[Gareth]

Originally Posted by iron25

It won't take long for you to realise that compared to Windows, Linux does not make for a good desktop PC. As a file/print server, firewall/router or web server then Linux is in its element but as an all round desktop PC it is light years behind Windows.

Shame on you! Go wash your mouth out now!

I think that as others have said, Linux can be a perfect desktop OS under many situations. Those that just use a PC for web browsing, emails, etc... would be much better suited with a Linux-based PC than a Windows machine. Less patching and securing required on the Linux box once it has been set up. As the slogan goes... 'it just works' and it will continue to work.

Originally Posted by philip.j.fry

I think BBKing makes the best point, many people don't really know how to use Windows, they just know where to click on the screen to make it do things but they don't understand why. People who have had little exposure to Windows will probably find using Linux a bit easier (like my g/f). Really the only way is to try it, with a little perseverance you may find that you prefer it.

Yes, spot on. Windows users have a tendency to learn that to achieve a certain task, you click a certain icon or run a certain GUI, without really understanding what's happening at the OS level. Windows does make computing nice and easy, which is why it became so popular so quickly, and why home computing took off as it did. I question whether so many would be interested in computing if we were all using DOS. MS should be commended for that, at least.

Originally Posted by Strzelecki

I prefer to have control over my PC and like to know what is going on, with Windows you don't tend to get that. You ask a majority of XP users what a set of DOS commands do and they probably wouldn't know, ask linux users what a set of unix commands do and they probably would know!

...and if they don't know the command, then they'll know how to use the man command

Originally Posted by Tristan

In environments where it's either undesirable or unnecessary for users to have admin privaleges, Linux is a perfectly usable desktop.

This is a good point. El Reg recently reported that

Mike Nash, Microsoft's security business and technology unit corporate vice president, has said Longhorn would accord end-users certain rights and privileges apparently ending the concept that everyone using their PC is also the PC's administrator.

Speaking at Microsoft's Worldwide partner conference on Sunday, Nash indicated the architectural change is part of a move to improve security of desktop systems by limiting the ability for end-users to install applications or for malware to take control of a machine, turning it into a zombie.

The move mirrors techniques used in versions of Unix and Linux to create more limited variations of "the God user" or root account. This account provides a single user with total control of, and access to, an entire system's resources.

..."In October 2003 someone asked: 'How come, when I go to a Windows machine, everyone has to be an administrator?'," Nash told conference delegates, referring to an incident at Microsoft's partner conference two years ago.

Nash said a key Longhorn feature would be increased "granularity" in administration capabilities "so people need a lower level of privilege to install applications and printers. When a higher level of privilege is required, we can elevate that. You can use Longhorn in a very effective way without being an admin."

Unix and Linux users have understood the importance of this for years! How many Windows users browsing the site now are signed-in as an Administrator user? Compare this with how many Linux/*nix users browsing the site as root? If your box gets compromised and code gets executed as the current user, which would you rather have the malicious code running as, an administrator or not? It's a no brainer, innit