10 Things Linux Does Better Than Windows

Tagged: Linux, Technology
Source: techgage - Read the full article
Posted: 6 years 28 weeks ago

"In the computer hardware world, certain segments are saturated with choice, while others are not. Take graphics cards for example. For the most part, it's AMD (ATI) vs. NVIDIA. For CPU's, AMD vs. Intel. For CPU coolers... ugh, where to begin. We'd need at least a billion "vs." for that one! Then there are operating systems, where like GPU's and CPU's, the choices of major vendor are slim.

For consumers, there are three main operating systems on the market, with Microsoft's Windows dominating all of the others. In second place is Apple's Mac OS X, followed by all Linux variants combined. An OS seems simple, but in truth, it's the one piece of the computing puzzle that seems to divide us all. After all, there are few applications, games and drivers that are interoperable across each.

That being the case, I doubt many would refute the fact that some OSes do a better job at some things than others. Although Linux is easily the least-popular of the three consumer offerings on the market today, over my years of using the OS full-time, I've stumbled on many things that caused me to shout, "Why can't Windows do that?!", and this article pretty much sums up a handful of those.

To be clear about this article's intent, it's not to bash Microsoft, or Windows. Because to be fair, despite using Linux 95% of the time while I'm on the PC, I can find more faults with it than Windows. So, this article's goal is to highlight some of the major pluses of Linux, and also showcase where Windows could improve in the future, should Microsoft take heed of the suggestions.

Please note that the list here is in no particular order, and because Ubuntu is currently the market-leading distribution, I used the latest release (10.04 Beta 2) for the sake of capturing most screenshots and backing up my claims. Ubuntu utilizes GNOME, but the entire list applies to KDE and likely other desktop environments as well. So without further ado, let's dive in!"




It'd be great if I could assign Alt+F1 to the Start menu and Alt+F2 to the Windows run dialog, but that will conflict with applications that uses Alt+F1 and/or Alt+F2, such as Outlook 2007.

Gee, I've gotten myself so used to Linux shortcuts even though I'm very used to Windows.

I don't know why the creators of Gnome chose Alt+F1 for Application menu and Alt+F2 for the command window, but oh well. When I get used to Linux, I do hit the Windows key to open the Application menu, but then I too often use Alt+F1 instead.

ChristianD's picture
Joined: 03/31/2010
Posts: 5

I have always thought Linux to be an OS that requires you to think a little about what you're actually doing. Windows is more often than not a fairly easy PnP OS, whereas with Linux, knowing what you're doing is always important. If one wants to tinker with an OS, then by all means, go nuts with Linux. :)

I prefer good old Windows, because I have become lazy and don't tinker as much anymore, and for all it's intended purposes, it works just fine.

Lvaneede's picture
Joined: 03/28/2010
Posts: 212

The one thing I like about linux is, it can handle a faulty hard drive a lot better than windows can

Andreas Hofer
Andreas Hofer's picture
Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 121

I do prefer Linux, Ubuntu Server to be precise, over other operating systems for my lan-server. However for a desktop environment it is a real pain that you can't just install applications with a double-click. If there is not compatible package or the package servers are not answering you have to build it from scratch and "oh no!" you might need newer unstable components to get it running and this will make your whole OS unstable as well and you sit there trying to figure it all out for hours (not joking here).

I have started with the old MS-DOS back when I was 7 years old. I also experienced the first versions of Windows as well as the early MAC OS stuff. A lot has changed since then but I feel Windows has now got some logic to it in the way it is constructed, there are certain similarities with UNIX but I think that is a good thing. While on the other hand Linux is still based on the same structure as UNIX from way back then and therefore has not had a lot of change in that department and I think that is where they should focus there efforts. Like with Windows they need to rewrite the whole package instead of updating the core and other components from time to time. Compare it to cars: It is like driving a 1950's Ford Galaxy and changing the engine and interior from time to time but the rest will stay the same and finding newer components that fit well will become more and more difficult.


For desktop stuff and gaming: Windows XP SP3 or Windows 7

For a workstation: Windows Server 2003 or 2008

For a dedicated server: Ubuntu Server Edt. or Solaris (depending on tasks)

For desktop users that want to run linux and unix stuff but also want the ease of the double-click, go with current Mac OS 10.x

mimart7's picture
Joined: 11/14/2007
Posts: 105

The most user friendly distro of Linux, Ubuntu, still requires some knowledge of command line arguments to get the basics done, like updating drivers, etc. It is not for casual pc user.

"Real men do it with their bios"

"Je plie, donc je suis"

Tiv's picture
Joined: 08/12/2009
Posts: 3584

True, if Linux could game like Windows Microsoft would be out of business.

I sleep fine at night knowing we are banning people who deserve it.  Tivon
Don't test my skills, I was trained by myself! Check out my Gaming Videos!

3dGameMan's picture
Joined: 12/31/2000
Posts: 5401

Except gaming....

Rodney Reynolds,
Register: http://www.3dgameman.com/user/register