Is the login screen's beauty a criteria to being a powerful, stable OS?
I don't completely agree with you.
I purchased Asus AH1000 netbook which came with Windows preinstalled. As soon as it was unpacked, I have erased Windows, downloaded Ubuntu NRE, ran the install program, and everything, I repeat everything, is and has been working fine. No crashes (not only because of viruses as some say), no speed loss.
However, if you purchase Windows on CD (not OEM versions), I doubt that it will install all the necessary drivers. This, I know, because I too used to be a Windows fan until I got to know Ubuntu and eventually threw away all the Windows CDs.
You must be a Microsoft employee to believe for one moment that either Vista or Windows 7 stacks up against ANY properly configured Linux distro, let alone Ubuntu. You must be a Microsoft employee (or in their pay) because you failed to mention the fact that the Linux platform is virtually virus proof out of the box, whereas we all know just how weak security is and always has been in Microsoft products and that many many serious computer users decide to migrate to Linux simply because they need better security than Microsoft delivers. You also failed to mention that Microsoft software will always be at a performance disadvantage compared to Open Source alternatives because of Microsoft's built-in anti software piracy code, which is like having a spy in your computer, using up a significant proportion of your computers' resources; not for your benefit but for the benefit of Microsoft. You also failed to point out that the number of web servers running Microsoft software is a lot less than those running Linux software. Why didn't you mention the fact that thousands of gifted programmers around the world are constantly improving Linux at a pace that Microsoft cannot hope to match? In the few years that Ubuntu has been around, we are already up to version 10.xx and in the same time period only 2 new versions of Windows since XP have been released and one of those (Vista) is generally regarded as being not as useful or as popular today as its predecessor. You failed to mention that Microsoft software also has bugs and that image quality in XP/Vista/7 is inferior to that delivered by the Linux platform. I believe that Linux image quality is on a par with the Mac. You could even say that image handling in Microsoft is permanently buggy out of the box!
Please, take your tinfoil hat off, sir. Thank you.Microsoft's built-in anti software piracy code, which is like having a spy in your computer
Prodigy.....Ever consider that maybe you are just no good at configuring Linux? Maybe you have never seen a properly configured Linux desktop with all the eye candy and best programs enabled? Maybe you have not used any of the benchmark tools to compare them?
So tell me, what version of linux have you used for your desktop? Can you even explain what process you used to customize your desktop let alone performance?
I wonder if you really have any experience with linux beyond looking at some default settings for a bare bones distro, or if you are a microsoft employee/shill.