It's important to note that Linux is not an operating system. In other words, a person cannot just download “Linux OS.” Why can't they, you might ask? It's because it doesn't exist.

Linux is not an operating system. Instead, Linux is a kernel. This kernel provides the basic instructions and functionality for the system to run, but by itself, is not an operating system. It is up to developers, coders, and programmers to take the Linux kernel and from that kernel create an operating system.

This is where the average user starts to come in. When most people talk about “using Linux” they almost always refer to using a Linux-based operating system, as most average users do not interact with the Linux kernel. These Linux-based operating systems are called distributions, or distros, for short. These distributions take the code found in the Linux kernel and add their own programs, file managers, and interfaces, as well as their own styles.

Because of this, no two distributions of Linux are alike. In fact, there can be major differences among distributions. Fedora, which is known for being a more conservative distribution, cannot be compared to a distribution like Ubuntu which prides itself on being user-friendly. That being said, in spite of all of this, all of these distributions share the Linux kernel.

These Linux distributions are meant for wildly different audiences, but the average user is most likely to use either Ubuntu or Linux Mint.

Linux has major advantages over Windows in that it does not receive viruses. This is partly because Linux (along with OS X) is a UNIX-based operating system. As a result, these systems have more security protections and are harder to infect than corresponding Windows-based systems. Both of these systems tend to not get infected by viruses, even though that has been changing for OS X. Linux, however, is still largely virus-free. Another reason for this lack of viruses has to deal with market share. Globally, Linux on the desktop has about 2-3% of the market. Because of this, virus makers prefer to focus on Windows which makes up 90% of the market. Lastly, Linux users tend to be more tech-savvy and therefore less likely to be the victims of a virus. These reasons combined make Linux relatively virus-free.

Another major difference between Linux and Windows occurs in the area of user profiles. Linux users have always accustomed themselves to operating under normal permissions, and only taking on sudo (serves as the equivalent to the Administrator on UNIX-based operating systems) when necessary to install programs or update software. Windows users, on the other hand, would traditionally run programs as an Administrator. This is because most programs at the time required Administrator permissions to run on Windows. Running these programs as Administrator programs, however, was problematic because it increased the probability of a virus striking the system, since having Administrator permissions by default allowed viruses and malware to strike while having full control. While Windows Vista and onward have used User Account Control to encourage the creation of limited user profiles, the old legacy of default Administrator profiles lives on.

Other advantages of Linux include the fact that it is less bloated than Windows and that it typically, as a result, operates better on older or underpowered hardware. In fact, there even exist distributions specifically intended for these uses. Linux also is better at managing updates and the installation of programs when compared to Windows.

Updates are typically done in a less obtrusive way, and sometimes, restarts aren't needed. They are recommended, but are not always necessary like they are on Windows. Program installation is also better on Linux. On Windows, for example, if a person wishes to install a program, they have to fire up their browser, find the website of the program, and download the file to install the program. Occasionally, programs provide installers or may require files to be zipped. This is very insecure, and programs oftentimes attempt to sneak in other apps or programs which the user may not have intended to install during the installer process.

Linux does not do this. Instead, Linux has what are called package managers. These package managers allow for programs to be installed in one of two ways. The most common way is through software app stores. On Ubuntu, for example, the Ubuntu Software Center allows for the installation of most programs. Popular programs such as Chromium (an open-source version of Google Chrome) can be found, and best of all, installation is simply a matter of clicking install, giving root user permission, and then sitting back and watching the program download. Since these programs are vetted by the operating system, there is no risk that there are other programs the user may not want or that they harm the computer. These app stores serve as a graphical front-end for what is actually happening behind it, as the terminal installs the program.

In addition to this, the terminal itself can be used to install programs. Using a line of code, programs can be installed. For example, in Ubuntu, let's say I wanted to install Unetbootin (a software that creates installations of operating systems) through the terminal, I would type: sudo apt-get install unetbootin. It would ask for root user permission, I would input the password, and the program would be installed. Last, but not least, it is possible to find programs on the Internet much like on Windows. This probably won't be used frequently, however.

Linux is also easier to manage than Windows is, and it typically is less bloated. It's easier to manage because of the aforementioned lack of viruses and slow-downs, and it's less bloated because it, unlike Windows, is not weighed down by legacy code. In fact, most servers use Linux distributions instead of Windows or OS X.

Most importantly, Linux distributions, in line with the goals of the free and open-source software movement, are free of charge. In contrast, a license of Windows 10 Home costs $119. OS X is free, but in order to get it, the user has to buy an expensive Mac.

You might be asking then: If Linux is better than Windows and doesn't cost anything, then why does Linux have such low market share on the desktop? It's a good question, and it's also not an easy one to answer. There are multiple reasons, some of which we'll discuss here.

First and foremost, it is very difficult to find computers that have Linux distros preinstalled. This is mainly because stores prioritize Windows machines, which typically sell more. However, most consumers use the operating system that their computer comes with. Very few consumers will put in the time to install a different operating system. As a result of this, people familiarize themselves with Windows, making it harder for them to switch to Linux. While it is possible to buy machines that come with Linux pre-installed, this requires going online and buying specific machines, which often do not get the same focus as their Windows counterparts and which as a result, require more time and effort to be found. Having said that, those machines do tend to be cheaper than corresponding Windows machines due to the lack of a Windows license.

In addition, Linux typically requires a certain level of tech-savvy. That's not to say that Linux can't be used by regular people, but it does require the user to know more about the computer than Windows or OS X do. It is expected that when a problem comes up, that the user will have some idea of how to fix it, and that the user should also have knowledge of the inner workings of a computer. As a result of this, Linux is typically viewed as a hacker's or geek's operating system, and as a result, average users are reluctant to use Linux due to its reputation for being for tech users. That being said, Linux has come a long way, and distros like Ubuntu and Linux Mint are very user-friendly.

Linux also lacks compatibility with many programs and drivers that people use. Especially in comparison to Windows, fewer programs work natively on Linux. Programs such as Photoshop, iTunes, and Microsoft Office cannot be run natively on Linux. There are ways to run these programs on Linux through emulation layers, such as WINE or CrossOver, but these programs either require a lot of technical expertise or cost money. This is why it is recommended that most users try using Linux-based equivalents, such as GIMP, Rhythmbox, or LibreOffice. Few drivers and peripherals also work with Linux. Printers and mice, for example, which may work with Windows or OS X, don't work on Linux, unless they are specifically made for Linux or if the user reverse-engineers them. This is a more complicated route, however, and it's not recommended for the average user.

Lastly, but not least, the amount of Linux distributions, which is oftentimes held up as a benefit, may actually be a major detriment to user adoption of Linux. With Windows and OS X, there exists one primary version. Sure, there are older versions of the operating system (particularly so on Windows) that have high market share, but there is one main version. Windows 10, Microsoft's latest release, has two main versions: Windows 10 Home, meant for average consumers, and Windows 10 Pro. While there are other versions, such as Windows Server, most consumers will only need to choose between Home and Pro. Linux distributions, on the other hand, are almost as numerous as the stars in the sky. There's Ubuntu, there's Linux Mint, there's Fedora, there's ReactOS, there's Slackware, there's Elementary OS, and that's only scratching the surface. Within these versions, comes more complexity.

Let's take Ubuntu as an example. The standard version of Ubuntu uses Unity as the main desktop environment. However, there are versions with different environments, such as Ubuntu MATE, which uses the MATÉ desktop environment. There are also distributions spun off from Linux, such as Lubuntu, Xubuntu, Kubuntu, and Edbuntu. This is a large number of versions which are all based on one distribution: ONE. Imagine all of the different versions of Linux distros and desktop environments available, and this massive amount of choice makes it very difficult for the average consumer. This is because a consumer should have choices, but there should not be so many choices that the consumer is confused and doesn't know what to do. Had Linux coalesced into one distribution, it might have had more success, but doing so, it would have lost the diversity that makes Linux unique. Linux distributions also are not the most attuned to beginner users. While some, such as Ubuntu or Mint, do focus on primary users, in generally, computer novices are ignored in the computer world.

Among open source software advocates, there is an almost religious hatred of closed-source software, epitomized by Microsoft Windows. They believe in the ideal of free and open source software, and their zeal is such that newcomers, who want the programs they are used to using to work on Linux, are reviled. This hurts the cause of Linux, because newcomers are not going to want to take a chance on Linux if they will simply be laughed at, mocked, and treated poorly.

All in all, Linux is important. It runs the world's most popular mobile operating system (Android), most of the world's servers, and many other systems. And yet, in spite of that success, it hasn't managed to exceed 2% of the desktop market. Perhaps it doesn't need to, though. It has become so common everywhere else that the small percentage of market share it does have on the desktop is more than compensated for elsewhere.