Absolutely agree. If any of them didn't have someone in the rear-view mirror, they'd stagnate. We saw that with windows for a while when it had such absolute dominance of the personal computing world, and linux was something where you actually did have to compile your kernel by hand. (Thankfully that's something I haven't done in many years.)
I'd also agree that Microsoft has woken up a bit since Ballmer left. Time was, interoperability seemed to be a dirty word at microsoft.Caused me many, many headaches trying to deal with the purposeful incompatibilities that microsoft brought to the mix.(one of the reason I despise the company as much as I do.)
Yes, I understand and agree with your point. But my point was that this is a limitation of Windows in which there was a lot of investment since Windows 7. I haven't had an update cause more than 1 reboot cycle in Windows 10 since I installed it.
OK, so if you were to download the ISOs for windows 10 today, how many download/reboot cycles would you suffer through? I'd bet 3 or 4.
I like the "everything's a file" design of *nix, and particularly like human-readable configuration files. However, not everyone does, and there's even been talk in the past from some of the distros of moving to a binary registry like Windows. I never did understand the reasoning for this, but I am sure there is one.
'Everything is a file' is a particularly powerful concept to someone who really understands it. We're starting to see creeping binary crap in the mess that systemd has become. I don't understand the concept of binary logs, other than the minimal security benefits it obtains. All it does is slow down troubleshooting in my world. Hate it. Would hate a registry worse though. I'm sure they thought it was a neat concept when they first came up with it, but the registry has been the source of more issues in windows than just about anything. At this point, it's etched in stone, and MS is too wedded to it to escape even if they wanted to. To me, one of the biggest drawbacks of a monolithic binary configuration, is that it makes system restoral problematic at best. Yeah, you can restore your data, but suppose you've made a lot of customization to your desktop, in the way it is organized and presented. If you have a hard disk crash, even if you have good backups for your data, you're going to have issues getting your environment back the way you like it. In the linux world, you restore $HOME, and you're pretty much good to go. I recently upgraded a fellow from Fedora 12 to Mint 17. Once I restored his home directory and files, as far as his desktop and stuff, it was like nothing had changed. Can't beat that with a stick.
It's impossible for Microsoft to directly support every piece of hardware out there.
Similar to Linux. Not everything is supported, but these days, especially with older hardware Linux has better support than windows in many ways. Sometimes Linux is ahead of the hardware curve. I recall when the I7 chips were announced. You could run Linux on them before you could run Windows.
That said, the amount of supported hardware on Windows still vastly exceeds Linux and OS-X.
I'd question that assertion with the exception of some really low-volume hardware that has stuff specifically written for windows, and only windows to work, like CNC machines and the like. Even with those, good luck upgrading to windows 10 without spending a lot of money, if it is possible at all.
OK, so if you were to download the ISOs for windows 10 today, how many download/reboot cycles would you suffer through? I'd bet 3 or 4.I bought my son a Dell laptop recently (graduation present). After booting the laptop, we ran Windows update. There was one reboot required to update to the latest everything from Microsoft. However, afterwards we went to the Dell web site, which has its own utility to scan and update drivers. When we ran that, it did install some drivers and trigger a second reboot.
Love the laptop, btw. It's a Dell XPS-13.