Do you keep Windows around even though you have Linux?

[ninaholic37]

Just curious if you keep Windows around even though you have Linux?

I voted No, as Linux (and Freedos) pretty much satisfy all my current needs.

 

[Red Squirrel]

I have a separate machine for Windows, mostly just for gaming. Everything else I do in Linux.

Though typically if a game is cross platform I might still run it on the Windows machine just because it's easier to get going. Like Minecraft for example, next next next done. In Linux you have to screw around to get the jar file to open properly and know what path java is in etc and it does not even get a proper icon. Minor details though.

 

[lxskllr]

I still have Vista on my home machine, but it hasn't been used since 2009. I have a 2kpro vm on my work machine to use with a couple old programs. Yay for proprietary software. If I had the sources, I could modify the necessary programs, even with my limited skills. As it is, the companies no longer exist, and I'm using 2kpro :^(

 

[unokitty]

Mint Linux on two desktops... Puppy Linux, booting from CD, on a really, really, old desktop...

Windows 7 on one laptop... Windows 8.1 on another laptop...

VMware Workstation on the laptops for when I want Linux...

Most people I work with use Windows. Some work programs used to require it...

Uno

 

[Crusty]

I pretty much exclusively use Linux in virtual machines for servers and development environments.

I used to be a big fan of the Linux desktop but it just doesn't do what I want/need. Biggest thing is playing some AAA gaming titles. It became a giant pain in the ass to maintain dual boots starting and virtualization tech definitely works well enough for anything non-3d.

 

[replica9000]

I still have XP in a virtual machine. Comes in handy for things like using APC's software to just off the damn beeping on my UPS when the power goes out.

 

[Hi-Fi Man]

I unfortunately need Windows for several programs and games. I do use live media to troubleshoot and fix issues though. Any servers I setup use BSD, Debian, or Ubuntu MATE.

 

[adamantine.me]

I've been using Windows less and less - I'd like to think the Microsoft Office license I bought last year will be the last payment I make to Microsoft.

Once I'm familiar enough with Libre, the only thing left I'll need Windows for is gaming, which I do very very casually nowadays, anyway. I had Linux and Windows on dual boot - I believe a graphics driver conflict made that a huge failure. Weekly BSODs.

 

[hasu]

I need windows mainly because OpenOffice is not 100% compatible with MS Office. I am sure Microsoft won't let that happen. But for home use, Linux Mint is just perfect, albeit the incompatibility with some printers, scanners etc.

 

[MrColin]

My stupid job requires me to use Dayforce HCM from time to time which runs on silverlight which only works in IE on windows. It won't even work on a mac with the official silverlight for mac from microsoft. I upgraded my windows installation from 7 to 10, and while it looks nice and works well, it also seems to have a lot of the caged feeling that I also hate about the Apple products. Also, it seems closer to what Orwell, Huxley, Stallman, Snowden, and the bible were trying to warn us about.

 

[Essence_of_War]

I said "yes-dual-boot", my primary machine is my desktop and it is dual-booted for gaming purposes.

Laptop is a windows-free, gentoo-frankenstein that does nothing useful yet except for "being luks encrypted" and "having a zpool".

Soon-to-be-server will be windows-free also.

 

[Ham n' Eggs]

Yes I have a computer specifically for Windows: but soon that will become "yes-dual-boot"

I'm new to linux but I love it thoroughly so far.Specific software are holding back a full and permanent transition... namely art software that runs only on MacOS or Windows. I'm guessing that isn't changing anytime soon.I would transition one computer over fully but the music players on GNU-Linux are a bit lacking in my opinion. If Foobar2000 ran on GNU-Linux I would have another computer to switch over fully.

 

[wiseguyin]

Whats wrong with having Windows too? Its not a bad piece of software ya know.. (I typically have dual boot laptops setup but the fan boyism is stupid).

 

[lxskllr]

Whats wrong with having Windows too? Its not a bad piece of software ya know.. (I typically have dual boot laptops setup but the fan boyism is stupid).

What "fan boyism"? Having Windows is bad because you're under the control of MS. It doesn't have anything to do with technical merits, or convenience.

 

[Kaido]

Having Windows is bad because you're under the control of MS.

 

[jae]

Only time I use Windows is for learning. I work at a high school district where Windows is used on 98% of the computers/servers, so I have a virtual Windows environment for studying for my MCSA. That's the only thing/time I use Windows though.

 

[KlokWyze]

A lot of stuff is still painful in the Linux desktop world. I'm still way more efficient with Windows because that's just what I've used for so long but, I'm impressed with Fedora 22 w/ Gnome. I thought I liked Plasma, which looks great and has some cool functions, but it's just really unstable and glitchy. That being said, I still don't trust it and know I need to regularly image the boot drive. It WILL break at some time as all Linux desktop environments do. Do you guys know how many flavors and desktop environments I've gone through in the past 10 years??!?!!!?!? Too many. Broke my heart about Plasma on both Ubuntu (Kubuntu) and Fedora...

Since I need a Windows box at the house for the desktop environment alone (phone hacking, music applications, MS Office and others), but I also use it as my file/backup/movie server. I don't need or want 4 separate computers running 24/7 in the basement.

Need to get Serato working through Wine though.... if I can't then I'll need to get a spare laptop purely for that... Linux seems like it's always playing catch up for anyone that wants to use professional top shelf applications only available on MS or Apple.

Some things it does so well though. Love it. BASH, DNF, desktop customization. :wub:

 

[cyclohexane]

For games, although I've thought about Vt-d and running Windows as a VM for gaming...but too much of pita

 

[Mem]

Whats wrong with having Windows too? Its not a bad piece of software ya know.. (I typically have dual boot laptops setup but the fan boyism is stupid).

Nothing wrong having Windows.

I've two Linux PCs and two Windows PCs, my Windows PCs are mainly used for gaming etc which is still the best gaming platform for the PC period.

Both Linux and Windows have their own strengths and weaknesses.

 

[dustyz16]

After reading some threads, I had to put my 2-cents (3or4? inflation) in on subject...
I have Vista stuffed on a 40gb SATA I salvaged from a PS/2 gaming system and use it only for the gaming aspect. I am stuck on Steam's Train Simulator 2015/16 (and a couple of other games). I don't want to pollute any of my Hi-cap drives w/windows of any kind. So it sits in an older, slower, PC where it belongs (1.3ghz Celeron II HP).
I really DO NOT like windows; never have/never will. I started my love of computers in 1974 in High school and have seen alot of changes not always for the better...
40

 

[ultimatebob]

What "fan boyism"? Having Windows is bad because you're under the control of MS. It doesn't have anything to do with technical merits, or convenience.

Are you really under control of Microsoft if you're dual booting? If Windows does something to piss you off, you boot into the other OS until IT does something to piss you off

 

[lxskllr]

Are you really under control of Microsoft if you're dual booting? If Windows does something to piss you off, you boot into the other OS until IT does something to piss you off

Yes. When you're in the non-free O/S you're under MS's control. You can't change, or even look at the software you're running. Especially with newer versions of Windows, it takes Herculean effort just to keep it from spying on you. When finished disabling the crapware, you still don't know if you got it all since it's a blackbox.

All technology is a pissoff at times. What matters is the ability to deal with it. With Windows you can ask for a patch. Unless you're a company paying them millions of dollars, that'll be as successful as asking an apple tree to grow bananas. With free software, you can change it yourself, or pay anyone with the skill to do it for you, and it'll cost far less than millions.

 

[ultimatebob]

Yes. When you're in the non-free O/S you're under MS's control. You can't change, or even look at the software you're running. Especially with newer versions of Windows, it takes Herculean effort just to keep it from spying on you. When finished disabling the crapware, you still don't know if you got it all since it's a blackbox.

All technology is a pissoff at times. What matters is the ability to deal with it. With Windows you can ask for a patch. Unless you're a company paying them millions of dollars, that'll be as successful as asking an apple tree to grow bananas. With free software, you can change it yourself, or pay anyone with the skill to do it for you, and it'll cost far less than millions.

Sounds good in theory, but when you use a "modern" version of Linux like Ubuntu it seems like you're putting Canonical in the driver's seat. Ubuntu seems to be even worse than Microsoft about releasing patches that break applications or even hardware support in the core OS because they aren't QA testing them properly.

 

[Essence_of_War]

It used to be worse in the bad old days, I have been using Ubuntu for ~5 years now and I have had nothing break in the desktop distribution. I don't run around arbitrarily apt-getting dist-upgrades, though, and I stick to LTS distros, so maybe I'm playing it too safe

 

[lxskllr]

Sounds good in theory, but when you use a "modern" version of Linux like Ubuntu it seems like you're putting Canonical in the driver's seat. Ubuntu seems to be even worse than Microsoft about releasing patches that break applications or even hardware support in the core OS because they aren't QA testing them properly.

There's some truth there, but I wouldn't consider Canonical the paragon of GNU/Linux. They give everyone a bad name.

As far as upgrades go, they've been pretty good to me, but like Essense, I stick with the lts releases. AFAIC, interim releases are for testing, and breakage should be expected.