I use Windows 7 for my desktop (mainly because videogames) and Debian for my netbook which I use for most of my uni work assignments (except that one time I had to install SQL Server Express, which is Windows only and uses a ton of ram) even used it for my OOP course exams (and almost wrecked the professor's external hard drive once ).

I found linux a pretty good choice for my netbook since Windows 7 was too much of a performance hog for my poor single core Atom and installing an "ancient" OS like Windows XP wasn't an option.

So with my LXDE Debian install I got the possibility of not missing 10 years in OS development and get good performance out of it (modern OS that uses 90Mb of RAM, how cool is that?).

Though to be said, using a relative "new" desktop environment wasn't such a good idea, I didn't had a working battery monitor for a good while and I have been using WiFi via the console (ifup/ifdown and config files) since I got pissed off by the network managers available (either you install 80% of Gnome to get the Gnome Network Manager or you're on your own).

Probably I will switch to a recent build of Gnome Debian (that has the Gnome 2 look, which performs quite well actually and has all the configuration utilities you could ask for).

I don't use Wine though, I think it defeats the purpose when there are available alternatives. I've been using OpenOffice on my Windows desktop for a few years actually, and with the Debian I started to use Gimp more. I really like the package managers and the tons of programs that are available.

Using LXDE was a good learning experience though, got to use the console often which is pretty fun mostly (find/locate is friggin' fast!). I'd like to know a lot more about Linux since knowledge is the thing that keeps you from doing cool stuff with it.

Probably the only thing that is keeping me from going Linux 24/7 is games. If the game industry gave me native Linux games, I'd probably switch to Linux completely.

I use Linux, and dual boot with Windows. I have used Macs too, which are also quite nice.

I'm not a gun enthusiast, I only know about guns from games, so maybe this metaphor is broken, but I like to use this metaphor.

Mac OS is like a sniper rifle. When scoped in, it targets only a few things, but it's accurate and reliable. It's far from featureless though, and can do nearly everything you need to get the job done. Plus every part about it is built professionally, and subjectively beautiful. It's not perfect though, but neither is Linux or Windows.

Linux is like a sniper rifle with tons of customizable parts, and these parts aren't necessarily built by professionals, but definitely all built by enthusiasts. So sometimes the gun bugs out and is less than sub par, especially if you just need a normal gun. Sometimes it works just fine. But if you know all the parts and understand how it works, it becomes a well oiled machine, and far more accurate and powerful than Mac OS or Windows could ever be. On the other hand, sometimes you just can't find that extra part you need...

Windows is like a shotgun. It fires many shells, so it's bound to hit something. It's extremely powerful and reliable for most situations. Sometimes it misses, but you have to give the gun some credit for trying to appeal to every situation. Lots of people use it, so you never run out of ammo (in a generic fps or zombie situation).

So with my LXDE Debian install I got the possibility of not missing 10 years in OS development and get good performance out of it (modern OS that uses 90Mb of RAM, how cool is that?).

Though to be said, using a relative "new" desktop environment wasn't such a good idea, I didn't had a working battery monitor for a good while and I have been using WiFi via the console (ifup/ifdown and config files) since I got pissed off by the network managers available (either you install 80% of Gnome to get the Gnome Network Manager or you're on your own).

Right... you're using a "modern" OS, and have to use terminal commands and config files to manage your wifi networks. So glad you're putting those 90MB of ram to good use.

Actually, there is, because of (not limited to) these apps:

• MS Office (Really, don't compare this to the buggy OpenOffice)
• Adobe Photoshop (Again, don't compare this to Gimp)
• Adobe Lightroom

Because I use all of these three, and there's little interest to support them in Linux, I can't use Linux, even though I want to.

That' not fully true. I use Photoshop and Dreamweaver on Wine/Ubuntu without any problems.

Actually I develop on Ubuntu everyday with Eclipse, sometimes with Qtcreator.
I also started gaming with steam and probably never go back to Windows...

To avoid incompatibilities with older or other office apps, use ISO standardized *.odt documents.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=ms%20office%20odt%20plugin

I use a linux box as a file, print, scanner, backup service and running my primary development tools, subversion, Open-Ameos (UML), editors, documentation tools and HTML-Editors and a folding@home client on it. Some virtual machines are even running on that box if I want to play civ2 or need an old 32-Bit linux installation (have some needs for that).

The box is headless.

As a frontend for the graphical application I run a Xming server on a W7 box with a dual monitor setup. For the connection to the VMs running on the server I use the TightVNC viewer. For some shell interaction and sometimes administration I use putty or a xterm. The applications I build on the linux box with the gcc or with a Visual-Studio 2008 Express edition on W7. Documents can be edited on linux with openoffice or libreoffice or lyx or TeX and on W7 with MSOffice2007, LibreOffice, lyx or MiKTeX.

So I do not see why not using Linux for development or dayly duties.

But for playing games W7 and a W-XP in the VM are the better solutions for me.

So with my LXDE Debian install I got the possibility of not missing 10 years in OS development and get good performance out of it (modern OS that uses 90Mb of RAM, how cool is that?).

Though to be said, using a relative "new" desktop environment wasn't such a good idea, I didn't had a working battery monitor for a good while and I have been using WiFi via the console (ifup/ifdown and config files) since I got pissed off by the network managers available (either you install 80% of Gnome to get the Gnome Network Manager or you're on your own).

Right... you're using a "modern" OS, and have to use terminal commands and config files to manage your wifi networks. So glad you're putting those 90MB of ram to good use.

How cute. Did I said that there were no graphical network managers? That I was forced by the evil Linus Torvalds to use the console? No. There are quite a few, tried 2 or 3 that I found on Synaptic and didn't found one that I liked so I did all the work on my own.

As I said, you could grab a Gnome (or KDE, or Unity, or whatever Mint uses) desktop environment and have all the graphical utilities you'd want, I simply choose not to and travel the rough path to see if I could learn something.

But bash the OS for my personal choices! I sometimes use the console on Windows too, must be a pretty archaic OS too right? Ooooh, spooky cmd!

Actually I believe Linux is often used for Servers because it is free, not because it's THE best os for it. As always it depends on what you do want to do with the server.

For example we work closely with a web design company which also hosts the websites or helps the customers set up their web server. And in this field of the industry you just have to be cheap. Adding a few hundred euros/dollars/... of license cost for the os and additional software is just not an option because you might end up not landing the contract at all.

I myself use Windows Server 2003 on my machine which is colocated in a datacenter. And it just runs, there is no crashing, just as you would from any other server os.

Most of the other stuff has already mentioned before. However I would like to add that the move to Linux is just not worth it for me. Growing up with DOS and then with Windows, using it at home, at school and at work. Why should I switch to Linux? Just to save few euros? It's not worth it for me. Windows still has the familarity bonus.

Besides I find other projects much more interesting. ReactOS or one of the BSD distros for example.

And some more points why I don't think Linux will replace Windows:

• Usability - don't expect the user to read the manual or pages of documentation. Or did you read the manual of your microwave, mobile phone, car, coffee machine? If somebaody asks me for help on his/her windows machine I'm most of the time able to actually help, even if they use software I never used before. On Linux this is probably also possible, if I'm willing to read pages of documentation (I'm not willing!).
• Provide simple configuration option and a sane default configuration - really why does every Linux application have to use a config file? And more importantly, why can't they use a common synthax? And why is it so hard to provide a default configuration that works for most people and only requires changes if you need something special?
• Drivers - well as long as you can expect any device to work on Windows but not neccesary on Linux, why risk it? It's mainly the fault of the vendors, but maybe it's possible to motivate them to write drivers for your OS. E.g. simplify writing of drivers, try to select a common driver standard that works with other operating systems (One could try to make it so that one driver works on Linux, BSD, Unix, ...other open source os'es).
• Distro jungle - well every distro wants as many users as possible, but which one is right for user X? What distro should a software company target?
• More software jungle - different window managers? You might think it's great, I think it sucks. Why not one that can be customize?
• No central command and control - this is the cause for my two previous complaints. There are a few companies and hundreds of individuals and everybody is doing their own thing. Generally you could describe it as lack of direction.

Actually I believe Linux is often used for Servers because it is free, not because it's THE best os for it. As always it depends on what you do want to do with the server.

If it always the best OS for the purpose you want to use it, if it does what you expect.

For example we work closely with a web design company which also hosts the websites or helps the customers set up their web server. And in this field of the industry you just have to be cheap. Adding a few hundred euros/dollars/... of license cost for the os and additional software is just not an option because you might end up not landing the contract at all.

I myself use Windows Server 2003 on my machine which is colocated in a datacenter. And it just runs, there is no crashing, just as you would from any other server os.

I think you can use any other Server OS as well and it will not crash anyways. I run a root server for years now with linux installed. We never had a crash, only scheduled maintenance. So Linux is not either a crashing OS.

Most of the other stuff has already mentioned before. However I would like to add that the move to Linux is just not worth it for me. Growing up with DOS and then with Windows, using it at home, at school and at work. Why should I switch to Linux? Just to save few euros? It's not worth it for me. Windows still has the familarity bonus.

Besides I find other projects much more interesting. ReactOS or one of the BSD distros for example.

Yes. Your opinion. Stay with it.

And some more points why I don't think Linux will replace Windows:

• Usability - don't expect the user to read the manual or pages of documentation. Or did you read the manual of your microwave, mobile phone, car, coffee machine? If somebaody asks me for help on his/her windows machine I'm most of the time able to actually help, even if they use software I never used before. On Linux this is probably also possible, if I'm willing to read pages of documentation (I'm not willing!).
• Provide simple configuration option and a sane default configuration - really why does every Linux application have to use a config file? And more importantly, why can't they use a common synthax? And why is it so hard to provide a default configuration that works for most people and only requires changes if you need something special?
• Drivers - well as long as you can expect any device to work on Windows but not neccesary on Linux, why risk it? It's mainly the fault of the vendors, but maybe it's possible to motivate them to write drivers for your OS. E.g. simplify writing of drivers, try to select a common driver standard that works with other operating systems (One could try to make it so that one driver works on Linux, BSD, Unix, ...other open source os'es).
• Distro jungle - well every distro wants as many users as possible, but which one is right for user X? What distro should a software company target?
• More software jungle - different window managers? You might think it's great, I think it sucks. Why not one that can be customize?
• No central command and control - this is the cause for my two previous complaints. There are a few companies and hundreds of individuals and everybody is doing their own thing. Generally you could describe it as lack of direction.

The thread does not question about whether Linux will supersede Windows. So who cares.

In the movie "The fifth element" there is a scene where the mangalores doing tests with some new weapon. They even do not read the manual but trying how things work and than they press a red button that destroys the weapon and kills most of them.

Yes I use Ubuntu on my laptop for school work from time to other. I have a dual boot installation so I can choose between Win 8 and Ubuntu when needed :o)

I also would like to say that Open Office has replaced all kind of task word would be used for years ago in my case. If I wish to be absolutely free I simply just use LaTex as I can do pretty much everything I need.

Also now it seems that my game developer tool(the engine I use) will be optimized for use with the Linux system so I might end up using Linux for more than just school related work.

All in all Linux is a fine system but Windows is still the King of OS for now :o)

I use Windows 7 at home and Linux Mint + Windows 7 at work and in general Windows 7:
1) Starts and runs slower than Mint.
2) Handles hardware worse than Mint (Far too much hardware require you to install drivers manually)
3) Handles multiple monitors worse than Mint (solved using third party software though).
4) Insists on being rebooted after every damn update (a problem that gets a bit worse since i sometimes only boot Windows at work once or twice per week and thus usually have a bunch of important updates waiting for me)
5) Is a pain in the ass to install software and libraries on (APT is just pure awesomeness imo).

(I tried using Ubuntu a bit at work before installing Mint but things just didn't work out of the box and while i liked the HUD the rest of the interface was a pain in the ass imo)

At home i use Windows for one very simple reason: The games, most games aren't released at all for Linux or get released months or even years after the Windows version and Wine will never be good enough for new games. (They can't start working on becoming compatible with a new Windows or DX version before it has been released), and ofcourse for games Windows has one thing that is just as good as APT so installing new ones is a breeze (Steam rocks).

Edit: Why the heck does my posts get filled with HTML crap all the time ? (editing the post seems to allow me to remove it and fix things)