General discussion

Locked

Why do IT people really bash Windows?

I wrote about this in another thread in response to a comparison of windows question.

Anyway, it's a hot topic in my opinion so let me recap. Comment away. :)

Why does everyone "bash" Windows? I could sit here and bash linux, windows, mac os and anything else, but that is just pointless and pedantic.

The point is every operating system has it uses. You just need to choose what best suits your needs.

Anyone who claims to hate Microsoft Windows, Linux, Mac OS or any other operating system is not a true techie or network guru. You don't ever bash the OS, in fact if the OS crashes then it's your fault not the OS; Why didn't you make sure that it was using the right drivers, or the hardware is compatible or blah this and blah that, and so the list goes. Any OS crashes for a reason, not because it just feels like it. Compatability is there for a very good reason, why support something that is old when you need to keep moving forwards. Example, all leaded petrol car owners here in Australia can no longer purchase leaded petrol, they are forced now to use unleaded and an additive. Why? Because those cars are so old and they are few and far between now because unleaded cars are cheap enough to buy second hand as your first car. Get my point there?

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

719 total posts (Page 1 of 72)   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

by The Admiral In reply to Why do IT people really b ...

I think the reason that so many techies bash Microsoft products in general because of so many of the ways that they can be hacked into.

I mean, sure there are the same vulnerabilities in other operating systems, but I have only seen the one where the description added to a GIF becomes a PC's weakest link. Obsurd if you think about how silly that vulnerability is.

I think people were hit with so many patches that they told Microsoft to can it, and when they slowed down, they complainted even more. So it is all about perception.

Collapse -

Then there are those that are only happy complaining

by Ole88 In reply to

We have all had these users! Those users that will always find something to complain about. You stated "I think people were hit with so many patches that they told Microsoft to can it, and when they slowed down, they complainted even more."

When you think about it, there are users who will find something to complain about when their machine is running at peak performance levels. For some of them, it probably boils down to the fact that Bill Gates dropped out and became a millionaire and they are just jealous.

I see windows as a good general use platform, but when it comes to photo editing, MAC tends to be the better (and chosen) platform. All I have to say to the complainers is, if you don't like what you have - get something different. If you don't like that, you can still find typewriters for sale out there.

Collapse -

software vendors to blame

by kyuso In reply to Then there are those that ...

The problem is, there is no OS that fits everyone's simple needs, and those OS which CAN be made to fit the simple needs don't, so people complain.

For example, Windows OS had a tendency to be less than well designed and not conforming to standards. They crashed because the OS design allowed sloppy drivers or applications to bring down the whole OS or not interoperate. It is not the user's fault that they had to wait and patch the bugs and update the drivers (what if the updated drivers were not ready yet for a few months, which usually happens?)
The GUI was not well-conceived to be consistent and natural, needing repeated changes in the interface.

Linux has a one of the stablest design for an OS (as with any unix variants). Almost no application or driver can bring down the OS, the OS is very scalable (embedded to supercomputing), and the security can't be matched. The problem? Not much in the commercial game or education area running natively.

MacOS has all the desktop goodies that Windows lack (naturally consistent and cohesive GUI, etc.), and also includes all the goodies of unix. The problem? More expensive, can't run many commercial games that run in Windows.

In the end, each OS has a potential to be up to par to the simple needs of stability and usability of an automobile, but is not there yet.

How often does a brand new car need parts replacement as soon as you get one? When was the last time installing a new oil filter broke a car? Can you find any usual parts like windshield wipers that exist for only certain brands of cars (a vendor usually carries wipers for all contemporary brands of cars)?
How often do interface to cars change between models drastically that you need to re-learn how to drive?

All the OS will be up to par if:

They can run all the popular software, does not need manual software driver update just to make it function okay, and is well designed based on a consistent and secure fundamental structure that doesn't change often.

In the end, I want a Linux-like stability and security and scalability, with MacOS-like consistent GUI, and with Windows-like availability of applications, especially in the areas of games, education, and references.

I use Linux because it's stable and robust and has all the tools I need for work. I have Windows for kids' games and education. I have a Mac for my wife because my wife can't stand Windows or Linux way.

But we sometimes dual-boot or use one other's computer precisely because none of the OS has everything: My kids use the internet, email, word processing, and multimedia from Linux for security and ease, and we all use Windows to play Red Alert 2 Yuri's Revenge (don't exist in Linux or Mac, and it's such a cheap way of doing family entertainment because it costs about $50 nowadays to buy 4 user license for multiplayer!)

It's the fault of software (including OS and application) manufacturers. Application vendors should port their software to all popular OS, and OS vendors should make their OS more secure and stable and better conforming to standards so that application and driver writers don't write sloppy codes.

I'd rather see in the future at least three major OS (Linux, MacOS, Windows) competing at the same level, just like in the car industry, and parts (application/driver/hardware) vendors provide for all brands, but with enough differentiation that different people choose different OS or model.

I guess in the much further future, OS may become public utility, just like water, electricity, or highway.

Collapse -

Not quite right dude

by tselca In reply to software vendors to blame

Linux and every OS has so many holes it lloks like swiss cheese. Linux robust and great security it is obvious you do not work in the security field. secondly there is no one version of linux that runs everything without updating this kernel version or another. You got to be kidding me to say that unix or mac is better then this or that. They all have flaws becuase humans write the code for all of them.

Collapse -

Lot of talk but no substance

by waterbj In reply to Not quite right dude

I think the subject is very interesting and I've heard a few well thought out conversations elsewhere. However, I've seen only opinion without any material backup in this blog. I particularly irked at the user who bashed LINUX as a securty swiss cheese. As an IT project manager I have seen lot's of conjecture and requirements from 'security experts' without material information. Their concerns may be quite true but are poorly communicated. Therefore, I was not supprised yet further frustrated to see yet another 'security expert' raise the red flag without backing it up. These people have to be very careful to support there concerns with material information that can be weighed with risk and ROI. Otherwise, you have the old type IT person who speeks in tongue and is closed mouth about the knowledege but quick to raise a red flag. It really gives professional IT/business people a poor basis for business investment.

Collapse -

Substance? You gotta be joking

by humbletech99 In reply to Lot of talk but no substa ...

Have you ever heard of a buffer overflow? Well, surprise surprise, they exist in Linux as well as Windows, Unix and just about any other piece of software more than a few lines long. Substance?

Anyway, I'm a Linux and Windows sysadmin. I agree that every system has it's own strengths and weaknesses, what people need is more brains and less criticism. The people who write that stuff are far superior to anyone here in skill, IQ and all the rest. If you can do better, go ahead, otherwise stop acting like a crab trying to pull others down.

I personally believe that Microsoft does as well as they can, as well as anyone can. More users means more attacks discovered. Firefox security bugs in the last 6 months after version 1 shows this (I use that too). How many did you hear of when it was Firebird? They're both still good. There's just always room for improvement. Keep working on it fellas!

Collapse -

A more global picture...

by twylyght In reply to Substance? You gotta be j ...

This is my take as I hear this kind of thing all the time. Part of Windows' strength is also its weakness. It was designed to be the OS that would allow anyone to use virutally any software on virtually any hardware. Of course we know where that has gone. Proprietary vendors and manufacturers have combated MSs dominance of the market by trying to create their own niches, and they have succeeded to varying degrees.

The two things that keep MS on top are marketing (which contributes to ubiquity and familiarity) and flexibility (in terms of software selection). Apple tried to corner the marketing strategy by being everywhere in the school systems, but has had to take a back seat and continue as mainstays in graphical arts and media production. Only recently has its marketing picked back up again.

This brings me to a key point in the whole discussion. I has been touched on that the more a system is used, the more it is targeted. Windows is obviously going to be the target as it is undoubtedly the big dog in the arena. It will be what hackers know and strive to beat. As Apple, Linux, Solaris, etc become more popular the attention will be diverted as such. To this day, one's best security is being unknown.

This brings me to the second major crux in this discussion. With MS being the one handling the burden of testing ALL hardware for ALL levels of its applications, it is presented with the horrendous task of researching, testing, and developing for 90% of the world's products. Sun and Apple generally know exactly what is in their systems since their software and hardware generally go hand in hand. When messing with Linux and compiling kernels for different devices, we tend to run into many of the same issues.

Hence, I tend to think that while MSs drive to be the dominant monster in the market is what is bringing in their money, it is also driving their problems with system stability and the comparably inordinate number of complaints among users and IT professionals.

Collapse -

Too right

by deckmonkey In reply to Substance? You gotta be j ...

Quit the whining about "My OS is better than yours" because it is hugely juvenile and proves nothing other than the plaintiffs own childishness.

Yes, windows has vulnerabilities, as does every other OS, but windows does a huge amount of stuff compared to other OS's so it is to be expected that there will be more imperfections. I'm not excusing them, after all as a developer myself I try my best not to write code which has bugs and we try to test them out of existence, but you never, ever get them all.

The only justified whinge can come from someone who has never written software with any bugs in and which is totally secure. And I'm pretty sure there are about as many of them as there are flying pigs in this world.

Collapse -

Substance? You gotta be joking

by humbletech99 In reply to Lot of talk but no substa ...

Have you ever heard of a buffer overflow? Well, surprise surprise, they exist in Linux as well as Windows, Unix and just about any other piece of software more than a few lines long. Substance?

Anyway, I'm a Linux and Windows sysadmin. I agree that every system has it's own strengths and weaknesses, what people need is more brains and less criticism. The people who write that stuff are far superior to anyone here in skill, IQ and all the rest. If you can do better, go ahead, otherwise stop acting like a crab trying to pull others down.

I personally believe that Microsoft does as well as they can, as well as anyone can. More users means more attacks discovered. Firefox security bugs in the last 6 months after version 1 shows this (I use that too). How many did you hear of when it was Firebird? They're both still good. There's just always room for improvement. Keep working on it fellas!

Collapse -

I love Microsoft

by Ron In reply to Lot of talk but no substa ...

I just think of it as Job Security. If we all used Linix, the required support would not justify a full time person. I could do all of my work in about an hour per day, and do it all from home!

Back to Windows Forum
719 total posts (Page 1 of 72)   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums