Why Do More People Use Windows? And No, Not Because Its Better

[whafizi 0]

In TERMS OF WEB DESIGN:For me, Windows are good for Designing and Viewing.-easy and nice guiBut LINUX are the best for its servers implementation.-stable-secured-FREE

[Viezevis 0]

First of all hello to everyone over here ;-) I'm a newbie on the forum and its my first post here so... ;-)Anyway, I think the main thing people use Windows rather dan Unix or MacOS is the accesibility of the windows OS. Everyone must admit that windows has the lowest grade of learning and is pretty easy to use for the basic stuff people use a pc for. Offcourse we also can't forget the marketing strategies of our uncle billie :-p who managed to get windows pre-installed on about every pc. The main thing people switch to another OS is the stability of it I think, once they are starting to learn more about pc's etc. everyone can notice that windows isn't the most stable system available on the market ;-)another reason I think is the fact that just about every well known piece of software is mainly designed for windows just because the monopoly of Microsoft on the OS market which makes it most profitable for software designers do design and program software for Windows OS rather than for linux or MacOS etc. That about my point of view :-)GrtzVZV

[sottm 0]

Windows . Windows is apocalipsis, critical error. Let's go to the past. The good boy Billy stolen PC-DOS , make from it MS-DOS, promoted it and ... have a money. This occurs now. So why pepople pass to Windows:1. All people using ms win , and i must using it too.2. Windows easy, all other systems is hard3. Windows has many beautiful programs.4. All programmers developed on win325. People dont hear about other OS.6. Windows support all devices.It's most.

[spaceseel 0]

The reason that 'windows is better' is the fact that windows programming is a lot more popular and a bit easier to use (in my opinion), Even though that the OS may crash sometimes, It still is the mainframe for a lot of programs that are written today. I mean, only a few games and programs are written for Mac and Lunix, and even though they may be easier to use, or it's better looking, It is still a well structured OS. This is all based on my opinion.

[NilsC 0]

Why are M$ OS popular? because most people don't feel like taking the time learning something new. It's mainstream, it's advertized on all the tv networks, therefore it has to be good... M$ grabbed the marked a long time ago when they created the point and click GUI and removed the users from the dos prompt with the "c:\>" prompting you to type something to make it work.Since it's mainstream and a lot of software makers cater to M$ the price goes down on all the software created for that OS. It doesn't make any better, just more affordable.I don't like XP but I use it everyday at work. My preffered OS is Linux. For servers the sco *nix is what I know and use married to emulator most of the users don't even know that they are working on the *nix box.Nils

[vladimir1405241474 0]

Its a pity that so many people uses microsoft windows. Linux would be much better...Unfortunately it has no games.But when more users would use linux, there will be more games.Windows is easy, but if you really want a good system you cant have an easy like windows. Linux is much safer but has not as many programs because the producers only make programs for windows because everybody (almost) uses it.

[Darren1405241470 0]

Linux would be much better...Unfortunately it has no games.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There are actually quite alot of good games for Linux - The Sims 2 and Unreal Tournament, just to name a couple.

 

Linux is much safer but has not as many programs because the producers only make programs for windows because everybody (almost) uses it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I wouldn't quite say that almost everyone uses windows. Certainly alot of people do out of sheir lazyness (like me ) but there are still alot of people who use macs and a precious few who use an open source OS (linux/unix/solaris).

[cryptwizard 0]

There's actually lots of games for GNU/Linux.Freeciv is a good multiplayer one.

[MajesticTreeFrog 0]

Nah, what really keeps linux from gaining acceptance is a near total lack of universal human interface guidelines and good graphical installers. It doesn't help that a lot of the software available is named absolutely random things. For instance, GIMP does NOT suggest 'image editor' to people like 'paint' or 'photoshop' do. Or the graphical install/config utilities named stuff like 'Yum'. the KDE utilities like Kword and such are better, and thats really how things need to be named(or openoffice, for example). But XMMS, VLC(which I LOVE but come on. Rename the thing already), etc. are just strange and confusing(cron jobs, instead of 'task scheduler' or something similar)

[qwijibow 0]

Nah, what really keeps linux from gaining acceptance is a near total lack of universal human interface guidelines and good graphical installers.  It doesn't help that a lot of the software available is named absolutely random things.  For instance, GIMP does NOT suggest 'image editor' to people like 'paint' or 'photoshop' do.  Or the graphical install/config utilities named stuff like 'Yum'.  the KDE utilities like Kword and such are better, and thats really how things need to be named(or openoffice, for example).  But XMMS, VLC(which I LOVE but come on.  Rename the thing already), etc. are just strange and confusing(cron jobs, instead of 'task scheduler' or something similar)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thats a good idea.. but can you imagine the chaos that would follow if for the newbs sake, all the linux apps were re-named. people would fill online forums with questions like "whats Firefox called now... WebBrowserFox..., i cant find it anywhere cos i dont know what the frek its called".

 

total chaos... gonverments would fall, antisocial teens would take to the streets to loot cheap cider, and drink it in anti-social ways,

 

lol.. ok, maybe thats a little over the top.

 

however it Does seem hat the linux community is working on this problem.

 

for example, in the main KDE menu, instread of program names, a descrition followed by the rpogram name is there.. for example..

 

Web Browser (firefox)

Instant Messenger (kopete)

Audio Media Player (amarok)

 

So strange names only become a problem when you are searching for an application that does not come as part of your distro.

 

still a problem none the less... but its being worked on.

[wwheeler 0]

Bill gates steal the first project for MS-DOS froma NY company, something loike Xro o Xero, i don't remember...watch this film http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0168122/

and you'll undestand because win is "more popular" and Bill so rich

 

'njoy

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, he didn't steal it, he wrote MS-DOS and sold it to Xerox. That is where he made his first move into the market.....

[the empty calorie 0]

This may be kind of late to reply to, but Microsoft in fact did make hardware as well as software in the 80's. The most common hardware I know of is the Z-80 processor card for the Apple II. At the time, Digital Research's CP/M was a quite popular OS (before MS-DOS was around), and you could use CP/M on intel 8008 and 8080, and other computers like the TRS-80 which used a Zilog Z-80 processor. The Apple II was based on the MOS 6502 processor which CP/M was never designed for. Microsoft manufactured an expansion board for the Apple II which had a Z-80 processor on it, and I believe it came bundled with a copy of CP/AM, so you could run CP/M programs on the Apple II.

 

QUOTE(k22 @ Dec 9 2004, 04:22 PM)

Bill gates steal the first project for MS-DOS froma NY company, something loike Xro o Xero, i don't remember...watch this film http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0168122/

and you'll undestand because win is "more popular" and Bill so rich wink.gif

 

'njoy

*

 

 

 

 

No, he didn't steal it, he wrote MS-DOS and sold it to Xerox. That is where he made his first move into the market.....

Actually, Bill Gates did not write MS-DOS. QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System) was originally written by a board maker, Tim Patterson of Seattle Computer Products, who was too impatient to wait for Digital Research to release CP/M-86. Bill Gates bought QDOS from Patterson. Tim wrote it originally for his computer which was run by the new 8086 processor. Most computers at that time were 8-bit, and he needed a new 16-bit operating system to take advantage of this processor. A lot of DOS's characteristics are actually based on CP/M. Microsoft never sold DOS to Xerox, or anybody. Xerox is responsible for the mouse and the Graphical User Interface.

[CoolBradG 0]

I like Windows becuase it is what I've used all my life. Now I have to admit I hated Windows ME! Worst Operating System ever! I have XP now though and love it. It does not seem to crash and have errors like ME does. At school we use Windows 95 which is also better than ME but its really slow which stinks.The reason I think is people are so used to using Windows that they continue to use it because there familiar with it.

[hajime 0]

Personally I think these are the few main factors when it left off few years back:1) 'Good' Marketing, slap in windows as the default os for many major pc distributors.2) Easy to use GUI. Around win 3.11/95, other major OS are still command based/menu based (excluding the mac os). Many apps are built for the IBM x86 platform so tat helped. I think these 2 are major factors. Anyway, I juz feel that people who critisize Windows and yet still use it so often are hypocrites. It is true that windows has some flaws but which os doesnt?? Besides, for the features we get from a wndows pacakge I think that the latest version did pretty well. I for one is a satisfied user of windows.

[MajesticTreeFrog 0]

Mainly people use windows because they are too lazy to bother with anything else. It takes effort to switch OS's. That being said, windows is still bad. Its just not so bad that users consider it worth switching to something else.My biggest issues always were:1. having to continually defragment the hard drive. We have filesystems that dont have this problem, but for some reason MS doesn't use them.2. Lack of 'usefull' features. For instance, how about a usefull help system, that actually helps, for a change. Or a good default file/image viewer? Or something better than MS paint for image editing without having to shell out more money. How about an intelligent search tool that can use meta-data? Or, better yet, system wide services like universal spell check, and so on.I mean, they are asking people to pay for this thing.They *Finally* put in a firewall, but it comes badly configured so I understand.I wonder if they ever did a good job implementing protected memory, things still seem capable of crashing in sequence......