However, this “mythbusting” only takes into account rapidly changing distributions.

Windows XP was released in 2002 and when it was first released very little software would work.. anti-virus software around 2002 would cripple or make the system unusable.

Now let’s look at OpenSuSE. It’s supported for 2 years and new releases are every 6-7 months. It has the latest and greatest, expect some bugs just like XP had at first release. Now let us compare Vista’s initial release… just kidding… :P

Now, Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 on a PC from 2005, rock solid. As Red Hat Enterprise Linux has a long QA and release cycle it is less buggy at release point and less likely to have “bad updates”. =] Same goes for RHEL 5 on a PC from 2007. Also, RHEL can be obtained freely as CentOS with the same quality.

Windows has more bugs at release than GNU/Linux will ever do, but since GNU/Linux distros release more often… new releases should be treated in exactly the same way as new releases of any other OS.

I think hardware causes different tendencies in all OS’s (and their apps)

yum,man, curl, cryptic commands: yeah. win has it’s own, though. both could be better:
One reason why i like wget is that i has “long” and short option names. any command that’s not used often needs long names, IMO. Some “DOS” commands have a long name version: DEL= DELETE, REN = RENAME.

In majorityof usage, context-sensitive info is faster than searching thru a manual.
Of course a standardized “frontend” gui should allow easy provision of hover tips, etc. for the infrequent user. In the most haphazard app guis, hover tips could just be the documentation comments.

Also, I do not use win in an eye candy mode. i turn that junk off. All gui is functional. (Color is good, much as different color lights are used at road instersections)
The standard visual of vista is worse than xp’s. eg: vista’s icons are large and muddy. If I used vista regularly, I’d have solved some of vista’s ui problems, but tightening up xp seems easier…
Similarly, I don’t expect to ever use compiz, beryl, etc. (on 2d hardware)

The last Mac I used was a g3 running “office” apps on OS 7.x or 8.x (don’t recall). It was about as stable as win98se of the same era. Possibly being run only 5-9 helped. :-)

I agree with the author that the Windows XP has matured a lot and today April, 2008 it is a very stable system. I have a windows xp running IIS and a CFTV software along with Comodo Firewall. I barely ever reboot the system, only after requierd updates.
At the same time I have to say this: The comparison was not made right. The author used the BEST windows version that has matured for 7 years and compared to some of the worst linux distributions. I think a good comparison would have been if he used CentOS (which I also use for server purposes, DNS, Apache, Qmail, Squid, Firewall) or maybe OpenSuse, or Debian. That would have made a way better comparison. It´s like, “Let’s compare Vista and RHEL” everyone that has ever messed around with both of then knows that would not be a fair match.
I have been using a CentOS distribution for Samba, FTP, and internall firewall and I’ll tell you, I think it’s been 3-4 months since my last reboot, and I think I did it just for the fear that it would stop whenever I wouldn’t be at work. Yes it is that good.
But I am talking about server purposes. My desktop at home and at work are Windows XP. And yes drivers are more readly avaliable for Windows than for Linux.
So to wrap it up, I will say this: I have a rule on what is the best OS. One has to follow certain steps to come-up with the answer. My method goes like this:

1. Find the OS that can meet your needs. (Ex. How good would be to install FreeBSD if all you want to do is to play Civilization IV with the latest video card in the market?)

2.How good are you on operating that system? (Ex: You may have a Xeon with 16GB on a Dell server, but if you have Linux installed and don’t know what the command ‘ls’ is for, that OS is not for you, or you better learn)

3.Identify what is more important to you. (Ex: Security, Stability, Hardware Support and so on…)

My two cents…..or should I say CentOS :)

One Love Y’all

QUOTE:
“I don’t want to be on the internet (providing you can find a driver for your ethernet card) ”

Which Linux distro have you been using? Are you talking about wireless-Ethernet only?

I used a few distros and not once have I found a wired ethernet card that any of them does not detect properly, Linux has an outstanding ability in this area,better than windows by a mile, gosh man be fair!!

on the other hand I quite often have to hunt for drivers somewhere to make windows use a good deal of the less common Ethernet cards, case in point I have a Dell precision 380 workstation with a Broadcom Ethernet card the machine ships with Windows Xp but if you do a clean install of Windows you will have to fetch the Dell driver CD to get on the internet, I installed Ubuntu 8.04 on the same machine and I do not have to reach for any other disc, I am on the internet immediately.

The same on an Inspiron 9100 laptop, even the wireless worked more quickly than a Windows setup, the Broadcom firmware is downloaded and configured easily by Ubuntu. I installed windows on this machine there is no wired Ethernet, no wireless Ethernet, no sound, no video drivers, display set to 800 x 600, I had to go to another connected machine and fetch the drivers as the driver disc for this laptop has been mislaid long ago by the previous owner, not so with Ubuntu you can get to work immediately after installation

almost all USB printers and scanners are detected by the modern linux distros now, my Canon pixma 2000 is one of them,

and BTW Linux should not be the one and only OS it never will be, do not be ridiculous, if you want Linux to become better take some time and read something worthwhile and join the geeks or at least file some sensible bug reports with the ones who are involved in many lovely projects (UBUNTU,GENTOO,GNOME,KDE,GIMP INKSCAPE ETC.), coming here spouting your unjust argument or ignorance does not make you any smarter than Goofy.

The truth of the matter is that neither Windows nor Linux are for everyone. Anyone who tells you that Linux is better without explaining why it’s better for YOU, doesn’t know what they’re talking about.

The other important thing is that you should make your own decisions. So many people will tell you that you have to do things this way or that way. Linux people will tell you that you can’t use a proprietary driver or you’re evil. Windows people will call you stupid if you don’t think eye-candy is enough of a reason to shell out big bucks. It’s your computer, do what you think is best.

I’ve already said why I think Linux is great. I will also admit that I think Windows is kind of crummy. One of the great features of Linux is that you can run it without affecting your Windows system at all. Almost any Linux can be installed in a dual-boot system ( as long as Windows is installed first ). There are also versions that can run from a CD or thumb drive. Try it before you wipe windows form your hard drive, you might just find that you like them both!

If you want to try Linux, that’s great, just don’t wipe Windows when you do. Your computer geek friend may be well intentioned, but if you follow his advice you probably won’t be able to figure out what brand of wireless card you have so he can help you get it running under Linux.

Good luck, you’ll need it no matter which OS you run.

That is very strange that Firefox would lock up the Linux kernel since the GUI is just another application and does not actually directly access the Kernel. I can see locking up X to the point that you can’t even do a control, alt, backspace but you still can do a Control, ALT, F2 or F3 etc to get to the shell then log in and kill the process. But totally lock up the machine is very, very strange.

That is the cool part of Linux (Something you can’t even do with the Mac OS)

But I guess anything is possible?