I put this page together in response to a large number of misconceptions about Microsoft’s Windows operating system (some of which, I freely admit, I have held myself in the past) that I’ve seen on the ‘net, in the hope of perhaps correcting the misinformation.

This list is in no way exhaustive. If you spot any inaccuracies yourself, please do not hesitate to get in touch and correct me.

Windows requires anti-virus software.

Not necessarily. Particularly with Windows Vista and 7, and even with Windows XP (following adequate reconfiguration, of course) you’re relatively safe as long as you exercise common sense: namely, keeping your browser up to date, keeping the firewall up, not browsing for porn in IE6 etc.

That said, anti-virus software is still a good idea. If you have one of the client versions of Windows (namely XP, Vista and 7) I strongly recommend Microsoft’s own Security Essentials: it doesn’t get in your way, has a nice interface, does the job very well, and is free (as in beer).

Windows XP is better than Windows Vista or 7.

Definitely not. No, no, no. Windows XP is old, sorely deficient as far as modern operating systems go, comparatively insecure (due to the lack of UAC) and overall showing its age.

Ditch it, and its server counterpart, at the earliest opportunity. Only an idiot would configure a new computer to ship with Windows XP.

UAC is a pain and can be disabled safely.

Definitely not. UAC is one of the most important new features in Vista, and although it’s a substantial pain thanks to the way Windows is designed, it should never be disabled.

Especially if you’re running using an Administrator account, UAC should always be enabled. (As a side-note, if you’re using XP or Server 2003, you should never do day-to-day tasks in an administrator account. Always keep the default Administrator account passworded, and make your own account a Power User at most.)

Windows is not Unix-like.

Not exactly. Originally, Windows was a simple graphical shell which sat atop Microsoft’s existing 16-bit MS-DOS operating system. This, in Windowses 95, 98 and ME, was assisted with 32-bit extensions.

However, at the same time, Microsoft was developing Windows NT, ostensibly industrial-strength Windows with a completely different code base. It’s distant cousins with IBM’s failed OS/2, and it’s underneath Windows NT 3.51 and 4, along with Windows 2000, XP and all releases since. (Windows 7 is, underneath, Windows NT 6.1.)

Whilst not a conventional Unix-like operating system, Windows NT-derived OSes are certainly more Unixy than those where Windows was just a shell. For example, it includes a proper users system, and proper permissions under NTFS. (These were finally maximised in use in Windows Vista and Windows 7, with the introduction of UAC.)

So, Windows is not Unix-like, but it shares some characteristics.

Windows Vista was all bad.

Mostly, with substantial exceptions. Vista was definitely a step in the right direction: for the first time, it included a modern, compositing window manager, it had a proper user permissions system in the form of UAC, and it gave a good kick to Windows, which had turned somewhat stagnant with five years without a release.

However, it was buggy, endlessly delayed due to Microsoft becoming sidetracked with half-heartedly chasing Google, Apple and Yahoo in other markets, and in the end rushed out. In addition, hardware manufacturers had been allowed to become complacent, releasing machines nowhere near powerful enough to run Vista well.

In essence, Vista was a great OS, ruined.

Spelling it “Micro$haft Windoze” is at all witty or acceptable.

It ceased to be, years ago.

Windows Server is sufficiently technically different from client-side Windows to make it faster and more efficient.

It’s not. It’s just configured, by default, to place performance over prettiness and ease-of-use – as you’d expect from a server operating system.

Underneath, Windows Server 2008 is technically identical to Vista, and 2008 R2 is identical to 7. (The same goes for 2003 to XP.)