the linux vs windows debate

The reason behind writing this post is because, well, I am appearing for a debate on this same topic. However this is just for the prelims. This debate is part of the NIIT celebrations on completion of their 25 yrs of service. I will be representing my center (NIIT - Triplicane); that is if we get selected! The first topic that was given to me was a technology debate - java vs dot net. I told them that I would want time to think about it. Then a little later they announced a topic change.

But this also happens to be topic that most of us want to know more about; hence thus I have decided to share some views here. For this debate I chose to argue for linux to be the better os. Well I have thought of this topic before so I thought this was a good choice for me. However this debate is more of expressing a new concept; and for explaining that concept I would call upon no other person but Richard Stallman.

In my opinion linux is more than just an operating system; it is a revolution! It has changed our perception of software and how we can and ought to use it. This revolution is best described by Richard Stallman in his freedom essays. (www.gnu.org). The essence of this revolution is a subset of another huge debate free/libre software vs proprietary software. I should say that it has changed the way people think about software. This revolution is not at all connected with what an operating system is; rather it talks about what software is; how it should be used, modified and distributed; it talks about the person who writes the programs, etc. It is thinking in this path that we finally stumble on to an os.
Linux is an os built out of this concept. Linux is growing. Despite the optimism here I am still using a windows 2000 os that is running firefox to compose this post. What is even more ironic is that I have never laid my hands on a linux distro, yet!

Windows is something proprietary. Meaning Microsoft (the company that owns Windows) owns the all versions product. In other words ms claims ownership. The proof of this ownership can be seen in the EULA and copyright licences, and even in their patent documents. The most significant thing that I want to point out is that, every owner builds something abiding by a set of standards. (We will have to think in abstact terms here). When that product is proprietary, the consumer can only make use of what that product was designed for. Hence, for any modifications or upgrades on that product, the consumer must depend on the owner. This relationship is somehow at a loss to the consumer. Because he or she ends up paying to the owner for services. What is worse is that when the owner decides to update his standards, all the consumers are more or less inclined to upgrade the product to the new version. And this was what has been happening all along taking MS as an example.

The new windows version i.e. MS Windows Vista requires hardware upgrades. Think of how much this would cost an orginization that has established itself using ms products.