Here is why Windows is better than Linux. (1) Installing programs is easy with windows because there is a standard. Try installing VLC and you'll see what I mean. (2) Anytime you try to install or change something on your own computer you have to type a password. And god forbid you run the program in root, then you get every warning that exists. (3) Installing anything good in Linux requires an entire weekend ending up in learning how to reinvent the wheel. (4) To truly use any Linux distribution your going to have to either take classes in how Linux works or spend time reading a lot of books and forums.
My love for linux has turned to hate.
T Bone
why linux is better than windows
1. It's free...legally free.
2. Almost every useful application you would ever want to run on Linux is free.
3. When you want to update to the latest and greatest version, with all the latest and greatest features, you don't need to buy a new version...and if you want to stick with the old, you can.
4. Security. Defaults are much better than Windows. There are so many free options for increased security, SeLinux and Grsecurity just to name a couple.
5. All you need to learn about it is out there somewhere, for free, whether it's online, in a man page, or in a forum or newsgroup somewhere.
6. Performance...Linux almost never forces you to upgrade your hardware, and it always runs better on older hardware than windows.
7. Simplicity. Yes simplicity. Most young people think Windows is easy because that's what they grew up with and had the most exposure to. That's like someone in the US saying english is the simplest language.
8. The choices...the free choices, are endless. What filesystem do you want to use, what do you want installed or not installed on your system, what graphical interface do you want to use and how do you want to configure it, which pdf viewer do you want to use, etc. Windows will never be that flexible.
Those are just a few reasons....
As for some of your reasons why Windows is better...on Gentoo Linux I can type emerge -v vlc and in a few minutes it's installed, no issues whatsoever. If I choose to I can also use root as my main login and never have any issues or warnings. It's not secure and it's not smart, but it can be done for convenience on just about any distribution. And as for installing anything good on Linux, that's not even worth arguing. There is so much great software available and on most distributions, most of the time, it's not difficult to install.
I agree that some applications just don't exist for Linux, interoperability is more difficult than it should be, and there are lots of other issues. Most distributions are still somewhat difficult to install for people used to windows. There are plenty of good games that are never ported to Linux. People still design web pages for IE only and who wants to run IE on Linux? I could go on and on, but I can't think of anything that would ever make me pay for Windows over using Linux for free.
The device driver issue is pr
The device driver issue is pretty important. Get a brand new Printer / Scanner / digital camera from the market and you will get a windows driver CD. But hardly or never a Linux driver CD. Also Linux drivers vary with kernel versions and sometimes distributions. So its difficult to write all versions of drivers.
On the other hand Linux detects and loads all necessary drivers during installation. So if your hardware is supported on Linux then no driver CD is required.
Drivers
That's the way it should be. Why should I have to search Canons website for scanner drivers? Hardware support should be part of the OS, not some add-on download. Ever install a windows system for someone and then have to go searching for network drivers without a network connection because Microsoft decided it wouldn't include them? How many basic NICs chipsets are out there?
getting linux drivers
The problem is that the NIC was invented *after* the Windows release. That happens all the time with Linux, too.
I couldn't get a 1 year old Ubuntu CD to install on the machine I built two weeks ago. I had to download a pre-release version of Dapper just to get an OS running.
With Windows, at least, you *do* get a CD, and the CD will contain drivers which will work. So your brand new disk controller or network card or USB controller or whatever will be usable even during installation.
That's impossible with Linux, as the kernel APIs and ABIs both keep changing, so there's no way to ever deliver a driver for older kernels. You need to make sure you upgrade your kernel to the latest revision, which often entails upgrading your entire OS, just to use some recent hardware.
No. Linux drivers are very ea
No. Linux drivers are very easy simple. All the drivers you need are already in the kernel. And when you upgrade the kernel, it's not true that you need to upgrade anything else. At least that's extremely seldom the case. In modern distributions at least, you usually don't have to worry about these things, since the system takes care of the difficult parts of updating.
So, with an up to date system, you will never need a driver cd, because you already have all the drivers. If there's no support for the hardware in the kernel, you choose different hardware. There's a lot to choose from, and just a few devices that don't work (Like stupid Canon printers).
The only drawback I can see, is that completely new technology sometimes takes longer to get support in Linux, but I'll rather wait a short while for the new stuff, than having to use windows.
The point is that for a major
The point is that for a majority of people on the wrong side of the migrate to linux barrier, "all the drivers you need" are not already in the kernel. And what's more they will never be. The idea that the kernel and then the distro at large for regular software should be the single source of software that you install is just wrong. It is the very opposite of freedom. Sure it's a passable solution up to a point, but only up to a point.
If you don't like it, then do
If you don't like it, then don't run linux. Nobody is forcing you to run it, and if you wish it had better support for something, implement it yourself.
What is your point?
Your comment doesn't make sense in the context of a "Windows is better than Linux", "Linux is better than Windows" discussion.
Trollbait?
The comment made some sense, though it could also be seen as trollbait; Windows doesn't support everything out-of-the box (and let's face it, the Windows install routine is hideous) and to a large extent I'm sure it's a personal experience thing, but I would rather have a nearly-working Linux install than a nearly-working Windows install to finish off (with or without drivers or internet accessibility)
Illusion ?
A "nearly-working" anything in IT is useless.
I belive the usability point here is, are you willing to compromise and able and knowledgeable enough to get arround it or not ?
For the majority of users the answer is "NO". I belive nobody is in the business of trolling about drivers. Inkernel or userspace, GUI install or CLI, simply most users just cant get arround it, after pulling a lot of hair out of their heads, and drop back to Windows where in almost of the cases, there is a more familiar solution to them or to someone close to them..
Drivers should be a "no-issue". And surely it isnt it that makes Linux of Windows better or worst. But one point is true, just "ONE" single driver missing for any of the parts, makes their OS solution unpracticable for a "MULTITUDE" of users.
It's only "conventional wisdom" that favours Windows
I think you're letting your obvious experience with Windows, and some "conventional wisdom" cloud the issue.
The issue is how easy is it to get your computer working -- i.e. the hardware you own works. There's a few sides to that issue, a mixture of how easy is it to get and install the driver, and how easy is it to fix if it doesn't work for you, on top of the general expectation that Windows is easier.
With respect to drivers: it doesn't matter if it came on a CD: if the driver's not great, or not compatible with your version of Windows: Game over, and there's plenty of awful drivers out there written by the manufacturer of the hardware. With Linux, it's only a matter of how up-to-date your Kernel is. If it is, then you can microwave the CD. If it's not got the driver, or the necessary level of maturity in that driver, then you're hitting pretty much the same brick wall as a "crap driver" above. And there's no point in saying how manufacturers respond to their customers: some do, some don't! And the manufacturer would honestly prefer you bought the next version of their cool kit, anyway! Kind-of takes away the incentive. This is the part where Linux shines: 5+ year old kit Still Works With a New Kernel (TM) -- or at least it's around 90% more likely to.
The other side to that is getting a Knowledgable Tech to install / fix it for you. If it's a crap driver, then this may be impossible. If it's a Windows guy... honestly, there's such a huge variance in skill in the Windows arena, that you're more likely to find your neighbour's kid who does computers for a living (works at a retail shop ;-) knows enough to be dangerous, so instead breaks your machine completely.
My personal experience makes me believe that because the Unix / Linux learning-curve is steeper, it tends to cut the wheat from the chaff more quickly, consequently Linux Techs are a bit harder to find, but they actually do know enough to be helpful.
And I really hate the "Windows is easier" -- only until it breaks, and even before then, I'm not very convinced.
If you really want easy: get a Mac. The big trick there is a tightly controlled hardware-platform.
I remember working way back before Windows 3.11 was common, where WordPerfect (Text-mode only, no layout or pretty fonts on the screen) was what all the secretaries used. Now, there's an unfair stigma about the level of intelligence in the usual secretary, but I prefer to think they're just more practical: just want to get the work done and go home, don't really care how.
They were thoroughly happy with having start Wordperfect by typing the command at the CLI, and with having to learn what might now be called complicated key-strokes and actual commands; wow! Many even having to learn some Batch script coding (!!) so they could just get it done and go home. If they didn't have to call a tech, that just meant it got done faster.
Anyway, my long-winded point here was that it's *all* about what you're used to. It could easily become that Linux supercedes Windows, the way Windows superceded DOS, CP/M, etc.
PS Read Freakonomics for a nice take on the value of conventional wisdom -- i.e. usually worthless.
caveats
1.) backwards compatibility doesn't mean a whole lot to people living in a world driven by bleeding edge technology.
2.) from an end user standpoint, windows drivers are actually quite good ... once they are installed, your hardware works and you don't have to touch the driver afterwards ... this is exactly how device drivers are supposed to work and the windows paradigm is a good one, though the implementation is flawed ... now, if you want to discuss the windows boot/install CD not recognizing your SATA controller, THEN you might be in a position to make a convincing argument.
3.) "windows works fine ... until it breaks" ... okay, well so does a space shuttle ... you can say this about any halfway decent piece of technology that does what it's supposed to do most of the time ... my point being that this statement proves nothing ... linux works great until you break it too ... try getting your friend's ubuntu desktop working again after he disables DBUS in a fit of drunken rage.
if linux is to continue to compete with Solaris, BSD, Windows, MacOS, etc. it will have to evolve into a much more centralized, mature, consistent, user-friendly operating system ... as of right now, it is none of those things (not that it doesn't have the market cornered in other areas - clustering, speed, FS support, versatility).
it would not surprise me at all if at some point linux forks into 2 new kernel sets in the not so distant future ... say one tailored for home users & another for servers & high-end professional applications. this might not necessarily be a bad thing ...
but i would agree that the whole windows vs. linux argument is pretty much null & void since what OS you use should depend entirely on what your personal needs as a user entail ... this is not a metaphysical issue here folks ... use what works for you. there will be pro/con trade-offs inherent in whatever OS you may choose.
umm Centralized???
Ok, someone please explain to Aonymous the whole theory behind a modular OS scheme. Seriously, the monolithic, centralized, single user design of MS Windows is the heart of the problem with the OS.
Personally I am really sick of the Windows-vs-Linux---Linux-vs-Windows. Really it's getting kind of old. this is '08 and I was listening to this back in '97. Eleven years and you people still have issues. Use the operating you want and proclaim it loud. Don't worry about the other one. They will work their problems out as soon as some hacker breaks the NSA owned security key built into every copy of windows since 95 osr2 :)
P.S. For those who didn't know, clutch your authenticity sticker close. Do some reading on NSA windows NT kernel.
Gee it must be nice to have
Gee it must be nice to have smart engineer types at the company that made the hardware do the work of writing device drivers for your operating system. That way you can just sit back on your laurels and have the total value of your operating system rise.
humph.
People pulling their hair out
I think that the word here is "familiar". As Linux is getting more mainstream, more people will be more familiar with Linux than Windows. In some (foreign) countries, if you ask people if they use Windows, their answer will be: "What is Windows?"
agreed terrible installation
agreed windows has an awful installation precedure, often i have had to reinstall and haven't been able to watch my computers every move and it has left with the name "Owner" for my username,
in linux you do all the configuration before hand, or at least in bulk so that the computer can be left to insatll and then when ready can have the usernames etc configured
Good philosophy
I really like that philosophy: don't like it, don't use it. thats what all the rest of us are doing.
First thing. The kernel of b
First thing.
The kernel of both windows and linux doesn't have every driver that may someone need, of course.
Second thing.
Hardware vendors can build drivers both for Windows and Linux. Unfortunately, today many vendors don't make drivers for Linux. However, in a closer future they'll make, because Linux is growing too fast.
Third thing.
While Windows drivers are too exacts, Linux drivers are more generic, what means that you can use or adapt them easily, what you can't do in the Windows.
Ohh, I've been lost my Apollo P-2600 CD! I'm a stupid Windows user! What I do? Ohh, I try to go to my-apollo.com!! Right? Wrong, the site is no longer maintained.
I haven't found any HP compatible driver.
What I do?
But I'm not a stupid Windows user, I'm a linux user... I go to linux-printing.org, find the PPD file from my printer, if I don't found I can adapt some other.
Token time:
Configuring at Windows: 3 weeks(searching drivers on the internet)
Configuring at Linux: 3 minutes.
There's more samples... :}
you can always go to driversg
you can always go to driversguide.com for windows....ass...
And when you get there and
And when you get there and the only available driver is for Win XP or NT? Too bad you have Vista! Yet another peripheral in the trash because of Microsoft's lack of reverse compatibility.
How would I?
How would I, when windows doesn't support my network card out of the box?
Moreover, pulling precompiled binaries from the web and installing them into your kernel is on about the same security level as putting your root passwd and ip address on your blog.
oh come on now
hmmm lucky for you you don't do the exact same thing with linux every time you update your OS ?
unless of course you've written your own kernel & userland which is perfect & free of buffer overflows & backdoors.
and lucky for me i don't have a static IP or run SSH w/ RootLogin enabled ...
when you download drivers
when you download drivers from manufactorer's site you can trust on it. The same when you download updates from repositories. Can you trust in drivers downloaded elsewhere?
In all fairness, if it takes
In all fairness, if it takes someone 3 weeks to configure hardware for a windows install, then the problem is not with the O/S.
Drivers in Linux
You can't blame linux on the driver end. That has to do with the companies of the product. Such as Nvidia and ATI. Thanks to their close source no one is able to truley put together a completely functional open source model of the drivers because it is close source and only the respective company can fix that. That goes for all the other companies out there with drives, they are worried about losing trade secrets over making drivers. If you want to get make a differnce with the drivers issue then write a letter or email your favorite manufacture and ask them to get on the ball with development of drivers for Linux, and for them to also work with open source develpement like Novell and IBM are doing. It helps out everyone.
Wow, its nice to know that
Wow, its nice to know that the only thing that linux can kick windows ass in is downloading drivers and bragging about there kernal.
I've never fully understood
I've never fully understood the whole "drivers must be open" thinking of the Linux community... to me, what matters is that the *core* of the kernel is open, so that I can extend it, modify it, and do whatever I want. And I really don't have any problems with running proprietary drivers at the same time - I'm typing this on an X server with a proprietary NVIDIA driver. Not everything needs to be open in a system, IMO.
But again, that's just my opinion. I can understand where people are coming from when they say that they want open drivers. I just think that it's OK to give people the freedom to choose proprietary drivers.
A tainted kernel is never a
A tainted kernel is never a good long term solution. All drivers should be open source so that they can be properly peer reviewed.
For a good set of 'bad' examples on windows, look at most games and many many productivity apps. You get crap like closed source CD Protections / Anti-Cheats / DRM being run in kernel mode which sacrifices system integrity at the expense of convenience.
ARRGGG
My first computer was a SOL20, then TI99/4A, C64, C128, Amiga3000, A4000, and inbetween the TI99/4A and C64 My Dad got my an IBM PC(Door Stop). I read alot of books on the basics of computers (0 and 1), I know at lest 8 programming langs. Took A few classes in High School(Back in the 80's). Point is, I feel like if you don't understand How Computers work, or willing to spend a little time on something then you don't need to (or should) have a computer! People call me all the time with the DUMBEST questions! I have ZERO patience for people that do not understand some of the basic crap like the differance between ram and a fraking Hard drive! If you like Windows Crap_P, I mean Windows XP or S.S. Vista, then please stay there! Linux is for people with brains!
ZXM
But it's nice...
But isn't it nice that the brainless masses keep buying computer hardware that does practical things for them? It drives R&D to some degree wouldn't you say?
It seems to me that lusers, as they're called, are generally focussed on the things that are useful in the context of their own lives, rather than the life of some obscure nerd. If obscure nerdmanship were a determining factor in technological progress, you wouldn't have started your illustrious career with a SOL20, no. You'd still, to this day be waiting in a cue for that precious hour or two in the middle of the night, on a PDP-10 or something similar. But then, you'd almost certainly be a tops-10 wizard or some such, so that'd be alright.
It's a drastic illustration, and sure, military and industrial demands would have at least brought computing up to a more developed stage for their own purposes.. but would you be able to use it as a private citizen? Probably not.
NO, No and uh No
The Brainless masses buying computers has very little to do with R&D of computer hardware. Take the Amiga, Very Cutting edge techo for the time, It was a MultiTasking Wonder Box for the 80's and 90's, It was not Developed for the Brainless.
To say that only Military and Industry would be using them is crazy! It was the HOME users that started the demand for better Video and Audio on computers (The Birth of the 3D animation) Amiga Video Toaster etc..etc.. These "Users" were not Brainless, they knew the basic working of the computer even though they wanted to do Animation or, Audio.
Heck even the old IBMs needed you to at less have a basic understanding of what your computer was doing! Its not that hard and takes very little time to learn! CPU, RAM, Floppy, Hard drive, Graphic Card, etc..etc..
How many people get into a car without knowing how to drive, wreck and then say, I was trying to get to the Mall I don't care how the car works. So when you save a file and then can't find it because you don't know were your D drive is too bad.
I can understand things like Viruses and AD-ware as they get by me from time to time. What I am talking about is BASIC understanding of Whatever your using Computers, Calculators, or a Power Drill.
-=( ZXoney )=-
oh please
nothing works by default in linux except hard drives, optical drives, floppy drives, and generic peripherals. everything else is windows/mac. it's an unfortunate but true fact. and linux drives are not easy. you have to have detailed knowledge of the operating system to get anything new to work. plus, all this root/sudo stuff by default is a bunch of tech geeks getting off on security. your average user doesn't want to deal with passwords all the time. also, linux isn't intuitive so many people don't want to have to become a linux hacker to make things work. windows sucks, but windows xp sp2 works and it's really easy, so it wins. it's going to be hard for linux to conquer it until it becomes equally easy.
Yes you are right, but is
Yes you are right, but is exactly this people that complain about virus, because something pops up and they just press. No wonder why Vista do the same now. And you are talking about something that you might dont know, because you dont need to have the knowledge of the Os, just put CD and install. Windows is not easy, the thing is that they put in your hands even before you can get a possibility do choose.
My last fedora is working with 198Mb of ram from 1G and Vista takes 600 Mb it own, thats what I like Linux.
About drivers, the problem is just because linux is opensource and they might no get any money from this they dont do it, but things are changing, sis and many other companies are make linux drivers. Everything on my not book works without any setup.
One-word "Ubuntu"
One-word "Ubuntu"
> I couldn't get a 1 year old
> I couldn't get a 1 year old Ubuntu CD to install on the machine I built two weeks ago. I had to download a pre-release version of Dapper just to get an OS running.
1 year-old Ubuntu? Was that Ubuntu Warty or Ubuntu Hoary? You must understand that Ubuntu is one of the newest distros around, so taking something extremely young going back an entire year to what to use a version who's very name screams "We've just started and this is what we've got so far, in case you're curious, but be warned that it probably won't work on your machine" makes me wonder if you actually put some effort into finding an operating system which wouldn't work for you.
> With Windows, at least, you *do* get a CD, and the CD will contain drivers which will work. So your brand new disk controller or network card or USB controller or whatever will be usable even during installation.
No. That's what you get with Linux or BSD, unless I've misunderstood you. With you get some basic drivers which get you to the first boot, but then you need to get separate drivers for everything. Even most of the drivers you start with need to be replaced (unless, for example, you really like 60 Hz CRTs). Neither Linux kernel nor BSD shares this problem.
> That's impossible with Linux, as the kernel APIs and ABIs both keep changing, so there's no way to ever deliver a driver for older kernels. You need to make sure you upgrade your kernel to the latest revision, which often entails upgrading your entire OS, just to use some recent hardware.
I haven't messed with the 2.6 kernel enough to know whether they change the interface between minor versions. If not, then they're on par with Windows in that regard, otherwise they really should either standardise or provide wrappers. But I don't really follow any of the arguments you are making here.
Im a Linux noob & everything
Im a Linux noob & everything works fine on my machine! I will never go back to Windows, its not a terrible OS at all, I just dont understand why people hate linux.
getting linux drivers
>With Windows, at least, you *do* get a CD, and the CD will contain >drivers which will work. So your brand new disk controller or network >card or USB controller or whatever will be usable even during >installation.
>That's impossible with Linux, as the kernel APIs and ABIs both keep >changing, so there's no way to ever deliver a driver for older >kernels. You need to make sure you upgrade your kernel to the latest >revision, which often entails upgrading your entire OS, just to use >some recent hardware.
My experience with installing Windows 2000/XP on Dell Dimension that is preloaded with windows XP would attest that driver installation with Windows can be a nightmare. All the basic drivers that would have been automatically detected and installed by Ubuntu, I have too search and download them from dell site (Oh yeah, later on I found out that the CD that Dell sent has the drivers, only that there are hundreds if not thousands of zip files with names like R12649862 which says nothing about what driver it is for and for which version of Windows. So you have to open each jar and see if it is for the device and operating system you have. And since you don't know what brand and version your device is, you got to try to install the driver and see if it works, if not try another one.) The CD is better than the site, at least you don't have to download the zip.
Getting a network card setup took me about a week testing each damned Rxxxxxxx file. I don't know why they have to call the file names like that and put all drivers together for all Windows versions is beyond me! But then, you may ask, why anyone would want to use windows? I don't know.
> So you have to open each
> So you have to open each jar and see if it is for the device and operating system you have. And since you don't know what brand and version your device is, you got to try to install the driver and see if it works, if not try another one.)
Uh, no. When Windows says "Hurray! I've found a new device!" you point it to the cd, and it scours it for the driver automagically.
With the dell driver cd's?
With the dell driver cd's? Nope. They're all self-extracting .EXE files. Good luck.
Pretty sure the dell cds
Pretty sure the dell cds have a program that helps you with that. Just autorun the cd and then it takes you to a launcher where you select the hardware you have etc. and there you go, your driver
The NIC was not invented
The NIC was not invented after windows you dolt. Ethernet was first designed for unix in the DARPA project. FFS It is amazing at how many folks are blinded and mind screwed into believing windows was the first os and "everything" was designed for it.
Both OS's have their strengths and weaknesses. But to say one is easier than another is simply put short sighted. Linux's strength is in its "usability" Windows is folks know it basically already. To say it's installs are easier, sure if you go with "default" settings but any it professional knows defaults are why we had Blaster and many other worms. Also, try to run a windows network with default settings and see how crappy it runs. With linux, sure some folks have a hard time breaking from the registry being the os to the filesystem being the OS. It is the same type of psychology as right brain left brain.
But to say either one is better than the other is silly. I installed windows on my 65 year on mother's pcp and had all the virus protection security on. She complained about it running so slow. So I installed linspire for her and let her go at it. She doesn't care for windows any more. She even asked me to install linux on her pc at work. Her it guy said go for it but he wouldn't support her. Installed open office and set up samba and she has less crashing and so on to this day. That was 1 year ago. It does everything she needs it to and she is happy.
Life is about choices, some choose to use MS Windows, some choose to use Linux. Neither are wrong or right. What it boils down to is... does it get the job done for you.
NIC before or after Windows
"The NIC was not invented after windows you dolt."
Ethernet itself was invented before Windows XP, but a particular hardware interface implementing Ethernet may have been invented afterwards. So if I want to switch from Windows to Linux, and my hardware isn't on any distro's hardware compatibility list, then what should I do?
You know what they meant
And ethernet was a result of PARC, not DARPA. If you're going to correct someone, correct them correctly.
"How many basic NICs chipsets
"How many basic NICs chipsets are out there?"
Alot; if you have ever ran menuconfig you would know.
Linux isnt perfect in hardware support (lathough it is better than *BSD), I had to wait 2 years for a typhoon driver for my old 3cr990, and alot of their current drivers arent very great, not that it is the crew at kernel.org's fault.
How many basic NICs chipsets
I will bet that Linux hardware support at this point in time is not any worse than Windows.
So far, I have not been able to use Epson Perfection 4490Photo on sane while Epson provides driver for windows. But again, I was able to connect to Canon powershot digital camera on Ubuntu without installing anything while I got to install the powershot driver for Windows.
As I posted above, I had nightmare installing basic drivers (NIC cards) for Dell Dimension on Windows XP which are automatically detected by Ubuntu.
EPSON Drivers
EPSON has released Linux printer drivers for a long time:
http://avasys.jp/hp/menu000000500/hpg000000442.htm
I don't know what level of quality they provide though...
My experience with
My experience with installing Windows 2000/XP on Dell Dimension that is preloaded with windows XP would attest that driver installation with Windows can be a nightmare. All the basic drivers that would have been automatically detected and installed by Ubuntu, I have too search and download them from dell site (Oh yeah, later on I found out that the CD that Dell sent has the drivers, only that there are hundreds if not thousands of zip files with names like R12649862 which says nothing about what driver it is for and for which version of Windows. So you have to open each jar and see if it is for the device and operating system you have. And since you don't know what brand and version your device is, you got to try to install the driver and see if it works, if not try another one.) The CD is better than the site, at least you don't have to download the zip.
Drivers
Isn't that why mac is better than windows, driver support is built into the OS. Apple know the meaning of Plug 'n Play.
MAC Vs. PC
You can not really compare any sort of support for MAC hardware to any PC hardware support. All MAC computers are created equal. They all have the same hardware. On the PC side however, hardware variations are vast. Well known PC vendors don't even keep to the hardware base from one machine to the next.
The target hardware on a MAC is a fixed point.
The target hardware on a PC is an unknown variable.
Wrong problem
The issue has to do with how drivers are recognized and attached to hardware. Windows does this by assigning a driver to a PCI identification (or USB identification) code. This means that every driver is vendor specific even if the chipset is the same.
Linux assigns a driver to a device and tries to use the identification codes for driver selection. This means that a Tulip driver will work on any Tulip NIC, but on Windows, you have to get the driver from the manufacturer even if you have another driver that really should work.
This is, IMO, a serious flaw with Windows from a usability perspective. As Linux continues to increase in popularity, it is going to make it far harder for Windows to claim a usability advantage.