In the following article I will examine a few of the many differences between these two operating systems.
Windows and Linux differ greatly in this area.
Windows is a single proprietary product of Microsoft. A new version is released at Microsoft's discretion, time gaps between versions have had different ranges.
Linux has two levels of versioning. First, you have "flavors" or "distributions." Linux is not a single product, but a family of operating systems all released by different companies or organizations based on a common foundation. The central part of Linux that is maintained alone is the kernel, the core of the OS.
Through distributons, Linux has major flexibility. Distributions each have their own goals, intented use, release schedule, and other differentiating factors. There are distributions geared to function as desktops, servers, NASes, etc. There are distributons created to serve certain languages, localities, even religions!
Both of these models have their pros and cons. Linux is able to acheive major flexibility through distributions, but some suggest that this causes confusion amongst users, whereas the Windows product line is much easier to follow.
Some of Linux's more popular distributions are Ubuntu, RedHat, SuSE, Debian, and Mandriva.
Due to Windows' majority market share, it has the best hardware support of any OS. Some hardware, especially newer hardware, is not supported at all in Linux. Virtually any hardware ever made has Windows support and drivers available.
I have found from personal experience that when something works on Linux, it just works, whereas with Windows I've found some hardware to be more difficult to install and set up. However, I've also found that when something doesn't work on Linux, it's usually a huge pain if not an impossible task to make it work, whereas with Windows it's almost always possible with a little bit of work.
Linux is a generally a more flexible OS than Windows, therefore there are versions of Linux that run on many different architectures. For the average user though, this is no concern, as they both run fine on the standard x86 and amd64 architectures.
Malware, adware, spyware, viruses, whatever you want to call them, they are programs that intend to harm you or your computer in one way or another. Whether it be stealing personal data, causing system problems, or displaying 1,000 ads on startup. Malware of all forms has become a huge issue over the last few years.
This is an area where Linux shines above Windows. Linux has virtually no malware. Whether this can be attributed to quality or simply that malware writers ignore Linux due to its small market share is an ongoing debate.
This is one of the areas where Windows beats Linux hands-down. Windows has been around for quite a while, and has been the most common operating system on desktop PCs for most of that time. Due to this, most software is written for Windows and not Linux.
The situation here is a catch-22 for Linux, because software vendors won't start writing for Linux until it attains a larger market share, but it is quite difficult to attain a larger market share with a more limited software selection. Adobe PhotoShop and Microsoft Office are two major software packages that currently have absolutely no support for Linux, making it difficult for Linux users to inter-operate. Games are also a problem for Linux, the vast majority of advanced games will only run on Windows. Some view this as the number one barrier to widespread Linux adoption.
Windows is expensive. Linux is free.
As far as upfront costs, Windows costs anywhere from $100-300 retail. However most users do not pay this, as Windows is usually obtained by buying PC with it pre-installed.
Most often Linux is obtained by download over the internet. Some retailers (such as OSDisc) sell pre-made copies of Linux on CD or DVD, usually for around $2-5 a copy. Also, lately there have been some Linux pre-installed desktops released, such as Wal Mart's $200 Green PC.
An added cost benefit of Linux is that it can run on older hardware and still get good performance.
There is no question that Linux is cheaper upfront. However many still debate about the total cost of ownership, a difficult figure to calculate.
This is an area where the two operating systems seem to have met right in the middle.
A few years ago, a Linux install was an advanced operation, that pretty much required a computer expert.
Nowadays, a Linux install and a Windows install are barely different at all. They both use graphical interfaces with easy to follow steps. Linux installs may actually be easier in ways, many distributions can automatically set up a dual boot system and perform similar tasks.
Linux and Windows both provide a graphical interface and a command line interface, or CLI.
Windows has one GUI front-end, known as "explorer."
Linux has multiple options for the GUI interface, such as KDE, Gnome, Xfce, FluxBox, and many more. This can be compared to the way that flavors work. Windows has one, internally owned and maintained, whereas Linux has multiple options, created by different groups.
The GUI in Windows is a much more integral part of the OS than in Linux. This has benefits and drawbacks. It benefits beginners in certain cases, because whereas some Linux software may not even have a GUI, virtually all Windows software does. Many novice computer users know nothing about the command line.
The drawbacks are mostly performance and flexibility related. A Windows server requires a GUI to run, and any advanced software such as this is another potential point of failure. Linux's detached GUI nature also makes the system much more flexible for remote management.
The Linux GUI has improved quite a bit over the years, Compiz/Beryl and desktop effects in general now meet or surpass those of Windows. Whether it is better or worse than Windows is a matter of personal taste.
Linux is the clear winner in this category. This is not due to the technical issues, but the different business models these two oses are created under. Windows is proprietary, owned by a company. Companies exist to make profits. Linux is owned by the community, so the only concern is to develop a good product. Therefore, while Windows aims to lock users in, Linux aims to just work as well as possible. You can interface with Windows from a Linux machine much easier than you can interface with Linux from a Windows machine.
Most web hosting nowadays runs on Linux servers. Windows servers are generally more expensive, and the normal drawbacks of Linux (graphics, ease of use, hardware support) do not apply to servers in the way they apply to desktops. Security is also a major issue with servers as they are a more likely target for hackers. However a good system administrator can acheive adequate security with either platform.
The difference between the two mostly comes down to price and what technologies you will be using. If using proprietary Microsoft technologies such as ASP, FrontPage, MSSQL, etc. you will probably want to go with a Windows server. If using PHP, Java, Ruby, Perl, or any other open source technology, Linux is the natural choice because it is usually cheaper.