> Why would anyone use Windows; an expensive, proprietary, bug ridden OS when they can use Linux or Chrome OS to perform the same tasks?
Because for most people, for most setups, for most use cases, it just works. Expensive? It's rolled into the price of the PC they bought. Proprietary? They don't care. Bug ridden? I rarely see a Windows machine crash these days. Even the years old XP machines I deal with sometimes, for all they need a good fix to be running at acceptable speeds, still run.
With Chrome there's certainly an argument that it can be more convenient than Windows. However, the argument for Linux needs to be stronger than being a free version of Windows or Mac OS with relatively poor hardware support and access to the underlying code that most people won't understand anyway.
Are updates included for free? If not, it could be more expensive in the long run.
>I rarely see a Windows machine crash these days
I wasn't just talking about Windows and besides, not all bugs are visible -- they might manifest themselves as security holes. Companies (should) care a lot about security, if they did, I'm sure they'd be more interested in OSS.
I think I'm trying to reason with HN and not the average Windows dependent company. How many of us have relatives using Linux or Chrome OS? Very few? That could change down the line.
Because for most people, for most setups, for most use cases, it just works. Expensive? It's rolled into the price of the PC they bought. Proprietary? They don't care. Bug ridden? I rarely see a Windows machine crash these days. Even the years old XP machines I deal with sometimes, for all they need a good fix to be running at acceptable speeds, still run.
With Chrome there's certainly an argument that it can be more convenient than Windows. However, the argument for Linux needs to be stronger than being a free version of Windows or Mac OS with relatively poor hardware support and access to the underlying code that most people won't understand anyway.