Totally agree with original author. That's the reason why OpenSolaris may eclipse Linux over time. Take a look at what Nexenta guys doing! Its pretty much Linux but with all standard interfaces at core.

Don't know about you, but when I want to install for example Acrobat Reader, I type "emerge acroread". In Widows (which I no longer have) I have to search the adobe site, click at infinite buttons, etc. Well, situation is far worse for dollarware. I have to find cracks, serials, etc etc. In Linux is just "emerge whatever-you-need".

When I have to compile a program, it's just "gcc name.c". In windows I have to push infinite buttons, start project, define thousands of parameters, waiting for minutes, and so on. I used to use MinGW, but it doesn't support some (actually MANY) GCC's features.

BTW, when I get to Widows, I really feel weired. I continuously searching where the console is. When I run cmd.exe, ohmygawd, it's SO LAME! It's like bad-ol'DOS.

I think that Widows is all student, programmer, network administrator, database administrator, web designer, moderate or advanced user UNfriendly. Even for my parents who don't know how to click I installed linux so I can solve their problems via SSH. On the contrary, Widows is better for the naive user that HAS to maintain the system himself. And who doesn't bother searching for warez.

Windows is for people that usually don't know what they are doing on a computer, or for people that do not care how they do it. This however doesn't mean Windows is better, it means it is easier to administer for people without computer knowledge. Microsoft made so many duplicating standards to undermine the existing ones. Standards are meant to help compatability and interoperability. If you think Windows is compatible in any way with any other operating system please go ahead and support it.
(1)There is only one distribution of Windows from one vendor and all the COTS software is compatible with it, jee I wonder why ?!?
(2)Right, that's why I don't use M$ Windows, I want users to be asked for their password before they install/remove stuff from my PCs. I'm sorry but I can't seem to find any other reason why a user might want to use the root desktop.
(3)I usually know exactly what I install on my computer and know how to do it, so I don't have to install/remove stuff all the time.
(4)Thanks, so we all agree that Linux is better. The better is something the more knowledge it requires.

I have always wondered about the unique quality of linux and how smooth it runs. I am not an expert in Linux but know my war around. I am installing Suse now on my laptop... Totally removing XP..
One cons on Linux has always been, installing of programs that comes on CD which are for Windows and Mac. Such as to be able to run and equipment certain drivers and the software has to be installed. Sometimes that is a problem with Linux.
At the same time, there is a program called Wine.. That does the job as far as making it compatible.
Linux Rocks....
-James

I don't have to reboot my machine every time I install software!

(1) Installing programs is easy with windows because there is a standard.
ok, admit it there is not such things as "standards" for linux (as some of us mentioned, distro-specific) and windows (even M$ starts modding its own installer for validation) [I don't know enough for a Mac to have opinions at this point]
but then at least Mac/Windows are trying to make the stuff easy for mostly everyone (and in the cases those screwed up, yes, they are way harder to troubleshoot, but most of the users will either call (and talk until they see results) if they have it legit, or shut up about it if they don't) for linux you have to make it easier yourself, which given normal individuals who has a life elsewhere (it is not meant in a bad way, like those who are interested in computers have a life around computers) a very steep learning curve. Speaking of which, for some reasons it is somewhwat difficult in windows to *completely* remove packages using their installers

(3) Installing anything good in Linux requires an entire weekend ending up in learning how to reinvent the wheel.
it took me an afternoon to resolve the problems happened when I attempted to update my KDE on my newly installed fedora core 6 (maybe I was missing something I ended removing the existing KDE and reinstalling it after another fresh install of fedora). Seriously you should back up your stuff more often so more options (like reinstalling the whole thing) are available to you (when your skills are more limited you may as well need more options). But then again, people who have minimal interest in computers in general is not going to try to care what a dependency problem should be and what should be done about it.

(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.
At least I didn't. I come across this post when I was deciding whether I should install the nVidia proprietary drivers. God forbid I didn't even read the help/man pages when I am trying to solve the problem I had with KDE above (I just use a more idiotic method from experience with troubleshooting windows)

And then there are people who say Mac are easier to use and more secure. Perhaps I haven't done it myself, has anyone find local stores which sell enough Mac parts to build one themselves (speaking of which, maybe several local stores so you can compare quotes)?
that's probably why artists choose Mac: flexibility in hardware is not important (get a new one when they need a better Mac, most of them get money to burn); just get a box that works right out of the box, with minimal learning curve and maximum stability so they can devote more time on their passions

then there is the drivers issue: grab someone on the street who primarily use windows and see if they actually like to find some other remote exploit bugs on the video card drivers (like the one from nvidia on linux) for windows as a hobby (if they do I assure you they are either one of those geeks applying for a job in nVidia/M$ or looking for stage time in conferences)

But then I wonder why would nvidia release open-source nForce driver and not vid card driver, even their nForce chipsets are a better product relative to their vid cards (I don't think other companies made stuff that comes close to what they did with nForce so far (perhaps intel has something good that I never used), but nVidia has tight competition with ATI on video cards)

Why is it that this debate over which operating system is the best has to even take place? If people want to use Linux or Windows its up to them, but we don't need all this ridiculous arguing. Both have their resspective problems, disadvantages and advantages. Why can't we just get over it?

Windows: A 64-bit service pack to a 32-bit extension and GUI shell to a 16-bit patch to an 8-bit operating system originally coded for a 4-bit microprocessor and sold by a 2-bit company that can't stand 1 bit of competition

I appreciate you wrote this in 2005 and it's now 2006, but if I develop an app for Win95 (at a low level) it WON'T run on WinNT. If I write something for Win2000 and run it on WinXP I'd better hope that the VC runtimes are the same. What you say applies to BOTH! At least with Linux I can download the source and build it on my particular config.
Microsoft have yet to properly sort out the DLL hell and until they do that, stop insisting on the registry, stop binding the desktop into the explorer process, stop making servers GUI based, start making secure software and stop being so arrogant with their pricing policy I as someone who writes software for both will ALWAYS favour Linux. It's stable, does what I tell it and is just plain BETTER.
I did a big data conversion job a while ago and was forced to use MS Windows servers. I used about 8 of them. I also used one Linux box. I found myself having to reboot all MS servers. The linux one stayed up (and that was running an MS VM!!)
The whole architecture of MS Windows in my opinion is simply geared towards the home user (even with 'New Technology'), it's not fit for large 24/7 server tasks - even hotmail uses Linux!
So :

1 is wrong.
2 is for security, that's why windows is so insecure.
3 is just not true - sudo apt-get install xyz???
4 If you need to do this then go and do something else with your time....

linux does suck i grew up with mac in school not windows in fact most grew up with mac then learned windows quiclkly. linux doesnt know what a driver is and if it does you cant even update them to use the extra features with your device.
hence most game are for windows
ill gladly pay to get something to work.

Software:
There is a lot to be respected about Windows. One is the ease with which things can be installed. However, where everything in Windows is easy to start up, it is a nightmare over time.
With Linux it is a nightmare to get it up and running. But once you do, you can be fairly assured that unless *you* do something to it, it will just run. [I have only used SuSE and Gentoo, fired Red Hat for being too much of a pain in the ass.]
And I think that it is a lot easier to sum up the time wasted and frusteration in the beginning than it is intermitantly during the computers operation. Or the insane amount of time wasted waiting for all that f**king scanning on your windows machine.
On the other hand, try getting say ClamAV for Exchange or Asterisk for Windows, isn't going to happen. Seems the best way to filter email for Exchange is to run the mail through a Linux server 1st. So as soon as you get out of the desktop arena, software is lacking for Windows.

Drivers:
As far as drivers and Linux goes, if you research your product *before* you buy it, you'll be fine. Yeah, most poeple seem to like to impulse buy, and yeah, ads encourage that, but it doesn't mean you should do it.
Not to metion, with projects like foomatic, you can get the drivers for 100s of printers in one swoop. So I would actually say that Linux has superior drivers in many respects.
If you are struggling with drivers in Linux, it is more than likely that you a)failed to research your product prior to buying it or b)aren't using the right resources to get drivers.
As for all of those people who say: "I should have to research what I am going to buy." You should, unless you like taking the word of people who are trying to part you with your money. But the merits of thinking before you act are a totally different subject.

say what you like about linux and windows, linux is better if you're willing to accept less from your computer, and are willing to accept that the vast majority of users in the world, have looked at linux, and decided to stay with windows.

Linux lost its chance for greatness, during the time when windows was broke, win95,98,ME, and when you were still pulling UNIX users away from their user base.

but now windows has fixed all the problems the Linux community continue to claim plagues windows OS's. we'll they dont, i would still be happily using WindowsME, if it was not for their poor memory manager in that version.

XP fixed that, its super stable, (NEVER crashes), has all the applications i need, or are easily available, (NOT available on Linux),
AND NEVER WILL BE, !! thats the Critical thing, IF i want to do my work, and make a living. There will never be linux equivalents for these packages, and i dont care at all. Linux has a HUGE way to go before its anything like commercial quality. i dont expect it will ever get there, there is no reason for it too.

The Linux community does NOT want linux to be too popular, or to get out of their control, they dont want it easy to use, or maintain.

they want to give us free (and crap) software, and charge for support.

and Personally i dont like the risk and trouble i would have to go through to use an operating system, that is basically a reverse engineer of someone elses efforts.
(by elitists, for elitists).

AND NOW THE BAD GNUS-
"There seems to be no doubt that the grotesqueness of the appearance of the GNU is a provision of nature to protect the animal.
When frightened or disturbed, these remarkable antelopes go through a series of strange evolutions and extraordinary postures, in order to enhance the oddity and hideousness of their apearance, and to frighten away intruders."
(Scientific American Feb 1904)

Lick a lollipop, my boy. If u dont hav kindly ask Microsoft!

I'm sorry but I completely disagree with your point of view. Here's why:

(1) - have you ever tried "apt-get install"??? Or some other software updating application? It's very easy and you get vlc or whatever programs you'd like installed very quickly. It doesn't compare to installing something in Windows... and by the way, at least in linux you don't need to be doing a hundred reboots when installing updates or new software. Can you give me a good reason why windows needs all that reboots? It's stupid and counter-productive.
(2) - It's a security policy. If you don't have access to installing something that's because you _shouldn't_ do it. Unless you know what you're doing and have the priviledges to do so. On the contrary, in your dearly Windows, anyone can install any kind of software, including spyware, virus, and other stupid software that forces you to have a bunch of anti-virus, firewalls and all that crap... what's the point in that?
(3) - you don't need to reinvent the wheel. I don't know what were you trying to do but there's a lot of information available online so you don't need to do anything you're _not_ supposed to do and that can guide you quickly to obtain your goals.
(4) - You do need to learn the basics but quite honestly there are desktop environments so simple to use and can do everything you want, like KDE... why not trying it as a starting point? And when you feel you know how to use linux move over to more advanced and interesting subjects. Is it all that hard?

As a final note, linux doesn't force you to think and to interact with your computer in a somewhat blocking manner like windows, e.g. you don't have to do your programming or your work the way windows want you to do it. It's a very limitative OS since you don't have the freedom to explore, program or just have fun with software that works very well because you need to _buy_ it! And even then you don't have the source code to learn how a program was implement and to have a chance to improve it. And how about having to pay for all those software licenses? It's crap and you can get the same or better not paying and with a huge supporting community worldwide when you have doubts or questions. What more can you ask?

Cheers, from a very happy debian/ubuntu user

Because Windows is designed to used by morons, maintained by morons, and to be obsure enough so that only the inside few Microsoft elite understand how it really works.

I would rather be using an operating system like this than a completely open one like GNU/Linux any day.

Windows flames
Here is why Linux is better than Windows. (1) Installing programs is easy with [Gentoo] Linux [and others] because there is a standard. Try installing [insert crappy third party Windows program here] and you'll see what I mean. (2) Anytime you try to install or change something on your own computer either (a) Windows lets you do it when you aren't even Administrator and it screws something up, or (b) Windows won't let you do it for no apparent reason and there's NOTHING you can do about it! (3) Installing anything big in Windows requires an entire weekend ending up in learning how to get all the magic versions of and licenses for everything. (4) To truly use any Windows install (and keep it working, constantly guarding against spyware, viruses, exploits, root-kits, and what have you) your(sic) going to have to either take classes in how Windows works (heaven forfend!) or spend time reading a lot of books and forums.
My fleeting hopes for Windows have turned to hate.
Not T Bone

Mr T Bone,
I am glad to note that you are happy with windows and therefore you deserve windows. It was probably written for people like you. For the rest of us, thank Linus (and friends) there is Linux, so that we do not have to be tortured by windows.

Okay, serious post here. The reasons why I think Windows are better than Linux on the desktop.
* Universal GUI. This might sound pathetic, but every application in Windows has a look and feel that easy to pick up. Linux doesn't have this.
* Decent user interface. Gnome is shit in too many ways. KDE is passable while still crossing Fisher-Price with programming geek in a way that just makes it look freaky. Windows is good. Mac OS X is great. Come back to me when someone has tackled half the usability issues in either of the Linux "desktop environments".
* General ease-of-use without needing the command line. Sure, if you're good with Linux, you can do anything you can with Windows - but I bet you have to use some command-line commands to do it. Everything is point and click in Windows. It'd be nice to have a choice though, but having point-and-click access to most things on a system is essential - another thing where Mac OS X shines.
* Ease of application install. Yes, you could argue that apt-get and compiling from source is good, but then I'd call you an idiot. Asking people to go to the command line is missing the point. Application installers and uninstallers are, quite simply, a /good thing/. Download and go - what RPM was /supposed/ to do, but thanks to the million and one distros it became an even more retarded mess (and I hear RPM is a retarded mess anyway). I don't like package repositories - I like going to a site, reading about something, clicking download and running it. It makes perfect sense. Going to a site, reading about something, loading a fucking package manager, searching for it, hope it's been packaged, oh please fuck off. It's horrible and people are too shortsighted to understand it.
* Every Linux "killer app" has been ported, not every Windows "killer app". There is no advantage to running Linux application-wise, yet every advantage to running Windows application-wise. With WINE getting increasingly good, this is becoming less of an issue by the day, but some clever sod should do what Lindows aimed to do and run Windows application out of the box with no playing/installing of WINE. Having Adobe Photoshop (GIMP is /still/ shit), Microsoft Word (yes, it's shit. Yes, it's the standard), Nero and dozens of other applications are a good thing.
* Many Linux apps are shite. Many Windows apps are better, and there's more choice. Key examples are publishing and vector graphics software.
* Games support. See above, should become less of an issue as time goes on. Yeah, TransGaming Ceda-whatsit does some of it, but if you're gonna be buying it, you might as well use Windows for just over twice and price and be done with it and any compatibility issues. Don't claim to me that a Doom3 port means Linux has games, it doesn't.
* Driver support and device compatibility. This one is a no-brainer. I wanted to install Linux on my laptop. I looked at the instructions and decided I had better things to do with my time, like... well, anything. And this was /Ubuntu/, supposed the easiest. The fact there aren't open source drivers for Nvidia cards is a joke. You buy something, it runs on Windows. No ifs, no buts.
* Linux isn't an operating system, it's a kernel. There's not one universal thing that Linux is. KDE and GNOME are still "Linux". Bash and csh are both Linux. One Linux system can be completely different to another, yet a Windows system is always a Windows system.
* Linux has too much choice by default, there are very few standard applications. In Windows, if you want a text editor, Word is pretty much the standard. In Linux, you have Abiword, OpenOffice.org, TeX and whatever K-thing all competing. Confusing for the new user. Give a barebones interface, and let the market decide what people wanna install and use. I know this is often cited as an advantage for Linux, but it really isn't. I mean, Linux is confusing because there IS too much choice. Again, KDE or GNOME. Windows comes with Notepad, Linux has Emacs, Kate, Nedit and god-knows how many others. I know it's odd to criticise too much choice, but imagine a new user trying to find something to use.
* Linux and its applications has too many options. One of it's greatest strengths and weaknesses. Ability to customise = good. Having to wade through great big fuck off conf files and menus to get one option = bad. FireFox gets this right - major options in simple menus, geekery in about:config. Very few times do you need to play with altering random text files (although sometimes it has to be done).
* Confusing directory layout, remnants from 70s Unix and POSIX compliance. I like drives, I like a non-fixed directory structure. It makes sense that I can dump files anywhere in my head. As such, anything POSIX-like fucks with my head. And that's not even touching the frankly horrible external drive support, meaning things have to be mounted, although I'm not sure if this is still an issue.
* Windows has the advantage in that it's installed on most of the PCs worldwide.
* Open source development is often a black hole of retardation where things get avoided and aren't developed because they aren't fun, which is a major problem with open source development. Sure, you get kernel virtualisation, but you won't get someone fixing the fucking Mozilla bug tooltip bug which has been there for half a decade. Usability /should be king/.
* "root" and users in Linux et al. Avoid getting the user involved in accounts. It's confusing for most people. Yes, security is an issue. But usability /should be king/.

Of course, these don't apply to the server. And that's where Linux excels. Yeah, some of these really overlap (USA-FUCKING-BILITY), but that's because they are the most important things. You shouldn't need a book to learn how to do something, which Linux still needs.

I like Linux, I really do, I like what they're trying to do, but in the end it's impossible to avoid the fact that it's development structure really isn't cut out for the desktop and few people out there care enough, or even notice it, to do anything about it. A major barrier is Linux people admitting there is a problem, but most seem to ignore it and dismiss it as "STUPID WINDOWS PEOPLE" which is more than a little disheartening.

I has a chance to correspond with the lead on the OpenOffice project over the Christmas holidays to express my concern that average user uptake of OpenOffice may be impaired by the fact that users are required to download the ENTIRE program (93+ MB) every time there is a patch (like the WMF patch).

His response. If you want that feature then go pay for Star Office. WTF!

I tried repeatedly to explain my position with no luck. Sigh!

Pretty much explains why Linux/Open Source projects remain out of the mainstream.

1. Rather than spend my time (and money) reading books so I can get the tools that I want to run, I can just go out there and pay for most of these tools.

2. The paid-for tools install easily (only requiring a reboot for each install - sometimes multiple reboots if other third party software is in there)

3. The configuration information is all stuffed into a number of enormous files which are regularly corrupted (the Registry) - this is so much better than having those awful human-readable files in /etc

4. Computers get boring without malware - aren't there any more Linux distros left that leave you as root user and with a blank password?

5. With Windows, everything really can be fixed with a reboot! For example, I bought NWN2 - excellent beta software for only $80 - and every now and then it will lock up. All I have to do is reboot, and it's working again! My experiences with NWN2 lead me to my second-to-last point (actually I can write volumes, but unless it's going to be a bestseller, I'm not wasting my time):

6. FREEDOM STINKS! Yes, Microsoft is right - freedom is bad for you. I installed NWN2 and the updater program runs and updates itself. Fantastic - now to update the software itself. After 1h to download 115MiB and about 70% of the patching done I get an error "could not open new file - probably not enough space on your HD". Yes I do have space - 4.5GiB. How large is the file to be replaced? 270KiB. OK, let's try that again - oh look, isn't that neat - it's downloading that 115MiB again. Oh look - an option to "save downloaded patches" - OK - activate that. Patch fails at same point. No problem, I saved the file this time. Oh look - it's downloading that 115MiB file yet again. Hmm... no option to use the already downloaded file. That's OK - it's a zip file - I'll open it with 7-zip (yes, my Windows is tainted with 'free software'). Oh look - that zip file contains one giant PROPRIETARY data file. I cannot apply a patch manually. OK, now I write to Obsidian/Atari and whoever else might be involved. No response - why should they care, I only paid $80 for what I thought was release software.

7. What I love best of all though is when Windows cocks up it does a damn good job of it - Linux is always easy to fix up, which is bad for people who make their money off service calls. On Windows I've got to reinstall the operating system then all of my software, most of which requires me to type in a 40-character "CD Key". It's great because it makes me look like I actually have something useful to do. Fortunately I had used the registry editor to hive off the configuration info for all that software, so reconfiguring should be as easy as importing hives. Well... after trying that I wish I'd had the hives - it would have been much more pleasant.

So there you have it - systems based on Linux are obviously inferior.

There is no one who has said that Linux is easier than Windows, but in some cases its more effectiv and more safe than windows!

In some cases Windows is the best, and in some cases Linux is the best. Still i prefer Linux for servers, and windows for homeusers (pc-games, writing documents, see movies, listen to music).

Im having a threesome with windows and linux.. I love them both.

what a bunch of artards. just pick an OS and shut up about the other.

(from same person who wrote the previous comment...)
...or run both systems. in any case decide what YOU like and shut up about the rest.

Linux by far is better then windows. IN my opion is more stable, and unlike in windows blue screen of death, there is no such thing in Linux. If somthing happens in linux, Memory page faults, erros, CPU, SWAP running out etc. There is always away to get into it and solve the problems. Though linux my not be as user friendly as Windows, they have made huge improvments. You have office which is free, you an operating system which is free and you have user friendly icons that allow a user to navigate quiet easily. Installing programs, just like in windows requires administrator (Root) Privilages. The thing I like about Lnux is it allows you to enter the password, no need to do right lcik run as, administrator then password. Thats a lot of steps. Once you do the install as root in Linux, I have never run into any issues with it asking questions or it erroring out. Linux is also more stable and unlike IE I have never faced a problem with it freezing or crashing for an uknown reason. Also, if you are the advanced user you can modify your Kernal to custimize your envrionment to your liking, somthing that is harder to do in Windows, I heard it can be done, but being that Windows is so unstable I would not take a chance. The thing I like about SUSE the most is you have a group of people like you and me with different skill sets constently building and modfing items with in SuSE (Linux) For example. and not abounch of high paid people that have one specfic job to , and that is to make people by MS products the rest of there life, becuase evntually WINDOS MS becomes so unstable or so crappy that you are forced to upgrade or buy more MS pproducts. LInux no need to buy. Oh and linux is making a huge comeback, I guess that explains why Microsft is scared and developed Vista which by the way they are making compatable with Linux,, Why would they do that, oh and vista has alot of cool features that Linux has had for quiet some time, maybe finally some one is getting the Picture here. :)

Peace

I read a comment on first page and i was disgusted. DO NOT USE WINDOZE!!!!!! They say you can trust microsoft? bullhshit! Ilegally hacked Windows Media Player 10 and found some code that sends a log of all the things you play and watch to MS. Personally i don't want people to see what i watch on my computer, and a lot others probably don't either. So screw doze and use Linux, BSD, or some weird UNIX.

Doze Hater

P.S. Mac sucks aswell

Windows is better. It has no security problems. There are no crashes. You can't see the code, so you can stay ignorant. Mr Ballmer has your welfare as its prime objective. He even makes a nice monkey dance for your amusement. Nothing is forced on you and you are free to do whatever you want with your Computer.
Its also the fastes OS, because thats what Microsoft says. It's always installed on any PC you buy, that makes it easy and you don't have to think. No classes are needed. You just need to click OK, Yes and Next al the time. When everything stops working you just power down and start up again. This is also good for your hardware, just like stopping oil from running in the engine of your car.
You happily pay an increasing amount of money on soft- and hardware, because you need the new stuff that the computer does. Like uh.......uh.......more confusing graphics and things bouncing on your desktop.
The dependence on the software is also great. Hee it works for crack and those junkies look happy.
I can go on, but you're the choire so why preach. Let us do the monkey dance yippie

here, read how great Fista is: A cost analysis of Vista content protection

It is not the question whether Windows is a better operating system

The question is who is evil?
Answer: Microsoft is evil.

(1) Installing programs is easy with windows because there is a standard.

I don't call every program shipping its own installer a standard. MSI (akin to RPM) was a good step by MS to fight this setup.exe wildness.

(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.

True. It was designed that way. Like it or lump it. Perhaps read LNW (link) first, because (4) is not an argument at all.

You are just comparing finger with penis :)
Sure you can't scratch your nose with your dick :) It's made for another purpose.

Ok, look guys. Linux sucks. Plain and simple. Windows is much better than linux in almost every way Have you ever tried 3d modeling on linux? its nearly impossible. on windows its easy and fast. Gamimg, dont even get me started. my linux comp cant even play sim city when my windows can play half life 2, battlefield 2, and FEAR all at the same time with next gen grafix without any lag online. Firewall-well linux does have a nice firewall, but if you have comcast high speed with the windows fire wall and a seperate anti-viurs+ firewall like Mcfee, which is free with comcast, then nothing can get through accept viruses on limewire...unless your retarded. Im sick of people telling me that linux has breakthroughs and technology better than windows. first of all, windows is the only OS that can make next gen games and software. second of all, windows and apple have thousands of programs for doing work like presentations, modeling, and word documents while linux has 1 presentation program, unless you use wine with Microsoft Office, doesnt have a modeling program of its own, and the same thing for presentations is for word documents. I am writing this whole thing because im fed up with my linux computer. I have mastered wine, but its given me so many problems. I was trying to put the sims deluxe edition for windows on it and when it got to 95% done, and i had to put the second cd in, it didnt recognize the second cd. I had my neighbor look at it whos been working with linux at work and home basically since it came out, and he said its faulty programing. The only reason i have linux is because i bought a laptop on ebay without an os and my neighbor put it on it for free. Trust me, there is a large crowd of people that hate linux, yes, some of them are noobs at linux and dont know what their doing, but I dont think that it shouldnt be so damn hard for someone to get their computer working the way they want it to. Lastly, blame canada.