OSNews

Well, it depends on how long you have been at it and how much you consider your time worth. This assumes that you have the ability to use linux. When I first saw windows 1.1 I was amazed that the people who couldn't understand dos suddenly flocked to windows. How about taking into the fact that most people have no intention on getting smart enough to run linux.

You oughta give Xandros a try before you say something like that.

Running Windows with its many backdoors that enable Microsoft to steal data off of your computer can be very damaging. I've heard many people have lost important intellectual property because they use Windows.

How do you know Windows has backdoor that allow Microsoft to steal data. Get real.

as possible for my home users. It doesn't necessarily have to be an "either or" proposition with windows, as there are *many* open source alternatives...

And no, I'm not a big fan of M$ either....

They'll be baffled and confused at first "There's something other than Microsoft?"

But I recently installed Fedora Core 2 (like it or not it's what I had on hand at the time) in place of a badly screwed up Windows 2000 Professional installation on my neighbor's laptop.

He was amazed that I didn't have to install a firewall, anti-virus, pop-up blocker, spyware checker, and that I was able to simply use all of the peripherals he had on hand without installing extra drivers. Also, the integrated NIC that hadn't functioned under W2K mysteriously started working again once Windows was taken out of the equation, negating the need for a clumsy PCMCIA dongle.

Not only that, but he was thrilled with the amount of pre-included software, and basic capabilities that hadn't been available. Things like multiple desktops and the ability to lock the screen are abilities he'd never even realized he was missing. The inability to change system settings is a feature as well, since he no longer worries about accidentally changing them.

Windows users may fear the concept of change, but they like the reality when they see it.

You did forget $80/hr for maintience on the Linux machines. less if you leave SSH running and a user account, so that you can just log in and due the repairs, with out leaving the office.

Otherwise I agree completely, I am so fed up with crashing windows and reinstalling every six months. Linux I can start a new install(I keep jumping distro's), and be up and running with 90% configured in a day. Under windows it usally takes three days and then I still have several games left to go.

TCO studies always seem to leave bits out. Linux TCO studies must be careful so as to be better and more complete than MS studies such that the average person begins to question the studies. Then MS will slide down.

With all the people auditing windows and doing packet captures on windows machines, don't you think someone would have notices the machines doing file xfers back to microsoft? You claims are retarded and without merrit.

Sadly though, many people are using Linux becasue they think like you.

Sort of makes me wonder how many people would be using it if they didn't drink the cool aid.

I think a big problem in getting linux into the home is the fact that most people just use whatever is given to them. They put up with all these viruses, spyware and of course costs because they have just come to think that this is what they have to live with. I also have done tech support for people and I can say that people will complain about this and that with windows, but never do they ask if there is something else out there for them to try. Currently I just built a computer for my dad at his work and he has spent around $2000 just on software. Now thats not all microsofts fault about 60% of that is going to them, but just in general software is getting to be way too expensive.

Ok, now tell some little old lady to try linux and then reply. They have to have help and who exactly is going to heip them?

I have a few problems with his assesments. He talks about how you have to pay more money for office, a firewall and antivirus making the assumption that you don't have to in linux because its free or you don't need it. There are free firewalls, antivirus and office programs out there for windows too.

The antivirus I would probably spring the money for but Windows XP has a decent (and soon to be good) firewall built in and Open Office is also available for windows.

Even keeping that in mind the most important thing to me is what can the computer offer me. I'm 24 years old and pretty much just use my computer for talking with my friends, web surfing and playing the latest games. Linux can't do the last one so for me windows is worth every penny.

A small business would probably be better off using linux (assuming they have someone on staff that knows how to trouble shoot it) but for a regular home user windows is still the best choice.

I think client licenses for SBS are $80-90. $33 sounds like a CAL for hooking into Serv03 STD.

Yes the dollars add up, especially for the Office Ste.

Although, isn't this initial cash the cost of doing business? If you can afford that employee and all the cost associated with him/her, what's another grand or two for the workstation THAT THEY ARE CONSTANTLY working on. The question is, are they more productive / have fewer issues that require tech support vs. Linux.
A computer/worker bee that's down for a hour or more re: hard/soft issues starts to wrack up lost bux pretty fast.(well it can, depending on the work not being done)

and if it's the server... OOY!

So, until the day Linux is on 100% of the desktops, servers, etc. in this world are we going to see articles every day starting wars between Windows and Linux users? Most spyware is installed along side regular software. You think if Linux takes over the desktop and your average Windows user is using it they aren't going to be installing software they download that has spyware in it? You think that users that click yes on everything won't click an attachment, it says they need to be root to run it so they type in their root password and all hell breaks loose? You think the users that don't run windows update now will loyally run Up2Date, apt-get, yum, to update exploits found in various distros? It would be great if it could happen, but if the world went 100% Linux I don't think you'll see this Utopia where all the worlds computer troubles go away; it will just be different troubles.

Well, try to install Linux on a new pc with not so much Linux compatible hardware, it's a god damn nightmare for the average user. So is installing applications and other things, simplicity is something Windows comprehend and logically the end user also comprehend. If Linux had 90% ++ share of almost "every market availible" it would suffer much more than today I think, it's logical right? Time is money, and when the lack of techsupport and hardware compatibility in Linux begins, then the money goes to hell, overall I would go for WinXP on most machines and perhaps Linux on a server, time is money...

My mom is 64 and she gets by with Linux just fine. The only help she ever seems to need is for me to set up some windows apps under wine. Again, you oughta give Xandros a try before you talk about how Linux is.

"How do you know Windows has backdoor that allow Microsoft to steal data. Get real."
He's a secret Microsoft hacker, they wear a blue hat because it's more fasionable than black or white.

LOL

Do the home user really need Word just to type in some silly letters every time and now???

Does he really need to use some silly antivirus software if he doesn't download a crapload of things? And there's some AV free for Windows of course.

Does he really need an firewall? If it's a dumb user, the auto update is on with sp1...

Does all those user really has spyware everywhere? I know lot of people who never had a spyware on their computer... just some popup if they use Explorer

Strangely enough, most of these user know someone who can help them. Someone like us. Someone who can give them the basic rules to use their computer without major problem : use Firefox, use OpenOffice, don't download thing you don't know(heck, most people didn't custom their car themselfe, do they?) and so on...

Most of the times, when friends(or their parents) call me, it's because they couldn't launch their new soft - no DX9, computer not powerfull enough... Rarely for other things.

I installed SuSE 8.0 on a newly bought machine and it worked perfectly. Just get a well supported distro or buy a pre-installled Linux machine from Walmart. Again, if you install Windows XP on a new machine that is not pre-installed you won't get as far either. Linux has better out of the box hardware support. With Windows you have to insert driver CDs.

The hardware support is moot. Get a pay for distro and you will get tons of propreitery drivers that "just work".

"Ok, now tell some little old lady to try linux and then reply. They have to have help and who exactly is going to heip them?"
Computers are confusing in general, this is an unfair test. You try explaining Windows to a little old lady. Try explaining Mac! Everything is going to confuse someone who hasn't the foggiest. Especially if they say that: "I haven't the *foggiest* idea of what is going on." No, I'm not old.

In this world there are users and administrators. Quit trying to turn Aunt Tillie into an administrator. She is not root!

That would be a good point, except for the fact that he explicitly stated his premise of "do[ing] this the way Microsoft thinks it should be," which you can't tell me with a straight face is to use freeware firewalls and OOo.

Sort of makes me wonder how many people would be using it if they didn't drink the cool aid.

I believe its spelled: K-o-o-l A-i-d. Sort of makes me wonder how many people would be using windows if they had half a brain.

"Strangely enough, most of these user know someone who can help them. Someone like us. Someone who can give them the basic rules to use their computer without major problem : use Firefox, use OpenOffice, don't download thing you don't know(heck, most people didn't custom their car themselfe, do they?) and so on... "
You realize that firefox and openoffice are in direct competition with Microsoft? Do you realize that Microsoft Office is one of Microsofts two bread winning products? If every Windows user ran openoffice Microsoft would be almost breaking even. I don't think Microsoft will buy your TCO that involves competing software.
Anti-virus is unecessary, I agree; although it's very difficult to remove viruses you do get without it. A firewall is a necessity, and XP Pro comes with one. It's basic, but it's good enough for people not serving out network requests [intentionally].

Sorry to reply so much, but there is too much to reply to. Oh and one thing about the article.
Aren't percent signs supposed to follow the number? So 70% not %70. Or do they do it the other way outside of the US?

I stopped reading after the fourth paragraph. This guy has his numbers skewed to increase the prices to make Linux look like the better alternative.

$500 for a new PC w/ Win XP. Thats reasonable. Then the real FUD begins. You say $45 for Norton Anti-virus. New PC's come with a year subscription to antivirus. Next is Office XP Standard for home. More FUD I need to disprove. New PC's come with MS Works or Office basic. They can do reports in that. If the home user needs MS Office XP for work, then work will provide a copy of Office. Ok, so thats $445 off your price. Firewall, there are free ones, and Win XP has one built in. Or since most people are having home networks now, buy a cheap router. It adds an expense to Windows or Linux but you don't need the firewall as its built into the router. It looks to me like you can have a comparable system to Linux for the same price.

Now you ignore the important things, like when someone wants to play a game. We both know Linux is lacking in that department compared to Windows. I won't limit it to just games, but there are other miscellaneous files the rest of the Windows world is using that someone in Linux can't use.

If you want to do anything useful with your computer then add:

$60 MPEG2 video tool (Womble)
$60 DVD authoring tool (xDvd-Maker)
$80 Quicken
$30 winzip
$99 nero burning rom
$94 adobe acrobat
$100 visual studio standard
$100 dv-movie editing software

For a grand total of $623. I have equivalents for all of these running for free on my FreeBSD machine.

ok first of all, windows and linux can both be cheaper than each other depending in the ways they are used. you cannot specifically claim one is cheaper than another all across the board without facts. most notably, windows requires less staff to operate it. the biggest job is virus scanning/removal :-(

Don't reply that windows xp has built in zip and cd burning support, they are useable for only the most basic basic tasks.

> Let's start with the basic costs of a Windows XP Home machine for an average user. We'll say about $500 with the OS

Sure.

> Drop another $45 into Norton 2004

or download the free AVG.

> That's another $400 for Microsoft Office XP Standard.

or download the free OpenOffice.org

> That's another $30 for Norton Firewall.

or download the free Zone Alarm

> So for the average user here we'll say about $60 a pop for getting a system cleaned and updated at a service shop that knows what they are doing.

Or download the free Firefox and free Thunderbird and free Spybot

So far at home things look good for only $500 per box (lets say $650 for WinXP pro.)

I don't know server costs.

So far the article is out the window.

I installed SuSE 8.0 on a newly bought machine and it worked perfectly. Just get a well supported distro or buy a pre-installled Linux machine from Walmart. Again, if you install Windows XP on a new machine that is not pre-installed you won't get as far either. Linux has better out of the box hardware support. With Windows you have to insert driver CDs.

The hardware support is moot. Get a pay for distro and you will get tons of propreitery drivers that "just work".

Er, have you ever actually used Linux, or are you just a complete liar?

I've never had a single device which hasn't worked out-of-the-box on Windows XP, and I've never inserted a "driver disk"... do those even exist anymore?

[quote]
Don't reply that windows xp has built in zip and cd burning support, they are useable for only the most basic basic tasks.
[/quote]

and MOST people only need these things for the basic tasks. ie. decompressing a downloaded file, and archiving data. Windows media player will burn an audio CD for you, or iTunes.

[quote]
$100 visual studio standard
[/quote]

Not everyone who uses a computer for surfing/e-mail etc. are developers.

as a purported pro in the field, your specs are way off. are you a manager or are you a technician?

in the usa you can regularly buy a pc with windows xp home for as little as $349 with speakers, 17" crt, and inkjet printer if price is your main concern. pc will have have specs like celeron 2.8ghz, 256mb ram, cd-rom, 40gb hard drive, etc.

how many PCs come pre-configured with linux and the above equipment for that?

can you buy a complete PC with no os for that price?

avg home user is then going to dl and install a free distro of linux with no support?

linux with support can and does cost as much as windows.

as for ms office:

avg home user-- one, doesnt need it.
two, most cheap pcs come with MS Works or Corel Word Perfect Office already and is more than adequate for average user. (just as appleworks does the trick for most mac consumers and openoffice for linux folks)
three if you must have office to get along with work environment lets say, lets use Dell as an example:

add to dell 2400 desktop-- basic edition office 2003 for $149
small biz edition is $279
pro edition is $399 (lots of average home users need that access database)

more: almost all cheap pcs come pre loaded with 90 days of some major brand name anti virus software. updating every year at most costs $30. you can also buy the newest full version year after year with upgraders rebates for anywhere from $0-$20.

zonelabs zone alarm firewall is generally regarded as one of the finest software firewalls made. it is FREE for home use.

spyware/adware defense: again two of the most positively regarded apps for this chore are FREE. ad aware 6 by lavasoftusa.com and Spybot Search and Destroy.

now onto your points about a fairly small business.

you accurately point out that windows small business server 2003 is a logical choice

the software is $431 for standard (outlook, windows server 2003, SharePoint Services, shared fax, and exchange email server)

and $955 for the premium that includes sql server, frontpage 2003, and isa firewall server

(the above include 5 cals)

5 pack cal addons are $375 on pricewatch.com (as are the above). so add $750 for 10 additional users to get to your 15. $75 each.

so yes you can easily spend $2500 on the server with the os, or you could place it on an old workstation, or you can buy it preconfigured on a machine for as little as $1000 with standard small biz server 2003. then add the cal cost of $750.

most businesses already have xp pro. if ordering new on a pc from someone like Dell, the upgrade to Pro from Home is about $70.

to buy a new full license to xp pro is about $130 (again pricewatch.com)

you say "Let's say we're going to use Suse 9.1 pro as the desktop" well its $90--

http://www.digitalriver.com/dr/v2/ec_MAIN.Entry10?V1=632188&PN=...

finally if you are going to use "OpenOffice, Antivirus, client apps...you name it, so there aren't many additional costs per workstation" on the linux box, the Windows user can choose to do the exact same thing.

all of the above are available for free to Windows users as well.

the most telling thing is: a small biz of 15 users with no on site tech staff is going to be able to set up a full network (client and server) using linux? paying who to do it for them? and how much will that cost versus having a windows network dropped in?

and how much will the biz lose in productivity as the users start using programs that are all new to them?

good read and good idea to do this, but you pricing is way off. as a technician helping home users, why wouldnt you recommend some of these free alternatives like zone alarm?

Good for all those people if they all moved to linux, but what about you ?
I mean you would need to get another job.

3 licences of WinXP Home + 3 licences of the cheapest MS Office resulted in something like 30 minimum wages here in Romania... My coworkers will hate me (at least at first) but when they will come from vacation they will find KDE/Gnome and OpenOffice.

Did I see a free Xandros version? OHHH
Lemme try this on an old lady.

download it using BitTorrent
unzip it
check the file
create an installation CD
install it

Sure... And then spend 5 years learning that.. no... Linux doesn't quite do what all your friends do with windows.

Well last time I installed XP(yesterday) i had to supply it with a driver disk for both my built-in promise fasttrack 376 and my wi-fi card (these hardware pieces are like 2 years old). FC2 came with built-in support for both....

Well, when you have new hardware with a month old distro you may not even get into KDE or Gnome because you have no clue of how you should and can configure your video card. All new hardware have compatibility issues with Linux, I know that it's the vendors fault, but it shouldn't be hell just to get into KDE or Gnome in order to do some useful paperwork. All the time it takes to configure and tweaking takes away the big money issue. People should not have knowledge about everything they do, but a little they must have i.e cars, you need to know the most basics things and that's what most people with a Windows machine knows. Having them migrate to a new OS will 9/10 times be less inefficient than what they previously used.

I like Linux, don't get me wrong, but when you have "thousands and thousands" of distro's, something is bound to get wrong, we don't need 4-5 different standards, we need only one and that's a problem in the Linux world imo. The other things are that you complain what Windows come with, strip Linux down to the kernel and ask a average person to install that and so on. Distro's take software here and there and implement in their install and hencefort begins to argument that Windows lacks of free software, almost all the same software availible to Linux is also availible to Windows.

as i've posted before, my 44-year-old mom has had no problems with Suse 9.0. she had no problem surfing the web, downloading pictures for the kids, opening them in gimp, and printing them on her printer. i just installed suse and set up accounts, i didn't set up the printer, she did, and she even figured out gimp-print.

the only people who think linux is hard are either a) the ones who haven't used it or b) the one's who thought they could jump right into a more geek oriented distro like debian or gentoo and have all the luxuries of a graphical OS.

Commenting myself due alot of bad writing and the lack of ability to edit it.

Having them migrate to a new OS (new as in completely different) will 9/10 times be more inefficient than what they previously used.

But that built on junk is not good enough for ME and I do developement on the same computer as I email and surf, so windows is VERY expensive for ME. And there are LOTS of people out there that have hobbies or that like to do different stuff with there computer besides email and surf, windows is VERY expensive for THEM.

If everyone was satisfied with only email and surfing, then internet appliances would have done extrememly well. In case you haven't noticed, every IA tanked, maybe your the one guy out there that bought one, I don't know.

People prefer general purpose PCs because of the fact that they are capable of doing lots of different things. Windows charges you for every little piece of software to do anything out of the box, FreeBSD and linux do not.

The point of the article (which is right on, btw) was the TOC between the two platforms for the BUSINESS world. Business's don't give a crap about games.

Good article, right on the money.

"Well, when you have new hardware with a month old distro you may not even get into KDE or Gnome because you have no clue of how you should and can configure your video card."

Tried the same with Windows XP recently?
You might have noticed that since SP1 there has been a lot of hardware being marketed, which XP simply doesn't have a driver for "out of the box". No matter what the idiots above claim, driver disks really are still a fact of life. (be it disks are downloads, or whatever. Where did you get your current video driver from? Would you want to have Aunt Tilly go through the install?) Oh, forgrot. These are the l33t geeks that already have SP2 beta installed...like everyone else, of course.

The article touches some nice points, albeit it does focus a lot on expensive software. Why? Because that's what people are brainwashed to think: Free == Bad, mmkay? Trust us. Go wander by your "normal" friends and family sometimes. Have a look on their PC, jot down what you find, and *then* come back and comment on this article.

is installing windows any easier for an old lady?

ok, go to the store
get the 32-bit home version, not the pro or the 64-bit version
do a clean install, sorry you'll lose all your data
install it

Linux doesn't quite do what all your friends do with windows.
like crash, get infected with viruses or spyware, or get locked in to specific hardware and software

in the usa you can regularly buy a pc with windows xp home for as little as $349 with speakers, 17" crt, and inkjet printer if price is your main concern. pc will have have specs like celeron 2.8ghz, 256mb ram, cd-rom, 40gb hard drive, etc.

Where are you finding that kind of a deal? That is nuts. That processor alone is about $120, the RAM would be at least $40 or so, 40GB harddrive is another $50 or so, motherboard and so on. Are you talking about some kind of rebate deal?

Your 44 year old mom must be a wonderful woman, I have worked as a tech-support for many years and it's insane how people lack of computer knowledge, even small things that should be know. I can tell that 95/100 people that call in don't know anything besides surfing and writing, everything else is too hard to do. And people do not sit down to read manuals either, they are too lazy, think how it's like when they install something and maybe an icon do not appear, or some packages are missing or not installed so the application do not function properly? Write more objectively oriented, some people only see the downfalls and some just see the good, see in between.

The 'average' user 'borrows' a lot of that software, thus reducing their cost of ownership. The Windows arguments remind me of the AOL arguments, you know the ones - "AOL rocks, it's the best, who needs Cable anyway". People just don't care that their private information is leaked all over the place by spyware, so long as Media Player works and fonts are pretty - just listen to all of the Usability wonks who claim that Linux sucks and isn't 'usable', while every other day another exploit is posted.

[quote]
But that built on junk is not good enough for ME and I do developement on the same computer as I email and surf, so windows is VERY expensive for ME. And there are LOTS of people out there that have hobbies or that like to do different stuff with there computer besides email and surf, windows is VERY expensive for THEM.
[/quote]

I agree with you. For MY purposes Linux (Libranet 2.8.1) is cheaper to run FOR ME, because the tools I use are free and would cost a BUNDLE for my windows box, which I only use for gaming.

HOWEVER, I was just trying to point out, that what is cheaper for YOU and I, may not be for others. Your basic user, needing a machine to e-mail family, write small papers for school/work/whatever can GET BY using a $500 machine with Win XP home preinstalled with Microsoft works (or OpenOffice.org), and using the default Windows tools for certain jobs (ie. burning audio cd's, unzipping files etc.).

I use Linux, but that doesn't mean I will always rant that it is the best/cheapest for everyone.

Gimme a freakin' break here! This article couldn't have been more biased if it tried.

Tell you what, Mr. Smartypants, get yourself a copy of Slackware and install that on your new boxes, then put them up on the Internet without a firewall. Let's see what happens.

Try again with SUSE, or RH, or Gentoo....

The result will be the same: rooted. You don't bother to add in the cost of the TIME to configure your new happy linux box, nor the TIME to convert your data, or the TIME for training the user....

Linux is great, provided your time is worth nothing. But plop a XP box on their desk, and they can get to work. Oh, and thought about buying perhaps a Dell? Gee, for about $500 I cna get a new machine with Office on it. It's called a corporate discount. Look into it.

I'm not disagreeing that there was bias in the article, but he didn't say that you didn't need a firewall. Each of the OS'es you mentioned come with a firewall - which you darn well better configure!!!

Firstly, a pretty damned good firewall is built into the Linux kernel and setup by default by any major distro. Tools like Firestarter make is really, really easy to sure things up even more. And the amount of time to set up a Linux box: it takes me about a half hour to install the "Personal Desktop" options on FC2 and then use synaptic to download all the goodies I need - like DVD, MP3, Flac, bittorrent, etc. I get the whole box up and running in about two hours. A normal small business user, though, could probably just stick with the "Personal Desktop" install. You've already got your browser, email client, office suite, etc. Pretty damned easy, if you ask me.

~"Er, have you ever actually used Linux, or are you just a complete liar?

I've never had a single device which hasn't worked out-of-the-box on Windows XP, and I've never inserted a "driver disk"... do those even exist anymore?~"

If you don't use a driver disk then you can't possible be getting optimum performance out of your hardware. I mean to use Windows "Out-of-the-box" I mean do you just use onboard video and a cd-rom? I had to install the drivers for my ATI card before I could see anything over 800x600/16bit. My six channel audio was only mono until I put in my driver disk. In linux out-of-the-box was just that, no other disks.
I agree with the person that said you should try Xandros or a few other distros that are just as easy as installing windows. I don't know what this "retraining" sh*t is moving around in KDE 3.2.3 isn't any harder than navigating windows. It's all about orientation and learning where things are located.
There are many benefits to linux and the people bashing it for the most part haven't gave it a "real" go. They're so used to all the flaws in Windows they accept it as a "normal computing" experience. That is sad, Linux doesn't have to be frightening give it a go before you condemn it. I can bash Windows because I've been using it for so long I'd kill for a viable alternative, and I know it sucks!

You want an example? How about this one.

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/MS03-021.mspx

The attacker would only have access to manipulate the media library on the user's computer. The attacker would not be able to browse the user's hard disk and would not have access to passwords or encrypted data. The attacker would not be able to modify files on the user's hard disk, but could modify the contents of any Media Library entries associated with those files. The attacker might also be able to determine the user name of the logged-on user by examining the directory paths to media files.

Microsoft makes it sound like only malicious people would do such a thing, but who is it that makes you go to particular pages, pages that could determine who is running Windows and what they are playing in Windows Media Player? Maybe someone who sells DRM'd media files and wishes to verify that unauthorized copies aren't being used?

Now, who sells DRM'd WMV/WMA files, can make users go to a particular page (-cough- Windows Update -cough-) and would be interested in knowing who is running Windows and what files they play? I'll give you three guesses, but you'll only need one.

I don't know very much about the author except that he is definitely biased like hell.

how can he even start ranting about MSOffice and then choose Open Office for Linux as a comparison? Open Office DO exist for Windows... Viruses and Spyware is easily solved for home users... AV is free (grissoft) as well as using FireFox.

The only cost he can talk about there is OS costs, and normally when you buy a box you get win XP for a very cheap cost so it's not really a problem.

I believe this article is what you can call FUD

Assuming that the user only needs the browsing, email, and office functionality that is common to small business, your post makes Windows seem pretty worthless. Even though you say that viruses and spyware are easy to take care of for home users, many studies (see Earthlink's recent numbers on the issue) suggest otherwise. There are zero problems with spyware and viruses on Linux. A base install of Fedora will contain everything the small business user needs in many cases. No costs. Pop-up blocking, lack of spyware and viruses, nicely themed office suite, great email client - all free and all out-of-the-box. Why use Windows?

It isn't what people need it is what they want.
They don't need 99.9% of windows or linux. Who really needs a gui? No one. Since one can go to the store and get a fully working and warranteed computer loaded that every neighbor can assist with then your whole point of linux is a shame. Yes, I may not be the brightest bulb in the garden but I have yet to find a linux distro that I thought was "easy". Sure your ma might be a whiz and your granny too. I can also assure you that very few computers are actually line tested with linux. That means with all the billions of chips that millions of computers that some chip from some company will fail on linux.

If it was so easy then why doesn't all your grannies ask for linux? Hey, I a beos guy, I would rather see a smart OS built for x86 boxes run rather than a stolen unix os forced to run slowly on an x86 box or a stolen dos os patched to run.

For any hardware not supported out of the box, something like Fedora can be a pain to install. If setup by someone with half a clue, though, what is difficult for a small business Word/Excel junkie in Linux?

With all the people auditing windows and doing packet captures on windows machines, don't you think someone would have notices the machines doing file xfers back to microsoft? You claims are retarded and without merrit.

Sadly though, many people are using Linux becasue they think like you.

BS. I think that, in fact, very little people run Linux because they believe that there is a backdoor in Windows. But don't let that stop you from flamebaiting, though!

I think that, over the past few days, it's pretty clear that anti-Linux trolls and flamebaiters now far outnumber so-called "Linux zealots."

But, one may ask, aren't they afraid that their rude, adolescent behavior will react poorly on their proprietary OS, leading companies to shun its use? (Yes, that's sarcasm...)

most notably, windows requires less staff to operate it

Actually, studies have shown the opposite. Linux admins can manage more servers by themselves than Windows admins. For sure, Linux servers require less maintenance than Windows ones at my office...

Well, when you have new hardware with a month old distro you may not even get into KDE or Gnome because you have no clue of how you should and can configure your video card.

For NVIDIA cards, if you want good 3D performance, the information is clearly explained on their web site. If you don't care much about 3D, then you have nothing to do, it works out of the box. (At least in Mandrake 10)

All new hardware have compatibility issues with Linux,

This is a completely false statement. Maybe you meant that some new hardware has compatibility issues. Even then, hardware problems are less and less frequent, especially with hw that adheres to USB standards.

This article is nothing but pure Linux propaganda bullshit. Hell, I want to respond to this, but I honestly don't even know where to begin.

My advice to the author - learn how to use Windows and then come back and write us another article, Sherlock.

All new hardware have compatibility issues with Linux,

This is a completely false statement. Maybe you meant that some new hardware has compatibility issues. Even then, hardware problems are less and less frequent, especially with hw that adheres to USB standards.

I've had many hardware problems with Linux when I buy recent stuff. Problems I had when my Asus A7v600 motherboard was new: AGP, NIC, sound, IDE, ACPI & IRQ. Also, SuSE 9.1 have problems with my DVD burner and it can't detect my monitor. Everything works in XP.

is because of rampant software piracy.

If everyone actually paid for their Windows software, TCO would be much higher. But chances are the 10-workstation office isn't going to buy 10 licenses to Office XP. They're gonna buy one and install it 10 times.

It's true that Big Corporations will pay for each of their seats, but small businesses will not. A lot of small businesses don't pay for any of their software, especially if the owner's kid is an 3r33t warez d00d.

"How do you know Windows has backdoor that allow Microsoft to steal data. Get real."

Easy: Surf to http://www.google.com and fill in: "Windows 98 NSA backdoor" then click on search. A good, in-depth article is linked to somewhere on the first page. (You failed to specify a specific Windows version.)

Thanks for making linux-users look like idiots.
For all my personal distrust for MS, I don't believe that for even a nanosek.

Like they say in anime............... BAKA!

"Everything works in XP."

No it doesn't. x86-64 and SPARC support was earlier in the Linux kernel + userland than in any current known, public MS Windows version.

As for the monitor i'd like to know details.

As for the general statement i agree. However it has also become better the past years. There are also pro's, like digicams are very well supported by the Linux kernel.

Driver disks? Heck yeah they're still around. And it drives me nuts to have to use them every single time I install Windows. There's a driver disk that came with the motherboard, video card, sound card, etc. But you know what, you don't really 'need' the video driver do you, I mean the default VGA driver 'works'. Sheesh, gimme a break. They're called CDROMS these days, but they definitely exist...

"Thanks for making linux-users look like idiots.
For all my personal distrust for MS, I don't believe that for even a nanosek."

So be it and stay ignorant, or for example drive the path i've shown you. It is a freakin' fact in regard to Windows 98! Pretty wide known among the geek communities afaik...

and i can't speak in regards to Windows XP except that i found some weird things i personally find suspicious. IIRC there were some users and groups enabled by default, including one with a random name with as description an LDAP entry. Why would one do that?

"in the usa you can regularly buy a pc with windows xp home for as little as $349 with speakers, 17" crt, and inkjet printer if price is your main concern. pc will have have specs like celeron 2.8ghz, 256mb ram, cd-rom, 40gb hard drive, etc.

Where are you finding that kind of a deal? That is nuts. That processor alone is about $120, the RAM would be at least $40 or so, 40GB harddrive is another $50 or so, motherboard and so on. Are you talking about some kind of rebate deal?"

$349 e-machine at circuit city

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=%24349+e-...

that search will show you how they have been on sale in recent weeks.

this week my local circuit city has its best deal at $419. Its not every week. Some weeks they are Compaqs, some weeks E-machines.

see http://www.circuitcity.com/bundledetail.jsp?OID=90017&bdlid=531 (it has cd-rw and is compaq name brings a little premium over emachines)

Yes, you spend $600 or so and get $250 or so back i rebates in 6-8 weeks.

The bottom line is you can get a very inexpensive PC for 20-25% less than the author mentioned...(with Windows XP Home and: Works, Money 2004, Encarta Online (1-yr. trial), Office 2003 trial (60-day student), Quicken® New User 2004, Norton Antivirus™ 2004 (60 days updates), Personal Firewall (60 days updates), Acrobat Reader®, SPAM Subtract Basic (PRO 30-day trial, AOL dial-up (3 mos. free)/cable/DSL, Earthlink cable/DSL/satellite, SBC Yahoo!™ DSL, CompuServe dial-up, RecordNow, MusicMatch Jukebox, 100 MP3.com downloads, RealOne Video Player, InterVideo WinDVD Creator, Adobe Photoshop Album starter Ed., Arcsoft ShowBiz DVD, WildTangent GameChannel 10-game preview, Movie Maker 2.0)

Millions of them are being sold too. The best selling PCs in the USA are less than $600 models.

I live in Illinois and run a tech service shop which keeps users from the problems listed above.

No, not the fact he lives in Illinois.

If he makes his users pay up to $500 on top of each computer for Microsoft software, he should get a medal from Microsoft.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

There is no problem with biased or uneducated opinion. Heck, if he said HE paid extra $500 for his computer because he does not know better- his money, his loss.

But making people trusting him pay hundreds of dollars unnecessarily, just to prove the point that he loves Linux- I find this disturbing.

I thought this was a good article.

First, most of the whiners posting unintelligent replies did not bother to leave email addresses - next time, don't bother.

Second, I have to agree that the TCO of Linux is much lower for home users. And, yes, your grandma can use Linux just as well as Windows. Both have support costs associated with them. She needs help with Windows and she needs help with Linux.

Third, Microsoft DOES send information to itself, like in the "Send Error Report" message. Sure, you don't have to send it, but a lot of people really do send it, and it has information I'd personally rather not see sent to Microsoft.

Fourth, Windows has its place in playing games. No, I do NOT want to buy an XBox or Playstation - I want to play games on my PC, decked out the way I like it. Let's face it - gaming is terrible in Linux. XFree86 is no speed demon, and I've not seen anything fantastic in Xorg, either (yet).

Sixth, users won't necessarily HAVE the root password, or at least there will be the sanity check of a prompt for the root password, which is better than running as admin by default on Windows.

Don't get me wrong, I use both Linux and Windows and I've had a lot of success running XP as my gaming system. I use XP at work because I have to. I use Linux as my server at home and I've had a lot of good times with it, and I have another Linux system for word processing, non-3D games, etc.

This is NOT a religious war. This is a proof of the TCO of Linux. Nobody said you had to agree, but Windows really does cost a lot more and the Microsoft TCO "studies" have been a running joke amongst computer users - from both the Microsoft and Linux camps.

Bottom line - use what you like and what you can afford. It's just that simple.

Driver disks? Heck yeah they're still around. And it drives me nuts to have to use them every single time I install Windows. There's a driver disk that came with the motherboard, video card, sound card, etc. But you know what, you don't really 'need' the video driver do you, I mean the default VGA driver 'works'. Sheesh, gimme a break. They're called CDROMS these days, but they definitely exist...

And er, which version of Windows is this? Oh also, just to point out a glaring gap in your argument, you don't need to install graphics drivers - if you visit Windows Update with any major-chipset (Geforce, Radeon, FireGL, etc) card, then it'll automatically offer the drivers to you.

The ONLY time you'd need to insert a driver disk is possibly for LAN cards (although XP recognises 95% of all chipsets), or RAID adapters.

I think you're a little too positive about Windows hardware support. I recently set up a Windows XP box for a cousin who wanted to do some basic home audio recording. It was a basic VIA-based mother board with a Western Digital hard drive. The install process wouldn't even start up until I turned off Ultra DMA in the BIOS. Then, after figuring that all out, it was very difficult to the get the drivers on the motherboard's driver CD installed before Windows would crash - it took several attempts of installing drivers, crashing halfway through install and then reinstalling XP. The system simply wouldn't run without the drivers from the CD. I've never experienced anything like that with Linux. As soon as the drivers were installed from the CD, though, everything was fine.

This article assumes you will use a lot of products that the home user doesnt have to use and it assumes you are upgrading home PC's. Most of the time when you buy a PC you have got an office suite and many of the other tools such as AV that you are not required to buy. But lets look at a Windows machine that is being upgraded.

Windows XP Pro -- for everyone I actually suggest Windows XP Pro mostly because its a better program and not cut down like XP Home. Bow if you search the cheapest I have found it is 150.00 for the upgrade so thats the price Im going to use.

Cost $150.00

Sygate Personal Firewall or Zone alarm -- much better firewalls than Norton or McAfee. I personally like Sygates more because it is aimed at business users and it is an excellent firewall. I list them both because they are Free, so either way its no cost.

Cost Free

Avast AV -- Very good Anti-Virus software. I have had more success with this AV solution than I have had with Norton or McAfee, also those viruses that are written to disable Anti-Virus scanners ussually are targetted at Norton and McAfee and not at Avast or AVG. There is no cost for Avast for personal home use.

Cost Free

OpenOffice -- Good office suite. Has a lot of the functionality that the home user would ever need and then some. You can create PDF's and all Presentations can cross over from Office to OpenOffice. You can download it or you can buy a CD.

Cost Free

So if you add it up how much do we spend? $150.00. If users are scared of the Adware or Spyware use Firefox or Mozilla. I dont have any Spyware or Adware myself. So Linux can be downloaded for free, it can be had in CD Form for 79.00 from SuSE for example but lets look what you get from that deal, you get a CD and 90 day installation support. What do you get with Windows. You get better technical support, you get hardware support without having to hunt down device drivers or post to a mailing list. You dont have to recompile drivers that 90% of the home computing public wouldnt know how to do anyway and dont work half the time without some serious know how. With Windows all devices work and with XP I have yet to find a configuration that I couldnt get working. Windows has a nice installer program and all programs written for Windows has a setup utility, no recompiling or Dependancy hell to deal with that 90% of the computing public doesnt know how to do or has the know how. Multimedia support is limited and gaming support is limited in Linux. Multimedia and Games work better in Windows. Windows is a much better solution in my opinion for the home user, let me take a breather and I will come back and give you my lowdown on small business cost with Windows.

I've had many hardware problems with Linux when I buy recent stuff

Try Mandrake 10. It's work with every single piece of hardware I've thrown at it. Of course, as always, it helps if you check for compatibility first. That's just being smart.

Problems I had when my Asus A7v600 motherboard was new: AGP, NIC, sound, IDE, ACPI & IRQ.

I find that list hard to believe, sorry. In any case, it does not reflect my own experience.

Downloading loading drivers from the website; installing them via disk, it's damn near the same thing. As far as multimedia and games go I can play Max Payne 2 and Hitman:Contracts in linux and there isn't greater benefit playing these games in Windows. I can watch any format of video file or play any type of audio on my linux box, and alot of times the output is smoother than WM9 or DIVX.

I've had a similar experience. In fact, of the dozens of Windows systems I've set up over the years, I must have hit hardware snags (both trivial and serious) for over half of them.

Meanwhile, I've always found installing Linux to be a breeze, with the exception of winmodems and sound cards. But even for these exceptions there have been lots of progress over the past two years.

Linux hardware problems are no worse (and, in my experience, much less common) than in Windows. Truth be told, Win2K was probably the best of all Windows in that regards, and I've actually had few problems with these.

If some of you really believe that all hardware automagically works with Windows (even WinXP), I suggest you go visit some of the many Windows Troubleshooting web sites on the Internet.

Even keeping that in mind the most important thing to me is what can the computer offer me. I'm 24 years old and pretty much just use my computer for talking with my friends, web surfing and playing the latest games. Linux can't do the last one so for me windows is worth every penny.

I have one word for you: winex.

http://www.transgaming.com/

'nuff said.

I play the latest and greatest games - on Xbox and PS2. The few games I really care about on PC I can find a way to play on Linux.

Serious gamers play on consoles.

Evaluating TCO in anything other than very specific situations is foolish. Saying something is cheaper in the long run ignores a huge number of factors.

-Erwos

"I won't limit it to just games, but there are other miscellaneous files the rest of the Windows world is using that someone in Linux can't use."
So did Microsoft buy a license to decrypt DVD's? I don't remember, I thought I had to get one with my DVD drive? Did they get it for all the other limited formats?
I think you mean that there is software available for Windows, not included.
Maybe they just want to write e-mails, buy things online, and have something for the kids to do homework on and all that stuff is just extras. No, that'd be reality, and reality is boring so I think I'll live in media user land and say everyone uses their computer to view media!

Btw, I've yet to find those formats that it is not possible for me to play in Linux.

Oh, and no one buys a computer for one year of use in mind. They will likely pay for at least one more year of anti-virus service later on, or they will not have anti-virus.

I have one word for you: winex.

How well does this actually work? If you're going to recommend WineX to me as a solution for playing the latest and greatest Windows games in Linux, it had dammed well better play anything and everything I throw at it.

As I'm sure others have noted, let's not forget about the free antivirus alternatives such as AVG and Avast. Also note that MS has teamed up with CA to offer free antivirus and firewall software: http://www.my-etrust.com/microsoft/. Plus, MSN Premium (included with Verizon DSL) comes with McAfee Antivirus and Firewall. Not to mention that Windows XP SP2 will have an enhanced firewall.

As for the cost of an office app, yeah, retail is more expensive. Get a free/cheap app or get Office OEM version with a new computer (you can still build your own if you buy it at the same time as the parts) or get a free home version of Office if you work at a company with a volume licensing deal.

There are plenty of ways to have a functional, inexpensive Windows computer.

While I like the thrust of the article, I'd say you're off on the price of Office. Many computers come with office pre-installed at no extra charge. And anyone can buy a copy of Office 2003 Student & Teacher Edition for #130.00. It comes with Outlook, Word, Excel, & Powerpoint, which is all most people need. No one that I know of is enforcing the purchase restrictions, and the license allows installation on up to 3 computers in the same home.

I installed OpenOffice.org on my wife's computer, a WinXP machine. After a week of use, she implored me to re-install MS Office XP. She said she is unable to do what she wants with OpenOffice.org, and that her work looks strange on other computers. We had a serious argument.

While I like the thrust of the article, I'd say you're off on the price of Office. Many computers come with office pre-installed at no extra charge.

Yes, that's true, though often the cost is hidden in the bundle. MS can't just give office away - well, not yet (you know, with 40G$ in the bank).

However, it's not just office you get when you get a Linux system. You get a load of great software, such as GIMP2, which is a good contender to Photoshop. You get Scribus - a fast-developing DTP program. You get databases. You get great CD-burning softare. You get a choice of two great media players: MPlayer (which embeds in Konqueror) and Xine. You get great development software, if you're a programmer. You get a lot more games than Minesweeper and Solitaire, and some educational software. Some of these apps are also available for Windows (and that's a good thing, it promotes open software and file formats), but there are lots of exclusive as well.

The quantity of software available in an average Linux distro is staggering. In fact, Linux distros are often criticize for the quantity of apps they install. Not all of these apps are of commercial grade, for sure, but quite a few are. Enough anyway to represent a real value to users. That should be taken into account in the TCO as well...

And anyone can buy a copy of Office 2003 Student & Teacher Edition for #130.00.

I doubt that anyone can buy this. There must be restrictions for commercial and/or professional use.

No one that I know of is enforcing the purchase restrictions,

No doubt Microsoft tolerates it, to a certain extent, to maintain its file format monopoly...

Syxx: I have a few problems with his assesments. He talks about how you have to pay more money for office, a firewall and antivirus making the assumption that you don't have to in linux because its free or you don't need it. There are free firewalls, antivirus and office programs out there for windows too.

(Note: Usually I read all the comments first, but I decided to respond to this one right away)

I have to agree. Also, if people bother to keep their eyes open, sometimes you can pick up some ridiculously sweet deals on hardware or software.

For example, sometimes stores are running specials on new software that is about to be released or has just been released and sometimes they have really nice prices on stuff that's only a version or two old. I myself have picked up software for as little as $0.25 or for free this way on a few occasions.

Also, if you buy the right hardware at the right time sometimes you can get free software with it. (For example, both my motherboard and my father's motherboard came with Norton Internet Security).

Also, sometimes the companies producing the software have specials that they are running. (I've picked up one free copy of Windows this way from MS. Plus some other stuff at different times.)

Anyway... If you take advantage of that kind of stuff, then the price of software can drop ridiculously fast. The next thing you know, your hardware is costing you way more than your software.

This also doesn't include the fact that there are sometimes competing products which are cheaper (or $0) and offer all of the functionality the person who is shopping needs.

But then, most people I know aren't very good at this, they always pay the highest price for their software. (No wonder they're always broke.)

Yup, some great apps in that list - though to be fair, they're not all free. Lots of them are shareware, which isn't freeware (nor free software).

However, as far as I know, you don't have the convenience of installing all of those great apps while installing the OS, with very little time and effort. Nor can you run a live CD with all those great free apps. If that's not value then I don't know what is...

I want my Windows LiveCD with tons of free apps NOW, dammit!

A nun, he moos: However, as far as I know, you don't have the convenience of installing all of those great apps while installing the OS, with very little time and effort.

True... But after installing once, you can create a "set" of backup CDs/DVDs/whatever which can be used to restore your whole configuration all at once.

Also, some apps you can install all at once anyway. (I'm not familiar with all the ones that can and can't be.) All you have to do is create an install script for Windows and a CD with the apps on them, insert the CD, run the install script, and there you go. And if the installers are made just right, you don't even have to click any "Next" buttons or whatever.

I have one CD with some apps and patches that I setup that way.

Hi,

I wish someone do this type of comparison and include all 3 major OS, particularly the use of Mac OS X Server, GNU/Linux, GNU/Linux on PowerPC (would it make sense to replace the Mac OS X on a bunch of Macs with GNU/Linux?) and Wind