5 more killer features Windows 9 should steal from Linux

lehnerus2000 said:

Whilst it is inconceivable that more people would be using a Linux Distro, than there are using Windows on Desktop PCs, I wouldn't be surprised if more people were using a Linux Distro than are using OS X.

My internet radio runs linux, by router runs linux and for all I know so do my refrigerator and my tv. My Macbook Pro runs windows though as I prefer it to OSX.

If MS could drop support for everything legacy they could be more nimble. But that wouldn't go very too well with folks who have vested interest in older technology.

The twins OS2 and NT emerged in 1989 and ever since then MS had to support two different OSes in a few flavors (XP, Win7, Win8)(not easy) all the while trying to merge the two into a single offering. Most analysts say XP was that milestone, but it was the first milestone of many.

MS was freed from the herculean tasks and could focus on improvements without expending resources on migrating changes. Vista, Win7, and Win8 show steady progress in 'catching up' to Unix/Linux especially in a portable OS sense. But Windows still suffers from the legacy issue. Look at the reluctance to move off of XP and more recently the reluctance to move off of Win7. This isn't the old problem of device incompatibility. This is more a resistance to change in general. Sure, each release of Windows had it's drawbacks, but they were resolved and led to the next release being better for it.

Now if MS would only build grep and tail into the OS

adamf said:

Statcounter is based on the website traffic to the specific site though no? You'd expect more Windows users on a Windows forum surely.

:) Can't eat it though.

I don't know their method of creating stats other than hits. I'll have to read up on it when I find time. I'm sure there's other sites with stats.

No, you can't eat it, but it buy food whereas our money will be worthless.

Ok...

Package manager that has all the system apps in an app store. Why does that need to be a feature that needs to be implemented when the Windows Store ALREADY HAS BEEN DOING THAT. Seriously. Go to the Windows Store, and search for some Desktop programs, Photoshop (ALL of Adobe's collection is there), google chrome, WinZip. Not all are there because the software developer has to go through the Windows Store Desktop app certification list to meet some requirements before being published. The reason why Steam isn't on there is because gabe newell is a fool and instead of pushing Steam further onto Windows 8 PCs by only taking a couple of hours to retweak the Steam installer, he choose not to do so. Basically, all CERTIFIED Desktop and modern apps are in the Windows Store.

Software repositories. That's a non-needed feature to target a very limited crowd.

Always on Top might be useful especially for File Explorer.

Web app integration actually is something that needs to be used. No one really knows that certain apps are available because of using a Desktop browser, even modern IE as well. Problem with that though, apps like amazon or ebay end up being more easily used through the browser rendered for PCs than they are in apps. Shoot, even facebook takes you to the website for account settings.

Tiling window management doesn't work as well as you'd like. Past four windows, introduce another window on top of those four, you've lost the whole purpose of a tiled window setup. Even then, that would a feature tied to screen resolution and size as 8 inch tablets wouldn't benefit all that well from such. Better idea is to do a panoramic workspace window management setup.

Linux is Linux for a reason, it's used by basement dwellers who spend hours recompiling their kernels while saying Windows sucks because it's unstable and prone to malware and BSODs. Windows is Windows because the vast majority of the world uses such and that entails it being designed for the vast majority of the world. Having a software repository wouldn't be at all a selling point for anyone looking to upgrade OSs or PCs. It's the same as Windows Media Center, very very few people need it or use it so there's no point in keeping it around.

Quite frankly, a lot of universities are using Linux. Back when I was a student, our university ran on Unix. It took a lot of convincing to force the IT to install a single Windows machine in the department. The winning argument was the ease of operating a standalone scanner. Nowadays, in my department (that's a 14-story building) there is a networked Linux box on every desk. Windows and Mac are only present in form of laptops, while many students have Linux on their laptops as well.

The winning point for Windows as a home PC (or shared work/home, small/office/home, etc.) is the abundance of drivers. With Windows, any new device can be plugged in and it would be working in a few seconds. Sometimes you might want to get a specific manufacturers driver or software package to gain more functionality. But the bottom line is - they all work. I've seen a lot of complaints about consumer devices that do not come with Mac support. Now Linux support is basically non-existent, if you're lucky, someone on some forum might have created a driver for the new shiny gadget you just bought, but it will take forever to find it and who knows how well it works.

On the other hand, nobody at work plugs gadgets into their desktops, so that particular feature of Windows is irrelevant. Networking and cluster assembly seems much easier in Linux, at least if you have a knowledgeable IT guy. But that's a particular need of a university.

At the end of the day, the statement "one OS is better than another" is rather empty. You need to specify for which purpose the OS in question is being used and who's using it. I have a friend who has a Mac at home for the only reason that he has Windows at work and wanted something different to look at when he's not working.