Why Use Windows?
I’ve been charged with the task of writing this article by the boss because evidently everyone else is deathly afraid to even speak of it. I’m not. That being the case, here goes nothing.
Reason 1: It’s the same OS you use at work.
In the large enterprise environment, this is usually how OSes are typically broken down:
- Finance department (accounts receivable/payable): Windows.
- Marketing department: Windows and Macs.
- Plant floor: Windows and Linux.
- IT: Windows and Linux.
- R&D: Windows and Linux.
- Sales force: Windows.
- Customer Support: Windows.
- Help desk: Windows.
No matter what department you’re in, large enterprise always uses Windows first. And at present it’s usually Windows 2000. That OS is very similar to XP. And if you’re using Vista, there is still that same familiarity from XP and 2000.
The familiarity is a selling point because there’s a very large population of computer users that absolutely positively do not want to learn a new operating system. Windows is what they know and that’s what they use, period.
If you use Windows and it does what you want it to do, it is your best choice.
Reason 2: Windows has the most hardware and software support.
Go to any retail establishment that sells software and you will see Windows titles. Lots of ’em. Go to any retail establishment that sells computer hardware and everything works with Windows. Keyboards, mice, digital cameras, camcorders, printers, MP3 players and so on. All of that stuff works with Windows.
When you run Windows you have far more choices of where to shop for the stuff you want to install or plug in to your computer.
No other OS has as much choice and this is undisputed.
Reason 3: Your other choices suck.
The Mac fans will say “Try a Mac, you’ll like it!” This would be true if you actually could try a Mac, but you can’t. Can you rent a Mac and take it home to try it? Absolutely not. However you can rent a laptop with Windows and try that (go to any Rent-A-Center, they’re right there). So when a Mac fan says “Try a Mac” they mean “Buy a Mac”. And if you don’t like it and return it, the Apple Store will gladly charge you a restocking fee. You thought you were getting all your money back? Oh no.. this is Apple we’re talking about. They don’t do full refunds for Macintosh computers. How much will the cheapest Mac set you back? 600 bucks. And it doesn’t come with an Apple-specific keyboard or mouse (which you need by the way for the best “Mac experience” – and that costs extra).
You can try Linux because it’s free. But you’ll fast discover that the stuff that works in Windows without complaint is a nightmare to get working under Linux. Oh, so you wanted to plug in your printer and have it work? Sorry. Your wireless card isn’t supported? Guess you’re out of luck. Linux’s only saving grace is the fact it’s free because no one in their right mind would pay for this crap.
Remember all that software you bought over the years that works happily under Windows? None of it will work on the Mac or Linux. Feels good wasting money like that, doesn’t it?
Reason 4: Internet Explorer
There isn’t a single person who uses internet and hasn’t found a need (yes, a need) to use Internet Explorer from time to time.
Whether you use IE as your primary or secondary browser, you will notice that major web sites always work best with IE.
Great examples of this are your bank’s web site, your credit card’s web site, your ISP’s web site and on down the line. You use IE and they work flawlessly. You use anything else and you run the risk of weird issues or having the site not work proper at all.
Even though Firefox is my primary browser I am comforted by the fact I have IE 7 because there are times when it’s absolutely required to have it. And it’s only on Windows and no other OS.
Reason 5: It’s the most cost effective.
Mac is a money pit because you’re required to buy a Mac box to have their operating system. And Macs cost more than PCs do. This is undisputed.
Linux is a money pit because you have to waste massive amounts of time specifically looking for stuff that’s compatible (it’s never native) with the OS. Time wasted = money wasted.
You buy a box with Windows and you’re ready to go. It’s cheap; it has the most support; it works with everything.
The choice is obvious. Use Windows.
How-To: The 1-2-3 Method Of Troubleshooting Your Broadband
Read Next
22 thoughts on “Why Use Windows?”
I’m so glad I employed intelligent, QUALIFIED, technical staff. You are very obviously an unskilled amateur.
One day I’ll be able to read decent technical articles, this article was just uneducated garbage.
Reason 2 is not true at all, Linux supports almost all hardware out there, in some cases such as legacy machines better than windows.
Reason 3 is pure BS. Ubuntu Linux is one of the best, most seamless operating systems I have ever used.
Reason 4. Internet explorer is the worst modern browser in the world. Any site that would require it is not worth visiting. IE refuses to follow standards and thus holds the rest of the world back.
-most windows users don’t know how to use windows all that well anyways (as with any OS)
-Arguing that you should use windows because your friend uses windows is completely invalid. most (all that I can think of) common files can be run on a Linux/OSX/BSD/Solaris/Unix equivalent without any work.
-Linux/BSD can be added to all machines for free. windows cannot make that statement
2: Just plain false/slanted
-of course the ~80% market share has more individual hardware friendlies. even so my Dell built to run Windows was heavily buggy… until linux, where everything worked with less than 30 min. of tweaking SEAMLESSLY.
3:Not one point made.
-sure it is hard (impossible) to try OSX, but what does that have to do with the OS. as if Microsoft isn’t just as big of a con circus.
-Linux really isn’t any harder for day to day use. (every now and then some vocab. knowledge may be necessary though)
4: Firefox/Safari/Opera/Chrome/…. all free and more secure
-when do you “need” one browser… NEVER. IE has now magical powers its just on the majority of machines and is a necessity to be familiar with
5. Is it really cost effective when almost everything else is free. a 0:anything ratio beats a 100+:anything.
-Free software that runs native with community support: found on Windows and EVERYTHING ELSE
True I am a bit of a windows hatemonger but I see its uses for the every day user. The problem is these uses only exist because windows is dominant and because of this it will never die. Windows gets the Job done(ish) every time, but everything else gets the Job done right with customization 90% of the time. most of the legendary linux nightmares could have been avoided with minimal research. (if IE is so great why don’t you use it to make a real argument.)
Windows is the universal OS like English is the universal language: Technically True, Practically False. it doesn’t stack up because it hasn’t had to fight like Mac. (even Linux geeks promote without gain)
btw: not all windows coding hackers use Linux, windows is actually a better choice as it provides a direct test environment.
(1) Morals. Don’t give money to a company convicted of criminal behavior.
(2) Free software. You can burn copies of most Linux distros and give them to your friends without being taken to court. You can examine the source code and modify and learn from it. With Linux, you have control of the software, not some criminal company.
(3) Security. No spyware/viruses to contend with on Linux.
(4) Customizable. This isn’t Soviet Russia where everything must look the same. Even without modifying the source code, you make Linux look any way you want. Witness the screenshot thread on Ubuntu Forum’s Coffeehouse.
(5) Easier. Ubuntu and Fedora have tools that download and install multitude of programs in one click. This is impossible in Windows.
(6) Portable. There are Linux distros which can run on systems Windows was never able to.
When you say windows has the most hardware support, that’s not completely true. Most peripherals (mp3 players, video cameras, sound cards) have drivers written for Windows (sometimes Mac too). I will give you that. But when it comes to the architectures that Linux can run on, Windows can’t compete. There are lots of other architectures out there (Sparc64, PowerPC, MIPS, alpha, amd64, ia64) and Linux has extensive hardware support for a majority of them. That’s not very relevant to the consumer standpoint, however. :/
When you brought up your Reason #3, it just seemed kind of harsh. A lot of Linux distros are developed with the help of grants and collaborations with developers of hardware. This has helped with completeness of a lot of hardware support, however, some manufacturers are not releasing and code or designs to the community to help support their hardware. It seems a little absurd considering that HP (who has Windows on pretty much all of their comptuers sold, not incudling HP-AIX and UX.) has released open-source printer drivers for Linux that supports a vast majority of their printer product line (My multi-function HP Deskjet P4280 All-in-one works great on Fedora 11). The problems with wireless cards have been disappearing slowly as Broadcom and other networking chipset companies have been releasing code and providing their own proprietary drivers for Linux (available in Ubuntu repositories, nonetheless).
Another tough to ignore point is that a lot of manufacturers have been rolling out netbooks with Linux on them (Xandros, Linpus, Ubuntu). Since the Linux netbooks are the cheapest, people will probably be buying them mostly if left to their own wits (if there’s not a geek squad member or somethign nearby trying to sway them away from them). The Eee has great hardware support for printers and wireless cards. Vodafone, a UK telecom company, has released their own driver utiliites for the Eee’s Xandros for full support for their modems (You can take advantage of things like SMS messaging via computer). That’s bringing Linux’s market abundance up (at least in the consumer market).
Just thought I’d add my 2 cents since there’s a couple of Linux Zealots commenting from what I can tell. I’m not much of a Linux zealot, I have 2 PCs. My main is running Windows 7 Build 7100 and my secondary (a laptop with a broadcom wireless card) is running Fedora 11 with wireless drivers easily installed via rpmfusion and yum.
This is not really keen on reply, just a couple of my thoughts.
“Linux’s only saving grace is the fact it’s free because no one in their right mind would pay for this crap.”
Do Linux seems a crap to u?
Every OS has its own Pros and Cons.Have u ever tried *NIX distro’s?
If you didn’t yet then you don’t have any right to say like this because developers are maintaining support for it free of cost.So just think how much times they are donating from their end.Will MS support ever do same? Will u donate one-tenth of your own time to develop a free tool?
If tried then I can bet that you’ll never say like this and its a possible chance also that U’ll never turn back towards Windows.
Please let me know if you’re having anymore.
Try looking around the site next time.
Linux is not security through obscurity. It has a _PROPER_ permissions system so that the user isn’t running as root/admin the whole time.
The only time I would recommend Windows is if someone plays videogames and hasn’t discovered the PS3, is too lazy to learn about Linux, or uses certain Windows only applications.
This is my favorite line: Reason 3: Your other choices suck.
Yes, Rich….you sound like you have much to teach us idiots. I stand in awe at your wisdom.
It looks like you’ve been using Linux longer than I have (I’m also probably younger) and you still have yet to understand it or the philosophy behind FOSS. Worst article I’ve read in a while.
Remember that saying about arguing on the internet being like winning the Special Olympics…?
If I can choose an OS that doesn’t force me to pollute it, I certainly will.
With the exception of a Canon scanner, every device I have plugged into my Ubuntu Linux machine has worked. Sometimes it has asked me if I want to download and install the proper drivers, and having answered yes, it all “just works”. I have had lots and lots of trouble getting things like scanners, printers and network devices to work under Windows.
With Linux, I find I am immediately productive, and do not have to waste time tracking down obscure little faults. My Linux machines continue to work year after year without suffering “OS degradation”, whereas I find I have to do a complete Windows re-install every six months or so to regain the performance I had when it was last installed.
I know my Linux machine does not snoop through my application collection and report what I am using to Microsoft. I know this because I am able to look through all the programs installed in the OS and read about what they do on the net.
Best of all, with Linux, there is no registry to get corrupted. All configuration files are human-readable, and easily found in the /etc directory.
/begin Netspeak mode
u no linucks cant compair to windoze so go fsck urself lololol XD an yeh u go bak 2 playin ur WoW on ur mommys puter lolololol vista RULZ!11!1!!1111!!
/end Netspeak mode
Ah, that was fun.
Ya no Rockin Richie that linucks sux;
Ya noze da windoze cost mega-bucks.
Ya noze dat a mac is a komp on crack,
An ya rite al right an ya dont giv a
What it appears is that you tried Linux for about… say, an hour, and apon not having everything working by “magic” you immediately proceeded to quit and whine about it. How long have you been using Windows? Say, about eight years maybe? You can’t understand Linux in an hour. It takes time to learn.
Good think no one else wanted to write this article, maybe some of the others are better.
And Rich has a lot of experience with Linux. Stop and think before you assume that people who write on this site are nuts, ok?
I’ve been using Windows since 3.1 (1992) and Linux since Red Hat 5.2 Apollo (1998). So I’ve actually been using various versions of Windows for 16 years and various distributions of Linux (SuSE, Damn Small, PCLinuxOS, Ubuntu, Mint, Sabayon, Turbolinux, etc.) for 10.
I *bought* my Linux off the shelf at a Borders in 1998, thank you very much.
There is a plugin for Firefox so that it will render pages like it’s in Internet Explorer.
You should have a part 2.
A Mac is the toy because there is only one or two things you can do with it then you are bored. Nothing else to do, nothing else to try because it won’t let you as its foundations are so incapable.
It is in no way troublesome if you take care and treat it with a bit of respect. You would do fine with Windows – you bought a Mac, your not exactly the type to go surfing the wrong stuff.
Macs are not toys. Whatever you can do on a PC, you can most definitely do on a Mac–exempting Games, which has been been reigning supreme on windows for years now.
Ubuntu (I know nothing of the others), is a fine OS too. Once it’s up and running, I haven’t found anything that I can’t do on it that I could on a PC, barring MS products and again Gaming. It’s more customizable than Windows will ever be, and hell I’ve found instances where it supports hardware better than windows.
As for IE7, there’s always the User Agent plugin for FF for those pesky occasions.
However, we both know that GNU/Linux is a far more stable and secure OS, and hardware support is growing at the speed of light. OSS is nowadays almost at the same level of closed source titles and besides, there is commercial software available for linux too. Granted, if you are a professional graphic designer or a media producer, for instance, MS Windows offers state-of-the-art professional software, like Avid, Photoshop, Corel, After Effects, Premiere, to name a few.
As for Macs, well…. their Macs. ;-)
Your article doesn’t encourage change and open mindness. MS Windows may be the best choice for many people, because of the familiarity with it, but it has so many flaws I don’t even know where to begin.
With all due respect, your boss is an idiot.
If Linux is for you and floats your boat then fair play to you; but I know which os I’ll be sticking with.