User Interface: Beryl is very easy to install from the available software repos using yum or apt-get (Fedora or Ubuntu) and will run quite nicely with default settings, but has far more options for eye-candy than Vista offers. Fonts: I agree with you fully about the fonts, but the default set in Gnome on Fedora 7 is more than adequate for most "normal" users. Games: I agree that it would be great to have more modern games be natively available, but as you sort of pointed out, that's the game developers' fault, not Linux's fault. We dont' have DirectX, but OpenGL works just fine on what are considered to be "gaming" video cards(a point proven by using Wine for gaming). Media Center: Ever heard of MythTV? You can build a pretty impressive media server with it as the base. Yes, you might need to get a little geeky to do it, but once it's done, it can far surpass Media Center. Support for Tablets: I also don't have much desire to own or use a tablet, but you can buy them with Linux pre-installed and configured for hardware functionality on Lenovo/IBM hardware from www.EmperorLinux.com (starting at just $2200). Just check out the Raven X61 Tablet. ReadyBoost: Windows needs REadyBoost, because they don't give you the ability to run the entire OS from DVD, CD, USB, Floppy. Try grabbing one of those 4GB flash drives and installing the "Live" version of your favorite Linux distro on it. It's leaps and bounds faster than the little extra "RAM" that ReadyBoost will get you. And that's not nearly as geeky as MythTV. In fact, it's quite easy to find a site that will hold your hand step by step through the entire 10min(not counting the ISO download) process. iLife: It's a widely-known and accepted fact that if you want top-of-the-line multimedia, you choose Mac. I do agree though, that Linux needs more help here than Windows, although, I'd still recommend a Mac to anyone that wants a really top quality experience in this field. Networking: NetworkManager is coming along nicely, however, you have a very good point here about the need for more "Network" friendly tools that are readily available. IT Management: As a Systems Administrator at a medium-sized company, I actually much prefer third-party tools for managing hardware and software inventories and the like. Even if more tools were available in this area, I wouldn't use them. Because most networks are vastly different from one-another, I much prefer using simple shell scripts that pull data to a single management/syslog server that essentially operates outside of the normal realm of daily activity. Marketing: Microsoft wins, hands down. It always will, because of it's deep pockets and OEM integration. That's just a sad fact that others have to work around. Hence the funny, Mac television spots. Over all, I think this is a decent listing of things that could stand to see some more improvement. However, there is one very primary issue that your article seems to dismiss. Widows is designed, developed, maintained, and marketed by Microsoft. Macintosh is designed, developed, maintained, and marketed by Apple. That is what gives those operating systems the ability to stay focused and cohesive in rolling out applications that can stand out above all other that are available for that OS. Your article assumes that "Linux" is has that same luxury. I'm sure that you realize that, but your article fails to make that obvious. It's because of that fact, that in a lot of categories, there is no stand-out package. Because of the strong development community for "Linux", developers work on a large array of projects instead of a singular primary one. Should we want for that to be different? How would a more focused community of developers change the "Linux" culture? Note: I put "Linux" in quotes because of it's intended implication as a singular entity rather than typing out various GNU/Linux based distro names. "Linux" is a kernel, not an OS, I just didn't want to seem fanatical. »