In the world of IT services and support, one unusual fact of life is that efficiency is relative to ease of use and that the best options are the ones that most computer users do not notice in operation.

The most popular keyboard standard in the world was designed to slow typists down when it was originally used for typewriters but because it is the most common standard, changing the key layout now would slow a lot of businesses down even if it was more efficient in the long run.

The same is true of Microsoft Windows, the most popular operating system for businesses. Whilst there are hundreds of alternatives available, many of which have small programmer or hobbyist communities who will evangelise for them, it is nearly impossible to find a business machine which does not use Windows with Microsoft Office.

There are quite a few reasons why, and many examples of the pitfalls other attempted Windows-beaters have fallen into.

Poor Performance

The selling point of the Java programming language was designed to run on anything, so the logic by Sun Microsystems of creating an operating system that could be written once and run anywhere was deeply tempting.

In a modern computing world where virtual machines are a common part of many remote working and cloud computing systems for compatibility and security reasons, JavaOS was conceptually ahead of its time. 

However, the price users paid for this was in performance. JavaOS was slow, the primary programming language was more difficult to use which stopped software being developed for it.

It was designed for network machines and embedded systems, which made it very slow for more conventional computers of the era. The Sun Javastation, designed specifically for JavaOS, was found to run better by installing an alternative OS such as Linux instead.

Providing A Similar But Worse Experience

Many alternative operating systems to Windows are caught in a Catch-22 situation; they cannot be too different from Windows otherwise people will not want to change systems, but if they are too similar then there is no reason to switch either.

This is a common dilemma surrounding a lot of operating systems that try to emulate Windows in various ways, with perhaps the most infamous example being Lindows (later Linspire).

Lindows was designed to provide a Windows-like experience using the open-source OS Linux as a base. Linux is very different to Windows and applications designed to use the latter will not work on the former without an additional compatibility tool.

Initially, Lindows relied heavily on an early compatibility tool called Wine which allowed Windows programs such as Microsoft Office to work on the Linux-based Lindows. 

Whilst Wine today is stable, reliable and regularly used, at the time it was infamous for breaking without warning, which could potentially destroy hours of work and ruin productivity. This was replaced with a tool to make installing Linux software easier, but by that point, it was too late.

Microsoft sued Lindows for trademark infringement but ultimately settled out of court when the company feared that a judge could rule that the term “Windows” was a genericised trademark and cost the company millions.

Lack Of Compatibility

Part of the reason why Lindows was so aggressive in its attempts to replicate the look and feel of Windows to attract new users was because the last major attempt before it to make Linux a major mainstream business OS was a failure for the opposite reason.

In the late 1990s, Windows was possibly at its most ubiquitous, before several lawsuits, the relative failure of Windows Vista and the rise of serious alternatives meant that it was possible to run a business without it.

This meant that compatibility with Windows software was all but essential for any business user, and the Apple Macintosh, Acorn Risc PC and other systems were designed to run Windows software.

Corel Linux, on the other hand, was not, and it paid dearly for its lack of usability. Whilst based on the relatively popular Debian distribution of Linux, it was extensively modified to the point that it was not even compatible with software designed for Linux, let alone Windows.

Despite being sold with WordPerfect Office, a relatively popular alternative to Microsoft Office at the time, Corel Linux lasted just two years before it was discontinued.

Lack Of Reliability

Modern Windows is designed around reliability and will not typically break in the same way Windows 95, 98 and ME were somewhat infamous for.

Reliability matters because computer crashes wreck productivity, and one of the worst early offenders in this regard was SCO Open Desktop.

Whilst it would later evolve into the reliable network OS OpenServer, its original incarnation was nicknamed “Open Deathtrap” for its propensity to stop functioning entirely, taking the system, any unsaved work and any network tasks with it.