Is Windows really unstable and unreliable?

[General Rule]

I am using Windows since 1998 and until now I did not even know that there are other operating systems out there; I even didn't have a clear concept of what are operating systems. Since some time I have been visiting many Linux forums where they are very much against Microsoft and Windows and the reason they state is that Windows is based on a flawed system i.e. Dos and also that Windows is inherently unstable, unreliable and insecure. It lacks stablity and frequently crashes. Also Linux is more stable, reliable and secure and never crashes because it is based on a more perfect Unix system. In addition many other things such as its a monopoly and vice versa. I do not have anything against Windows personally but I would like to get some clarification here as to what these people say is true? Is Windows really based on unstable foundations and therefore unstable, unreliable and insecure or is it based on very strong foundations and is stable, reliable and secure. Is Windows OS equal to Linux in stability, reliability and security? Please clarify as I am upset. :(

[catgate]

I am sure you will get more erudition, before long, than I am able to offer, but here is my opinion.

There was nothing much wrong with DOS. It was not until Microsoft decided that it's aim was to be all things to all people, and as a result took unto themselves some of the smaller programming houses and even more of the software of those it did not take over, that things started to go pear shaped. Since that time they have produced one commercial programme after another, all of which have been sold complete with flaws (as is the norm with most things that are "commercial")

I will no doubt be accused of cynicism, but it seems to me that Windows is produced by people interested in money and Linux is produced by people interested in computers All the other varieties of OS seem to fall hierarchically into place when measured against this idea.

Most versions of Linux are certainly more complete packages than Windows, in as much as there are few pieces of hardware that will not just plug in and run, without having to mess about installing drivers and all that that entails,

I ran DOS, Windows 3.1, Windows 95, Windows 98 and W98SE and stuck with 98SE until a year ago. A year ago I tried Fedora Core 5 and six months ago tried Ubuntu 6 (since changed to 7). There are some things for which I have kept my W98SE machine alive (purely for convenience) but for virtually everything I prefer Linux. But that is only my opinion.

[Scarecrow Man]

If you would like to explore Linux, you can always run a LIVE CD version of it. There is nothing to install, and it will not overwrite anything on Windows.

The choice is best left to you to decide which you prefer.

http://wiki.freespire.org/index.php/Running_Freespire_Live

[andsome]

Operating systems are a matter of choice. To date I have had NO problems with Windows XP, and therefore have no reason to even consider messing about changing. If you are happy with Windows, why change? If you are not happy, then the choice is yours. :D

[Alan2273]

Linux is more secure and less susceptable to viruses than Windows, because of the different way it works.

But if you run a firewall and Antivirus and keep them up to date, there is no reason why Windows can not be as secure as Linux.

[jason.b.c]

If you would like to explore Linux, you can always run a LIVE CD version of it. There is nothing to install, and it will not overwrite anything on Windows.

The choice is best left to you to decide which you prefer.

http://wiki.freespire.org/index.php/Running_Freespire_Live

You're still messing around with FOS..? I left it months ago after i found out about the FOS/Microsoft agreement as well as all the switchover to the ubuntu repo's... :angry: :angry:

[catgate]

If you would like to explore Linux, you can always run a LIVE CD version of it. There is nothing to install, and it will not overwrite anything on Windows.

The choice is best left to you to decide which you prefer.

http://wiki.freespire.org/index.php/Running_Freespire_Live

You're still messing around with FOS..? I left it months ago after i found out about the FOS/Microsoft agreement as well as all the switchover to the ubuntu repo's... :angry: :angry:

Well done....that will teach them!

[jason.b.c]

If you would like to explore Linux, you can always run a LIVE CD version of it. There is nothing to install, and it will not overwrite anything on Windows.

The choice is best left to you to decide which you prefer.

http://wiki.freespire.org/index.php/Running_Freespire_Live

You're still messing around with FOS..? I left it months ago after i found out about the FOS/Microsoft agreement as well as all the switchover to the ubuntu repo's... :angry: :angry:

Well done....that will teach them!

yet another intelligent statement by Catgate ladies and gentlemen...

[MaskedOne]

So yeah I have tried all these Linux OS's and have had more stability problems than any windows except ME (which puked). Thankfully I had been dual-booting with windows and had a working OS to run back to. Also gaming and a lot of hardware does not work very well in linux and a lot of things take technical knowledge versus easy to use GUI's.

Therefore although I do enjoy Linux, especially Mint, I have to say WindowsXP will stay my main OS untill my next computer comes with Vista. Or untill I find a Linux that can do basic things OOTB such as hibernate and logoff a session.