Why Windows is better than Linux
Let's not kid ourselves; the majority of us use Windows. I, for example, have been with Microsoft since Windows 3.0. I have dabbled with Linux for years, including versions of Mandrake, Red Hat, Lindows, and Corel Linux. But I am far from being a Linux Expert. I can barely run the command line.
The fact is acceptable to only about 10% of the desktop pc population. There's probably another 10% who could use but just don't want to. The remaining 80% are never going to learn the quirky ins and outs of Linux well enough to adopt it in droves on the desktop. Linux OS makers should take this as a call to action. If you Linux users disagree with me, then the best way is to prove me wrong.
There are a very few areas in which Linux outstrips Windows: Operational reliability and basic TCP/IP networking are the two that come to mind.
Also, Linux requires far less hardware; it displaces less hard drive space and uses up less memory. But if you'll flip the coin over, I'll prove to you why Windows is better.
Windows doesn't come with every software driver you'll ever need, but Microsoft ships each version of its OS with a large driver pack. It also provides generic that can serve in the place of more specialized drivers. If you ever installed Linux distributions on multiple PCs, you've probably run into the problem that your Linux distro either wasn't able to detect some piece of hardware or wasn't able to assign a workable driver into it. What's more, you may find that it only partially supports your device's feature set. Some Linux distros have improved markedly in this area over the past couple of years, but they're still not...