What are the key differences between Windows and Linux operating systems?

Windows, created by Microsoft in 1985, began as an interface for MS-DOS and has grown into the world's predominant operating system, boasting a 75% market share by 2020. It's a proprietary system, so only Microsoft can modify and distribute it. On the other hand, Linux, introduced by Linus Torvalds in 1991, is an open-source system derived from Unix, meaning anyone can alter its source code. Linux has seen significant development over the years, resulting in various distributions like Ubuntu and Debian. Although commonly chosen for servers and supercomputers, Linux also finds use in a minority of personal computers, accounting for about 2% of the market by 2020.

People know Windows cause that's about all they know other than MacOS. If people especially new business owners knew they could get started with very little down and not have the monthly or yearly overhead of all the Windows apps they pay, they would try and be happy with Linux and most likely their is a Linux distribution that fits perfect with their line of work. Nice Article Joe with bringing awareness to others that are not familiar with Linux. The best part about Linux is when your Windows machine is running too slow and you are told your machine is just part of History. It's time then to install Linux and watch the life of that old machine come back and look to be on steroids when it does.

Windows dominates in personal and enterprise computing, while Linux leads in server and supercomputing markets. Windows has a broader range of commercial software, while Linux has a vast array of open-source software. Linux is often seen as more secure due to its open-source nature and strong user permissions model. Linux is generally more efficient in system resource utilization, which is beneficial in server and development environments. Windows has a more user-friendly GUI, making it more suitable for everyday users, while Linux provides robust CLI options favored by system administrators and developers. Linux offers high customizability which is beneficial for developers and system administrators.

Man sollte sich darüber klar sein, dass alle Betriebssysteme – egal, wie sie hei?en – denselben Zweck erfüllen: "Ein Betriebssystem, auch OS (von englisch operating system) genannt, ist eine Zusammenstellung von Computerprogrammen, die die Systemressourcen eines Computers wie Arbeitsspeicher, Festplatten, Ein- und Ausgabeger?te verwaltet und diese Anwendungsprogrammen zur Verfügung stellt. " (Wikipedia) Alle Betriebssysteme sind brauchbar für den Zweck. Der imho gr??te Unterschied sind die AGB der Provider. Einfach mal selbst die AGB der verfügbaren Betriebssystemhersteller objektiv gegenüberstellen und dann entscheiden, womit man gut leben kann und welche Einschr?nkungen man akzeptabel findet.

Linux is superior than its competitor, Microsoft, in a number of areas. Open-source software is well known for its dependability, security, and speed. But you have to look more deeply at the operating system in order to get these benefits. It's not that easy to get started with any of the current Linux distributions. To get the system configured perfect, you will need to study a great lot and comprehend its subtleties. Without this, you won't go very far with Linux.

Windows is built on a closed-source architecture. Linux is built around an open-source architecture. A company builds Windows. The world builds Linux, which has a totally different approach and vision.

Windows being a proprietary operating system has its own advantages over Linux. A clear well-defined roadmap from Windows 95->NT->ME->XP->2000->Win 10->Win 11. Windows provides better enterprise support over Linux and usually cost effective to manage because of the tools available for support.

Windows and Linux, distinct in their architecture and design, approach system resource management differently. Windows operates with a monolithic kernel, consolidating most of its OS functions into a single large module operating in the processor's privileged mode. This design lends Windows its efficiency and user-friendliness but can make it more susceptible to errors and vulnerabilities. In contrast, Linux employs a modular kernel. At its core lies a microkernel responsible for fundamental OS tasks, while other functions are executed by loadable kernel modules in the processor's unprivileged mode. This design offers Linux increased flexibility and security at the cost of complexity and configuration challenges.

Windows and Linux vary in their approach to security and stability, impacting their system and data protection capabilities. Windows adopts a centralized security model, where a singular authority dictates user and application access rights. It also utilises a registry, a crucial database for system settings, but this can be vulnerable to corruption or attacks. Conversely, Linux operates on a decentralized model without a sole authority for permissions. It employs a file system hierarchy to organise its files and applications. Each file is governed by specific permissions determining its access. Though robust compared to Windows' registry, this system can be complex for some users to navigate.

It is true that Linux has less compatibility with some commercial hardware and software products, specially the ones that the common users use or work with on their environments, but that aspect is rapidly changing as Linux becomes more and more popular as an alternative to Windows. It is also worth mentioning that Linux, despite of that temporary disadvantage, has a powerful edge: Its malleability and capacity to morph into specific free open-source tools, as examples we can cite Kali Linux which is a Linux security distribution specially used for digital forensics and penetration testing, and Ubuntu Studio which is a Linux distro especially developed for music production, video production, photography and graphic design.

Windows and Linux offer distinct compatibility and support characteristics influencing their interactions with hardware and software. Windows, holding a significant market share, boasts compatibility with a wide range of products and receives consistent support from Microsoft through updates and fixes. However, it involves higher ownership costs, necessitating licensing, activation, and security software. On the other hand, Linux, with its niche market position, sometimes faces compatibility issues. Official support can be limited since many contributors work voluntarily. Nonetheless, Linux generally incurs lower ownership costs as it's open-source, eliminating the need for licensing fees or additional activation procedures.

Windows and Linux offer contrasting user interfaces that shape their users' interactions. Windows provides a graphical user interface with icons, menus, and other visual elements, making it user-friendly and consistent across various versions. This consistency contributes to a more seamless experience for users transitioning between versions or devices. In contrast, Linux primarily employs a command-line interface, relying on textual commands. However, it does offer diverse GUI options like GNOME, KDE, Xfce, and LXDE that users can install based on preference. But, the lack of uniformity across Linux distributions can be daunting for users, making the learning curve steeper compared to Windows.

Windows has been designed as a graphical user experience on top of Microsoft's original MS-DOS to enable people to use the PC without writing commands. It's main use case is having the user in front of a PC running the Windows operating system. Linux on the other hand has always been designed to be available from remote locations so the main focus was being able to send commands and receive feedback as fast and as clear as possible, with limited bandwidth. While now you can also control Windows remotely and you can install a local user interface for Linux, their most common usage scenarios still remain in the UI for Windows and in the CLI for Linux.

I enjoy being able to use different Linux Distributions to see which one I liked to customize, which would have cost a fortune if I did so with Windows. The open source feature of both the OS and applications provided me with the ability to learn how to modify configuration files to make the box work like I wanted it too. Of course, there have been times that I had to use Windows due to compatibility issues. Many instrumentation firmware updates require Windows to install them on the equipment. Many control equipment runs on Linux due to simplicity and resource constraints. Many backend servers run a Linux based OS like Rocky Linux, a current distro I’m playing with. I guess it comes down to choice of customization or not.