That seems to be an older article since he was experimenting with XP. The other OS's came along more since then.
I won't deny that Microsoft seems to have the most versatility regarding software --- simply speaking more stuff works with it. But that's because everyone and their brother kisses up to those where the money lies.
And likewise, I won't deny Linux has its quirks. There's usually something buggy, usually more of an annoyance than a major problem.
That being said, I think it's time I enumerate the reasons I'm so passionate against Microsoft:
1)
"Everybody uses it" --- I'm not a sheeple. And when everyone and their brother does it, it opens a BIG door to exploitation, including stealth control. Most people don't care because most would give up their constitutional freedoms in the drop of a hat and" believe what they are told". I don't want to be in that crowd.
http://www.christianforums.net/showthread.php?t=40474
2)
The cost. While the cost is better than Mac, still one has to dish out even more cost for other software. It depends what one needs to use a computer for. For me, reading emails, forums, web surfing and listening to youtube videos (and maybe some other simple applications) is enough. I don't need something with bells and whistles and then pay for it yet. Thus a free OS like Linux serves me fine. If one's into intense gaming and graphics, then I'd say get a Microsoft computer --- better yet get an x-box.
3)
The viruses (and along that line slow-ups, errors, bugs, etc). If a person can deal with the viruses, fine. Then get a Microsoft and I don't want to hear complaining on the average of 4 times a year. But for me, viruses was a MAJOR issue and source of stress. I don't mean major in the sense I got any more than the next person, but major in the sense that this is an important issue with me. And then you know what they tell you to do? SPEND EVEN MORE MONEY for "Good Security" software. Something is fundamentally wrong with that modus operandi and logic --- anyone can see that's not playing with a full deck. (On a side-note here, it was because of the myriads of viruses that Microsoft gets that I opted out of any on-line study because rest assured, the day of the big exam or project the computer would get a virus, and then I'd have to explain it to the professor. I don't mind taking responsibility for my own actions, but I hate when I have to justify myself for another's faults.)
4)
Building one's own computer. I like to build my own computers and since the inception of XP it does not allow you to load too many computers which is a combination of issues 1 and 2. For example, I had to change the motherboard on this computer once. But I already had XP installed on the 3 allowable computers. When I went to install MY OWN DISK THAT I BOUGHT WITH MY OWN MONEY, I had to explain to a guy over the phone in India what I was doing. That smacks in the face of privacy rights and their wanting more money (for an OS that is highly prone to the issues of #3). Windows 98 and earlier did not have this problem, and that was my last love-affair with Microsoft in those "good old days".
Let's compare that to Linux:
1) Most people don't use it. That's good in my eyes. They keep their eyes on the source code well.
2) Zero cost--- and yet I can use it well for what I want a computer to do.
3) No viruses, and for that matter, it does not slow up, have as many bugs or do crazy stuff.
4) I can build computers from now until Christ comes, install Linux in as many times as I want, and they even encourage you to give away Linux to others. And no Indian guys, either. Now giving an OS away sounds more Christian to me.