I comment on these cherry picked, because they appeal valid to you, yet are completely invalid in my opinion.
Originally Posted by allquixotic
1. Windows: Does it have open source drivers? No, it does not. Linux has - half-arsed, half-shining - but it has. It also has proprietary versions. Who looses?
2. Windows: Does it use opensourced OpenGL stack? What stack is used by Windows? Closed source. For patent reasons. Same thing is used in Linux binary blobs. Is this limitation of Linux? No - it is limitation of software patents that cannot be integrated into opensource solutions. This means currently software patents are reason for development slow-down. Does this apply due to Linux? No.
5. Windows addressed this problem in variety of ways: Stable ABI = Lots of malware. Multiple copies = "DLL Hell" and later "Library Hell" - reason why vista and up use up to 5x more space, and more compared to XP with "Dll Hell". Also, this too adds to "Lots of Malware", since windows does not have ONE fixed stone to build upon, but MULTIPLE broken ones. Software, that is built and works on Bugs and Holes - this is Windows Compatibility. Every sane person understands that software MUST be supported over its lifecycle and it is impossible to produce anything "backward compatible" without actually PLACING CONSTANT effort to have it. This "effortless compatibility" would work only if two things suddenly apply to software development AT SAME TIME:
a) Development freezes
b) Current versions are flawless
Which is utopia!