Linux is too broad a term to compare with Win10, but I get where you are coming from... Some distro's offer more than others but overall for sheer efficiency there is no doubt - especially for those who do not care too much for extended graphics - also with the .Net port to Linux, we should see a lot more apps delivered - Mono just never cut the mustard.
This is the kinda post that would normally be a poll on Google+. I've enjoyed Linux for years, but I'm finding less reasons to be annoyed with Windows. Windows 10 certainly seems to be running fine for me. It's all about personal preference
I think, in PC market, Windows 10 better than Linux. But in server market, Linux better than windows server 2012.
Agreed. Windows has made it this far mainly because it's more mainstream for games. Though I enjoy Linux, the wide variety of distros available can make it harder for developers to create content to the same standards within the amount of time they are given to create content.
Here's a list of reasons why Windows beats Linux hands down. 1 ) Most users are -NOT- power users, nor do they want to be. Windows caters to that market. To do sophisticated things in Windows, you have to dig in and go "under the hood".But Windows offers the average user everything that they need without having to resort to high tech. 2 ) Windows is Windows. There is only one or two Windows "Distros" to choose from. There's not dozens of arrogant weenies screaming about how their "distro" is better than everyone else. A unified front means easy tech support for the masses. And easy tech support means happy customers. Try going to a Linux support forum and mentioning the wrong application. They'll bite your head off. When you're paid to do support, you tend to mind your tongue, or you'll find yourself out of a job. 3 ) In Windows it's easier to write and support applications. You don't have to deal with dozens of #ifdef'ed sections of code which have to be enabled in order to make the source code compile under your "distro" That's a support / development nightmare. And that compartmentalizes your code, making it more difficult to maintain and upgrade. This is the reason why you find much more commercial support for Windows, and the reason why people pay for software. 4 ) Personally, I don't like Apple, but what they have done is release their own "distro". They support it, and commercial developers support it because people will pay for the support. As far as Linux being on servers, that community is comprised mainly of power users. It needs to be, simply because of the security issues involved with running a server / network. But that's not the average user. The moral of this story: Before you say "Linux is better than Windows", ask yourself who is using it. And who is paying for it. :MJ
Ok MJ, just for the sake of a discussion, Ubuntu, Linux Mint, Zorin. Technically speaking, there are very few actual Linux distros. Debian, Slackware and RedHat. Everything else is a fork or derivative of one of those except for LFS and a few independent distros. But if we are looking at "distros" in general, Windows 10 has: Enterprise Enterprise N Enterprise 2015 LTSB Enterprise 2015 LTSB N Features on Demand Pro Pro N Home Home N Education Education N IoT Core for Raspberry Pi 2 Iot Core for MinnowBoard Max Single Language Probably more that I have forgotten. And all in both x86 and x64 variants. That's at least 28. Then there are the servers, HPCs, embedded (do they still have that?), etc. And then there are all the previous versions of Windows and the variants that they have. No opinion since both distros that I have used as a main OS both have packages that are already written, compiled and maintained that the "everyday user" would need. No opinion on Apple since I don't use anything Apple. I did have OS X ML running in a VM at one time but wasn't really impressed. Agreed, so you admit that there are great and many security issues with Windows. That would be a deal breaker for me if I used Windows as my main OS. Linux is better than Windows. If it wasn't then why does MS steal everything that was created by Linux/Mac? MS has never had an original idea. Never. EVERYTHING was stolen ideas from Linux and Mac. Right back to Windows 1.0 where Bill was licensed to use the MAC UI and has stolen it ever since. The only thing that Microsoft does better than Linux and Apple is marketing. (and spying) (and virus') (and crashing)
There's a reason why Apple lost. Windows was -NOT- built with -ANYTHING- apple. Perhaps concepts were shared, but each of the respective OSes had different Microprocessors (Apple = 68000,IBM = 8088) Apple went after Microsoft in part because MS used Pascal calling conventions in their OS construction. Apple did too. And MS -STILL- uses Pascal calling conventions today. And we're not even talking about Linux. Back in those days, Linux didn't even exist, and Apple's hardware and OS was 68000 based. I know this because I wrote code for the MAC 1 back in those days. So what does that even have to do with the OPs' original post? The bottom line is that the people -always- are the indicator. Who has the most market share in desktop computers? MS. Only recently since Apple decided to adopt a Berkeley UNIX core (Mach kernel) did Apple even matter enough to consider them a threat to the Windows Market. And even with a UNIX based OS, Apple will -never- achieve desktop supremacy with their boutique, overpriced hardware. Phones?, Tablets? perhaps. But their desktops are way too overpriced and too bland performance wise to even stand a chance against Windows. :MJ