In most cases I’m not interested in anything Microsoft does. I have, by and large, left that portion of computing behind me. There’s very little that excites me about Microsoft, very little that excites me about their products. Generally speaking I view Microsoft as a very uninteresting company that lives off of copying more innovative products, and re-releasing the same old warmed-over leftovers every year, with some minor bells and whistles added.
Thus, the whole Windows 7 release type thing interests me very little. October for me is Karmic-Month.
But every time Microsoft rears it’s less appealing sides and decides to try to hit below the belt I become annoyed. Not because there’s any truth in what they clam (there isn’t) but because it’s just such a low and tasteless tactic.
Recently there’s been some hooplah over the training that Best Buy-emplyees have received. Microsoft has given them a long list of various arguments why customers should choose a Windows 7-equipped computer over a similar Linux-equipped machine.
I’m now going to take the time to go through a few of these arguments.
- Linux can require a lot of time to maintain. For example, Ubuntu (a version of Linux) may have hundreds of updates a month
False. This is a complete straw-man argument, it has no grounding in reality. It simply sounds impressive.
Microsoft updates their OS on a predetermined, scheduled date. This means that an unpatched system might be vulnerable while waiting for Microsoft to take their sweet time. Linux-distributions shove out the security-updates as quickly as possible.
Add to this that it’s a breeze installing updates under most distributions. Vista makes a big show out of installing updates and constantly interrupts the user while doing it, while for example Ubuntu makes it very discreetly. Under Windows a batch of updates virtually always require a reboot, while under Ubuntu it’s rare with forced reboots. This also applies to most other distributions.
- It can be unclear to users whether or not software updates need to be applied immediately or are optional.
False. It’s quite easy. Simply apply all updates when they show up. Under Ubuntu for example updates are clearly marked where they come from. If it’s a security update, you have to be pretty dense to not understand to install it immediately.
- Linux does not support many common applications and online services like iTunes, Zune, Quicken, Photoshop, and Office 2007.
True, but only for Photoshop. The rest are easily replaced with similar free programs performing much or all of the originals features. In many cases the free software performs MORE, as well as being unencumbered by things such as DRM. Free Software is designed from a users perspective, not the designers. Thus, features are added that a user might enjoy – not the other way around.
UPDATE: The Photoshop-argument becomes even more absurd when you consider that this propaganda is aimed at people thinking about buying a netbook. Running Photoshop on a netbook is nothing less than madness – netbooks were not designed for that.
- Windows works with more software and devices.
False. This is one of the oldest lies about Windows, and Microsoft likes to perpetuate it. There are good reasons why computers for the last decade and a half have had the “Designed for [whatever]” sticker. Without it, you’re on your own. You still have to hunt down drivers, software and make it work.
Linux includes more drivers than Windows could ever dream of. It’s very rare these days to plug a device into a Linux-machine and not have it work immediately, and flawlessly. For a real-world example of this, I suggest you read my experience with a webcam.
- [When using Linux] There’s no guarantee that when security vulnerabilities are discovered, an update will be created. Users are on their own.
False. Had this been Windows, then it would be true. Microsoft has a policy of not releasing fixes for security issues that aren’t actively exploited in the wild, despite them being discovered. Linux-developers pride themselves on security and fixes are issued regardless of whether or not it’s being exploited in the wild.
In short, when you use Windows, you’re on your own. Microsoft likes to promote the “caring and loving” image of themselves, but it’s a lie. They will not help you, and they absolve themselves of any responsibility when using their product.
- Linux is a self help solution. There are no step-by-step tutorials provided, and help documentation is limited.
False. It’s been widely accepted that Linux as a solution and operating system is one of the best documented the world has ever produced. There are literally hundreds of thousands of websites devoted in some degree or another to providing help and documentation. If these are not sufficient enough, there are forums where more experienced users will help new users – providing these new users aren’t being assholes about it.
- Because there are different “flavors” of Linux, you can’t learn one version and be sure you know them all.
False. Most major distributions use the same desktop environments with some customization. Essentially, if you’re used to Gnome on Ubuntu, you will quickly feel at home in Gnome on Fedora, and so on. The minor differences are no more different than a driver being used to a certain car and needing some time to adjust to another vehicle. It happens in a few minutes.
Microsoft is becoming very very desperate to be using underhand ugly tactics like theese. Not only are most of the statements false but you have to wonder, why does the weight lie in badmouthing Linux instead of talking about the new and exiting stuff in Windows 7?
If OEM starts to get a grip on themselves and force a pricedump through for normal desktops Microsoft is in real troubles. All it takes is for a couple of OEM to push Linux instead of Windows and the prices will fall through the floor. Microsoft doesnt give a rats about Linux as a threat to their customer base, they are afraid of a market without the current price fixing. Two three percent of the desktop on sold systems is all it takes to make a considerable dent in Microsofts purse. Not because of lost sales but because the licenses sold will be at market prices instead of in monopoly money.
Microsofts problem is that they arent equipped to handle competition, kill competition yes, live with it side by side? No.