Reason why Linux failed to impress Windows users

Most of you know that Linux is far more stable and secure than Windows. But why so many people are still using Windows? (I dual boot Linux and Windows :)) Internet has revolutionized and changed the way we live daily.

On internet we do many things daily, from meeting friends to banking online. Security is a major concern for such netizens. We already know that Linux is more secure than Windows, but why are we still sticking to Windows and fall prey to hackers?

I want to share my opinion on why Linux has failed to impress windows users.

Windows impressive…

User Interface : I think there is no other operating system that is so easy and has a simple user interface as Windows. Bill Gates & Co. had done a brilliant job in making a very easy-to-use user interface. Even a beginner can master Windows within no time.

Since my inception of the idea of Linux it is known to be an operating system for Geeks. Many people are scared to use Linux, because the user interface is not as easy as Windows, that’s why many people don’t recommend Linux. Recently Linux-makers are working so hard to make the user interface friendly and till now they’ve done a good job.

Image Credits :

So many softwares : You can do almost anything on Windows. Windows has very huge variety of software database with which you can accomplish any kind of work. This is where Linux loses a lot.

The two points that we discussed above are enough to decide whether an operating system succeed or fail. Another important area next to above two areas is Security and this is the only area where Linux wins. But, without an easy user interface it is useless to have great security.

Linux – self goal?

If you observe, many offline computers use Windows only. It is very difficult to think about a PC that runs Linux without having an Internet connection and doing all the daily work, like playing songs, videos etc.

Almost all Linux softwares have to satisfy dependencies. Dependencies are nothing but a package/software that is required to run another software. Almost 90% of the softwares of Linux have to satisfy dependencies which are downloaded and installed from internet automatically.

So, it is very tough to use Linux for daily purpose on a computer which has no internet connection. On Windows, there is nothing like dependencies. Every software is independent of one another, except some softwares that use .Net frameworks, which count to less than 5% of all Windows softwares.

This is solely my own opinion. Have your say, why Linux failed to emerge as  a popular or one of the popular operating system?

Recent Articles

Related Stories


  1. The issue that became mentioned here before that Linux users meets difficulties in run their OS offline without internet all the time that’s a big big drawback in make Linux become more popular as it is today.
    The model by keeping software and updates in maintained repository’s online may serve the idea in make things more secure and it certainly having a quite important aspect in how it’s possible to enhance the security. Pity just they didn’t seem to consider these platforms to work under circumstances without connection outbound to internet against these free sources. Like always, many take for granted that internet is there in the game like everything else. “The Bill Gates Syndrome”

    Another reason which I experienced from many peoples statements and also from my own is the old fashion mentality that many of these developers & organizations working against which pull them back.
    We can also see this in lot of different kind of software that often follow “the same old pattern” even the programming technology has so high potential of knowledge today than it had 10 years back in the time.
    It’s boring from my point of view to see the doll interface in Linux when it could look much better. In my eyes it’s obvious that this is planed and ruled by old fashion minds that don’t want to improve and change these products in cope with our modern time and what people expects from it to look like.
    Mostly I see it as an consequence were the older generation not really want to listen and it then has the result that much stays the same like it always been and looked like and the evolution slows down.
    When it comes to OS like Mac and Windows newest version they both followed the same marketing tactic in impress people to buy by offer eye candy and base their products on highly developed graphical interfaces that walks miles away from Linux in comparison. That’s what happens when it is money involved. Lets see these on a line that measure the impression, Mac & Win 7 on one side and Linux distros on the other. What’s missing in the middle were much melting together for everyones leisure I found XP myself just because it has little of everything and makes it as a great easy to work with companion. Now perhaps someone thinks..Oh man isn’t XP old? Yes it is old and should be developed and improved in my opinion in fit better with our modern time BUT the way MS decided to go when created Vista and further on the makeover version Windows 7 was in my eyes mostly MS way in recover the former failure of Vista and in the same time a try to watch the shoulder on Apple in make something similar in get new marketplace. If check Mac latest versions, what makes it interesting to buy it?
    I would say it’s not more than a wallpaper on the desk and the Dock that have attracted buyers if talking only about the software itself couse it what we see that attracting us to something.

    Finally, I think there is a risk that some people at MS going to be upset when reading this but wouldn’t it be a nice dreamy illusion to believe that by develop Windows 7 there were people that expected the same success in market-share like MS got when released XP 10 years ago.

    Yes it could have been that successful attempt if internet arrived with this new operating system like it did for many people and users when brought XP to our lives.

    So how it is going with the market share for Windows 7?

Comments are closed.