If you think that Unix is terrible for client-side, then I don't think you've been working in Linux for long. How about the ability to install any of 20,000 programs from a convenient package/portage/rpm directory for free in seconds? How about updating every single program on your computer, including the OS, and recompiling everything, with one command?

And as for programming, whenever I'm working in Visual Studio, I feel like I'm working in Notepad. Honestly, if you take the time to learn the keybindings for vi or emacs (I won't say which, I use both :-), you will find that a much more lightweight program can manage projects just as well, and you can code many times faster.

Honestly, it's hard to get away from what you're used to, but immerse yourself in a non-Microsoft environment for a few months (I've been using Unix heavily for less than a year), and you'll realize that Microsoft is the one with the bad interfaces. For years they have been catering to the lowest common denominator. The people who want true control over what they are doing use or write an open source program.

I do like the ability to install on demand! Why is Windows leading client-side? Because it is easy! I am speaking from an average users perspective. Not us! I have used VI and I love it! Visual Studio is NOT like notepad. I'm sorry but AFAIK, VI or Emacs cannot provide intellisense can it? I have used both environments for development and based on my productivity, I concluded that Windows is a better environment for ME. Ultimately, it is about getting the job done FAST and using what works for you. I have used freeBSD and it is definitely STABLE, but really not something I would like to sit and develop on. Think about the millions of END-USERS??? Windows is really the solution for them... at least for now. Although Windows has its issues, I think Microsoft has improved its product in many ways. Do you realize how hard of a problem it is to solve, making the OS secure and user-friendly at the same time? I like Windows, Redhat and freeBSD... I wish Windows stayed away from the Server market and likewise Redhat stayed away from the client!

VI and emacs both have intellisense like features.

Oh that is great ... I last used VI and Emacs to do C++ development and then there was no concept of intellisense :-P ....btw, do I need to install anything to activate intellisense in VI/Emacs??

I think Windows Vista (tm) is going to go down in history as the best thing that ever happened to Linux. MS has done the equivalent of pointing the pistol straight at their shoes.

"...How about the ability to install any of 20,000 programs from a convenient package/portage/rpm directory for free in seconds?..."

Well, I tell you, it's just not that simple. Linux distributions may or may not work. Just yesterday (Friday) I installed Ubuntu Drake (you know, the STABLE version) only to find it boots to ... a command line. No graphical desktop. Command 'startx' unrecognized. Try to install xserver-xorg. It appears to succeed but startx complains about font 'fixed' not found. I Google some forums, they say font directories have moved, but by golly I can't find the new directories the forums mention. I'm not alone, but no further advice is to be found. Just for fun I try to install ubuntu-desktop in the early afternoon only to find the installation grinding on for a couple hours then dying with my network partner disconnecting the logical link. The better part of a day wasted trying what should be a simple installation. Right.

If you find Linux installs fine and upgrades painlessly, then I'm happy for you. But don't claim Linux makes MY life any easier. In return, I won't demand support from providers of free software.

Maybe MS has the bad interfaces, but they work where others fail. You've got to give them some credit for that. Of course, this can all change with Vista and maybe even XP eventually. And eventually, when XP is bloated with DRM, maybe even Ubuntu will boot my system to a graphical desktop.

I agree that there are still some quirks to work out, but you have to admit that these things have been rapidly improving. If you consider all of the software and configurations that exist for any given Linux install (a virtually infinite number), then you have to admit that Linux has come a long way in about 15 years. After all, Microsoft had a 10-15 year head start and the advantage of being able to throw money at the annoying little problems that open source programmers don't like to work on.

As for Ubuntu, I personally have not been very happy with it. I have had much better luck using Gentoo, being quite satisfied with the software management system (called portage), and their approach of compiling everything. My system is very stable and fast, without too much effort.

I will admit that there are some problems trying to work with closed-source software like the Java browser plug-in and Flash, but there are generally step-by-step how-tos out there that say exactly how to get it working. 64-bit is still a bit rough in a few places. I predict that within a year or two, however, many of these issues will be ironed out and everything will be smooth.

Of course, if you're trying to install beta software, you should still expect some difficulty.

Well, I agree with you that MSFT has had that head start and considering the situation they really are far behind!! I am using RedHat for production and I love it!! I use Fedora at home on a x64 dual-core and I have had a few issues, but they all have a workaround and my experience is great with Fedora....even freeBSD on the same box is PERFECT! However, one thing I don't understand is why do they come out with SO MANY flavors of Linux....why not imrovise what is out there?? Is there really a need for Ubuntu & Gentoo when there are so many other flavors that are good including Fedora (I know they are heading the windows route! LOL)... ???