You could pay for it!

I was waiting for the first smart alec to suggest that...
I could. But, if I'm paying, I'd rather buy Win8 and my laptop certainly can't handle it.

Windows 7 keys come a dime a dozen. Do you have friends at University? Most University students have more keys than they know what to do with.

Good call. FB, here I come.

If you fail to find one free, you can buy a legit copy for like $65 at:

http://www.missionsofts.com/

Thats what I did just a few months ago and had no problems.

Also, I wouldn't bother with Windows 8 unless you've got a tablet (see abge's post).

Also, be careful with cracks. Every virus I've ever gotten was when my friend attempted to download software cracks.

Linux.

No worries guys - I managed to save myself the 50 odd dollars. ; )
But, yeah. Next time I need an OS I'll probably just pay for it. Hard to get out of the student mentality though - even when you're not one.

Who pays for an OS?

People who don't mind paying for the tools they need.

Also people who don't have time to waste on familiarising with a different OS. I never worked in a company that used Linux on their computers. Why should I install it home then?

Because you don't have time for an OS that crashes, runs slow, gets viruses, and doesn't act like you want it to?*

*(Admittedly, Windows 7 deserves this slighly less than some others).

All jokes aside, I do dual boot with Win7. I use it for gaming and Netflix (until very recently, took the plunge and got it working with WINE last weekend), and that's about it. It's a better buy than most any other non-free OS, but it's still slow and buggy and rather unpleasant, so I don't use it when there are alternatives.

The last time I encountered BSoD was with Windows XP. The same goes with random resetting and other "crashes".

Whether something runs slow is not only a question of optimization, but also of the parameters of your rig. Unless you are close to the minimum requirements, the OS optimization is negligible compared to the demands of the applications you are running.

If you get viruses, you might want to install some protective software and cut down on your furry porn consumption. Apart from occasional adware, no harmful stuff has made it past the active components of my protection to meet with Mr Deep Scan. Not to mention the main reason Linux is mostly malware free is because there's not money to be made from robbing the basedwelling neckbeards. No incentive for black hats, no action by blackhats.

I don't even know what "doesn't act like you want it to" means. That you type in a command and the OS doesn't execute it? Maybe you entered the command in the wrong input box? The command prompt is not where you type "free horny furry gangbang xxx krellin slashfic" type of queries.

ulytau,

I bought a fast new computer with Windows Vista a few years ago. Out of the box (that is, with maybe one or two applications like firefox added, and nothing else), it would randomly freeze for 45-90 seconds while doing things like web browsing, and that within 5 minutes of booting. Occasionally it would never unfreeze.

Was this a configuration issue? Maybe. Should it be possible for a preconfigured OS on new hardware to run that badly? No. Did many, many others have similar issues? Yes.

(The computer ran, and runs linux blazingly fast and with no hitches at all. It also runs pretty well now with Windows 7.).

Even the less spectacularly bad OSes, like XP and 7, are slower than they should be, which is to say, it is difficult to configure them to run everyday applications as fast as Linux easily does. They also consume a great deal of RAM, even without applications running, and it is hard to impossible to configure this away.

As for viruses -- sure, you can run antivirus software, which will slow your computer down even (substantially) more and cause various inconveniences besides; or you can run an operating system that never gets viruses even if you don't run antivirus software.

There are various reasons Linux is virus free. One of them is that too few people use linux for viruses to propogate efficiently. Another is fewer security holes and a generally more robust security system. (This gap has narrowed over the years).

"Doesn't act like you want it to" means that it's woefully unconfigurable. Notice how every time a version of Windows comes out, people talk a lot about how great or awful some or other UI feature is? That happens a lot less on linux (other than ubuntu), because there's such a vast array of different ways you can set up your desktop that at the end of the day, it will pretty much look and act however you want it to. Windows sometimes improves in these respects, but then sometimes, it takes a huge step backward. Whatever it does, you're pretty much stuck with it. You're not going to be able (for example) to completely replace the desktop system, as you can in linux.

And even apart from the UI, it's pretty much going to do what it wants to do, how it wants to do it, and you're going to like it or leave it.

I use both Windows and linux regularly. So far as I can tell, your encounters with the latter have probably been limited to reading stereotypes.

It all comes down to what you need to do.

I loved Linux on my Workstation for coding and writing papers.

I use Windows 7 on my Desktop because I play games, making Linux simply not an option.

I use Windows 8 on my laptop because I have touchscreen and touch support on both Linux and Windows 7 is lacking. Also, when I install Linux on my laptop, I have major overheating problems.

A circular saw sucks when you're trying to drill something. Doesn't mean a drill is a better tool, though.

I try to let the Linux users live in peace. Problem is, that's often a one-way street. The amount of proselytizing makes some of them about as laughable as Jehovah's Witnesses. Surprise, I won't stop using Windows because THEY had issues with it - it works for me pretty well. Perhaps they could accept the fact that people use Windows because it satisfies their needs, not because they're ignorant masochists who never heard of the glorious panacea that is Linux. Just like I can choose my own car, house or president, I can choose something as trivial as OS. Thank you for your understanding, webDiplomacy Congregation of Neckbearded Sausagefest..

It is funny at how often in life a statement such as:
"I tried this alternative thing and have found it to be a wonderful improvement over the norm. You should give it a try. It made my life better and you might really enjoy it."

...is often met with:
"Don't try and suck me into your cult you wacko!"

I.e. Someone trying to help others improve their lives often being met with hostility.

Linux has it's place (technically competent people who aren't afraid to recompile the kernel whenever they add a capability and scientific types). Mac has i's place (phanboyz and artistic types/graphic designers). Windows has it's place (business users and home users who want simplicity and not an OS that needs recompiling every time they add an application to it). Each is a tool with it's appropriate market.

Linux user to Windows user:

What I think I'm saying: "I tried this alternative thing and have found it to be a wonderful improvement over the norm. You should give it a try. It made my life better and you might really enjoy it."

What I'm actually saying: " [Why should you install Linux?] Because you don't have time for an OS that crashes, runs slow, gets viruses, and doesn't act like you want it to?"

I agree with Draugnar, these products all have their places. So if all you want to talk about is Linux, don't do it in a Windows thread.