Microsoft becoming pro-open source?

[Hitmen]

Not really. It's getting to a point where if something can be done on windows, there is an open source equivalent for linux. There are already plenty of linux zealots who will refuse to use windows at all and can get along fine without it, and programs like Wine are supporting more and more windows apps every day.

[Banana fanna fo fanna]

If I can't use my printer, minidisc player, digital camera, some PCI device, etc, then I won't use it.

The two reasons people use Windows are being used to it and compatibility. First point doesnt matter; I've converted many people to use opera instead of IE. Second point, well...good luck.

[j0k3r]

Yes, iago switches over to windows when he wants to watch people on webcam.

He's a nasty perv!

[Mephisto]

I've used WINE to run Win32 programs.  From my experience with it, the program either looks horrible GUI-wise, crashes occasionally, and lacks support for many Windows apps.  It's also important to understand, based on your needs will determine whether you truely need to switch between the operating systems.  I doubt you would ever *need* Linux for something Windows couldn't do (correct me if I am wrong) even if Linux could do it better (highly arguable).  An example, an IT professional would be more likely to have to switch between the two OSs based on consumer/customer needs than a home user who has familiarized themselves with Linux.  But for another example, a regular home user who just switches to Linux probably wouldn't be able to adapt as well from Windows and would likely switch back permanently or for things they don't know how to do, or you can't do on Linux.

Also, on the subject of Linux vs Windows in the desktop area.  Windows is simply easier for people to use and deploy as a home user (let's not get into business).  And the consumer market is Windows, and most home users are capable of dishing out a $100 - $400 bucks for an operating system, or a $1000 for a new computer.  And because Windows, and Microsoft apps are in the consumer market as basically #1, the mainstream of programming is going to be for Windows in the consumer market, not Linux.  Until that changes, and Linux is made more user-friendly and aimed towards the consumer market/home user, I doubt very much Linux would ever take that position away from Windows.

[iago]

I doubt you would ever *need* Linux for something Windows couldn't do (correct me if I am wrong) even if Linux could do it better (highly arguable).

Try installing Windows on a 1.44mb floppy.  You can have a functional Linux installation that size.
Try booting a functional Windows shell off the installation cd.  
Try making changes to the kernel for extra functionality (in a book I read, it explained how to fix SYN portscans by making a small change the kernel's source).
Try setting up Windows so it can be remotely administered (via telnet or ssh).  I know it's possible, but it's a lot more difficult and troublesome.
Try running Linux programs from Windows.
Try reading Linux's filesystem.
Try using Windows as a router (port forwarding, etc).  Linux does that quite easily.
Try using Windows as a firewall.  Actually, a default Windows install NEEDS a firewall.
Try getting Windows to delete itself whlie running (thanks to Hitmen for this)
Try getting any program to run as a "service" (although in Linux, there is no concept of a service, just a program that runs in the background).
Try writing your own front-end to Windows (like Kde, Gnome, BlackBox, WindowMaker, etc).

Hmm, I'm sure I've missed some stuff, but those are many things I can do on Linux but not Windows.

[iago]

Yes, iago switches over to windows when he wants to watch people on webcam.

He's a nasty perv!

Yeah, I'm too lazy to find the right software for my webcam.  IT's recognized, I just don't have software to use it.

[Banana fanna fo fanna]

I doubt you would ever *need* Linux for something Windows couldn't do (correct me if I am wrong) even if Linux could do it better (highly arguable).

Try installing Windows on a 1.44mb floppy.  You can have a functional Linux installation that size.
Try booting a functional Windows shell off the installation cd.  
Try making changes to the kernel for extra functionality (in a book I read, it explained how to fix SYN portscans by making a small change the kernel's source).
Try setting up Windows so it can be remotely administered (via telnet or ssh).  I know it's possible, but it's a lot more difficult and troublesome.
Try running Linux programs from Windows.
Try reading Linux's filesystem.
Try using Windows as a router (port forwarding, etc).  Linux does that quite easily.
Try using Windows as a firewall.  Actually, a default Windows install NEEDS a firewall.
Try getting Windows to delete itself whlie running (thanks to Hitmen for this)
Try getting any program to run as a "service" (although in Linux, there is no concept of a service, just a program that runs in the background).
Try writing your own front-end to Windows (like Kde, Gnome, BlackBox, WindowMaker, etc).

Hmm, I'm sure I've missed some stuff, but those are many things I can do on Linux but not Windows.

Grandma doesn't care; she wants to scan pics of the grandkids, write a card, and print it out. Linux can't do that.

[Hitmen]

Grandma doesn't care; she wants to scan pics of the grandkids, write a card, and print it out. Linux can't do that.

Last time I checked:
1) You could use a scanner in linux
2) You could use a printer in linux
But I'm sure you just mean that the grandma couldn't do that in linux, not that linux can't do it

[Tuberload]

First off, why are you even arguing about something you know nothing about? You have said you know nothing about Linux, so I think you should just sit on the sidelines during these kinds of discussions.

I've used WINE to run Win32 programs.  From my experience with it, the program either looks horrible GUI-wise, crashes occasionally, and lacks support for many Windows apps.

Ah yes, crashes occasionally. I guess that's better than windows that crashes, for me at least, on a regular basis. It lacks support for many windows apps? Kind of like windows lacks support for all Linux apps?

It's also important to understand, based on your needs will determine whether you truely need to switch between the operating systems.  I doubt you would ever *need* Linux for something Windows couldn't do (correct me if I am wrong) even if Linux could do it better (highly arguable).

I think iago answered this best.

An example, an IT professional would be more likely to have to switch between the two OSs based on consumer/customer needs than a home user who has familiarized themselves with Linux.  But for another example, a regular home user who just switches to Linux probably wouldn't be able to adapt as well from Windows and would likely switch back permanently or for things they don't know how to do, or you can't do on Linux.

That makes little to no sense whatsoever so I will leave it at that.

Also, on the subject of Linux vs Windows in the desktop area.  Windows is simply easier for people to use and deploy as a home user (let's not get into business).  And the consumer market is Windows, and most home users are capable of dishing out a $100 - $400 bucks for an operating system, or a $1000 for a new computer.

First off why not get into business? Second, I don't know what world you live in but I highly doubt the bulk of the population can fork out $100-400 for an operating system. I for one know plenty of college students who cannot. Most of my family and friends cannot. The US is loosing its middle class my friend, so that means there will soon only be very poor and very rich. Unfortunately there will be more poor than rich, so I think what you're saying is wrong.

And because Windows, and Microsoft apps are in the consumer market as basically #1, the mainstream of programming is going to be for Windows in the consumer market, not Linux.  Until that changes, and Linux is made more user-friendly and aimed towards the consumer market/home user, I doubt very much Linux would ever take that position away from Windows.

See my first statement.

[Mephisto]

Try installing Windows on a 1.44mb floppy.  You can have a functional Linux installation that size.

Is it necessary to be able to install an operating system on a floppy?  Besides, is it even a full version of Linux?  Would you use it if you had the option to install the one on the CD?

Try booting a functional Windows shell off the installation cd.

What's the point of this?  I'd rather have the full operating system installed and use it afterwards, not use the CD to produce a functional environment that probably lacks features from the full installation of Linux (or Windows).

Try making changes to the kernel for extra functionality (in a book I read, it explained how to fix SYN portscans by making a small change the kernel's source).

Windows is closed source, you know that.    But I suppose anything that relates to open-source that you can do, then you can't do it on Windows if it pertains directly to the software associated it, and the OS itself.

Try setting up Windows so it can be remotely administered (via telnet or ssh).  I know it's possible, but it's a lot more difficult and troublesome.

You can already do this on Windows.

Try running Linux programs from Windows.

The major software that is native to Linux is avaliable on Windows (different software).  For instance, Linux's development environment -> Visual Studio.

Try reading Linux's filesystem.

?

Try using Windows as a router (port forwarding, etc).  Linux does that quite easily.

?  A router is a piece of hardware...I don't think I quite understand what you mean here.  And if it's what I think you mean, why not get non-native software and use it on Windows for the same effects?  Does it really matter if it's built into Windows or not?  Isn't the main point if you can do it on Windows or not?

Try using Windows as a firewall.  Actually, a default Windows install NEEDS a firewall.

Windows has a built-in firewall.  The one for SP2 is far better than the original flawed one, though...

Try getting Windows to delete itself whlie running (thanks to Hitmen for this)

?  You mean delete your system files?  Why would anyone want to do this?  And I'm sure there's ways of doing it, and in earlier versions of Windows there's no protection for this.

Try getting any program to run as a "service" (although in Linux, there is no concept of a service, just a program that runs in the background).

I guess you got me on that one.  Maybe someone else knows how to do this on Windows.  But software that really needs to be ran as a service can be specifically made to be a service.  If you're making your own programs, it's quite easy in VS.NET 2003.  Also, quite a few of the programs I use to run on a Linux server I once used couldn't run in the background...I had to use screen.

Try writing your own front-end to Windows (like Kde, Gnome, BlackBox, WindowMaker, etc).

What's the point of this?  And you could do it if you wanted to, it wouldn't necessarily be integrated into the operating system, but you could use it as your frontend...

[iago]

I doubt you would ever *need* Linux for something Windows couldn't do (correct me if I am wrong) even if Linux could do it better (highly arguable).

Try installing Windows on a 1.44mb floppy.  You can have a functional Linux installation that size.
Try booting a functional Windows shell off the installation cd.  
Try making changes to the kernel for extra functionality (in a book I read, it explained how to fix SYN portscans by making a small change the kernel's source).
Try setting up Windows so it can be remotely administered (via telnet or ssh).  I know it's possible, but it's a lot more difficult and troublesome.
Try running Linux programs from Windows.
Try reading Linux's filesystem.
Try using Windows as a router (port forwarding, etc).  Linux does that quite easily.
Try using Windows as a firewall.  Actually, a default Windows install NEEDS a firewall.
Try getting Windows to delete itself whlie running (thanks to Hitmen for this)
Try getting any program to run as a "service" (although in Linux, there is no concept of a service, just a program that runs in the background).
Try writing your own front-end to Windows (like Kde, Gnome, BlackBox, WindowMaker, etc).

Hmm, I'm sure I've missed some stuff, but those are many things I can do on Linux but not Windows.

Grandma doesn't care; she wants to scan pics of the grandkids, write a card, and print it out. Linux can't do that.

I don't see anything about Grandma in Mephisto's point that I was arguing against.  I was giving him examples where what he says doesn't hold up.

<edit> let me expand on that.  I don't know what we're arguing about, I just saw a blatent mistake that I had to compain about.  I will admit that Linux isn't for everybody.  Some people shouldn't use it.  Windows does have a market.  I choose to use Linux for 98% of what I do because I like it more, and if some people don't, I guess that's their problem .  *I* think linux is better, for what *I* do.  If others don't, that's fine too.  But you can't say that windows can do anything Linux can, because that's just not true.  

[quasi-modo]

My big beef with linux and unix is the fact that it is hard to configure for gameing. I have used suse and never could game on that. But my frieond got gameing on debian, took him all weekend to configure it though. Linux maybe fine for server use, but I would not want to use it here at home.

[Banana fanna fo fanna]

Grandma doesn't care; she wants to scan pics of the grandkids, write a card, and print it out. Linux can't do that.

Last time I checked:
1) You could use a scanner in linux
2) You could use a printer in linux
But I'm sure you just mean that the grandma couldn't do that in linux, not that linux can't do it

Last time I checked, Linux didn't have drivers for my printer OR my scanner.

[Thing]

My big beef with linux and unix is the fact that it is hard to configure for gameing. I have used suse and never could game on that. But my frieond got gameing on debian, took him all weekend to configure it though. Linux maybe fine for server use, but I would not want to use it here at home.

Funny you should mention that.  The only time I use Winders (edit- for personal use) is to game or click-along as I help others troubleshoot problems.  For everything else, there's Masta-Charge,

[Kp]

I will admit that Linux isn't for everybody.  Some people shouldn't use it.  Windows does have a market.

You forgot the people for whom no OS is appropriate -- i.e. the people who shouldn't even be using computers, but are able to do so because certain systems are excessively user friendly.