between each one?

Uh, no. With Windows update Windows will automatically and without user-intervention download and install the necessary updates, by itself.

How do I enable this in Win2k? How do I customize it to only select the critical updates I need that arent full of new bugs Microsoft is introducing to stay in business?

Which Linux distro offers that feature and is officially supported and continually updated by the company?

RedHat I believe.

Also, don't even try to pretend that security updates, bug fixes and weekly kernel rebuilds do not exist on Linux.

Not on my systems. Ill count the number of kernel rebuilds I made because of security bugs: 0. D'oh!

RedHat security updates? Very few of them are based on "linux" itself. Most are related to various packages that you can install (much like IIS would be with Windows, but not necessarily controlled by RedHat in this case).

Security updates do exist, but I dont see them to the degree I see Windows updates.

 

[Nothinman]

I still see your previous comment as nothing more than a blatant troll. Again I ask, would you care to explain to me how Microsoft "owns and rips me off every two years?"

If you havn't paid for any of their software then I guess they're not ripping you off, if you do own a license for every piece of their software you own I don't see how you can think otherwise. It's obviously their right to charge whatever they want for their software, but in my (and many other's I'm sure) opinion most of it is very over priced.

Well I'd have to agree that market share isn't the only measure of popularity but with a 95% share there's a pretty good argument at least partially for it.

Very partially, I think the AOL comparison pretty much says it all.

IIRC even the OEMs that offered Linux pre-installed have stopped because nobody was buying the machines.

Dell sells it on their workstation boxes, but for the home PCs I'm pretty sure MS won't let them in their OEM licensing. Hell MS' OEM licensing even says they can't sell PCs without an OS, so Dell recently started selling PCs with FreeDOS disks to get around that.

Uh, no. With Windows update Windows will automatically and without user-intervention download and install the necessary updates, by itself

And several of those automated updates have already severly broken poeple's machines, real good deal...

Also, don't even try to pretend that security updates, bug fixes and weekly kernel rebuilds do not exist on Linux.

Weekly kernel rebuilds don't unless you want them to.

 

[Barnaby W. Füi]

ok first off, where are these windows "power users"? i think people are trying to make themselves sound more professional just because they know how to install zonealarm.

second, n0c, i get very few code red hits, _NIMDA_, on the other hand, annoyed me SO much i had to write a little script to filter out the people so my apache logs dont grow at 4x the rate they normally would

and...the whole debate here, just seems like "linux is for loser nerd ascholes who want to be cool". well, get over it. people dont move from windows to linux because it helps tooth decay, they do it because they like it! most people who come upon a revelation tend to act a little high and mighty towards others who have not, you have to be a REALLY polite person not to.

as far as applications go, wine *works* for some stuff, but is a nowhere-near-ideal solution, vmware is great, but is slow (jesus, try it on my p233), and costs money, and well....thats about it. most generic-purpose applications (mail, browsing, mp3s, SOLITAIRE), have been taken care of for quite some time, but things like kazaa, and dreamweaver, most games, a media player that isnt kinda flaky (xine is good, but crashes kind of alot (for me)), etc etc are not available. this is probably the biggest problem, applications. mandrake and suse can take care of hardware support, its the apps that are missing. all we can do is promote linux more and more and eventually, if the numbers are there, companies will develop for linux. that brings up another thing - closed source software on an open source operating system. the nvidia problem is a huge one. software is not such a huge problem (IMO), closed source software on linux is not the end of the world.

for the dude saying he cant go without IE: use mozilla for a while like nothinman said. its a GREAT browser. beats the pants off of IE. what the heck does IE do thats so great anyways? it supports web standards less (i highly doubt you care, but you should..), it uh...IS MICROSOFT, the very company that enjoys inserting its large monopolistic penis in you every time you click the start button (you are being screwed by them, sorry to inform you..(and you many in fact not care about this either)), and it .... just doesnt DO anything special. its like comparing notepad to MS Word (sans the viruses and whatnot, and inserting lots of useful stuff).

for the guy saying mozilla didnt "look right": give me a break! when i first moved to linux (or started to), i was always noticing all of these miniscule, puny, whiney, unimportant things that were different from windows, and thought of them as being bad. its just because you WANT a reason to run from linux and go back to windows. you (and everyone) thinks i'm saying this because i'm some linux dickhead who likes to put people down, but i was in your shoes not very long ago.

theres too many things worth mentioning in this thread, and too many people talking that bring up more things to talk about, so i will cut myself short

 

[nagger]

My main system is currently running W2k. I'm thinking of swithing to a linux OS (dual-boot) as soon as I can find the time to install it.

I allready use Mozilla has my main browser and a mix of OpenOffice / 602Pro PC SUITE 2001 has my productivity software (no MS Office installed), the only things I need in linux are: Photoshop, Homesite (or another similar HTML editor) and a lot of patience

I currently have these distributions:

Red Hat 7.2
Suse 8.0
Caixa Magica 1.0 (portuguese distribution)
Mandrake 8.2

I'll probably flip a coin to find out which I'm going to install.

 

[Nothinman]

second, n0c, i get very few code red hits, _NIMDA_, on the other hand,

nimda is a CodeRed variant so I'm sure n0c, like myself, is just grouping them together.

vmware is great, but is slow (jesus, try it on my p233),

With VMWare you have to realize it's running 2 OSes at once (not saying you don't, just expanding a bit) so to run both well you need ~2x the resources. I have a dual Athlon with 1.2G memory and VMWare rocks, running Win2K prefectly fine and VMWare does such a good job managing resources I sometimes forget it's running.

the nvidia problem is a huge one. software is not such a huge problem (IMO), closed source software on linux is not the end of the world.

They both bring about their own problems. I personally am glad nVidia supports Linux in some form and I do use their drivers, but the fact that we have to wait for updates from them is annoying, like the fact that they don't support the 2.5.x kernels. I wanted to experiement a bit with 2.5.x but their drivers won't compile and even if you 'fix' them so they compile I know I wouldn't trust them.

Closed source software is unavoidable, but it brings about the compatibility issues. They either statically link in their support libraries, include the libraries in their software packge, provide a comprehensive list of needed .so files or RPM packages or say it only works on certain versions of certain distros and depending on the app certain kernels. Right now we see the 4th option and sometimes the 1st. The second would be nice for people like me who use Debian and can find equivilent libraries easily, but it's easily fixed by those that know how. The 4th would be bad, because then we'd be in the same situation of MS and their many versions of DLLs with the same name, I hope noone tries this.

The only real issue I see with closed source apps is once they start poping up they'll consolidate the market to 1-3 distros, because no company is going to spend the money needed for QA on all the distros available. So we'll see things like 'Requries RedHat 8.0, SuSe 8.0 or Mandrake 8.0', which we already do to an extent but once more commercial apps appear it'll be more prominent. Things change so fast in the Linux world a company doing a full development, qa and release cycle can't keep up, so to save money and their sanity they'll have to pick a couple of similar versions and only officially support them.

 

[Barnaby W. Füi]

Originally posted by: NothinmanWith VMWare you have to realize it's running 2 OSes at once (not saying you don't, just expanding a bit) so to run both well you need ~2x the resources. I have a dual Athlon with 1.2G memory and VMWare rocks, running Win2K prefectly fine and VMWare does such a good job managing resources I sometimes forget it's running.

cool. i'm somewhere in the middle of building a dual duron ~1.2 system, i cant wait! doing 2 things at once that both take 100% cpu, and at the same time, attempting to watch a video, on a p233, gets really old, really quick. :/

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey
ok first off, where are these windows "power users"? i think people are trying to make themselves sound more professional just because they know how to install zonealarm.

second, n0c, i get very few code red hits, _NIMDA_, on the other hand, annoyed me SO much i had to write a little script to filter out the people so my apache logs dont grow at 4x the rate they normally would

From my snort logs:

WEB-IIS CodeRed v2 root.exe access...te a few other IIS attacks in my logs too...

 

[JackBurton]

n0cmonkey,

Bug fixes and miniscule new "features" for the wonderful price of $300 every two years isnt a rip off? Atleast Apple includes big features with every new release of X so far.

Dude come on. I know you love your Linux (UNIX) and all, but let's give out the REAL facts here. Yes, if you go to BestBuy you'll pay $300 for XP Pro. HOWEVER, if you type in your brower "www.newegg.com," you'll find a FULL copy of XP Home for $90 (average users doesn't need to log into a domain at home)!! Now that is $40 more than you would pay for a PC game! Are you still going to tell me that it is overpriced? For $90 you are getting a bad ass OS that is VERY user friendly and extremely flexible. Ok now let me just clarify what I just said. User friendly mean to the average Joe, and flexible means a wide variety of software and hardware support right from the get go. Yes, Linux and FreeBSD might be easy enough for you, but ask yourself, would the average person be able to jump on it as easy as Windows? Definitely not! I like Linux, but I'm not going to start talking bad about a MS OS just because I have a problem with MS (And that is the REAL reason people hate WHATEVER OS MS comes out with). An AWESOME integration of easy of use and harnessing the power of UNIX is Apple's OS X. Just an AWESOME OS (well, OS X.02 to be exact)!

 

[Nothinman]

HOWEVER, if you type in your brower "www.newegg.com," you'll find a FULL copy of XP Home for $90 (average users doesn't need to log into a domain at home)!!

Domain support isn't the only thing missing from Home, I have a SMP system which is worthless with XP Home so I need Pro and that costs $139 if I get the OEM version with hardware or $278 for RETAIL.

For $90 you are getting a bad ass OS that is VERY user friendly and extremely flexible.

IME XP isn't user friendly at all, totally new users still stare blankly until you tell them what to do and teach them the basics and older Windows users are just confused because MS moved everything around. I've seen both cases happen multiple times. And I won't consider XP flexible until I can remove IE and replace the system HTML renderer with another component.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: JackBurton
n0cmonkey,

Bug fixes and miniscule new "features" for the wonderful price of $300 every two years isnt a rip off? Atleast Apple includes big features with every new release of X so far.

Dude come on. I know you love your Linux (UNIX) and all, but let's give out the REAL facts here. Yes, if you go to BestBuy you'll pay $300 for XP Pro. HOWEVER, if you type in your brower "www.newegg.com," you'll find a FULL copy of XP Home for $90 (average users doesn't need to log into a domain at home)!! Now that is $40 more than you would pay for a PC game! Are you still going to tell me that it is overpriced?

We are talking about the average joe here. Someone that cant figure out how to turn a computer on, or whatever the watermark is for the "average joe" these days. Do they know to go to newegg.com and order the OEM version with a floppy cable? No, I dont think they do. I stand by my statement for this reason.

For $90 you are getting a bad ass OS that is VERY user friendly and extremely flexible. Ok now let me just clarify what I just said. User friendly mean to the average Joe, and flexible means a wide variety of software and hardware support right from the get go.

A narrow range of hardware support, a wide range of x86 hardware support.

A moot point, I know. But its fun to make fun of OSes that only run on one platform.

Yes, Linux and FreeBSD might be easy enough for you, but ask yourself, would the average person be able to jump on it as easy as Windows? Definitely not!

I disagree. If they are taught these systems, the same way they are taught Windows, I think they could undertand them just as well.

I like Linux, but I'm not going to start talking bad about a MS OS just because I have a problem with MS (And that is the REAL reason people hate WHATEVER OS MS comes out with).

I have problems with both the company and the product. I dislike them independantly.

An AWESOME integration of easy of use and harnessing the power of UNIX is Apple's OS X. Just an AWESOME OS (well, OS X.02 to be exact)!

10.1 wasnt too bad.

As far as "What are the differences between WinXP home and WinXP Pro" goes, AndyHui wrote a nice FAQ on that. Here are the highlights:
* Remote Access Desktop
* Offline Files and folders
* SMP, or Multi-Processor Support -SMP systems are out there, believe it or not.
* Encrypting File System (EFS) for NTFS -Very important to paranoid joes
* Access controls for files, folders, applications and other resources (NTFS Security features) -Every OS should have some security
* Dynamic Disk Support
* Centralised Administration
* Group Policies
* Software Installation and Maintenance (automatic software installation, configuration, updates and removal)
* Internet Information Server and Personal Web Server -How many people out there run their own websites on their DSL or cable lines?
* Roaming User Profiles and Multiple Roaming
* Remote Installation Services and the entire IntelliMirror management services technologies
* Multi-Language User Interface -Sounds kind of neat for mixed language households (although I may be misinterpretting this one)
* Sysprep (System Preparation Utility) support
* Domain Membership on networks
* IPSec User Interface
* SNMP
* Simple TCP/IP services
* SAP Agent
* Client Service for Novell Netware
* Network Monitoring

There are a few important features XP home seems to be missing. Yet another reason I wont purchase it.

I want to touch on something Nothinman said in the post above mine (or so):

... and older Windows users are just confused because MS moved everything around.

That hit home. For a while I was going between NT (which I had much more experience with in the beginning of 2k than I did Win2k) and Win2k. Finding out that C:\winnt\profiles was missing was a wierd experience when I sat down at a 2k machine.