What can Windows do that Linux can't?

[georgegerm]

I know it's been said before, but with the amount of games out there for consoles these days I still don't uderstand why this is still such a big deal. I haven't been a big PC gamer in years and own a PS3 and a 360, so I guess I just don't see what it is that the younguns are missing out on since I don't keep up with it any more.

uhhhh...
i wish there was an easy comment here... think NOT,, but i shall give it a try..
not all the young ones (or the old ones like me) have a console or 2 for games !!!
some are comfortable playing on their pc and want to have to have it that way,, an all in one pack...
do not ask me why i cannot tell ya but i am one of them, and i can afford a console but do not want one...
as far as i know the pc games industry is doing quite well so i guess i am not alone...
to offer the console option is nice but not a complete solution since so many gamers use their pcs with windblow$ on it and will keep it that way (human nature maybe, the fear of changing to a console,, money ???...
personally i dual boot to deal with this....
but a console is indeed an option, for some

[ngrieb]

Um sadly... most high-end video games, and there is no way to view Shockwave apps without WINE.

[deadbeatdrum]

I didn't mind Windows 2000, I tolerated XP......then along came Vista.

Vista may not be as bad an operating system as portrayed in the popular press, but it is hardly a stellar product.

What can Windows do that Linux can't? An interesting question.

I never charged people to fix their Windows machines (mostly XP), I just tried to sort out their problems the best I could with the tools I had to hand. Most people seemed satisfied, I just never gave it much thought beyond this.

What was a trickle turned into a torrent around the time Vista was released. I was overwhelmed, I simply did not want to know.

These days you have to pay me to interact with Windows. A few beers, a good meal, a night with your rather attractive daughter/niece/second cousin removed etc.

I'm posting from Fedora Core 11, but I have two Ubuntu based machines for the record.

This is what Windows can do and Linux can't.

[fjosh]

What can Windows do that Linux can't?

Run a Broadcom 4306 rev 3

I'm extremely disappointed in the terrible wireless support in Karmic, so far at least.
bcmwl-kernel-source has done nothing for me.

[caeroe]

Run Flash video in fullscreen at optimal performance.

It's why my netbook is WinXP based, I wanted an Ubuntu netbook, but Flash performance is crucial to browsing.

[kwacka]

What can Windows do that Linux can't?

Run a Broadcom 4306 rev 3

I'm extremely disappointed in the terrible wireless support in Karmic, so far at least.
bcmwl-kernel-source has done nothing for me.

Have you complained to Broadcom about this?

[Chame_Wizard]

when 1 program is freezing,others are also freezing.

[omarly]

Windows installs quite ok. And eventhough it takes a long time, it's up and running without crusial bugs, for allmost all my experiences.

I have been using MS since 3.1, following Ubuntu - wanted to convert - for the last 2 yrs.
For my concern, i turned to Ubuntu when they got support for my Option usb 3g modem. My only connection to the net. But I had a long time searching forums, trying lots of things to get my intel 3945 wifi, to get started at boot.

his is a shame and i think Ubuntu would gain a lot of new users if these issues were solved. Ubuntu is now my only OS, and i like it a lot, but pc users today uses them FOR THE NET. We are addicted to it.

People like my mom, aunt, and i guess a lot like them, have issues with MS, but are happy to get their mail and browse. Then it should be a #1 concern for Ubuntu to get these connections working.

THEN i am sure Ubuntu would get a lot of converts.

Have i nice day!

[Spencer Caplan]

The only thing that I could do with XP that I can not do with Ubuntu is run iTunes.

[fela]

The only thing that I could do with XP that I can not do with Ubuntu is run iTunes.

Install amarok on Ubuntu. Amarok 1.4 OWNS all media players (in most people's opinions), definitely including iTunes. If you want a less-bloated itunes clone for Linux, just use rhythmbox (comes installed with Ubuntu). I'm not too sure I like amarok 2 though. At first I hated it but trust me if you persevere with it and learn the user interface then amarok 2 isn't that bad. It's just unconventional.

That being said I definitely prefer Amarok 1.4 (there's tutorials for getting it running on Ubuntu 9.04) - it definitely owns all other music players on every platform.