hello suman That is a question that has many different answers, depending on what aspect of Windows or Linux you want to know about. Both are what are known as Operating Systems, and in this case, both are designed to work on the same type of hardware -- PCs, otherwise known as IBM Compatibles. There are enormous differences in the way that they behave at a technical level, but I suspect what you really want to know is how they differ from the perspective of an end user. This makes any answer I give somewhat subjective (users have different preferences and expectations of their computers), but I will do my best to give an answer that is generally accepted by the IT community.
Windows was introduced by Microsoft in 1983, and has been the dominant Operating System available for the PC since the early-nineties. As such, Microsoft has enjoyed great financial success, and Windows has had many years and incredible fiscal resources to evolve to meet the demands of the mass-market. There is an staggeringly rich set of features here, from very explicit, step-by-step user interfaces for the first time computer user, to powerful interfaces for the computer professional, and everything in between. By contrast, Linux achieved notoriety a bit later, in the mid-nineties, with a distribution known as Redhat, and although Linux was built on more mature, stable underpinnings (Unix), it did not enjoy nearly the same marketing or development budget that Microsoft threw behind Windows. In fact, the developers of Linux are commonly credited as founding the Open Source Software movement, which is the idea that software can be made better through the free sharing of its source code. In this philosophy, programmers often volunteer their time to develop software for free, as was done with Linux, and Linux is still available for free in its more basic forms. Companies like Redhat only make money by "packaging" Linux with printed documentation, extra software utilities, and setup wizards designed to make the installation of Linux and its subsequent software packages easier. Even so, the amount of money they are able to generate this way is paltry compared to the wealth of Microsoft (which makes most company's financials look paltry). Because of this, the marketing behind Linux has been miniscule compared to that of Windows, and its lack of acceptance among less technical users reflects this. A large reason is because Windows has established a very deeply-ingrained (and some have argued unfairly controlling) relationship with PC hardware manufacturers, ensuring that almost every new PC ships with Windows installed from day one. Given that they must satisfy the demands (though perhaps less than perfectly) of the majority of novice computer users, and add to that the amount of time and money that Windows has enjoyed to make itself accessible to these users, and it is easy to see why Windows is generally regarded as superior to Linux in the area of accessibility to novices. There are graphic user interfaces (abbreviated as GUI) present for almost everything you could want to do, and there is almost always more than one way to do it. In fact, one common criticism of Windows is that so many features have been layered on top of one another over the years, that it has become an overly-complicated, almost labyrinthine user experience. By contrast, some may find Linux to be more streamlined; however, there are still many equivalent features in Windows for which Linux does not provide a GUI, and the user is forced to type textual instructions into a command-line interface, or shell. While many power users consider this a plus, it is unrealistic to demand this of novice computer users, and novice users should bear this strongly in mind. All this being said, Linux still shines brilliantly in some areas that Windows seems to consistently flounder. Because the underlying architecture of Linux is more mature, stable, and secure than Windows, Linux &q
Answered by
raj u
, an ibibo Master,
at
2:17 PM on May 21, 2008