Question:
Why do Windows users put up with viruses and security threats when they could easily convert to Linux?
Linux Mint 11
2010-03-18 11:32:53 UTC
Why do Windows users put up with viruses and security threats when they could easily convert to Linux?
22 answers:
Astro
2010-03-23 07:40:42 UTC
Hey!

After reading the many good responses here, I couldn't help but notice that the dates have changed but the song remains the same. Everyone made great points- but its the same exact pro/con discussion that Linux fans have been hitting on since we came outa the trees... The truth is that 'easily converting to Linux' (for the desktop) is not all that viable or desirable option for the MAJORITY. Despite my affection for Linux, there are flaws to it. Honestly, if Linux IS the answer then why isn't it on more desktops? If people can find porn on ANY subject, obscure bigfoot videos, finally get I-tunes to work, they are capable of reading upon- downloading- researching- and trying Linux out. Windows may be a lot of things, but left out in the cold ain't one of em. Windows is the 'One size fits all' pair of elastic pants! Unless Ubu's business model works- linux is gonna remain exactly where it is and where its been... a side note that challenges the thinkers and tinkerers, but not a threat. None of the Oem retailers take it seriously enough to mount a campaign for it, and its free! LOL! What does thaty say?
whitewolf_of_the_northern_arctic
2010-03-18 13:06:47 UTC
I would say it's because of compatibility. Let me clarify:



I'm going to be generous in my numbers here.



About 95% of the world with access to a computer uses Windows, about 4% use a Mac, and 1% use Linux.



Macs can't do anything unless it has something to do with media. Windows and Linux can do everything else. The reason we put up with viruses is because majority of the hardware and software on the planet works with windows, and it's a risk to take when checking for Linux compatibility (any Linux user who has tried to use a Seagate external understands what I mean).



Also, Windows is straight forward. No kernel updates that need to be put in by hand (I understand that's optional in Linux, but whatever), no compiling data for installation; that's all done ahead of time.



Let me point out one other thing that I know most, if not all, Linux users will deny until the grave:

Windows uses 95% of the market; therefore it has the most viruses and attacks.

Mac uses 4% and it has only a few.

Linux uses 1% and it has none that I have heard of.



What would you go after as a hacker who wanted credit cards? the 1% or the 95%?

What would you go after if you wanted to screw up someone's computer just for the heck of it: the 1% or the 95%?



Think about it...
Liz
2010-03-18 12:39:50 UTC
1) iTunes

2) Games

3) Adobe Flash

4) Ease of printer setup.

and then the big one..

5) Stuff that is at the store has little stickers with either an apple or a windows logo on it. Kinda like it ain't real until you see it on TV: It's not a product until you can buy it at WalMart.



Linux is better on security, no two ways about that, but it is going to be a couple two three years before it has the same product legitimacy in the consumer market. It will get there, but it needs critical mass. I'm going to call it 3-5% user base. Then companies like Adobe will decide that they want that money, and lo and behold. within what? three weeks maybe, you will be able to buy AdobeCS5 for Linux. Porting is a matter will, not way.



I did systems for a BROKE private school during my last job-type-job. When I got there, things were grim. In need of a desperate upgrade, and just set up like it was done by the fourth graders during computer lab one day. So.. I switched everything except the accounting systems to Linux. Either Ubuntu Dapper Drake where the machines could handle it, and Puppy or Slackware when I was dealing with 486s and Pentium 1 and 2 boxes..( This was 2006 mind you..). Anyway.. Things worked great, and after a few weeks of bi7ching, everybody got used to their new systems. They started asking how I got the money to do an upgrade, and when I explained that the operating systems were free, and that all it cost the school was my time to install and upkeep them, it broke down like this:



"But I mean where did it come from?" (Sow them Ubuntu.com)

"But who made it? Microsoft = billions of monies!"

(smile, cock head to side, and explain how you can turn root beer and peanut butter crackers in to an operating system by adding millions upon million geeky over-skilled under-impressed midnight hours to it.)

"Huh? Well how do you make any money with it?" (Show them paycheck stub)

"Well, I can't connect AOL to my wireless keyboard..."

(Pick lower jaw up off floor, head to ER to have it re-attached)



So.. Windows users put up with security risks, because they have always done, but more importantly, because they pay good money for the privilege of doing so. My opinion: First distro to come out with crossover-office and an installation system that takes your current Windows install, Virtualizes it, and seamlessly integrates it in to the new OS, and then charges (yup charges good old fashioned money, and not $5 either, more like $150) for the installation disks, and some support. That is the distro that will break the ice.



It's pure psychology. People think that if things are free, they can't be worth anything. In the case of Linux, it's not true at all, but the average person is still gunna think it.
2010-03-18 11:42:53 UTC
Because Windows has so much traction in the OS market that a lot of the big software companies who write the most popular software packages just aren't bothering with Linux support. If you're into gaming or producing music or videos, the open source software available for you on Linux lags so far behind the commercial counterparts on Windows and Mac it's just not worth bothering with. This will change slowly but surely as Linux gains a greater following and Linux users get used to the idea of paying for professional grade software just like they would have to on Windows (I don't see why it can't still be open source though).



And for people who can't or won't pay the free software is getting better and better all the time and it will only continue to do so. It just takes a little longer.
2010-03-18 11:39:59 UTC
Many people have become very comfortable with Windows. Windows is also very user-friendly and straightforward. No matter how user-friendly Ubuntu or other variants get, there are still some things that require hand-hacking and configuring to get it to work the way you want it to. Basically, Windows is just easier for the average user. Plus with Windows, a user can go to the store and buy a game or some software application, take it home, install it and be up and running in just a few minutes. With Linux they have to wither use a package manager and hopefully it will work, or they have to compile it themselves and hopefully they have all the required libraries that are needed.



I have used every incarnation of Windows and many flavors of Linux as well. I could go either way, doesn't matter too much to me except for one more point I would like to address: some things only work on Windows. My company's intranet and many web applications will only work on IE6+. It sucks to reboot into Windows just to get some work done. It also sucks to try to install something on linux and then realize you need to recompile the kernel or install a 500MB library package just to get it working.



So there's your answer. Windows is easier. Not everyone is comfortable doing "behind the scenes" computing, and in our modern society, everyone wants a computer.
Carling
2010-03-18 14:26:44 UTC
Having read these answers one wonders what world they are living in, Lets start with LINUX in the home that these people don't even know about, running their TV, Microwave's Washing Machines, Music Centres, now on mobile phones, Next they depend on Linux when they fly, it is used for Air traffic control,



Next they should do their home work on the high tech companies who develops and use Linux here are some names they can check out, Intel, Ibm Google, Yahoo, FaceBook, Myspace, Ebay Amazon, and Microsoft, The Internet is run on Linux Just imagine what the web would be like if it was run on MS servers, It would take days to download a web page. These windows users use Linux every day and have not got a clue that they are using it,



Those that have iPods and use iTunes don't know that they get all that in Linux for free, Talk about being clueless is not the word for it, I love it when I read those that say they never have problems or get viruses, who the hell do they think they are kidding,
Rickie
2010-03-18 15:14:16 UTC
You cannot easily convert to linux. For years MS has ruled alone as an empire the naive average consumer. Superb support by most corps (drivers, programs), preinstalled on most computers, compatible with most commonly used products, digicam, video recorder PLUS US laws if an American invented the concept of opensource surely the USA is NOT the paradise for opensource. Add to this as someone said the hundreds of linux variant the bickering between linux users as THEIR distro is the only one they swearby and MS has a field day.



Linux ALREADY rules in large corps giant servers (well over 95% of marker share is linux)



I am not pessimistic just realistic. To gain more acceptance linux would have to be more compatible or better said more officially supported say by HP Dell Acer etc and have more products available for linux.



It is slowly improving but unless this happens linux will remain marginal



RICK
Adam
2010-03-18 12:11:22 UTC
It's got to be the more in-depth procedures at completing simple tasks, the lack of corporate or a "centralized" support center. Who the hell can understand anything being said in the Linux forums. Forums are great but many of my Linux issues couldn't be resolved simply by participating in a forum. Besides I don't have to put up with security threats because of my anti-virus and MS updates. I understand nothing's 100% but I don't have any problems with Windows. However, in the future I would like to take a Linux+ class to better understand.
2010-03-21 09:14:31 UTC
The best & simplest solution really is a dual boot: one Windows, for all the bundled & 'must use Windows for compatibility' software; and have your Internet facing connection be Linux.

I've recently became so fed up with the 'cat-and-mouse' updates & threats from Internet vectors, I gave up on ANY use of Windows (and those bundled 3rd party items) for the Internet...there's too many mice.

The time saved not having to update, scan, re-update, re-scan (ad infinitum) can be used for making the minor adjustment (learning curve) to Linux.

And some Linux builds are MADE for this "outward facing, dedicated Internet use only" setup: point and click.

And that doesn't include OS re-installs, and rebuilding the data base when Windows gets trashed.
Digital_Utopia
2010-03-18 11:43:52 UTC
Because those people who have to "put up with" viruses would be hard pressed to figure out how to even choose a linux distro, let alone actually be able to use one.



Then of course there's having to depend on/find 3rd party drivers for hardware, because the majority of hardware companies do not support linux, and then having to either use a Windows emulator, or deal with an open source version of their Windows apps - often complete with a UI from hell (i.e. OOo, GIMP, Blender etc) - plus there's little to none in the support department.



Mind you, that would be from the perspective of an average user - those that are fairly knowledgeable about computers, such as myself, would have very little trouble using Linux (shoddy hardware/software support not withstanding) - however, those are the people who don't have problems with security threats or viruses - and thus, have even less of a reason to switch. Unless of course, you've gotten sucked into the "Microsoft is evil", "fight the man" fad, wandering around like some hippie of operating systems.
2010-03-18 11:37:49 UTC
Linux is still not desktop ready for the average user. Installing and configuring Linux can be more than the average user can manage. Obtaining drivers can also be a challenge for the average user.



Most users buy machines that are preloaded with Windows and they work for them right out of the box.



Most people will stick with what they know and do not want to learn a different system.
Nathan
2010-03-19 13:30:59 UTC
Where I work, the employer purchased mini netbooks for the managers. All of these came with Windows XP Pro. I inherited one of the old, broken laptop, which I immediately converted to LinuxMint 7 Main.

I went to one of the stores and was asked if the manager could use my laptop to place their order (as they had left theirs at home). When trying to log onto the site to place the order, I was told that my OS (as well as Firefox) were not supported. The ONLY system supported was Windows and IE7 or higher. Luckily my system is a dual boot, so logged out of Linux to restart in Vista. 6 minutes later, Vista finished loading.



I guess the moral of my tale is - some big corporations do not recognise Linux as legit. Until then, we're stuck with Windows.
Adrian
2010-03-18 12:14:56 UTC
Because Windows has most of the applications that don't require a Linux dictionary to find out the name of what to run, to find something. Also, installing Linux apps, they often get "installed", but there is no link to where to find them (they do not automatically show up in the "programs" menus). In other words, you have to know a bit more about Linux in order to use it. Most Windows users are "point and shoot" types of people...
2010-03-21 05:23:44 UTC
Everything is made to work for windows. Windows was the first os. Linux and mac will get viruses. No os can block all viruses. Windows is the most user friendly i have used. 99% of pepole will use windows. All computers are shipped with windows pre installed. i have windows 7 64bit with norton 360 v4 and ive had 0 viruses get though to my computer.

Thanks
wiseman
2010-03-19 19:08:26 UTC
Why are Linux and Mac OS X safer?



First, look at the two factors that cause email viruses and worms to propagate: social engineering, and poorly designed software. Social engineering is the art of conning someone into doing something they shouldn't do, or revealing something that should be kept secret. Virus writers use social engineering to convince people to do stupid things, like open attachments that carry viruses and worms. Poorly designed software makes it easier for social engineering to take place, but such software can also subvert the efforts of a knowledgable, security-minded individual or organization. Together, the two factors can turn a single virus incident into a widespread disaster.



Let's look further at social engineering. Windows software is either executable or not, depending on the file extension. So if a file ends with ".exe" or ".scr", it can be run as a program (yes, of course, if you change a text file's extension from ".txt" to ".exe", nothing will happen, because it's not magically an executable; I'm talking about real executable programs). It's easy to run executables in the Windows world, and users who get an email with a subject line like "Check out this wicked screensaver!" and an attachment, too often click on it without thinking first, and bang! we're off to the races and a new worm has taken over their systems.



Even worse, Microsoft's email software is able to infect a user's computer when they do something as innocuous as read an email! Don't believe me? Take a look at Microsoft Security Bulletins MS99-032, MS00-043, MS01-015, MS01-020, MS02-068, or MS03-023, for instance. Notice that's at least one for the last five years. And though Microsoft's latest versions of Outlook block most executable attachments by default, it's still possible to override those protections.



This sort of social engineering, so easy to accomplish in Windows, requires far more steps and far greater effort on the part of the Linux user. Instead of just reading an email (... just reading an email?!?), a Linux user would have to read the email, save the attachment, give the attachment executable permissions, and then run the executable. Even as less sophisticated users begin to migrate to Linux, they may not understand exactly why they can't just execute attachments, but they will still have to go through the steps. As Martha Stewart would say, this is a good thing. Further, due to the strong community around Linux, new users will receive education and encouragement in areas such as email security that are currently lacking in the Windows world, which should help to alleviate any concerns on the part of newbies.



Further, due to the strong separation between normal users and the privileged root user, our Linux user would have to be running as root to really do any damage to the system. He could damage his /home directory, but that's about it. So the above steps now become the following: read, save, become root, give executable permissions, run. The more steps, the less likely a virus infection becomes, and certainly the less likely a catastrophically spreading virus becomes. And since Linux users are taught from the get-go to never run as root, and since Mac OS X doesn't even allow users to use the root account unless they first enable the option, it's obvious the likelihood of email-driven viruses and worms lessens on those platforms.



Unfortunately, running as root (or Administrator) is common in the Windows world. In fact, Microsoft is still engaging in this risky behavior. Windows XP, supposed Microsoft's most secure desktop operating system, automatically makes the first named user of the system an Administrator, with the power to do anything he wants to the computer. The reasons for this decision boggle the mind. With all the lost money and productivity over the last decade caused by countless Microsoft-borne viruses and worms, you'd think the company could have changed its procedures in this area, but no.



Even if the OS has been set up correctly, with an Administrator account and a non-privileged user account, things are still not copasetic. On a Windows system, programs installed by a non-Administrative user can still add DLLs and other system files that can be run at a level of permission that damages the system itself. Even worse, the collection of files on a Windows system - the operating system, the applications, and the user data - can't be kept apart from each other. Things are intermingled to a degree that makes it unlikely that they will ever be satisfactorily sorted out in any sensibly secure fashion.



The final reason why social engineering is easier in the Windows world is also an illustration of the dangers inherent in any monoculture, whether biological or technological. In the same way that genetic diversity in a population of living creatures is desirable because it reduces the likelihood that an illness - like a virus - will utterly wipe out every animal
?
2016-11-29 10:45:46 UTC
we propose that u would desire to stick to WIN XP SP2.as this is the suitable OS.attempt going for linux on condition that u have deep it backgrd.attempt KNOPIX A plug and play version of linux U in basic terms plug in cd and linux starts and take out it stops.No ned to alter ur settings.
soupfine
2010-03-18 11:54:45 UTC
Some of us use Windows and never get viruses and also have tried linux and don't see any reason to switch at all.
Dryfyre
2010-03-18 16:18:04 UTC
well the reason they use windows is because they were raised into it thru corporate mindwashing and even though it can use photoshop and itunes, there are free replacements for those programs.



i use ubuntu-linux as well as pc-bsd and windows at work.
Kjpolker
2010-03-18 11:37:23 UTC
they know windows, and most people are opposed to change. plus linux has no realadvertisementss or anyway to get to the consumers :(
PeterR
2010-03-18 11:36:57 UTC
Because some of us actually look after our computers and enjoy using Lightroom and Photoshop CS4.



I do like a wee dabble with http://pclinuxos.com/ now and again though.
nicholashcanale
2010-03-18 11:42:41 UTC
Becuz Microsoft was the first to stupify using a computer by making Windows so that any and everyone can use it. People became way too comfortable using Windows and thus, refuse to change.



It is sad but peasants will be peasants and us nerds will be nerds.
LoveNightRain
2010-03-18 11:34:07 UTC
because we havent discovered linux lol


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...