Well you probably won't count this as "unbiased" but here are some benchmarks that looks similar to others I have seen:
http://m.domaindlx.com/LinuxHelp/resourc...hmarks.htm
ReiserFS does completely wipe the floor with both NTFS and EXT3 though, which is pretty awesome. Shame the guy who made it is in jail for murder. I'm sure some other people are working on it now
I never doubted that Windows had more software, my point was that I had to search through loads of software before picking one that I thought was good. I then had to install it and restart. With Linux and a package manager, you get the same as you stated (everything working, shortcuts provided, menu items provided). You mention dependency hell even though you no it's not a problem with a package manager, so please drop that as an argument.
I don't want to treat Windows "reasonably". I want to treat it the way I would any computer. I want to install a load of stuff on it that I need to use, and I want it to work. This shouldn't be a difficult task; after all, it's what computers were designed for. If you come to me and say "Adrian, you can either have this OS which is free and has less choice in software (but no gaps in software genres I might add), or you can pay for this OS which has loads more choices (some shareware, some freeware, some even adware!) but you have to treat it nicely, not putting too much strain on it" then I know which one I'd pick.
http://m.domaindlx.com/LinuxHelp/resourc...hmarks.htm
ReiserFS does completely wipe the floor with both NTFS and EXT3 though, which is pretty awesome. Shame the guy who made it is in jail for murder. I'm sure some other people are working on it now
I never doubted that Windows had more software, my point was that I had to search through loads of software before picking one that I thought was good. I then had to install it and restart. With Linux and a package manager, you get the same as you stated (everything working, shortcuts provided, menu items provided). You mention dependency hell even though you no it's not a problem with a package manager, so please drop that as an argument.
I don't want to treat Windows "reasonably". I want to treat it the way I would any computer. I want to install a load of stuff on it that I need to use, and I want it to work. This shouldn't be a difficult task; after all, it's what computers were designed for. If you come to me and say "Adrian, you can either have this OS which is free and has less choice in software (but no gaps in software genres I might add), or you can pay for this OS which has loads more choices (some shareware, some freeware, some even adware!) but you have to treat it nicely, not putting too much strain on it" then I know which one I'd pick.
