Dude... oh my God... stop with the propoganda and address the points already.

1) IF Microsoft ceased to exist, and Linux became No.1, how would you stop hackers from targeting it with viruses?

2) What is your answer to all casual users who must now re-learn everything they know about using an OS?

3) Apart from "Linux is better than Microsoft", why must Microsoft cease to exist just because it is inferior, even though it is familiar? Some people want familiarity, not efficiency. You still haven't provided an answer for this because you have assumed ALL computer users are somewhat familiar with this stuff just because YOU are familiar with it (I'm overusing the word familiar, because I hope you have an answer for it).

Quote from Not_Nish

1) IF Microsoft ceased to exist, and Linux became No.1, how would you stop hackers from targeting it with viruses?

Linux doesn't get viruses easily at all, because of it's design, by default files are not executable unless given explicit administrative permissions. Viruses that infect Windows computers is astronomically higher than the number of Linux viruses. And on top of that, the viruses that do manage to infect Linux will be much less widespread than Windows viruses There has never been a single instance of a widespread Linux virus akin to your bi-monthly Windows worm that infects a few hundred-thousand/million computers.
This is due to Linux's vastly superior security architecture, and to the fact that people can actually find and fix security vulnerabilities in Linux without having to reverse engineer binaries. Here are reasons Windows is simply inherently insecure and has poor design and why Linux does not
1. With default settings Windows "automatically" executes any crap ending with .exe or .pif and even hides the termination for the user. Apparently Microsoft made it deliberately easy for trojans to be accidentaly executed. On the other hand, if you use Linux to download a Linux executable from the Internet, it comes with execution permission off. You have to explicitly chmod it in order to make it really executable.
2. To preserve some compatibility with legacy Win16 and DOS applications, Windows security policies are very slack, being easily overcome by malware. This evolution from MSDOS, a very limited 8/16bit sigle tasking small memory system to a heavy windowing environment that tries to hide its shortcommings from the end user that has made Windows so fragile and unreliable.
Linux is based on a unix/posix model which was designed from the beginning to be a multiuser multitasking environment.
3. Most (almost all) viruses are made for Windows.
4. Almost all Windows applications are distributed without source code. Quite a few have undocumented features that spy on your data, make unsolicited internet connections and mess your settings. Even (or especially) the antiviruses are not to be trusted. On Linux (almost) all the software is distributed with open source code, so that generally there are no hidden features.
It should also be noted that MS Windows was originally designed with NO intention of being connected to the internet, thus internet security was never a thought until far into Win development.. Win was thought up with the idea that it would be a DESKTOP system, period.
Whereas Linux was created/designed specifically in networking environments, and with a mind towards keeping things secure in those networked environments.
The Win-OS is inherently flawed in this area, and since every subsequent release of Win is just modifications (for better or worse) on the previous release, I can't see how this scenario is going to change.
Besides, for windows home use, the first account that is being created (and thus used for daily operations) is an adminstrator account, with a different username. So everything you execute as that user, is has total access to the system.

Another factor why Linux is not vulnerable to malware/viruses, is because there are so many different versions of it. Each with it's own selection of apps, and setups. (including different version numbers of apps, and patches (custom or not).) It's impossible to write a virus for Linux that works for ALL distro's (and release versions included.).

You could say, Linux has no real viruses/malware. In the sense as described above.
There are some proof of concept viruses written, but they were only successful on a certain version of a certain distro, under certain conditions.

Quote from Not_Nish

2) What is your answer to all casual users who must now re-learn everything they know about using an OS?

That's just simply untrue. For one, Linux automatically starts with a clean desktop, firefox, and all the staple documents you'd need without some sort of specialization.
ALL SOFTWARE is automatically updated, with one click of a button, this includes all browser add ons, flash players, OS updates, everything. Plus these updates are not even forced. They just show up in a notification. Simplicity and frustration-free. There is a software center, so you don't even need to search the internet trying to get the software you want, you just type it in a search bar, or even just browse for it. Software center is built in, not a website either, so it's a direct connection and extremely fast. When you install it only takes 60 seconds at the absolute most, and there's no clicking through an installation and unclicking bundles and going through "terms and agreements" and things like that.
Everything casual about Windows is ever more apparent and done better in Linux. There's literally absolutely nothing to lose except poor software when it comes to switching to Linux.

Quote from Not_Nish

3) Apart from "Linux is better than Microsoft", why must Microsoft cease to exist just because it is inferior, even though it is familiar? Some people want familiarity, not efficiency. You still haven't provided an answer for this because you have assumed ALL computer users are somewhat familiar with this stuff just because YOU are familiar with it (I'm overusing the word familiar, because I hope you have an answer for it).

You already said you ever used nor are interested in Linux, so you can't actually be qualified to ask that question if you don't know anything about switching to Linux and having problems with familiarity. In reality, it may take an HOUR at the EXTREME MOST to learn how to use Linux in a casual fashion. That's if you use a distro that doesn't look like Windows. Linux distros have been created to look especially like Windows to the point where you can't tell the difference. Every detail can be exactly the same except even more convenient. In that case it should take 5-10 minutes to know how to use it. Windows is an exceptionally poor OS and most people (including you, evidently) are simply unaware of or in denial of it.
That's okay, con artists all over the world made billions of dollars off of people like that, if it wasn't for them they'd be out of business. As for the people who have more sense about what they spend their money on, they choose Linux.
I mean would you rather have a sports car that runs perfect all the time indefinitely and never runs out of gas and has a stick shift, or a car that has bad steering, bad brakes, overheats, smells bad, broken mirrors, bad paint job, breaks down every other week, bad gas mileage, leaked oil, but was automatic? You tell me.

you know windows doesn't allow executables to run with administrator privileges without asking, right? even command line requires privilege elevation to perform many of its functions. unless you're using the administrator account already, you still have to enter your password for any program that wants system access.

people still allow programs they don't have any reason to trust to access admin privileges, because they're stupid. what makes you think linux would be any different if it were the popular OS amongst such plebians?

also,

Quote from Sea Beast

you can't actually be qualified to ask that question

is not how debates work.

Quote from Scarecrow

you know windows doesn't allow executables to run with administrator privileges without asking, right? even command line requires privilege elevation to perform many of its functions. unless you're using the administrator account already, you still have to enter your password for any program that wants system access.

people still allow programs they don't have any reason to trust to access admin privileges, because they're stupid. what makes you think linux would be any different if it were the popular OS amongst such plebians?

also,


is not how debates work.

Point was how can someone using "Linux is hard to learn" as a valid talking point when the person saying that does not know whether or not Linux is hard to learn? Especially when they admitted earlier to not even ever using Linux nor have interest in Linux. So obviously when speaking from that perspective it's invalid to make a claim that it's hard to learn Linux for people who normally use Windows. Not even accounting for that being subjective to every individual.

As for Linux, .exe files don't even work on Linux. Linux uses different extensions, and even then, files are only executable when given explicit admin permissions using the password even on the admin account. A virus would only work if you gave each file involved administrative permissions, even after that it still wouldn't run. Even the administrator logs in with limited permission. You have to type the password for each administrative task to obtain root permissions.
A normal user has absolutely 0 root authority and cannot change anything outside their home folder.

Besides you side stepped all my points against Windows and instead choosing to nitpick points out of an indisputable case against Windows that the only thing attractive about Windows is it's business connections, not it's software.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure you're trolling now.


a) If its possible to nitpick points, then its not an "indisputable case".

b) I can sidestep your points all I want. You're the one saying something should cease to exist. The burden of proof is on you.

c) You say my point about people need to unlearn things is untrue. Please tell me how my dad and millions of others are going to deal with needing to use softwares that only run on Windows and not on Linux? Before you claim things are simply untrue, you need to think it over first.

d) You seem incapable of understanding (and it has been pointed out here before numerous times by other people) that just because something is better, people should not be FORCED to use it if they are more comfortable using something shitty. Your sportscar-shittycar analogy was laughable, because yeah sure, the sportscar is better. But if I want to use the shitty-car, I still want to be able to drive it. Maybe I find its simplicity soothing. Maybe I don't give a shit about cars, and I've been using the shitty car to get from Point A to Point B all my life. Maybe I don't want to think about it. I don't want to spend one hour or one minute or one second on something that I don't give a shit about.

e) You keep talking about how Linux is better and Windows is conning us out, sheesh u ghays r ghey cuz ur givving munny to da evil corporation faggurtzz. You say "Windows is a shitty OS but most people are unaware or in denial of it". But wait... what the fuck do we have to gain by being in-denial of it? Unless you mean people have some masochistic desire to use Windows. In that case, LET THEM USE IT. Or they're unaware of it. Well if its soooo shitty, how can millions of people be unaware of it? Clearly it fulfills their needs.

I wrote a little One-act, 30-second play. Its called "The Argument of the SeaBeast".

Argument : Hey SeaBeast, but what about the fact that people just wanna use Windows?

SeaBeast : Linux is better than Windows. Hence, Windows should not exist anymore.

Argument : But wait... can't both exist? I mean... people who want to use Linux can use it. People who want Windows can use that. Right?

SeaBeast : Linux is better than Windows. Hence, Windows should not exist anymore.

Argument : Dude, just listen to me. Some people don't care if its better. They don't even know a lot about computers but have to use it because its the digital age.

SeaBeast : Linux is better than Windows. Hence, Windows should not exist anymore.

Argument : Fuck. Listen. To. Me. Dude. Why can't people who CARE about your gazillion claims use Linux while normal people use Windows? Why must Linux be thrust upon them?

SeaBeast : Linux is better than Windows. Hence, Windows should not exist anymore.

Argument : Aaaaargh. But what about people who just DON'T GIVE A SHIT?? Why can't you just let them be. You're not talking about Linux vs Windows. You're talking about eliminating Windows completely.

SeaBeast : Linux is better than Windows. Hence, Windows should not exist anymore.

Argument : FFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUU

SeaBeast : Linux is better than Windows. Hence, Windows should not exist anymore. + *Trollface*.

People like and use Windows because they don't know there's an alternative. It's about educating the people. Not acceptance of ignorance.
People are unaware of how bad Windows is because they never used a proper OS.
Why should you stand idly by while people are cheated out of their money when there are better options for free?
I don't see any real argument for Windows other than the predisposition of Windows being everywhere, because of it's business monopoly.
Linux is not at all difficult to learn. Period. Especially on certain distros.
There was never a chance for a better OS to rise until Apple rose, and that took years.
Why should any evil corporation exploiting the public's ignorance exist?
You're basically saying ignorance is bliss, even when it rips the money right out of your wallet without reciprocating
Besides, why should it be okay for users' of computers to not know how to use them and then be left to use an unstable OS like Windows?
You don't want to think about it? Are you justifying ignorance as a reason to be exploited? Ignorant people had been wrongfully treated by others throughout history and those times were looked down upon but in this case it's acceptable for a corporation to feed off ignorance?
Not to mention Microsoft source code is secret, so no one knows about Microsoft sifting through all your personal data, working hand in hand with the government to spy on you and see everything you look up and all your files. They make unsolicited internet connections and mess with your settings.
How is that acceptable for modern technology especially in this computer dominated digital age?


You'd understand if you ever used Linux

You keep speaking about these things, and as it stands, you may believe yourself to be an expert. However, from my perspective as a rather un-computer-savvy fellow, you just seem like an ass who is projecting his beliefs and trying to feed his sense of superiority over the uneducated masses.

In my case, I use Windows because it's convenient and it's what I'm used to. Have I heard of Linux? Yes. Have I ever had any interest in it? None at all, though I've looked into it before. You speak on how there are all these distros for specialization, yet for me, I don't need something that specializes in anything. Why? Because specialization weakens other areas, and I use my laptop for all around purposes. Even more interesting, in all the years I've used computers, I've never needed to defrag anything, nor have they been wiped by viruses or some such. Some of them slowed down, yes, but after 5+ years with a single laptop, that's not too unreasonable, especially with the progression of technology in the field.

As for using OS besides Windows, I did for a time attempt to use Apple's OS for a computer (I own an iPod touch, so I suppose you can say I still use it), and I hated everything about it. It was awful. Maybe it's bias from years of being a Windows user, but Macs just suck to me. That experience further dampens my interest in experimenting with another OS, which means your "it takes an hour at the most to get used to" pitch falls on deaf ears, at least in my case. And ya know, Windows really hasn't ripped much money from me personally since I don't buy computers like crazy nor pay for any services of theirs.


And my biggest issue with your posts, Sea Beast, aside from you using the same arguments over and over and then chastising people for not continuously countering them, is that at no point at all during this bullshit "debate" which is honestly, as previously stated in this post, just you jerking yourself off for somehow being "superior", have you cited any source of any kind to back up what you've said. Not once. You've provided no sources supporting your claims that Windows is shit, you've provided no sources saying Linux is good, you just expect us to ride your dick on things because:

Quote from Sea Beast

I admit it.
I am a computer geek. As a result, I know A LOT about computers. The most useful information I can share with anyone is a knowledgeable comparison Between the Microsoft Windows operating system and the Linux operating system.

...which, without credentials to back you up, makes everything you say 100% opinion and 100% bullshit. So get off your high horse, and actually try to debate your case, or just acknowledge that you've lost because in the first place, you're not even really arguing for the thread's title. You're just trying to push your preferences somewhere nobody really cares since the usual demographic of this place doesn't give two shits on OS's in the first place.

With an all round purpose labtop, you'd want Ubuntu, Debian, Lubuntu, Peppermint, Linux Mint, Qubuntu, which are all general all round operating systems strong in every sense.
Also I guarantee you that your computer would run better and faster with Linux.
I'm only trying to show people why Microsoft is an evil corporation by purposefully releasing shitty products.
Windows is the only Operating system that gets viruses. They make billions of dollars off of viruses and terrible software.
Sure use Windows if you want but you are missing out on the oppurtunity to use a capable OS.
Any time there's any professional in the field of computer technology it's imperative to use Linux.

Why should a corporation get away with tricking people into liking a bad product, and using them as a weapon to argue with people trying to tell them that Windows is garbage?
You want sources? You can have em
http://www.techradar.com/us/news/software/operating-systems/20-reasons-you-should-switch-to-linux-912294
https://www.linux.com/news/software/applications/768257-why-arguing-that-windows-is-better-than-linux-makes-you-look-silly
http://http://linuxshark.info/
http://www.pcworld.com/article/201731/10_reasons_to_dump_windows_and_use_linux.html
http://www.pcworld.com/article/202452/why_linux_is_more_secure_than_windows.html
http://www.techuser.net/winsecurity.html
https://www.maketecheasier.com/why-does-windows-have-so-many-viruses/
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2015/08/windows_10_privacy_problems_here_s_how_bad_they_are_and_how_to_plug_them.html
http://www.itworld.com/article/2767536/security/why-windows-security-is-awful.html
http://en.windows7sins.org/
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/it-security/unix-vs-microsoft-windows-how-system-designs-reflect-security-philosophy/
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/askjack/2015/aug/15/windows-10-microsoft-should-privacy-problems-worry-me

I encourage you all to read these sources. Then maybe you'll be convinced

Quote from Sea Beast

With an all round purpose labtop, you'd want Ubuntu, Debian, Lubuntu, Peppermint, Linux Mint, Qubuntu, which are all general all round operating systems strong in every sense.
Also I guarantee you that your computer would run better and faster with Linux.
I'm only trying to show people why Microsoft is an evil corporation by purposefully releasing shitty products.
Windows is the only Operating system that gets viruses. They make billions of dollars off of viruses and terrible software.
Sure use Windows if you want but you are missing out on the oppurtunity to use a capable OS.
Any time there's any professional in the field of computer technology it's imperative to use Linux.

Why should a corporation get away with tricking people into liking a bad product, and using them as a weapon to argue with people trying to tell them that Windows is garbage?

Notice how, despite what I've said, you're still stating these bolded things WITHOUT EVIDENCE.

When you edit something in 5 minutes after my post, you're not helping your case; in fact, it makes it look like you only did it to try and refute me.

Quote from Azure

When you edit something in 5 minutes after my post, you're not helping your case; in fact, it makes it look like you only did it to try and refute me.

Because after I posted I decided to cite my sources after making that post in an edit? It's not my fault your post was there when I reloaded the page

Quote from Sea Beast

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/askjack/2015/aug/15/windows-10-microsoft-should-privacy-problems-worry-me

You know, I think I can honestly say that I have no interest in further debating you, just because you clearly don't read your own sources.

1. The sources aren't exactly the most reliable, as they're on opinionated sites and some even admit that they're opinions, not facts.
2. None of these arguments seem aimed towards the average joe, they seem aimed at people who actually care about computer performance and other such in relation to it, further negating the thread's purpose of "Windows not existing."
3. The last source you cited is actually praising Windows 10, and doesn't talk about Linux. You likely only included it because you thought it would prove your point, which it didn't. It acts against you.

As I'm not computer-savvy, I've no vested interest in continuing debating this myself, I just couldn't read on though seeing how you kept on circling around and such and not actually debating.

I'm only trying to show people why Microsoft is an evil corporation by purposefully releasing shitty products.
Windows is the only Operating system that gets viruses. They make billions of dollars off of viruses and terrible software.

Oh boy, the classic "wake up sheeple" revelation. That's a surefire sign that I must withdraw from this thread. Do you really think it's going to change anything in the grand scheme of things? Big whoop, Microsoft, Apple, Linux, whatever. As long as technology is there and improves, I couldn't care less about the current climate.

The only reason they made billions of dollars is because they got that much attention, and of course, with attention comes detractors. If Linux was top dog, you'd be complaining how your beloved OS is suddenly wracked with viruses and problems. And MS isn't doing it on purpose, it's what happens when you're on a leading frontier and are constantly expected to make something new, so the pressure is on.

Sure use Windows if you want but you are missing out on the oppurtunity to use a capable OS.

Not with me, because the programs I run don't run with Linux, can't expect me to run Danmakufu, Fallout 4, Flash CS6 and some of the newer games with it. You keep saying it is better in every way yet it's not capable of supporting some of my favorite programs. Your next line might be "Then maybe if those companies also run linux", well why would a faceless conglomerate sacrifice profits in the name of using something that might not work consistently all the time. Also, before your use the bugs and viruses card, keep in mind that the average office schmuck types out reports and creates powerpoints with their computers, nothing else so there's nothing really major in that area.

Any time there's any professional in the field of computer technology it's imperative to use Linux.

And who are you to dictate that? Some kind of head honcho expert in leading market trends? Professionals use Windows because it has the broadest market and largest business opportunities.

Why should a corporation get away with tricking people into liking a bad product, and using them as a weapon to argue with people trying to tell them that Windows is garbage?

Because they earned it, way back then when Microsoft was just new company. The market at the time really liked it and forked over the cash. All those flaws? It's because they're #1, and when you're #1 you are on a pedestal constantly expected to try new things. They're not gonna wait until Mac and Linux makes something new then rip it off (even though Bill Gates...), they're going to make it themselves whether it works or not; as long as the idea is there.

You want sources? You can have em
http://www.techradar.com/us/news/software/operating-systems/20-reasons-you-should-switch-to-linux-912294

This article is old and under the assumption that Windows' trump card at the time is Vista. Microsoft managed to redeem itself with 7 which I currently run on my laptop even though I'm an XP loyalist. The way I see it, the "battle between Windows and Linux" is just a matter of cherry picking and then presenting them in a manner that makes them look like it's the silver bullet to all your problems. By the way, your choice of sites aren't really that credible, they seem to be from opinion-oriented sites, I want something with more oomph. I want you to draw from more official sites. Also, the only security you need is common sense, regardless of what OS you're running.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/askjack/2015/aug/15/windows-10-microsoft-should-privacy-problems-worry-me

If you actually read the article, it's actually praising Windows 10. "At least it's not Windows 8.1" is like "At least it's not Vista." As Sans from Undertale says, "geeettttttt dunked on!!"

And before you answer the compatibility inquiries with Wine, keep in mind that running Wine means running a piece of Windows in Linux, essentially proving that Linux doesn't run everything natively.

Also, any tech problem I experience is self-inflicted. Browser lagging? Why am I running three bloated firefox windows with scores of tabs each? Blue Screen of Death? Running Flash CS6 with an unstable Java program wasn't the smartest move. Virus? I just haaaad to download the hentai game from a place that's suspiciously too convenient to find it in. Maybe your tech problems were a result of a mistake, and (one of) your next line is going to be "Then Microsoft isn't malicous, just stupid then. But why trust a company that's too incompetent in their work?" Because bless their heart, they're trying. I don't see you dripping with blood sweat and tears in program development, knowing that your product will remain buggy no matter how hard you try.

I'm gonna anticipate you pulling the "you're an average joe, not a computer geek like me" card and mention that I am an IT student. My college primarily supports Apple products with two computer rooms, one of which has Windows PCs. You might wonder why I support microsoft even though my college is leaning to be Apple oriented, to which I answer: "As long as it's not running Linux."

The Fanboy level of Sea Beast is Over 9000!
Anyway,

Quote from Sea Beast

People like and use Windows because they don't know there's an alternative. It's about educating the people. Not acceptance of ignorance.

Oh, so now we are UNEDUCATED just because we don't use Linux?
Also, all of those PC world articles are under LINUX LINE, so people who are just surfing the main page probably won't find these.

Quote from Sea Beast

I just cited numerous sources all showing my argument to be valid

Well, I have some too.
http://www.lockergnome.com/windows/2011/12/21/seven-reasons-why-windows-is-better-than-linux-distributions/
This guy is pretty fair.
http://www.zdnet.com/article/five-reasons-id-rather-run-windows-8-than-linux/
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/10-things/10-reasons-why-linux-isnt-triumphing-over-windows/
http://www.thewindowsclub.com/microsoft-windows-open-source-operating-systems
http://betanews.com/2013/05/28/dear-linux-im-leaving-you-for-windows-8/
But the main question here is, Should Microsoft even exist?
Imagine what would happen if it doesn't exist.
But I respect your opinion, but you are not convincing me to get Linux instead of Windows 10.
Besides you side stepped all my points against Windows and instead choosing to nitpick points out of an indisputable case against Windows that the only thing attractive about Windows is it's business connections, not it's software.-Sea Beast
I can say the same thing to you.
You'd understand if you ever used Linux-Sea Beast
Well, how about you stick to your Linux and I stick to my Windows. It is like arguing Burger King vs Mcdonalds.
As Azure and other users said- Get off your High Horse.