Recently, I witnessed how a new user of a Linux distro took on Linux developers on a forum because he was unable to automagically use some piece of hardware. To "prove" his point, he compared Linux to Redmond's OS.
Of course, other Linux users (and several developers) joined the discussion, some to offer help and others to criticize this person's approach.
The whole situation made me think about several interesting disparities:
-- Why is it that when many Windows users cannot set up a printer, they blame either the printer or the computer (hardware)... but when the same happens on Linux, they immediately blame the OS?
-- Why is it that when Windows lacks an important feature (or an unimportant one that they like), they accept it saying "that's how computers are"... but if Linux lacks it, then it is because Linux developers don't think about the regular user?
-- Why is it that when a virus strikes a Windows computer, users blame the computer or the antivirus, but not the OS? Linux does not get hit by many viruses, by the way. Last time I got a virus since I switched to Linux four years ago was... Wait! I've NEVER gotten any!
-- Why is it that when malware takes over the files in a thumbdrive and hides them, Windows users usually blame the thumbdrive and not the OS? Yes, the files are still as visible as ever if you use Linux! It is not the thumbdrive, it is Redmond's OS that does not see them!
People should pay more attention to these matters...