We all love Windows, right? Of course, this is a great operating system. However, what happens if I tell you that Ubuntu is better? You may laugh and think there is nothing better beloved Windows. But in this article, we will look at 6 reasons why Ubuntu is better than Windows.

Some of you think that Ubuntu is only for smart people and that the average user won't be able to use it. Then how can she be better than windows? The truth is that Ubuntu is not that hard to use, in fact just as easy as using Windows, in some ways even easier. So, let's look at a few reasons why Ubuntu is better than Windows.

Imagine the situation: you sit down to do some work on your Windows PC, and as soon as you are ready to print important document, a window pops up asking you to update Windows. Being a dutiful conscious user, you update and restart your computer.

After 10 minutes, you are ready to finish what you started, but suddenly a notification pops up from Apple that they also have an update for you. Annoys? Yes!

You see, this is because Windows handles OS and app updates separately. Therefore, you will receive pop-ups for each of the applications when they need to be updated. This makes the update process difficult, which is why a lot of people disable it altogether.

Ubuntu is different. Everything is done with the help of software repositories - repositories, it uses the update manager, for this OS process and all installed apps. This way you manage updates from one place. It's much simpler, so users generally don't disable it, which means they're more secure. By the way…

2. Computer security

Windows has security features that you can use to protect your system, but you can't get away from the fact that Ubuntu is more secure than Windows.

User accounts in Ubuntu have much fewer default permissions than in Windows. This means that if you want to make changes to the system (for example, install an application), you first need to enter a password. On Windows, you don't need to. This makes Ubuntu more difficult for malware or a virus to run.

Ubuntu is less popular than Windows. This means that the bad guys who make viruses haven't written much malware for Ubuntu: it's good news for users!

Also, a lot of the bad guys use Ubuntu themselves, so while Ubuntu is susceptible to viruses, the chances of you getting infected are slim to none. Negligible, but possible - always use antivirus software in Ubuntu.

3. Desktop decoration

Windows doesn't have a lot of desktop customization options, and although 10 has expanded on that from previous versions, it's still a long way from Ubuntu.

You are severely limited to changing wallpapers or colors start menu on Windows, but on Ubuntu, any part of the desktop can be easily changed. Want to work panel on right? No problem. Don't like icons? Easy to fix. Maybe Ubuntu fonts you want to do what you like? Not another word!

Below is a screenshot of my working ubuntu table 16.04. The changes I made in about 5 minutes make it look very different from a standard desktop.

4. System resources

Not everyone can afford the most modern computer. So for some, the latest version of Windows is a bit pricey. And Ubuntu can be used not in the newest version.

On a test machine, I installed Ubuntu and Windows 10, and as you can see below, Windows 10 uses almost twice as much random access memory than Ubuntu. It doesn't matter to me because test computer has 8 GB of RAM.

But if your computer has 2 GB of RAM, that means Ubuntu takes up 60% of your RAM and Windows 10 takes up 90%
If your computer has even fewer resources than 2 GB, you can choose lightweight versions of Ubuntu and Linux, which use less system resources. This will extend the life of your computer by several years.

5. Live environment

If you have not used Windows before and decide that you should try it, you will have to install the system on your computer. This means that you will lose a lot of time on the installation, and if you do not like it, then you will lose your data. Ubuntu is different.

In Ubuntu, as in many other Linux distributions, you can burn the image to a CD or flash drive and boot from that media in its entirety. working version operating systems s. This means that you can try Ubuntu without having to install on HDD.
Didn't like the OS? No problem: just reboot your machine and you will be back to previous version as if nothing had happened.

6. It's free

It's true, Ubuntu is 100% free. It doesn't cost a dime (but you can donate on their website). I know what you're going to say, "But Windows 10 is free too."

Windows 10 was offered as free update until the end of July, but the offer is no longer valid (although there is another way to upgrade).

Windows 10 will set you back $119.99 for home use and $199.99 for the pro version, which is very expensive. So why not save that money and invest it in something else? Instead of Windows 10, you can download for free latest version Ubuntu.

Windows vs. Ubuntu: what will you choose?

Overall, both Windows 10 and Ubuntu are excellent operating systems, each with strong and weaknesses. And it's great that we have a choice.

Have you tried one of them? If so, please write in the comments below about your experience with them. If you haven't tried Ubuntu yet, what's stopping you?

Related posts:

Rate this article:

(28 ratings, average: 4,68 out of 5)

about the author

Founder and administrator of the site site, I am fond of open source software and the Linux operating system. I currently use Ubuntu as my main OS. In addition to Linux, I am interested in everything related to information technology and modern science.

56 comments

Is Ubuntu 16.04 better than Windows 10?

I'll go through the points.
1. OS and software updates
There are no problems with updates in both Windows 10 and Ubuntu 16.04
2. Computer security
There are no absolutely safe operating systems. And in many ways, security depends on the user.
3. Desktop decoration
The default desktop design is better in Windows 10 than in Ubuntu 16.04.
The color scheme in Ubuntu 16.04 just annoys me.
4. System resources
I disagree with the author, since programs run a little faster in Windows 10 than in Ubuntu 16.04. (noticeable visually)
(tested both systems on an old 2008 laptop with single core processor and 4 GB RAM)
5. Live environment
Yes, I agree with the author. Ubuntu has an advantage here
6. It's free.
Well, yes, Ubuntu is free, but... if I have to, I'll pay for the product.

Windows vs. Ubuntu: what will you choose?
If for work, then Windows 10 (at least for me)
For the Internet, listening to music and watching videos, you can use Ubuntu.
…Although Windows can handle it just fine

In my house, windows is used only for games, video processing / editing, photo processing. For work and everything else - Ubuntu (though the KDE shell - I'm used to it).

The disadvantage of Win10 is its unmanageability. Updates that she puts when she pleases are not ok.

1. Oh no, don't tell me... Windows has always been full of updates with updates... At first, it starts to update on its own, without even thinking about asking for permission, and at that moment you might be playing something and you think - why did the system suddenly become so slow ... Then it starts to send you a notification every now and then - "reboot or reboot itself in 20 minutes." Of course, you can reset it endlessly, but in the end you forget to reset it and hop ... In the middle of the game, your computer starts to reboot by itself ... After such a mat, this Windows is not enough.
2. Say what you like, but it cannot be denied that Linux is much safer than Windows. And by the way, I have never heard of antivirus programs on Linux. Do they even exist? 😀 They just don't need it.
3. Here I agree. Unity (default DE in ubuntu) is a monstrous eyeball *of course. I don't see how anyone can use it. To me, she's just awful.
4. By the way, I also heard that Ubuntu has basically system requirements higher than Windows. Another question is that there are other Linux and other DE. Much more lightweight, but no less beautiful. For example Manjaro XFCE - just flies.

Windows vs. Ubuntu: Windows, because I don't like Ubuntu at all. Another windows question vs. Linux: Definitely Linux, because There are much better systems out there. The same Mint or Manjaro. And yes, Linux is suitable for any kind of activity. Although I must admit that of course with games on Windows it's easier. But there are also many games for Linux, and you can also run Windows games on Linux through wine.

Administrator - sorry for off-topic question: why do you use OpenSUSE, and what de ?

I like OpenSUSE, stable system, almost no bugs, easy to install the right software. Well, I'm used to it. The environment is kde.

thanks for the answer, I choose between mint with kde and opensuse, the only thing that stops me from installing opensuse is that I could not find the Russian-speaking community, but on their Russian forum, it seems to me somehow empty and sad.

Jack argue)

For MINT because they have the most disgusting attitude towards fixing dangerous vulnerabilities

Dear Sergey, I completely agree with everything you wrote. But Win has a lot of stuff that Ubuntu either doesn't have or doesn't work very well. In general, for those who only need the Internet, mail, movies and reading books, Ubuntu is definitely better than Win.

Linux is great for web development.
GBE in Windows needs to be downloaded and installed, in Linux one line in the terminal and that's it.
plus driver. As far as I know, Linkx installs the drivers itself. Vmndovs seems to be the same, but in fact it is not.
Plus, Windows eats a lot of disk space .. The only thing that stops me from switching is that Word is still better open office and that some games still can not be thrown out of life) ru

You can run games from Windows through Steam Play Beta through Proton

Many people are concerned about the issue of surveillance in Ubuntu.

Ahah. Gone. Didn't confuse anything? This is just total surveillance in Windows. Everyone already knows about it. Ubuntu is an open source system that users make. In general, Linux is just the safest system in terms of surveillance.

Well, this kind of texts should be placed on win resources. As a Windows user since 3.11 and having switched to mint for only a couple of weeks, I can add a fly in the ointment - I managed to adjust the sound with a tambourine and then I want to work, I want not. I had to abandon the mouse analyzer, it doesn’t want to work at all, I have an old CRT TV 21 "on the second monitor, the children play cartoons, and I couldn’t pick up the frequency for it, the chronic previka to the puntoswitcher - put xneural - chronically falls off.

At first it's always like this, then gradually it becomes easier. It’s better to start with a mint, over time it seemed boring to me, there are more interesting things, I have to try. (on the this moment I use ROSA, Simply, Ubuntu).

Sorry, but even Windows will not work on your rusty bucket!)

I have been using Linux since the release of Ubuntu 8. Now Ubuntu 16 is installed. Of course, now the hardware is different. old computer also whole. It has Debian installed. I turn it on sometimes too. What did you do during this time from more or less big projects. Edited videos and educational films. Drawn posters (interior printing, billboards, banners and streamers large sizes). Created presentations, course and diploma projects for students of various engineering specialties. Engaged in 3d modeling. I drew labels, coats of arms, texts and cut them out using a cutting plotter. Prepared materials (audio, video, photos, texts, animation) for publication on websites. Administered the database. There is no problem that would be impossible to solve in Linux. All work done in Linux is legally clear. Copyright is not violated. You feel independent and confident. Windows!? Most likely in Windows, when implementing long-term projects, there may be big problems. Microsoft has repeatedly refused to support the operating system and the programs that inhabit it, throwing users. I don't think this will ever happen again. You can inadvertently read and misinterpret something, so you have legal problems, litigation and various troubles due to the violation of someone's rights. Before you take on a case, you need to hire a lawyer to protect yourself. Windows is only good for entertainment. Play for yourself and play, unfasten the loot for every occasion and you will be happy.

But if your computer has 2 GB of RAM, that means Ubuntu takes up 60% of your RAM, and Windows 10 takes up 90%.

Ubuntu is on a laptop, but on a PC - Windows. I am a streamer))

Is a laptop not a PC?

A laptop is a mobile device and a PC is a personal computer! Fershtein?

Mobile device is a smartphone or tablet
A laptop is a PC, all components are from a PC and the processor is not based on ARM

Linux Mint. Switched to it from Ubuntu 2 years ago. I won't say the exact reason. Something did not suit me related to Unity. 2 main disadvantages of Ubuntu: a) screaming by default orange theme, as a result of which it is necessary to look for calmer colors, b) the need for "finishing", in particular, java, turning off aport, configuring Unity itself, lack of a classic menu (must be installed additionally). Currently switched from Cinnamon shell to XFCE (less "eats", but I need high responsiveness).

Here in the comments there is minus Mint for allegedly "the most disgusting attitude towards fixing dangerous vulnerabilities." But what this means is not disclosed. I suspect that the author of the comment was just reading liberatum.ru, which is famous for such statements. But...
1) Mint uses the same package base as Ubuntu (with the exception of Linux Mint Debian Edition), i.e., by and large, at the level of system files, Mint is the same Ubuntu;
2) but did the author of the comment try to set a different level in the updates than the default one, for example, "Always update everything"? I suspect not, because it seems to be "scary": op. from a system warning: "Update my computer in a timely manner. If there are problems after installing the updates, I will fix them myself."
And what is interesting is my system is vulnerable compared to Ubuntu? Nothing, and even slightly superior, since I use the 4.7 kernel, which eliminates a number of vulnerabilities in the TCP / IP protocol stack. It is unlikely that this kernel is already offered in Ubuntu. As for the negative attitude of developers towards kernel updates, this is their IMHO, since regular user will not be able to roll back to an older kernel (you need some knowledge). But no one bothers to enable the maximum level of updates in Mint, although the 4.7 kernel is also not offered there.

I fully support G.K.. Mint is easy to use and constantly updated. In terms of memory, Ubuntu is lighter than Windows 10, but Mint is lighter than Ubuntu. I have an old PC with 2GB of RAM and a built-in video card, Ubuntu did not pull it and the card was not enough.

I think it's not worth arguing about security, Linux uses MicroSoft itself ....

Ubuntutoids, I advise you to try Manjaro and if you have strength, then Arch. You will be shocked by the speed of the system. Moved to Arch, very satisfied. (experience with Unix-like systems for 16 years (muLinux, Frya 4. 6. Solaris, Mandrake, Mandriva, OpenSuse, ubuntu c 9th and its various derivatives)

I know for sure that Windows-10 is recommended for games.
The manufacturer himself writes (on the label of the new PC): "Play better with Windows-10."
🙂
Closed software cannot be completely controlled.
For serious and independent tasks, of course - open source.

I am a simple user! Ease of use, stability and speed are important to me! At first I did not see anything better than winHR, but then I began to think about alternatives. VIN quickly clogged up and started to slow down .. I paid attention to Linux! the first experience was with ALT 4! I liked the stability and good Russification!! since then, on my PC dual boot! gradually moved to OpenSUSE (the fourth sneakers fascinated with beauty), and then crawled over to ubuntu. I wanted simplicity and convenience! to this day, I am an ubuntovod! enjoy using it!!
Very pleased with the trend and development of the gaming industry under tench!! All the best!!!))

Windows Comparison and Linux Ubuntu is relevant only in the ethical plane. Compare these two operating systems technical parameters- it's like comparing the technical parameters of stolen Mercedes, which give people some kind of Robinhood for free, with absolutely free Opels, which are given to people by the owners of "Opel".

Windows is better than any Linux! faster, more reliable and no problems at all! and Linux will bug out sooner or later and you will have to dig into the terminal! Linux is for programmers and those who do not have money for software!

those who do not have money for software download it on torrents and do it right. Modern "programmers" have nothing to sit on, because C # JAVA and the like are mainstream, unfortunately. Wine was relatively good until the release of 8. 7 worked fine and was more or less under control. With the release of 10, the probe that they try to shove to the user has become so large that any console in Linux seems like a minor problem. Although from the point of view of stupid consumption of wines, 10 are stolen because there is no need to think.

Well, then use 7, who's stopping you? Even XP is still quite possible ...

So what? I don't see a big problem in poking around in the Ubuntu terminal. And I'm never a programmer. And I don’t have money for software (extra, at least), and why should I, figuratively speaking, ride a stolen Merc if BMW owners give me a BMW X6 with all the documents for free?

I have used both operating systems, and different distributions of both Windows and Linux. I have been using windows for over ten years. Ever since my first computer and Windows XP SP2. Then I did not think about much and did not even pay attention. special attention when Winda flew. But I have grown. Got an education. I got smarter and realized that Windows is still that magnet for all kinds of garbage, cache, and so on. And when Windows 10 came out, I thought that it was not so bad. Updated and used for a week. I understand. Which couldn't be worse. Hell, I liked Vista better than 10.
And then I remembered that someone was talking about Linux. I saw it a couple of times on laptops in stores and did not understand. What kind of operating system is this. Then I learned more information and put it to myself. Erase all data. I put it in the blind. And I installed Ubuntu. And after the first minutes of acquaintance, I realized that it was she who was what I had been looking for for so long. After that, I tried a dozen Linux distributions and returned to Ubuntu. I loved her and don't want to let go anymore. But still, no matter what anyone said, I hated Windows 7 with all my heart. Because even with the licensed version, I felt uncomfortable working with it.

I have been on Windows for many years. Started with Win98. I've seen many versions of Windows. When a dozen came out and started collecting user telemetry data, I didn’t like it, and I don’t like catching viruses that mail.ru generously sends out. I switched to Xubuntu. Xubuntu turned out to be not very stable (apparently after I screwed the Kubuntu desktop - KDE 5 Plasma onto it, it is very heavy). Moved to Linux Mint - Xfce 18.2 Sonya. Mint is more stable than Ubuntu. Happy as an elephant.

But Windows 10 starts up many times faster than Ubuntu 16.04. How to live with such a fact?

Well, where are the facts, just blah blah blah, prove reasonably and you can’t help but write nonsense.

Another 7th fact is that tench will work quietly on a half-dead screw, but there will be no Windows at all. And to compare all this is not entirely correct, try to prove that the left eye or left hand is better than the right. I use both systems, on the PC it costs 7 and on the old laptop of 2008 where Piggy barely drags herself, runtu xfce 16.04 flies like a jet. http://i.prntscr.com/Y_VVG1xCQhei2NOaMc3iTA.png

God ... children write all sorts of nonsense ... Games on Windows are better, is that, game console? ON Linux it is possible everything - dashtoty? Seriously?
And work with color profiles printer-also possible in linux? Pomnitsa Linux Mint was never able to print a normal photo for me on an Epson photo printer. There is no replacement for Windows VISIO on Linux, just as there is no normal replacement for Photoshop. Yes, you can run it in a virtual machine, but this is already perverted. Have you tried editing video on Linux? So how is it? Did the ambulance come to you? So it turns out that Linux is ideal for simple tasks: surfing, kinushki, looking at pictures, and that's all. For advanced people, the network capabilities of Linux are interesting, and here it has no equal, but these are a few percent, and Windows is absolutely the whole range of interests. I personally hate her...

V networking opportunities no equal? I highly doubt it! I have a home server Linux Fedora 27, a home theater system running Linux and Windows, and a work computer running three Windows 10, Linux Fedora 27, and Rosa Fresh R10. Previously used Debian 7 on server, Ubuntu 14.04 and Windows 7 on home theater. on the working Windows 8 and experimented with Linux, Debian based (Debian 7/8/9 itself, Ubuntu, Mint, ZorinOS...). The network was just terribly slow, especially the opening network resources their Linux, it took from 1 to 5 minutes to open the desired file! From Windows the same files opened in 0.5 - 2 seconds. Now about the Internet, I often have to download descriptions of various programs, operating systems, etc. In Linux, this is such a "hemorrhoid" !!! You fool, you fool, you spit, you swear, you reboot into Windows and everything works out in one moment. Launching several video files in a row from a server from Linux is a rather serious problem, but in Windows this is done once or twice. Therefore, I keep two systems on my home theater, when the stupidity of Linux gets it, I just reboot into Windows and enjoy it. Here on Linux server out of competition, power, flexibility, undemanding to resources. And when I transferred to all computers to another Linux platform RedHat and the network began to work much better, the discovery of resources accelerated tenfold, no more than 2 - 3 seconds. Now I have Frdora 27 installed everywhere, I use it on the server but without a graphical environment. A little more than six months have passed, the flight is normal. And my evolution was like this (for a desktop PC) - Ubuntu --> Kubuntu --> Mint KDE --> Rosa R7, updated to KDE 8.1. Runtu hfse is still on the netbook, but I want to try something super-light like Papyrus or Russified SliTaz ... And I tried it in live mode and virtualblx, probably a few dozen distributions ... Including the free insider 10, but the last one after 6 years of linuxoidism, it’s not very perceived ...

two systems, wines for the wife! Ubuntu for myself

I agree with everything except for setting up the desktop. Never had a problem with this on Windows

I have been trying to learn Linux for over 10 years. Started with SOS, TRDOS, these are Sinclair Spectrum operating systems, switched to DOS, then Windows, was indescribably delighted with OS / 2, this "half-axis" on a computer with Intel processor 80386 DX40 (40 MHz clock frequency of the processor and as much as 4 megabytes of RAM) worked in such a way that I now remember with longing, having a computer with an I7 processor and 8 Gb RAM. Worked with the unsurpassed reliability of Windows 3.11. From Linux, there is no system that I would not install. Now settled on Ubuntu 14.04. home server, however, on my home theater and work computer, I keep Windows 10 for the soul. On the home server, Debian 7 worked fine for 5 years, but it was hopelessly outdated, and with the upgrade to versions 8 and 9, it turned out to be a complete bummer. No matter how hard I tried, I could not even get a third of what I received on version 7. By trial and error, I found a stable and perfectly working Fedora 27 system. I implemented everything that was in Debian 7 in it, plus I additionally got dozens of times faster opening network resources (a few seconds, versus 2-3 minutes in Debian) and more sane than the Debian torrent client. However, when for a long time I can’t do anything in Linux, I swear, I reboot into Windows and everything works fine. By the way Windows 10, the best creation of the Microsoft campaign. I have not seen such stability of work since Windows 3.11. "Piggy" (Windows XP) is no match for her, after installing "Piggy" it works fine for a week, a maximum of a month, then it starts to slow down terribly, neither cleaning disks, system, registry helps, and in the end it has to, maximum, after a couple of months reinstall it again. In the top ten, immediately after installation, disable the update (best of all, through system registry), clean from spy modules, for example, with the DWS utility, and customize it to your liking. For example, I completely turn off all the prettiness, install the classic menu and use exclusively portable programs that do not litter the system. "Ten" is the ONLY system that I once installed, I have been using for more than two years now and I do not see a decrease in performance. As for the price, it is better to pay once and enjoy the work than to have endless "hemorrhoids" and "dances with a tambourine". Now about viruses, no self-respecting hacker would write a virus for a system that is used by less than 1% of computers. I'm not talking about tablets, smartphones, etc., here the percentage is higher, but there are already viruses for them! So it's not the system.

Creating shortcuts is easier on Windows than on Ubuntu.

And so, the srach begins. Many people say that games cannot be played on linux. Can. Steam was released on it, wine, crossover were released. The driver found (nvidia geforce 9600) sound using alsa. You just need to understand. I calmly play GTA 4, sun, city, stalkers... World of Tenks starts up. And you say not for games? Well, that's your right... Photoshop? Gimp is also strong, sort of. libreoffice docs, normas too. Interface? Change, there are a lot of them on the Internet, Download. Video? Vlc, music? Same vlc. Internet? No chrome? How about chromium? Firefox? Opera? Something else? There are ide programmers, there are editors, there are compilers. Compile for Windows? Download mingw by launching google. Consider an OS for programmers? Nonsense. Otherwise there would be no all this software. Writing software? Zim. C#? Mono... Minecraft? Pfff, it's cross-platform, download Java and you're done. I agree with drivers. Not at all, but the developers of these mice should understand that Windows is not the only system. Get root on android? Google. Files? Nautilus. Camera? Booth Further it makes no sense to list the software. And so, this is both on a laptop and on a PC, for games. I launch all the toys. What do not you like? It's not clear. (This is an appeal to Windows)

Arguments to put it mildly little truthful and meaningful. Any Ubuntu version, even if it is free, and cannot provide all users necessary tools for everyday tasks, most likely this OS is suitable for narrowly focused tasks, yes, I agree, the Linux repositories are rich, but they cannot provide the proper quantity and quality of programs that the average PC user needs. It doesn’t even make sense to talk about gamers, this definitely needs Windows. And the last one is 18 Ubuntu version with a desktop from a gnome (instead of uniti) generally eats more RAM than Windows. Personally, I like Linux, in my case it is mint cinnamon, but this is only because of the absolute independence of the latter and the media server, in linux it works very stably, compared to windows, but all are working and game processes only in Windows and why, I think it’s not worth explaining, take at least Libre office, it’s just some kind of hardcore - an office for masochists, there are also no worthy cad systems, etc. In general, advice to beginner Linuxers - don’t waste its time, this oc is not worth it in 99%. IMHO

25. 09.2018

Blog of Dmitry Vassiyarov.

Which is better Windows or Linux?

Good day, my dear readers. Today we will talk about the main question that occupies the minds of users: what better Windows or Linux? In the process of understanding this dilemma, you will understand how strong your faith in the chosen operating system is, and whether it is worth your attention, money and nerves.

Yes, friends, just like that, ordinary technical question concerning the comparison of two software products, goes into the plane of worldview. Therefore, there is a conditional division into "Linux guides" and adherents of Windows. And each category has its own user philosophy and its own arguments in defense of the choice made.

Let's take a closer look at the features of each of the OS and, perhaps, you will discover something new for yourself.

But first, let's look at the history of the confrontation.

How it all began

• The concept of the window system was proposed by Microsoft back in 1985 and has been constantly evolving, going from Win 1.0 to the modern "Tens". This was achieved through the periodic sequential release of new systems. But each of which required large resources. At the same time, the system always remained paid, and the developer did not allow anyone to work on this project. However, in every possible way supported the integration of Windows with other software and hardware.

• Linux was created in 1991 and its idea was to provide open source systems. Anyone could improve and modify this product with the condition of its further free distribution. As a result of this approach, many different distributions have been suppressed. From which, in turn, new systems began to “bud off”, sharpened to perform standard or specialized tasks.

Based on this, we will determine which is better than Windows or Linux, considering individual criteria. Later, by assessing the importance of each of them for yourself personally, you can summarize the results and get an objective assessment.

Issue price

Windows, as you know, is a licensed product and costs money (about $200!). Add to that the cost office suite and other useful, but paid programs. It turns out to be a pretty decent amount.

Linux by this indicator is just a dream of any user. And the OS itself is free, and the entire set of programs installed on it is also offered free of charge (that is, for free).

The right to choose

Supporters of Windows can choose an OS based on the configuration and resources of their PC. On older computers, some still run the equally ancient XP. Most have "Seven" and "Eight". And also, the owners of these systems once had a chance to switch to latest Windows 10. Roughly speaking, the choice comes down to new or previous versions.

Linux distributions also have early and current versions. But the sheer number of distributions is simply amazing:

• favorite of Mint users (in variations of Mate or Cinnamon);
• Ubuntu or Kubuntu (depending on the graphical shell);
• Debian;
• lightweight Lubuntu, Puppy or Elementary OS
• Steam OS for games
• Kodi for media entertainment;
• and many, many others...

At the same time, it should be understood that the Windows graphical interface is directly tied to the OS, has no alternative, is extremely conservative, and does not allow major changes.

With Linux, it's the other way around. Several graphical shells (Gnome, Xfce, KDE, Unity, LXDE), each of which is original and offers many flexible settings. Well, just a dream of some users.

Software and hardware support

This round is outright won by Windows. Almost all software originally created for other systems (MacOS, Linux or mobile shells) is also adapted for Windows. backward compatibility takes place in exceptional cases.

That is, you can find almost any program to install on a "window" system. Especially pleased with the availability of professional proposals for design and video editing.

In Linux, things are not so rosy. But, nevertheless, there is a small assortment of programs that allow you to successfully solve all the main tasks facing the user:

• file manager;
• playback of media files;
• office software package;
• work with Internet resources;
• simple processing of images, video and music;

It is worth noting that all of them are not only free, but in most cases are immediately installed with the Linux distribution. Particularly pleased with the possibilities of this system, provided for programmers and web developers. This is not surprising, they did it "as for themselves."

But what is really bad in Linux (from the word “absolutely”) is with games. As of 2015, the Steam service had about 10,000 games for Windows and only 1,500 for Linux. There are of course some ways to solve this problem. The same emulation, but still it does not always work and failures are not rare. All in all, it's not complete.

Although.. I'm lying to you.

What kind of compromises are there?

There is also such a thing as Steam OS. This system, as you probably understood, is designed for games from Steam, developed by Valve. But again, it will need to be installed next to the main system. If this is not critical for you, then go visit!

Regarding hardware support, the situation is not unambiguous. On the one hand, you can find drivers for Windows for any equipment. But on the other hand, on Linux you don’t need to look for them at all (at least for hardware) - they are already included in the installation package.

By the way, this Linux property is used for, since the system is able to recognize and work with several different video cards at once, while demonstrating excellent process stability.

But for connected external equipment there may be problems on Linux: for example, the MFP works fine as a scanner, but it is not recognized as a printer. This, of course, is all solved, but with some effort.

Stability and system requests

It's no secret that the phrase "you need to reinstall Windu" often comes from the lips of ordinary users. And the main reason for this is the “clogging” of the system after its long use.

We will not dig deep. But I will say that the reason for this may be the accumulation of debris, residual and temporary files, complicating the addressing of registers and the presence of viruses.

For some reason this doesn't happen on Linux. Experts believe that this is all due to a completely different approach to organizing the work of the main software and file system.

This can also be seen from what hardware resources are required for the normal operation of the program.

You cannot install a new Windu on a weak and old PC. But Linux is not so capricious (therefore, the question of what works faster is immediately eliminated). Moreover, there are stable, fully functional versions of the OS (moreover, those that come with the package necessary programs) that do not work with the HDD, but are loaded directly into the RAM.

Why the brilliant minds of Microsoft are not able to optimize their system in such a way remains a mystery. (Guess: mutually beneficial financial interests with PC component manufacturers).

User cyber security

The first program that is usually downloaded after Windows installation, is Antivirus (and it is usually paid). Otherwise, the system will quickly fail or upset you in another way. Alas, own system Microsoft security is also not effective.

In Linux, as in Baghdad, everything is calm. Under a rare system and viruses, doing something is not profitable. And besides, its own system of access rights to software, although it complicates the work, but reduces these efforts to nothing. For this reason, Linux is the most secure OS. What makes it ideal both at home and for the server.

In general, I announced the main criteria by which Windows and Linux are compared. As for me, if you do not take into account pirated versions of the software, then the second system definitely wins.

But in favor of Windows, I consider it necessary to add the following: this OS has a huge community that can provide support in difficult times. And there is also the force of habit. If you are not the only PC user in the house, then forget about switching to Linux before agreeing this issue with the rest (but you can try the system in a virtual machine).

Actually, any opinion about which is better Windows or Linux will be subjective. And in order not to rely only on the information given in this article, I propose to try out two systems in practice and draw a conclusion for yourself.

With Windows, everything is clear (many have already tried different versions). But the choice of a Linux distribution is worth thinking about. And this is where my blog post specifically dedicated to this will help you.

Well, now it's time to say goodbye to you, my dear readers, and wish everyone good luck.

It just so happened that even on Habré, many people have a very vague idea about the Linux OS family.

The purpose of this article is to tell in the most popular language about the features and differences between Linux and Windows for those who have never dealt with it at all.

I have been using Archlinux for many years now, downloading Windows only “to play around”. This article talks about things that I found out empirically, poking like a blind kitten. If at one time I would have come across just such information in this form, it would have saved me at least 2 years, during which I switched from Windows to Linux.

The cornerstone principle of working with linux systems is “From understanding to action”, while in Windows it is “I know where to click / where to tick - I do”. In other words, in order to do something, you need to understand how it is arranged there, inside.

Thesis number 1 - you NEED to know how to work with the system from the text console!

“Pure” Linux ( base system) in any distribution looks like DOS - black screen, text mode, the blinking cursor is waiting for input. When you encounter this for the first time, you sit and think: “Damn, what should I write?”.

Modern user-friendly distributions give the illusion that the user does not need a console. Good uncles, they say, have already taken care of everything. Here is a wallpaper in FullHD resolution, here is a program for setting the parameters - you know, check the boxes, everything is like in Windows ... To avoid unnecessary holivars, I will make a digression at this point.

There is Linux users, which never fails. Ubuntu is upgraded from one major version to another, starting with Ubuntu 1.0, and so on. Guys, do not write anything in the comments about the uselessness of the console for the user, go and admire the rainbow that pink ponies poop in your world.

In my world, Linux is buggy and broken. No, everything is quite ok if you just run programs and use them. But then suddenly there comes a moment when you desperately need to, say, change open firewood to proprietary ones ... well, or just update the system. And here, if the stars are unsuccessful, you get a broken system and a text console like the only method interaction with her. And (what's the worst) - this kind of garbage tends to happen regularly.

My experience is that at such moments, the Windows user acts in the way he is used to, obeying the familiar ideology. First comes an attempt to "fix". Windows ideology prescribes to find on the Internet a discussion of a similar problem and its solution, after which repeat all the steps that led to the solution of the problem. The result is that the user mindlessly drives in commands that he does not understand. Sometimes it even helps, more often it doesn’t: the contents of the commands must be modified for specific conditions and a specific local machine, and there is no knowledge for this. As a consequence, the next logical step is to reinstall the system. Believe me, I know what I'm talking about - I have broken and reinstalled Ubuntu more than 10 times ... about a third of which after the spontaneous death of the system during the update process, with no correlation with the curvature of the hands.

Studying the device of the system and working with it from the console is akin to the well-known “lose a day - fly in an hour”. Fixing the problem in this case is much faster reinstallation, not to mention the fact that it becomes much easier to “not break” :) In addition, the difference completely disappears - you sit at the computer locally or through a remote SSH session. Believe me, this feeling is worth a lot.

Thesis number 2: user-friendly distributions are not suitable for studying the system.

The developers of such distributions diligently create a front-end graphics layer, designed to reduce the interaction between the user and the system to mindless mouse clicks. Technically, this layer can be a completely enchanting heap of crutches - in bash "e, python" e, perl "e ... perfect hell for a beginner trying to understand the logic of the system. In addition, sane documentation (if any) is lost among forum posts like “to get A, enter B in the console, and in the settings press the C button”

Technically minimalistic distributions with high-quality and detailed documentation are best suited for learning. Examples of these are Gentoo and Archlinux. Personally, I recommend the latter - simply because it worked for me. After a couple of years of ordeal with Ubuntu, just a couple of months with Arch advanced me in understanding Linux 10 times further.

There are several reasons here:

1. The technical minimalism of the system greatly facilitates its understanding.
2. High-quality, detailed documentation facilitates the learning process.
3. Getting out of the "graphic comfort zone" is very helpful!

The last point is worth noting in particular. Ubuntu, with its graphical interface, does not add any motivation to poke around in the console. Another thing is when initially there is only a console and a strong motivation to “configure this graphical interface already” - there is simply nowhere to go, you have to master the documentation and acquire knowledge.

Windows and Linux: fundamental differences

1. File system

• Linux does not assign letters to logical disk volumes. Instead, one of them is assigned as the root, and the rest are connected to the specified folders within it. All paths start with a slash, no C drives:
• Everything system files dumped in the root file system, and are cataloged by type/purpose. Relatively speaking, all settings are in /etc, executable files in / bin and / usr / bin - and to all this goodness, a normal user (not an administrator) has read / execute access only, and even then not always (when it comes to system services)
• File extensions in linux are completely optional. Whether a file is executable is determined by a special mark, similar to the “hidden” or “archived” mark in Windows. Executable files without an extension in linux are the norm!
• On linux, there is no special flag that a file is hidden. Instead, names with a dot at the beginning are used, and already file managers allow you to turn off the display of such files. That is, the /home/user/.bashrc file is hidden. The dot in this case is part of the file name!
• The normal user has full access only to your personal folder, which is usually located in /home/%username%. Similar to the D: drive in Windows, a separate disk partition is often attached to the /home folder. Thus, all user data is on a separate partition (or even a physical hard drive).
• All user (not system) programs, if necessary, save some of their data or settings, do this only in home folder the user they are running as, simply because it is the only user they have write access to.
• The very concept of a “file” in Linux is slightly different, wider. There is a so-called. device files. For example, /dev/sda is usually a hard drive (although it could be a flash drive), and /dev/sda1 is the first partition of that hard drive. From here, such tricky maneuvers as dd if=/dev/sda1 of=/home/user/backup are possible - the command will copy the entire first partition of the /dev/sda disk byte by byte to the backup file in the user's home directory. There is a so-called. “symbolic links” - in the file manager they look like a regular file, in fact they link to another file, and do not take up disk space. That is, there may be one executable file and a bunch of symbolic links to it in different places.

2. Package manager and the concept of “package”, installation of programs.

• Programs are installed only from the administrator account. During installation, all files related to the program (for example, Firefox) are “smeared” over the root file system - settings common to all users will go to /etc, executable files to /usr/bin, and icons and various resources like graphics and sounds - in /usr/share/firefox. In this situation, the user, in principle, cannot know where he has what exactly lies. The package manager is responsible for this. For example, the "Firefox" package includes a bunch of files. The package manager, when installing a package, will decompose them according to the file system, and when uninstalling, it will delete them accordingly.
• One more important function package manager - satisfaction of package dependencies. For example, Firefox requires the libjpeg library to work. This means that when installing, the package manager will automatically install the libjpeg package, and when uninstalling, it will remove it if it is not required by any other package.
• The package manager usually has a database with all available packages, and it has the means to search this database. Therefore, installing programs in linux is incredibly simple - the first command we are looking for is keywords based on the exact name of the package, the second - set. No need to climb on sites, search and download something. If I need to put skype in Arch, I dial pacman -S skype and I press ENTER, and in a minute I have skype installed. I need Firefox - I'm writing pacman -S firefox. Etc. In another distribution, the command and syntax will be different, you may need to specify the address of the repository - the principle itself is unchanged.
• Never, ever even try to download and run anything through a browser like in Windows! Only if you fully know what you are doing - but then why are you reading all this?) Downloading and running the file is part of a completely alien (even hostile) ideology to Linux. Programs must be installed through the package manager. Dot.
• Never use the “configure && make && make install” method to install a program. Every time this happens, a dozen innocent kittens die a painful death in the world. This set of commands will assemble a program from source, and then scatter its files around the file system without the knowledge of the package manager. This is a violation of the normal logic of working with the system. Don't do that))
• I'll probably add one more thing here. Very often you can see persistent advice “do not run as administrator”, and there is a reason for this that is not entirely obvious to Windows users. The fact is that typing a command in the console is fraught with the danger of typos and accidental clicks. It is quite real when you are going to delete a folder, you start writing the path to it and accidentally hit ENTER. Linux doesn't have the habit of asking, "Are you sure you're that stupid? y/n" - he'll just do it. Therefore, under the root, you have to type commands very carefully. On Windows, of course, there is no such problem.

3. Graphical user environment

• The entire graphical environment of the user is a collection application programs. Historically, for a Windows user, concepts such as “Desktop”, taskbar, system tray, volume control, clock and calendar, Start menu, access to network settings from the tray are an integral part of the Windows OS. In Linux, all of the above is implemented by separate programs. Moreover, for each task from the above list, there is far from one program. As a volume control I can put volumeicon written in C or volwheel written in python
• The graphical environment is based on the following programs:
  1. X-server, or simply "X". A program that receives data from the user (from input devices) and basic window management, their minimization-maximization. It is called “server” because it provides “network transparency”: for Linux, it does not matter how the user entered the graphical session, locally or remotely. A kind of RDP as a basic functionality, to put it simply.
  2. Window manager, aka WM. It is engaged in rendering elements of the window interface, plus (depending on the trickery) providing a number of other functions. Some WMs allow you to set the desktop background, some add "system menu" functionality. Sometimes the simplest (to be) window manager, TWM, is installed with the X server. Scary as God's sin, straight out of the 70s.
  3. Window decorator - sometimes the window decoration functionality, the ability to change themes is transferred to a separate program
  4. Composite manager - also happens as part of WM, or as separate program. Its task is to shift the rendering of the interface to the video card. Technically, the principle is simple - each rendered window is a separate texture in the memory of the video card. And video cards have been able to handle textures, add effects and distortions, project onto a plane in space, change translucency and superimpose them on top of each other for many years.
  5. Interface elements: taskbar, tray, network manager, system menu, desktop wallpaper program
  6. Basic application software - file manager, terminal emulator (to write console commands in a beautiful translucent window)
• Pre-configured "sets" of matched elements of the graphical environment, programs from the list above, are called "Desktop Environments", or DE. The most famous are such DEs as Gnome and KDE, the most heavyweight and “fat”. There are also XFCE and LXDE. Installation is often implemented by installing a so-called meta-package - the package itself does not contain files, but requires the installation of the entire set of programs that make up the DE as dependencies: WM, decorator/composite manager, file manager, and so on
• It is also possible (and often reasonable) to assemble an environment for yourself from “pieces” to your liking - select WM separately, a separate file manager, and so on

Summarizing

After a little self-education, getting a graphical system from a text-console system takes place in one command. In my case, I type:
pacman -S xf86-video-ati xorg-server openbox tint2 nitrogen lxterminal xcompmgr wicd-gtk volumeicon.
This is the command to install all the listed packages:
xf86-video-ati this is an open source driver for my video card
xorg-server it's "x"
open box is a lightweight WM with system menu(like "Start")
tint2 this is the taskbar with a tray where applications will be minimized
nitrogen allows you to set the desktop background
lxterminal- my favorite terminal emulator
xcompmgr this is the simplest compositing manager, adds translucency and shadows
wicd-gtk this is the manager network connections, which hangs in the tray
volumeicon- volume control

After that, already from the graphical environment, through lxterminal I install everything else that is needed for life: browser (s), file manager, video and audio codecs, player, libreoffice, gimp, etc.)

So, if you have landed on this page, then you are probably now thinking about what is better to install on your PC - Windows or Linux. Of course, it would be best to install both operating systems in parallel or in turn and decide for yourself what suits you best, but if you don’t have time for this or you want to listen to other people’s thoughts on this matter, then this article should help you make a choice. .

We will try to describe all the pros and cons of these operating systems, and you can already draw conclusions yourself.

Of course, for a large number of people, Windows is the more familiar, if not the only, operating system. Linux, on the other hand, is less popular, although its popularity has been gaining momentum lately, not least due to Ubuntu distribution and Valve.

Myths about Linux

If everything is more or less clear with Windows, then a wide variety of rumors and conjectures are hovering around Linux. This is not a system exclusively for hackers, programmers, system administrators etc., this is exactly the same operating system as Windows, endowed with its pluses and minuses. Of course, many things here are arranged completely differently than in “windows”, but this does not mean that it is wrong or difficult, just something is not arranged here.

Unlike Windows, the world of Linux is not limited to one distribution - there are a lot of them and some of them are radically different from most. There is also Gentoo - a system that you need to build yourself for your hardware and Arch Linux - a fairly convenient and simple OS, but only if you are already familiar with Linux family, otherwise, even its installation is unlikely to be within your power. But this is all “in the wrong gate”, we are interested in a user-friendly and easy-to-learn OS. Perhaps one of these is Ubuntu (there is also OpenSUSE, in which, thanks to the built-in YaST administration system, you have a powerful configuration tool, thanks to which you don’t even have to start the console, but within the framework of this article, we will still focus on Ubuntu).

That is, getting to know the new OS should be completely painless for you - everything is intuitive and accessible, sometimes even more logical than in Windows. In addition, now, thanks to Valve, you can play a large number of games that were previously available only under, it is also worth noting that most of the games ported to this OS work much better, showing higher performance.

Benefits of Linux

The most important advantage of this OS is that it is completely free, in addition, LTS versions are supported for five years, and you do not need to pay for updates. Also, the lion's share of programs is also completely free.

All applications and games are available in their own "store" of applications, similar to how it is done in, that is, you do not need to search the vastness of the network - everything is done in a few clicks or in one command when using the terminal.

This operating system has a huge community of experienced users who, in case you have problems with mastering, will always answer any question on specialized forums.

There are practically no viruses on this OS, so you just don't need various antiviruses, which will "eat off" PC resources.

Benefits of Windows

Although there are no significant problems with Linux games now, all of them are originally developed specifically for Windows, and there are practically no old games for Linux at all.

Still, Windows is more familiar to the user, and habit, as you know, is a “terrible force”. A lot of professional and specific software exists only under Windows.

conclusions

Comparison windows vs linux (video)

In the modern variety of technology, it is very easy for the user to get lost. Often there are cases when it is very difficult to choose one of two approximately identical devices or systems, and it is even more difficult to argue your choice. To help the user understand, we decided to highlight the question of which is better: Windows or Linux.

Which is better Windows or Linux

It is rather difficult to answer this question unambiguously. The Windows operating system is familiar to most users. It is the rejection of the familiar system that can interfere with the evaluation and understanding of the alternative operating system - Linux.

Linux is decent Windows alternative, there are also some negative sides

To answer this question as objectively as possible, we apply a number of relevant criteria to the comparison. In general, the analysis of both operating systems should be presented in the table below.

Table: comparison of Windows and Linux OS

See also benefits and disadvantages of Google Chrome and Yandex.Browser: .

Thus, the presented analysis demonstrates the superiority of Linux in most parameters. At the same time, Windows has an advantage in some very sensitive areas for users. It should also be noted that it will be more convenient for programmers to work on Linux.