Windows 7 may be generating some positive buzz, but Jack Wallen remains sceptical. In fact, he says it's only a matter of time before Linux takes its rightful spot at the top of the OS heap.
I have an announcement: the error of Microsoft's ways is finally catching up and will cause the once-invincible juggernaut to kneel before that which is Linux. How is this? Microsoft started a tiny snowball when it released Windows Me. That snowball did nothing but gain momentum. There have been ups and downs along the way (XP being an up, for sure). But for the most part, the court of public opinion has steadily lost faith in what once was considered the heart of personal computing.
If you don't believe me, read on.
1: Inconsistent Windows releases
One of the things you can always count on from Microsoft is that you can't count on its new operating systems to be reliable. Let's take a look at the individual releases:
|> Windows 95: revolutionised personal computing.
|> Windows 98: attempted to improve on Windows 95; failed miserably.
|> Windows Me: a joke, plain and simple.
|> Windows NT: attempted to bring enterprise-level seriousness to the operating system; would have succeeded had it not taken Steven Hawking-like intelligence to get it working.
|> Windows XP: brought life back to the failing Windows operating system. It hadn't been since Windows 95 that the operating system was this simple.
|> Windows Vista: see Windows Me.
With this in mind, what do we expect from Windows 7? Myself, not much.
2: Consistent Linux releases
Converse to number 1, you have the far more consistent releases of the various Linux distributions. Yes, there have been a few dips along the way (Fedora 9 being one of them). But for the most part, the climb for Linux has been steadily upward. Nearly every Linux distribution has improved with age. And this improvement isn't limited to the kernel. Look at how desktops, end-user software, servers, security, admin tools, etc, have all improved over time. One could easily argue that KDE 4 is an example of a sharp decrease in improvement. However, if you look at how quickly KDE 4 has improved from 4.0 to 4.3 you can see nothing but gains. This holds true with applications and systems across the board with Linux.
3. Continuing Windows price hikes
Recently, I have had a number of long-time Microsoft administrators asking my advice on solid replacements for Exchange. The reason? Microsoft changed its licensing for Exchange to a per-user seat. Now anyone who logs on to an Exchange server must have a licence. You have 100 employees (including administrators) who need to log on to Exchange? Pony up! This gets serious when your company starts having to cough up the money for 500+ Exchange licences. The very idea that Microsoft would make such a bold change to licences is made even more ridiculous considering the current state of the economy. Companies worldwide are having to scale back. And like Exxon Mobile celebrating record profits amid the catastrophe known as Hurricane Katrina, Microsoft creating such a cost barrier while the globe is facing serious recession is irresponsible and reprehensible.
4. Stable Linux "prices"
Converse to number 3, the prices of open-source software licences have remained the same -- $0.00. When those administrators come to me asking for open source replacements for Exchange I point them to eGroupware and Open-X-Change. Both are outstanding groupware tools that offer an even larger feature set than their Microsoft equivalent. Both are reliable, scalable, secure and free. The only cost you will have with either is the hardware they are installed upon. And with both packages, there is no limit to the amount of users that can be set up. One user, 1,000 users -- it's all good with open source software.
5: Windows hardware incompatibility
Microsoft Vista was a nightmare when it came to hardware compatibility. Not only was Vista incompatible with numerous peripherals, it took supercomputer-level iron to run the operating system! Sure this was a boon to Intel, which stood to make a pretty shiny penny. Intel knew a good amount of the public would be shelling out for new hardware, and the new hardware would cost more because it had to be faster to run Vista in all its Aero glory. But even hardware that would run nearly any other OS with lightening-fast speed was brought to a slow, grinding halt with Vista.
6: Linux hardware compatibility
Converse to number 5, Linux continues to advance in the category of hardware compatibility. Take Xorg, for example. Recent developments with the star of Linux' graphical desktops have the X Windows server running sans xorg.conf. This was done primarily because the system had grown so good at detecting hardware. And so long as there wasn't a cheap KVM between your monitor and your PC, Xorg would easily find the mode for your display and run X properly. With new distributions (such as Fedora 10), X configuration is becoming a thing of the past. Most other pieces of hardware are finding the same level of recognition.
7: Windows promises
I wanted to save this for last, but seeing as how it is number 7... We've all heard the pundits proclaiming Windows 7 will be the resurrection of the Microsoft operating system. But I recall this same proclamation with nearly every release from Redmond. Windows Vista was going to revolutionise the way the user interfaced with the computer. Vista was going to be the operating system you would never notice. Instead, Vista refused to NOT let you notice. And Windows Me was going to take Windows 98 and make it far more simple for the average user. What did it really do? Remove nearly every actual functioning system in the operating system, leaving little more than a browser and an email client.
Everyone is always fond of saying the next Windows release will redefine the personal computer. But the public has finally reached such a point of apathy for Microsoft's up and coming, the majority doesn't even realise something new is coming out. The media can continue to push Windows 7, but the public will continue using XP until Microsoft pries it from its cold, dead fingers. And, of course, no one really knows when Windows 7 will land. How many dates Microsoft announces vs. how many dates change will probably be a 1:1 ratio.
8: Linux transparency
Converse to 7... The next release of any Linux distribution is never shrouded in mystery. Because of the nature of open source, the release candidates are always available to the public (and not on a limited basis), and the timeline is always made available. Any user can know exactly when a feature-freeze happens for a release of any distribution. And all Linux distributions work under the "full disclosure" model. Because of this, there is little false advertising going on with Linux. And unlike with Microsoft, you will never hear of a distribution claiming that its next release will revolutionise computing. If you go to the Fedora Project Wiki, you can view all the proposed and accepted features that will be included in the next release. You can also view the completed release schedule, where you will see that Fedora 11 has set an alpha release of 3 February 2009, a beta release of 24 March 2009, and a final release of 26 May 2009. These dates are fairly firm and almost always on target.
9: Feature comparison
Let's compare the feature lists of Windows 7 and Fedora 11.
|> Windows 7: OS X-like Doc, multi-touch screen, mapping application similar to Google Earth, Hyper-Visor virtualisation, location-aware apps, User Access Control improvements, Sidebar removal.
|> Fedora 11: 20-second boot time, btrfs file system, Better C++ support, Cups PolicyKit integration, DNS Security (DNS SECurity), ext4 default file system, fingerprint reader integration, IBUS input method replaces SCIM (to overcome limitations), GNOME 2.26, KDE 4.2, Windows cross-compiler inclusion.
If you look at those features in and of themselves, you could easily argue that either one could be the more impressive list (depends upon your bias). But understand that the Fedora 11 features are added on an already outstanding operating system, whereas the Windows 7 features are being added to a lesser operating system. And what Microsoft is proclaiming to be the biggest improvement (multi-touch) doesn't actually improve the operating system and also requires, surprise, new hardware! To get the most out of Fedora 11, you'll be good to go with what you already have.
10: Hardware requirements
Vista-lite? Out of the mouths of Microsoft comes the proclamation that Windows 7 will run on any hardware that would run Vista and even slightly less powerful hardware. Slightly less powerful? What exactly does that mean? Well for one, Windows 7 will have no luck in the netbook market. And since XP is dying, the netbook market will be owned by Linux. Netbooks are not gaining enough power to run anything from Windows but the watered-down version of XP. Netbooks are not going anywhere, and consumers (both home and corporate) have their limits on how many hardware upgrades they will make to fulfil an operating systems' needs. As of Fedora 10, the minimum system requirements look like something out of the mid '90s.
Your take
In your opinion, has the court of public opinion already condemned Microsoft to failure or will Windows 7 pull Microsoft out of the muck and mire created by Vista? Will Linux continue its climb above Microsoft?
This was published in 
1
Boo Radley - 24/02/09
You shouldn't steal other people's content...
» Report offensive content
2
Jack Acid - 14/03/09
Good points for the most part. Why don't other people realize a lot of this? If people would just give Linux a try and toss out their fear of change, the world would be a better place, and more than likely a world without Microsoft in the OS business...
» Report offensive content
3
Rico Suave - 15/03/09
Rewrite history much? Or should I say steal other people's versions of OS history much?
95 did revolutionize personal computer.
98 did not fail miserably. half of what we see in xp was born in 98, or 98 se.
winme, yeah, let's all just forget about that.
As for NT/2000 It has been aroudn since before windows 95, and was a completely different product line. The NT line, which XP is based on, is the most successful OS product line in history. It was wildly successful and you had to be retarded to not get it working.
XP the successor to win2kpro, still in use by people who are afraid of moving forward. Let us not forget that people hated it worse than vista when it came out, and called it useless.
Vista, is better at memory management, and more stable and faster as long as it meets its minimum hardware requirements. Vista is only a PR and marketing disaster, nothing more. People who use it, love it.
As for Windows 7. It is exactly what everyone is raving about, it's faster on the same hardware than XP sp3, and has a smaller HD footprint(something that vista is bad at).
Also, all the stuff you say that fedora supports? Yeah, Windows supports that too, and has forever. Secure DNS? Really that's what you are calling a feature of LINUX?
Better C++ support? With GCC? Gimme a break. Everything else you sport is just done a different way in windows.
Active directory, instead of policykit. etc, etc.
Also, let us not forget that with cygwin installed linux doesn't even have exclusivity to gnome or KDE. So you can't even call your window managers features of Linux.
Also, I'm typing this from win7, which booted up in approximately 20 seconds.
» Report offensive content
4
Anonymous - 11/04/09
You, sir, are very far from informed. This is some of the worst bs I've read in years. Still lollin' at better c++ support.
die plznkthx
» Report offensive content
5
RMSe17 - 25/06/09
Some of your points are valid.
However, I have to disagree.. I could write a short article, called "1 reason why Windows will continue to triumph over Linux"
1. Games
That's all I got to say.
» Report offensive content
6
kman - 04/08/09
you have idea what you're talking about? linux hardware compat?!?! hah! linux will never be a desktop OS, ever.
» Report offensive content
7
r2s - 04/08/09
until linux does away with the need for command line, apt sudo type of BS it will never be user friendly enough to topple windows reign
» Report offensive content
8
Bill Ross - 04/08/09
The reason Linux will triumph (if, in fact it does) is the socialist, anti-capitalist sentiment around the world. US corporations are the villain of every movie, book, article and the like. People like the idea of the demise of the powerful, even if they have driven improvement in the usefulness of computing devices in unprecedented ways. Envy may destroy Microsoft.
» Report offensive content
9
Johanna - 04/08/09
I agree.
» Report offensive content
10
Jim - 04/08/09
Linux would almost be usable if OpenOffice wasn't so terrible. I use Linux full time and am very patient with it's quirks, but OpenOffice makes me want to scream. It's autoformating has made it unusable. I wish someone would fork it and make it usable.
» Report offensive content
11
Crafty Spiker - 04/08/09
The minute Adobe releases Photoshop for native Linux Windows is simply toast. The Adobe suite is my only barrier to leaving Bill in the past. (And, please, no one say "Gimp")
» Report offensive content
12
Z - 04/08/09
obviously this is satire
» Report offensive content
13
Seer - 04/08/09
Honestly, I am OS agnostic ... I use windows and mac at home and Debian at work.
But this 'article' is the biggest pile of fanboy tripe I have read for a long time. Apart from the multitude of technical inaccuracies, the blatantly obvious fact that you have not used any of the listed operating systems in any serious capacity, and the highly 'edited' feature lists of win7 v fedora ...... your points are either flat out wrong, rehashed nixtard propaganda, or just plain ridiculous.
e.g.
point 8 - 'windows 7 is shrouded in mystery'
point 9 - 'windows 7 feature list'
LMAO!!! (not to mention the public RCs and betas everyone has been using for the last 6 months!)
And boot time is the mooooost ridiculous fanfare of nixtards at the moment and I don't understand why. Linux/OSX/Windows are all so stable now that uptimes are measured in months instead of hours and days like they were ten years ago. So if I am rebooting 3 or 4 times a year.... what exactly do I do with that massive 30 or 40 seconds of time per year I have 'gained' from using whatever distro you are banging on about?
Boot time regardless of the OS is down to systems specs, mostly disk I/O. Guess what! My Win7 RC boots in 11 seconds from pressing the button (4 seconds is the POST screen) and my OSX 10.5 boots in 14 .... why? I have an SSD!
» Report offensive content
14
abc - 04/08/09
What an angry rant. I don't usually respond to random articles, but I just wanted to point out that not one person who reads this is going to take you seriously through the nerd-rage.
» Report offensive content
15
Petre - 04/08/09
I switched from Win XP Pro to Ubuntu and wanted to see what the buzz was all about. Sure it is a nice OS but it will never triumph over Windows 7.
As someone mentioned before... Games. Until game developers start programming for linux, there wont be a transition to linux. also, applications that are supported on windows needs to be supported on linux as well. This is what i am struggling with right now. Doing something on linux takes ages compared to something on windows just because it is supported better. When linux can get better application support, then you can argue your point.
» Report offensive content
16
Ramses - 04/08/09
Smell that? It's a Windows fanboy!
"Vista, is better at memory management, and more stable and faster as long as it meets its minimum hardware requirements. Vista is only a PR and marketing disaster, nothing more. People who use it, love it."
Wrong!
Vista IS a disaster itself. Everyone, and I mean EVERYONE I know that has used Vista calls me about how bad it is. I end up having to help them get it up and working the way they're used to. Second problem is that the Vista hardware support truly is abysmal. Printers that worked for years on XP all of the sudden weren't supported on Vista. Lastly, tons of business applications still don't run on Vista! Seriously, it's not just about PR at this point. It's about it truly being a serious piece of garbage. I have yet to meet someone who loves it.
In short, Vista is a barely tolerated OS and that's about it. Linux is a great operating system if you've never tried it. I used to use Windows all the time.
I may not agree with everything this article says, but be realistic here. Windows isn't that great and it's just getting worse.
» Report offensive content
17
Max - 04/08/09
Have you even used windows 7? Your feature comparison list was weak at best.
As for inaccurate release dates... jeesus, look at Blizzard, they will postpone release dates for years. no to mention Windows is like trying building a car that you can put anything in and it will run. Windows has to support basically everything and still run fast and smoothly (which 7 does, I had to install 2 drivers manually).
Linux is cool and all, but there's no way your average small office, home office, or medium size business can run Linux, without having an on-staff IT person. get real. I know tons of people that can't even figure out how to get their email on their iphone, let alone install linux.
» Report offensive content
18
Max - 04/08/09
*not that installing Linux is difficult. but for most people they probably couldn't do it.
» Report offensive content
19
Mikey - 04/08/09
"20-second boot time, btrfs file system, Better C++ support, Cups PolicyKit integration, DNS Security (DNS SECurity), ext4 default file system, fingerprint reader integration, IBUS input method replaces SCIM (to overcome limitations), GNOME 2.26, KDE 4.2, Windows cross-compiler inclusion"
oh yeah, that's going to get my mother all excited about switching to Linux..
» Report offensive content
20
James - 04/08/09
this article is ridiculous. The only people who still think Windows7 will be a bust are the people who refuse to use it solely out of blind hatred (it was available for free as a beta and RC).
get over yourself and try both. You'll find that for geeks like us, there's a place for Windows (games, mostly) and a place for Linux (random geek cred) in your crowded office.
» Report offensive content
21
FixerDave - 05/08/09
Max said: *not that installing Linux is difficult. but for most people they probably couldn't do it."
Actually, at this point, I have to disagree. As a professional tech, responsible for installing and maintaining hundreds of Windows computers, I'd say that Ubuntu Linux is now EASIER to install, both for experts and neophytes alike. The last couple of installs have been seamless, easy, and quick. Just not having to hit 'okay', 'I agree', 'YES, already' over and over again during the installs makes it better. I'm not just talking OS here, I'm talking the whole shebang, a completely functional system with a full software suite. What takes minutes of effort (not counting the otherwise productive time while the computer does the work) on Ubuntu takes hours of clicking on a Windows box.
Oh, and as for: "until linux does away with the need for command line, apt sudo type of BS it will never be user friendly enough to topple windows reign"
Well, try doing tech-support for someone in a GUI... "Okay, you see the menu item called ..., now choose that, and when the box comes up, hit the checkbox next to ..., no, not that one, the other one, and then hit Okay, then go over to..." Or, "open a command window and paste this line in, hit enter, and type your password when it asks." Which do you think is easier to support? The command-line option of Linux is a feature, not a problem. It's not like there isn't a GUI for just about anything a regular user needs to do.
So, yeah, while I think the article could use some work, I agree with the sentiment. If you want me to install/support Windows, PAY ME. Other than that, it's Linux.
http://keliso.com
» Report offensive content
22
Chris R. - 13/09/09
I agree with the post above.
It seems to me that many experienced techs agree that Linux will reign within years. I agree as well.
Despite any feature of windows 7, there is one thing that windows will NEVER be able to compete with Linux on. Price.
Let's be hypothetical - put yourself in a manager/owner position of a medium sized business that has 50 computers. With Microsoft, you need on ever computer:
A $100 Operating system X 50 = $5000
A $300 Office suite X 50 = $15000
Virus scanning software $50/year = $2500 a year
Spyware scanner = $30 = $1500
So by this rough estimate, you would need to buy $24,000 worth of software. Within this software exists the operating system that has the most potential to get hit with viruses and spyware.
Now, Linux.
Free OS
Free Office Suite
No Virus scanner needed
No Spyware scanner needed.
Oh yeah, and also you can buy PC parts for DIRT cheap because Linux will run very fast on OLD machines. Xubuntu for instance. You can enjoy burning CD's/DVD's on free K3B too instead of paying $50 for Nero.
It really makes Windows from a financial stance look insane. From a technicians stance, Linux is a true OS that does not give you any B.S.
Functionality in an office environment for internet, office applications, email, IM's, is perfect in Linux. No need for games at work.
Also, you don't have to worry about people bringing viruses from home and damaging / infecting your entire office.
As for the person who says software is hard to install, he has not seen synaptic package manager. Most of it is sitting right there!! You don't even have to google software you want to find. Just put it in the search box, check it, and you are done.
Linux in the last 5 years has become insanely better and very openly competitive to Microsoft.
The "mental switch" is something people will have to deal with. To not see the standard XP start button drives some nuts.
But the one thing I can promise everybody is this, there is going to be an all out war Linux vs. Windows within 5 years. People's computers are powerful enough, and linux gives them something for free. MONEY ALWAYS TALKS.
(Also businesses don't have to keep up with license keys either. They don't have to worry about employees reporting them for piracy)
Seriously by the end of typing this, I think many companies are just plain flat insane for sticking with Microsoft. INSANE.
» Report offensive content
23
Malcolm - 02/10/09
In your world of linux you see to have actually lost touch with what Windows does...
1) inconsistent windows releases?
I'm running Windows 7 and run almost all my applications from previous versions of Windows. Same with Vista. Try that with Linux (without recompiling everything ) Not to mention at least 200+ different distributions, with a lack of binary compatibility for executables...
2) Linux updates are so frequent, often haven't undergone sufficient testing, bugs are fixed post-release. and this is a great release cycle? Microsoft consistently keeps OS upgrades to 3-4 year cycle
3) The price - you get what you pay for. Windows works without messing around. For example you have a network problem, it can automatically fix it. You don't have to go around and edit some .conf file somewhere in a text editor. As much fun as that may be - that's not for everyone
4) yeah it's "free" but that doesn't count the additional hours in recompiling software to run on your distro/kernel version, potentially having to recompile drivers on system upgrades, additional time to configure deployments/etc. Linux is great if "as-is" it provides everything you need, but when it comes to changes/using non-packaged software, etc - it wastes a lot of time
5) Have you used Windows recently? I've installed Vista and Windows 7 on 10+ machines, and all drivers are detected automatically (any that weren't automatically downloaded from the internet) Also we can use vendor provided drivers which are rare in Linux, and as a result a lot more reliable.
6) Linux does not have perfect hardware compatibility. Although it is very good many drivers are open source and although written by very smart people they don't have all information the hardware vendors have to fully utilize the hardware. Try using webcams on linux? Good luck.
7) Everyone I've spoken to using windows 7 loves it. Try it before you make the assumption it's not. Although I use Linux and Win7 - i'd take Win7 as main OS anyday, it's more complete/mature/finished product, and saves me time.
8) Linux is transparent - but the linux community maintains a lot of incorrect ideas - i.e. "linux file systems don't need defragmentation", (yes - they still get defragmented - the problem is its so hard to find a good linux defrag tool) "linux doesn't need virus scanner" (um yes there are viruses for linux too) "it's more secure than windows" (RedHat Linux 180+ security updates in first 90 day of release, windows vista only 1)
9) you need to check on Windows 7 features - you've missed out an awful lot. I suggest before you start bashing Windows you start using it for a while. You might be surprised it make your life a lot easier.
10) Linux does run well on old hardware. But Windows 7 + Office runs fine on netbooks, even with 512 MB ram. And considering 2 GB ram chips are now about $30 - can't see much reason to stay on low memory.
While windows does use more resource, it also DOES more. That is why it is the most popular OS choice. It's easy to use, it let's people get their jobs they need done quickly, and they don't require extensive technical knowledge to make configuration changes. While Linux Windows managers are providing configuration GUIs they are still limited in functionality, and often need to go edit text files.
That being said if you don't care about the above then by all means go and use Linux. However I think you need to understand there are good reasons why Windows is so popular over linux and it's just not we've all been brainwashed by "M$"
» Report offensive content
24
m0nde - 12/10/09
I've been pleasantly surprised with Windows 7. It's going to be worth upgrading to for home users.
Still to be seen whether business users can be coerced into getting CALs.
» Report offensive content
25
Crasster - 13/10/09
Enjoy your window 7 viruses & spyware. Also enjoy paying mega bucks for the office suite.
Have fun! (By the way, try ubuntu, you aren't editing any conf files)
Windows = A pretty but resource hogging virus & spyware ridden disaster that is monopolized by 1 company.
I would not hold ANY stock in MS right now. Ubuntu is so simple and user friendly without the need for virus & spyware scanners that I do believe numerous PC illiterate people will be happy to use it. Ubuntu is so automatic, it even pulls all the outlook & favorites out of an MS hard drive. LOL. No recompiling needed.
Take Care.
Linux = A developing OS that is free of viruses & spyware, is free, and developed by hordes of volunteer geeks.
Free will win. Mark my words. Microsoft can't beat free ever. As suites like open office get more and more developed, it will dominate Microsoft Office (It already does 9/10ths of everything MS does and 99% of what people use it for).
If you have not used Ubuntu of late, you will be shocked to find it incredibly user friendly and easy. Always free, no key needed. Installs in 7 steps.
» Report offensive content