5 Reasons You Should Switch From Windows To Linux Right Now

[phands]

Disclosure: I'm a Linux-head - been using it since 2001. I abhor windoze and the effect it has had on slowing progress in computing. Even Azure, their unreliable Cloud attempt depends critically on Linux to function at all.
That said, this is a good article by someone coming from Windows, and finally sick of the endless pain m$ inflicts on users. Their latest attempt, windoze 10 is an appalling mess.

When I published the highlights of my journey switching from Windows to Linux on my everyday laptop, I was floored at the engagement it received across all corners of the web. I also voiced an admittedly wrong assumption within the article itself that it wouldn't attract many eyeballs, and yet it became one of my most viewed pieces this year. From where I'm sitting, that tells me a ton of people are interested -- are at least actively curious -- about ditching Windows and making the jump to Linux.

1: Linux Gets Out Of Your Way
2: You're Not A Slave To The Terminal
3: Installing Software Is Even Easier
4: Updates aren't a headache. They're glorious
5: The Linux Community

Read the details of each of those 5 points here...

I'd add that Linux is free..no m$ tax applies.

I know this can be a religious issue in computing circles, and I don't want to reignite those flame wars....I do want to observe just how great Linux has become for Desktop users (it was always better than windoze on servers) as M$ seem to have completely lost their way, and at last are admitting that Open Source runs the world. It's recognized that NO significant computing innovation or enterprise grade software component in the last 10 years is not open-source.
I use the KDE desktop on my Laptops and Desktops, and it's easily the best one out there....in my opinion, which may well not be yours, and that's perfectly OK.

 

[bigfield]

I switched my partner's father from XP to Linux Mint after XP reached EOL.

He coped, but the update program hiccupped once and he couldn't fix it since he barely knows what Google is, let alone finding and following help online. When I got him a new PC I just left Windows 10 on there.

Win 10 is inefficient and gets in the way, but it is friendly to people who barely know how to open a web browser.

 

[steve_bank]

If a you are a commercial user of software or a devloper the reason to use windows are

1. Long term support. MS will always be threr. There is controlled continuity.
2. Software development tolls are plenty for the MS environment.
3. Interoperability is assured between applications by using MS tools for development.
4. For companies that pay for it, maintenance and support

.Linux is good for some, not for others. Depends on your needs. Not all software will run on Linux.

 

[bilby]

I use Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 7 at work, as the licence is paid for by my employer. It's pretty good, but I don't use it for my own machines because I don't want to pay for a licence. I guess some people like the fact that there is paid support for it, but generally that's something a business will benefit more from than a home user (which is I guess where the 'E' in RHEL comes from). In my experience, there are very few Linux issues that cannot be resolved by a few minutes googling.

For my own machines, I use Mint, except for one very old desktop machine that is only used as a CUPS server, where I have Lubuntu installed as it is nice and lightweight, and the hardware specification of that box is woeful by today's standards. It allows us to print to either printer from any other device (including iDevices), so it's likely going to be with us until it dies.

I see no particular need for Windows for myslef; My work machine has a Windows 7 KVM available, which I almost never use, and I have access to a number of Windows VMs on a remote server farm that I can use to test customer issues that arise on Windows environments. Gmbteach has a Windows 10 machine from her employer, and on the rare occasions that I am called upon to use it for anything, I am reminded just how glad I am not to have to use it for anything.

 

[phands]

If a you are a commercial user of software or a devloper the reason to use windows are

1. Long term support. MS will always be threr. There is controlled continuity.

LTS is the theme of many versions of Linux too, and continuity is often better because for most tools, you get the source, and can recompile with ease.

2. Software development tolls are plenty for the MS environment.

There are arguably more and better development tools for Linux than for windoze, and they're generally higher quality (although I still miss Borland JBuilder and C++ Builder).

3. Interoperability is assured between applications by using MS tools for development.

Have you heard of DLL hell and version nightmares because of the different version of the Windows Foundation Classes and successors?

4. For companies that pay for it, maintenance and support

Almost ALL Linux distros offer maintenance and support and often bespoke development, which m$ never do.

.Linux is good for some, not for others. Depends on your needs. Not all software will run on Linux.

This is true, but the reality nowadays is that most software is developed on Linux and may be ported to windows later. Also WINE and Crossover make a load of windows native executables run directly on Linux...including Office.

 

[steve_bank]

Some engineering packages run on Linux, many do not.

If different software developers make mods and compile the OS it is out of control. If I had a business I'd go with Windows.

For the user all that matters if is if it runs the software you need. I used DOS, Windows, Solaris, Zenix, Linux, Unix in the past. Linux is popular in embedded systems because it can be made small. I used Linux in a processor board for a building energy management system.



I remember when software would run on one PC clone, as we called them, but not another. Windows despite its baggage was the foundation for the growth of computers and software. The capacity for different software to directly communicate with each other via the OS and a worldwide set of common development tools was transformational. You had to be there.

 

[phands]

Some engineering packages run on Linux, many do not.

If different software developers make mods and compile the OS it is out of control. If I had a business I'd go with Windows.

For the user all that matters if is if it runs the software you need. I used DOS, Windows, Solaris, Zenix, Linux, Unix in the past. Linux is popular in embedded systems because it can be made small. I used Linux in a processor board for a building energy management system.



I remember when software would run on one PC clone, as we called them, but not another. Windows despite its baggage was the foundation for the growth of computers and software. The capacity for different software to directly communicate with each other via the OS and a worldwide set of common development tools was transformational. You had to be there.

Steve....I had wanted to not get into the windows-linux wars again, merely to point out that Linux, despite m$ claims, has become so mainstream that it is now not only a valid choice, but a majority one.

I have a business - it uses precisely zero windows. I worked for Google for a long time...not only do they run on Linux, they OUTLAWED windows completely, even for Office. I worked for Salesforce...totally runs on Linux. Facebook: Linux. Twitter: Linux. IBM: Linux. Windows Azure: only works with Linux by m$'s own admission. Amazon: linux core, allows windows as a guest OS in a container or VM. All stock exchanges in the world: Linux. All 500 of the top 500 HPC supercomputers in the world: Linux. Global DNS: Linux. HBASE: Linux. Kubernetes: Linux. Kafka: linux...I could go on, but you get the idea.

However I totally agree with "For the user all that matters if is if it runs the software you need.". This is just objectively true.

As a matter of historical record, every time a global standard has been proposed for intercommunications, m$ has resisted, vetoed or sabotaged it. I was there....I've been in this industry since before there was an internet.

As for interoperability, m$ can't even get windoze running on ARM properly after years of trying, never mind any other hardware. Linux runs on ALL known active hardware. Salesforce tried for years to get their software running on Azure, failed and gave up....they got it running on Amazon linux in a few months.

Overall, though, we agree....software and OSs are tools, and that's what matters....my hope was to point out that the world software order has changed...and for the better.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

I have run Linux for years. Mandrake, Mandriva, Mageia. I am about to move to Devuan. And later, I'll take a crack at Gentoo.

I have never been hacked, never been rooted, never had a virus, and never have had the upgrade follies of Windows. For this, I am grateful. The only thing I have hated about Linux is the buffooneries of KDE 4.0, released and foisted on us while it was in alpha state,
and Gnome stupidities. I am not happy with systemd.

All operating systems are evil. Linux, Windows, MacOS, BSD. All are evil in their own ways. Linux for my purposes is the least evil.

 

[phands]

I have run Linux for years. Mandrake, Mandriva, Mageia. I am about to move to Devuan. And later, I'll take a crack at Gentoo.

I have never been hacked, never been rooted, never had a virus, and never have had the upgrade follies of Windows. For this, I am grateful. The only thing I have hated about Linux is the buffooneries of KDE 4.0, released and foisted on us while it was in alpha state,
and Gnome stupidities. I am not happy with systemd.

All operating systems are evil. Linux, Windows, MacOS, BSD. All are evil in their own ways. Linux for my purposes is the least evil.

I HATE systemd too! I'm a convert of KDE, post the 4.0 debacle, and before, and use the new Plasma stuff exclusively..I adore the compositing desktops, especially the desktop cube an wobbly windows.

I have never been hacked, except on windoze. Remember the server breakin challenge? They put an unprotected linux server on the internet, advertised the IP address, and challenged people to break in. After weeks, they gave up, as no-one had managed. In contrast, the survival time of a windows machine was something under 3 minutes.

Linux doesn't get viruses, because it was designed for security and user segregation first. That's not to say it's impregnable, but the only successful attacks on Linux, SO FAR, have been via other vectors like BadUSB and other hardware/firmware design flaws.

I like Linux, because I can (and have used) source access to the kernel.

 

[bigfield]

I like Xfce, but perhaps it's time to try KDE and see if I like the extra features. I don't want a glossy, glittery DE, but perhaps I can disable that shit.

ETA: So far, so good.

 

[DBT]

I didn't mind XP or Win7 but found Win10 intolerable, never mind the glitches, it was the sheer scale of updates that drove me away. On accassion I have burnt though two months of prepaid credit installing updates that took hours to complete. For me, completely unacceptable.

 

[Juma]

I agree that windoes update has gone berserk... but.. what applications are better in Linux than Windows? I cant think of any. Most linux application really sucks .

 

[Jokodo]

I agree that windoes update has gone berserk... but.. what applications are better in Linux than Windows? I cant think of any. Most linux application really sucks .

Anyone remember Internet Explorer? Now I'm hearing Edge is somewhat better, but Windows actually came with recognized malware pre-installed until a couple of years ago...

 

[Juma]

I agree that windoes update has gone berserk... but.. what applications are better in Linux than Windows? I cant think of any. Most linux application really sucks .

Anyone remember Internet Explorer? Now I'm hearing Edge is somewhat better, but Windows actually came with recognized malware pre-installed until a couple of years ago...

I agree that ie (and edge) suck. I do not preach windooze. But that was not my question.
I can say that Chrome is better than ie and edge. But i like better chrome running in windows than running in linux.
So what applications are better in linux?

 

[bigfield]

I agree that windoes update has gone berserk... but.. what applications are better in Linux than Windows? I cant think of any. Most linux application really sucks .

Many applications than run on both Windows and Linux perform better under Linux, simply because of Windows rot: e.g. Firefox, Chrome, LibreOffice, Inkscape, Blender, to name some. For programmers, Eclipse and VS Code are cross-platform but perform better on Linux, as do other IDEs that are designed primarily for people working on Unix-based systems.

Just about any plain text editor available in Linux is better than Notepad.

Pinta is better than MS Paint.

VLC shits on Windows Media Player.

The archive managers, file browsers, backup utilities, command-line interfaces etc. are far batter in Linux distros.

I haven't used MS Outlook to make a comparison, but Evolution and Thunderbird are pretty good email clients.

Linux misses out when you get into more specialised software like CAD, DTP, and multimedia.

 

[phands]

I like Xfce, but perhaps it's time to try KDE and see if I like the extra features. I don't want a glossy, glittery DE, but perhaps I can disable that shit.

ETA: So far, so good.

Yes, there are hundreds of themes for KDE, and each of those is individually customizable. You can switch off the (wonderful) desktop cube and all other fancy compositing stuff, and just have an XFCE-like experience. But, to each his own.

 

[phands]

I agree that windoes update has gone berserk... but.. what applications are better in Linux than Windows? I cant think of any. Most linux application really sucks .

Many applications than run on both Windows and Linux perform better under Linux, simply because of Windows rot: e.g. Firefox, Chrome, LibreOffice, Inkscape, Blender, to name some. For programmers, Eclipse and VS Code are cross-platform but perform better on Linux, as do other IDEs that are designed primarily for people working on Unix-based systems.

Just about any plain text editor available in Linux is better than Notepad.

Pinta is better than MS Paint.

VLC shits on Windows Media Player.

The archive managers, file browsers, backup utilities, command-line interfaces etc. are far batter in Linux distros.

I haven't used MS Outlook to make a comparison, but Evolution and Thunderbird are pretty good email clients.

Linux misses out when you get into more specialised software like CAD, DTP, and multimedia.

There are so many text editors on Linux, it's hard to choose...and that's another religious war (vi vs emacs, etc), but Kate is superb,

VLC is a clear winner....even on windoze, but it's written on Linux.

As to Paint replacements.... too many to list here... https://alternativeto.net/software/microsoft-paint/?platform=linux

Dolphin is a superb file manager, but again, there are hundreds.

Outlook is an appalling mess these days. I used Evolution back in the mid 200s - was a beta tester for Ximian. These days email is best in the cloud and in a browser. Mozilla seem to be keeping Thunderbird on life-support the last few years, but they're trying to get rid of it, and no-one is buying.

I dispute your CAD claim entirely. Every mainstream and most other CAD programs are developed and run on Linux first. There are again, hundreds that are available in Linux, but will run windows under WINE or crossover.
AutoCAD, Cadence, Synopsys, FreeCAD, BRL-CAD, OpenSCAD, QCAD, CollabCAD, not to mention electronic chip and PCB CAD tools...there are too many to list. Many are free.

Ditto DTP. I think Inkscape and Scribus are world-class. Look at this comparison chart.

As for multimedia....there are thousands of superb tools, depending on what area of multimedia you want to look at. VLC rules the streamer/player space. Media conversion is a Linux strong suit. I counted over 100 multimedia packages just in the default Open SUSE repository, and I didn't include the Packman specialist multimedia collection at all.

Linux no longer misses out - it leads.

 

[steve_bank]

Some engineering packages run on Linux, many do not.

If different software developers make mods and compile the OS it is out of control. If I had a business I'd go with Windows.

For the user all that matters if is if it runs the software you need. I used DOS, Windows, Solaris, Zenix, Linux, Unix in the past. Linux is popular in embedded systems because it can be made small. I used Linux in a processor board for a building energy management system.



I remember when software would run on one PC clone, as we called them, but not another. Windows despite its baggage was the foundation for the growth of computers and software. The capacity for different software to directly communicate with each other via the OS and a worldwide set of common development tools was transformational. You had to be there.

Steve....I had wanted to not get into the windows-linux wars again, merely to point out that Linux, despite m$ claims, has become so mainstream that it is now not only a valid choice, but a majority one.

I have a business - it uses precisely zero windows. I worked for Google for a long time...not only do they run on Linux, they OUTLAWED windows completely, even for Office. I worked for Salesforce...totally runs on Linux. Facebook: Linux. Twitter: Linux. IBM: Linux. Windows Azure: only works with Linux by m$'s own admission. Amazon: linux core, allows windows as a guest OS in a container or VM. All stock exchanges in the world: Linux. All 500 of the top 500 HPC supercomputers in the world: Linux. Global DNS: Linux. HBASE: Linux. Kubernetes: Linux. Kafka: linux...I could go on, but you get the idea.

However I totally agree with "For the user all that matters if is if it runs the software you need.". This is just objectively true.

As a matter of historical record, every time a global standard has been proposed for intercommunications, m$ has resisted, vetoed or sabotaged it. I was there....I've been in this industry since before there was an internet.

As for interoperability, m$ can't even get windoze running on ARM properly after years of trying, never mind any other hardware. Linux runs on ALL known active hardware. Salesforce tried for years to get their software running on Azure, failed and gave up....they got it running on Amazon linux in a few months.

Overall, though, we agree....software and OSs are tools, and that's what matters....my hope was to point out that the world software order has changed...and for the better.

Yes, it would take a stanard for an OS. That would open up competition and bring MS doen a bit. The ANSI C standard fixed a lot of copiler portability problems. C was supposed to be a universal platform independent language.

I have no love for MS, not many do. You pay your periodic MS rax when they end of life a version. Cost of doing business. MS thrives on the fact most people are not tech savy.Istopped using MS Office years ago, I use Open Office.

Still Windows was one of the great modern inventions IMO. It had an inccalcuable effect on business and engineering software.

My first job in 1980 was at a company building systems for Telex,TWX, and DDD the orginal global nets. Nice talking to you old timer.

 

[phands]

Some engineering packages run on Linux, many do not.

If different software developers make mods and compile the OS it is out of control. If I had a business I'd go with Windows.

For the user all that matters if is if it runs the software you need. I used DOS, Windows, Solaris, Zenix, Linux, Unix in the past. Linux is popular in embedded systems because it can be made small. I used Linux in a processor board for a building energy management system.



I remember when software would run on one PC clone, as we called them, but not another. Windows despite its baggage was the foundation for the growth of computers and software. The capacity for different software to directly communicate with each other via the OS and a worldwide set of common development tools was transformational. You had to be there.

Steve....I had wanted to not get into the windows-linux wars again, merely to point out that Linux, despite m$ claims, has become so mainstream that it is now not only a valid choice, but a majority one.

I have a business - it uses precisely zero windows. I worked for Google for a long time...not only do they run on Linux, they OUTLAWED windows completely, even for Office. I worked for Salesforce...totally runs on Linux. Facebook: Linux. Twitter: Linux. IBM: Linux. Windows Azure: only works with Linux by m$'s own admission. Amazon: linux core, allows windows as a guest OS in a container or VM. All stock exchanges in the world: Linux. All 500 of the top 500 HPC supercomputers in the world: Linux. Global DNS: Linux. HBASE: Linux. Kubernetes: Linux. Kafka: linux...I could go on, but you get the idea.

However I totally agree with "For the user all that matters if is if it runs the software you need.". This is just objectively true.

As a matter of historical record, every time a global standard has been proposed for intercommunications, m$ has resisted, vetoed or sabotaged it. I was there....I've been in this industry since before there was an internet.

As for interoperability, m$ can't even get windoze running on ARM properly after years of trying, never mind any other hardware. Linux runs on ALL known active hardware. Salesforce tried for years to get their software running on Azure, failed and gave up....they got it running on Amazon linux in a few months.

Overall, though, we agree....software and OSs are tools, and that's what matters....my hope was to point out that the world software order has changed...and for the better.

Yes, it would take a stanard for an OS. That would open up competition and bring MS doen a bit. The ANSI C standard fixed a lot of copiler portability problems. C was supposed to be a universal platform independent language.

I have no love for MS, not many do. You pay your periodic MS rax when they end of life a version. Cost of doing business. MS thrives on the fact most people are not tech savy.Istopped using MS Office years ago, I use Open Office.

Still Windows was one of the great modern inventions IMO. It had an inccalcuable effect on business and engineering software.

My first job in 1980 was at a company building systems for Telex,TWX, and DDD the orginal global nets. Nice talking to you old timer.

I haven't paid m$ a penny since 2001...I have made quite a lot of cash on the side fixing borked windoze installations over the years, though.

My first job (an apprenticeship in 1974 at age 16, with the UK Navy) involved Valves (vacuum tubes to you merkins ), analogue computers, synchros and servos. At one point, I made memory boards with ferrite cores and copper wire. Every bit was 1/4inch across!
Imagine my delight at becoming a chip designer in the 80s and working with the tiny (for the time) 3.5Micron processes used by Motorola for the 68HC05 series microcontrollers.

I love this industry, and at age 60, I'm still relevant....much to my surprise and delight.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

The problem with Linux is fragmentation. Too many distros, too many differing ways to do things, no real standard. Among the distros are some real gems, but for much of that it means really getting your hands dirty and becoming a Linux head. Some of this means a steep learning curve many are not willing to learn. And now, it is all getting more complex. Differing DEs, virtual box and other VM systems, it can be overwhelming for a newb.

For many, they just want e-mail, play videos and games. My biggest gripe now is regressions in KDE Plasma, so I am looking at Enlightenment which I can modify to work like I want, but that is going to be a steep learning curve.