Windows 8 questions about Microsoft windows

[Granny Flats]

I am curious about Microsoft Windows. So I have a few questions.

Microsoft Windows needs an antivirus program because it is in danger of getting viruses.

Microsoft Windows also needs anti malware protection, antispyware protection..

Windows needs firewalls to protect from hackers.

Windows needs registry cleaners to clean the registry which gets messed up from installing and uninstalling software.

Windows has a defragmenter for defraging the hard drive which does get pretty bad over time.

Windows also needs a good cleaning program for the hard drive.

Microsoft requires the latest computers to run their latest operating system. The old computers just wont work with the newer Microsoft operating systems. Microsoft requires to much memory and system resources.

Microsoft requires you to constantly install drivers for various hardware.

My question is,

Why would anyone use such a crappy operating system if you need all this garbage just to keep it running?

A better question, why would people pay for it?

There are way superior operating systems available for FREE that are open source.

Linux does not need anti virus software because Linux does not get viruses.
Linux does not need a registry cleaner because nothing gets written to the registry when installing software. So there is nothing to clean.
Linux does not need a defragmenter because the Linux hard drive does not become fragmented.
Linux also does not need anti malware, anti spyware or firewalls or hard drive cleaners. Linux does not get that junk into its system and the Linux system is designed so secure that a firewall is not even necessary.

In Linux you dont have to worry about drivers. You plug your hardware in and it works. That's it. Everything works. Webcams, printers, scanners everything. You never need to install drivers because everything you need is already there.

Linux is so system friendly even a 20 year old computer can be brought back to life after installing Linux.

Other than that Linux looks just about the same as Microsoft windows. Its really hard to see the difference. Except you don’t have all that other garbage installed that is needed to keep microsoft running.
Unlike Microsoft that cost hundreds of dollars, Linux is free and available all over the internet.

So my question is why are people still dumping money into an inferior operating system when Linux is much better, easier to use, more stable, more secure, and FREE? Is it because they have never tried anything else?

 

[davehc]

I know little in depth, regarding Linux Systems. I am sure someone on the forum will answer your queries, However.
Your post is, in a nutshell, an attack on Microsoft Windows in their entirety.

First off, Bearing in mind my first sentence, I have, over many years, tried various Linux systems. In the end I have been forced to dump them. This, admittedly, on the grounds of a lack of knowledge on the different methods of accomplishing simple things. One disturbing feature was, even now, the need to run command prompts for some fairly normal functions My overall assessment was, up to Mint, the last one I tried, Microsoft windows was vastly superior in all round operation.

Googling, and a little personal knowledge, tells me

1. Linux certainly can get viruses, but few virus tormenters are interested in wasting their "talents" on an open source OS. Why would there be available anti virus programs, if not? See here:

http://www.tecmint.com/linux-operating-system-is-virus-free/

One reason why Linux is a little more protected, is due to its necessity to have a root password set up, during installation. Microsoft windows, and even computers, also have this choice, but many choose to ignore it. Unfortunately, digressing a little, there are literally thousands of pirated copies of Microsoft in use. These installations, for obvious reasons, are vulnerable.
Root kit/UEFI facilities on modern computers have taken care of quite a lot of the hacking problems, be it Microsoft or Linux.

2. There are Firewalls available for linux. But the same proviso as above. No one has a serious intent to hack Linux, other than to secure your private data. Easily done without a firewall.

3. There are cleaners, with a similar function to Windows registry cleaners, Gconf cleaner is the most noted one. Whilst Linux does not have a registry, it has a load of config files attached to each installation, and obsolete material will build up in the same areas.

4. Defragging. This page might sum it up
http://www.howtogeek.com/115229/htg-explains-why-linux-doesnt-need-defragmenting/

But, there are modern alternatives. An SSD, readily available these days, and often supplied with new Computers, do not need defragging. Defrag, in the later windows installations., is a discrete background process which, under normal circumstances, the user would not notice.
I do not consider it a talking point.

5. Cleaning program? See note 3.

6. A user can elect to have drivers installed automatically, or install them manually. My own personal experience, over the past one or two years, is that those which are installed during the initial installation, are usually full functional. During my experiments into Linux, I have had endless problems with latter day computers, concerning drivers. This, again, could be due to my lack of knowledge of Linux.

7. I cannot defend the point of Windows 8, for example, requiring newer computers. It is true. But, again, how old? The oldest I have at my disposal is a 6 year old Laptop. It runs Windows 8/8.1 perfectly. (With all its drivers intact)

8. Yes, No argument. Windows costs. Sorry for a hackneyed comment but, in my case anyway, "you gets what you pay for"

P.S. Just needed to add. With these days, I do not consider the size of the installation as important. There are, in fact, smaller MS installations for the needy, but they have limited functionality.

 

[whs]

This is indeed a good question but I think the answer is relatively easy. The 2 main reasons why most users end up with Windows are;

1. 95% of all PCs on the market come with Windows preinstalled. There are very few preinstalled Linux systems on the market and those are relatively expensive. Plus they are practically all Ubuntu which may not suit everybody (I run Mint Mate).

2. If you try to find the right Linux distro for yourself, you get very confused by the sheer amount of different distros that are available. It took me 5 years to finally settle on Mint Mate after working with Fedora, Ubuntu, Zorin and a few others. The whole philosophy of Linux is to provide options even for the last person in the world. And that confuses a layman.

I have had many discussions in the Linux circles suggesting that they all get together and come up with one streamlined system. All I got was pushback. I was even banned for life from the Fedora forum because I had dared to make such a suggestion.

Here is Link Removedto discuss the matter - and that is not on a Linuc forum. But I am getting nowhere. The fanboys insist that Linux is different and should not be viewed as a general OS for the masses.

 

[patcooke]

Do I detect an element of conflict between the OP's avatar:

Link Removed

and the opening line of the post:

"I am curious about Microsoft Windows."

Debates normally have the consideration and weighing of the evidence preceding the judgment

 

[davidhk129]

Do I detect an element of conflict between the OP's avatar:

Link Removed

and the opening line of the post:

"I am curious about Microsoft Windows."

Debates normally have the consideration and weighing of the evidence preceding the judgment

Personally, there is no need to contemplate.
Terms and Rules :
excerpt...........You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this website to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, purposely inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane..........

 

[MikeHawthorne]

Hi

The reason that I like most people run Windows or an Apple operating system is that is will run all of our software and Linux won't.
I run Ubuntu some times, but all I can do is browse, do email, and type a document.

If I want to run Photoshop, InDesign, Illustrator, Premiere, my voice creation software, games etc, etc, the list goes on and on, I have to run Windows or Mac operating systems.

The fact that Windows is on over 90% of all computers is part of the problem, who's going to waste time writing a virus for Linux.

Mike

 

[Granny Flats]

Hi

The reason that I like most people run Windows or an Apple operating system is that is will run all of our software and Linux won't.
I run Ubuntu some times, but all I can do is browse, do email, and type a document.

If I want to run Photoshop, InDesign, Illustrator, Premiere, my voice creation software, games etc, etc, the list goes on and on, I have to run Windows or Mac operating systems.

The fact that Windows is on over 90% of all computers is part of the problem, who's going to waste time writing a virus for Linux.

Mike

If your experience is limited to 1 outdated version of Ubuntu when there are over 200 different distros of Linux, then I dont really consider you an informed user.

Linux has come a long ways since you installed your version.
You are right. With windows I have a choice of 384 different photo editors to choose from.
But in reality, isn’t the really good 4-5 editors that work very well with Linux enough? Exactly how many photo editors do you need?
As far as games go, Linux runs STEAM now which covers most of the gaming industry.
I also use photo editors, movie editors and recording software, games and I find that the ones Linux offer are all superior to anything that runs on windows.
However if you do find a windows program you cant live without, Linux offers an add on called WINE which is a windows emulation add on that allows you to run windows based software in Linux and it works very well.

The fact that Microsoft is installed on nearly every computer sold is why they have been in court for trying to corner the market with their crappy software more than OJ Simpson has for carving up his wife with a pocket knife.
They are only more popular thanks to the tons of money they spent to try and corner the market.
They must have paid someone a lot of money to arrange that.
That fact alone tells you what the priority of Microsoft is. Make as much money as fast as you can and as much as you can.
You can think about that next year when you spend hundreds of dollars AGAIN on their next operating system.

 

[whs]

Mike, the situation is actually not as dim as you see it.

There are wonderful applications in Linux. E.g. this screen capture I made with Recordmydesktop - and that from a Mint installation on a USB flash drive. Find me a free Windows screen recorder that makes screen captures this crisp.

For photo editing there is nothing better than GIMP. You can do any editing with it. Videos I edit with Avidemux and file conversions with Handbrake. I have made beautiful presentations with Impress and for imaging you can use Clonzilla. And the list goes on. Just have a look into the Software Manager and you will find all these goodies.

 

[whs]

However if you do find a windows program you cant live without, Linux offers an add on called WINE

With Wine I would be careful. I tried that several times but had no luck. I rather use the Linux apps.

 

[Granny Flats]

I know little in depth, regarding Linux Systems. I am sure someone on the forum will answer your queries, However.
Your post is, in a nutshell, an attack on Microsoft Windows in their entirety.

First off, Bearing in mind my first sentence, I have, over many years, tried various Linux systems. In the end I have been forced to dump them. This, admittedly, on the grounds of a lack of knowledge on the different methods of accomplishing simple things. One disturbing feature was, even now, the need to run command prompts for some fairly normal functions My overall assessment was, up to Mint, the last one I tried, Microsoft windows was vastly superior in all round operation.

Googling, and a little personal knowledge, tells me

1. Linux certainly can get viruses, but few virus tormenters are interested in wasting their "talents" on an open source OS. Why would there be available anti virus programs, if not? See here:

http://www.tecmint.com/linux-operating-system-is-virus-free/

One reason why Linux is a little more protected, is due to its necessity to have a root password set up, during installation. Microsoft windows, and even computers, also have this choice, but many choose to ignore it. Unfortunately, digressing a little, there are literally thousands of pirated copies of Microsoft in use. These installations, for obvious reasons, are vulnerable.
Root kit/UEFI facilities on modern computers have taken care of quite a lot of the hacking problems, be it Microsoft or Linux.

2. There are Firewalls available for linux. But the same proviso as above. No one has a serious intent to hack Linux, other than to secure your private data. Easily done without a firewall.

3. There are cleaners, with a similar function to Windows registry cleaners, Gconf cleaner is the most noted one. Whilst Linux does not have a registry, it has a load of config files attached to each installation, and obsolete material will build up in the same areas.

4. Defragging. This page might sum it up
http://www.howtogeek.com/115229/htg-explains-why-linux-doesnt-need-defragmenting/

But, there are modern alternatives. An SSD, readily available these days, and often supplied with new Computers, do not need defragging. Defrag, in the later windows installations., is a discrete background process which, under normal circumstances, the user would not notice.
I do not consider it a talking point.

5. Cleaning program? See note 3.

6. A user can elect to have drivers installed automatically, or install them manually. My own personal experience, over the past one or two years, is that those which are installed during the initial installation, are usually full functional. During my experiments into Linux, I have had endless problems with latter day computers, concerning drivers. This, again, could be due to my lack of knowledge of Linux.

7. I cannot defend the point of Windows 8, for example, requiring newer computers. It is true. But, again, how old? The oldest I have at my disposal is a 6 year old Laptop. It runs Windows 8/8.1 perfectly. (With all its drivers intact)

8. Yes, No argument. Windows costs. Sorry for a hackneyed comment but, in my case anyway, "you gets what you pay for"

P.S. Just needed to add. With these days, I do not consider the size of the installation as important. There are, in fact, smaller MS installations for the needy, but they have limited functionality.

Just because it cost you money does not make it good.
Would you buy a new car if the windows were broken out and it had no locks on the doors and leaking oil across the parking lot? Maybe so if it cost enough money? If it cost that much it MUST be good.

True anyone running Linux can download a virus into their system. But then it just sits there and does nothing because it does not have access to the root directory. A major flaw in the design of windows.

My last experience with microsoft windows was when I was trying to install HP printer drivers on windows 7. I worked on it for a week with nothing but frozen screens and error messages.
I became fed up, deleted microsoft from my computer. I installed Linux instead. Not knowing much about Linux I began to search for Linux printer drivers for my system. During my search a friend plugged the printer into the computer and IT STARTED WORKING. I had not even found the drivers yet. It didn't need any. Everything I needed was already there.
That's been my experience over and over again with Linux. Every time I try and do something on Linux its either really simple, or already done.
So far I have deleted Microsoft and installed Linux on 37 different computers for friends and family.

There is a BIG negative side to all of this though.
All those people feel like a dork for having paid so much for an inferior system when Linux was available to them all along for free.

 

[Granny Flats]

With Wine I would be careful. I tried that several times but had no luck. I rather use the Linux apps.

Agreed, The more you try to turn Linux into windows the more trouble you have with it.
Pretty soon you will have to start adding registry cleaners, antivirus, malware/spyware removal programs and all that other junk an inferior operating system needs to keep running.

 

[Granny Flats]

Personally, there is no need to contemplate.
Terms and Rules :
excerpt...........You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this website to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, purposely inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane..........

Dont blame me.
Your website pulled my pic and name from my facebook page when I signed up using facebook.
I have not been rude to anyone.

 

[MikeHawthorne]

I don't want to have to work my way through 200 different versions of an OS to find one that will open my software, and the version of Ubuntu I'm running is the latest version 14.04.1 LTS and it works great.

I just can't run any of my software in it.

And as good as the software available for it may be, Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign on a Mac or a PC are the industry standard and that's what everyone I work with uses and expects me to use when I send them a job.

Some games are starting to be ported to Linux but that is still rare.

It is a great operating system for some things but Windows is an OK operating system for everything.
In this case being good at a lot of things beats being great at a few things.

There's no reason that many people couldn't use Linux for their only OS, but it would never work for me or any of the people I know.
They all want to run too many different kinds of software.

And by the way, I'm even older then you are. LOL

Mike

 

[davehc]

In non-ending arguments such as this old subject, both sides tend to focus only on those points which are suitable to them. That includes myself and other contributors. For example:
"Just because it cost you money does not make it good.
Would you buy a new car if the windows were broken out and it had no locks on the doors and leaking oil across the parking lot? Maybe so if it cost enough money? If it cost that much it MUST be good."

As I thought I had made clear in my post, I am of the opinion that I am perfectly happy with Windows. Its functionality suits me and, after many years of use of the various releases., it does not give me any problems. I have not found, to use your anecdote, any broken windows or leaking oil, etc. Should that have happened, then, as I would have done with a purchase of a "lemon" car, I would have got it fixed. fwiw. There are some quite expensive programs, other than Microsoft Windows, which I would not touch with a large pole, because of the many reported problems with such.
It is as easy to penetrate the root directory on a linux system, as it is in Windows.
Your HP printer problem, was, surely, the fault of HP, not of Microsoft. Microsoft only offer, as default, the latest drivers given to them by the manufacturers. They do not write their own for third party products. To digress, this was the principal reason for the failure of Vista. It was innovative, and the bodies who wrote drivers had not woken up to the fact that they could not rely so much on backward compatibility for their products. Not in the essence of this discussion, but HP was the first name that sprang to mind with my comment regarding expensive but poor products. If Linux can survive on Generic drivers for the OS, then I say with sincerity, more strength to them and their users.
A brief comment on your other post. Linux being so superior, why, indeed, are their so many posts, as mentioned here, on various ways to make it look and run like Windows. (Cost again, perhaps?)
By the way, not to be confused by Virus and hacking. Virus problems are, today, becoming rather insignificant. Mostly picked up by the use of pirated software. Two biggest problems we face today are redirection to other sites where advertising material is available of cots are incurred. The other, /hacking) , is more dangerous and by that I mean the actual intrusion on a computer, with the intention of collecting data. This is common to Linux and Windows.
I cannot comment on your remark regarding facebook. One of the Admins will have to answer that.

At the risk of "chickening out" , I am now through with this thread. I have totally exhausted my pov. Maybe stubborn, but still convinced.

 

[patcooke]

Whilst being an enthusiastic supporter of healthy constructive debate I just don't understand why people such as the OP even join a Windows forum, let alone squander their time contributing to one (albeit in a totally negative fashion). My purpose here is to offer support and assistance to Windows users and I have no inclination to engage in interminable non-productive debates on issues which have already been well and truly thrashed over the years by their fellow trolls. While the depths plumbed by their negative attitudes remain completely and inversely proportionate to the breadth of their understanding and intellect they will never be satisfied by any reasoned argument and the best response is a NULL response which I commend to all members as the one which will surely see them off to seek to feed their sad appetites for conflict elsewhere.

 

[davehc]

No bans, even if it was a thought.. That would only aggravate and boost the OP's assertion. I know another thread can easily be opened, but this is one of those arguments that could go into multiple pages, and maybe a closure is in order?
Woops! Sorry. I said I was out of this thread!

P.S. Perhaps the OP could rant better, and get more support, in the Linux section. There is already a very old thread there with almost the same content.

 

[whs]

I am (mostly) all Windows myself but I like the discussions with the Linux fanboys. I do a lot of Linux work myself and really enjoy that. So I am no novice in the matter.

This thread got off on the wrong foot because it was in large part inflammatory. Nevertheless we seem to get some useful arguments and facts out of it. I would let it go.

 

[patcooke]

More than happy to just "let it go", and as a supporter of free speech would not consider otherwise. I simply observed that I was not inclined to squander any time and effort in responding to judgements based on very slanted and limited perceptions and suggested others may consider responding in the same vein.

 

[whs]

I was not inclined to squander any time and effort in responding to judgements based on very slanted and limited perceptions

That is understandable - but sometimes you have to get them down from the tree. In this case it may be possible, but maybe I am wrong.

 

[strollin]

I find it's best not to feed trolls.