common experience. Trust me, it doesn't necessarily reflect on the operating system, it's simply what happens. Beginners start somewhere. they buy a computer. what's on the computer? Windows.
I Don't need "facts and figures" when basic deductive reasoning can infer that since a higher percentage of beginners end up using windows that a higher percentage of these beginners will be the type with no initiative- that is- they are simply interested in doing their job and getting out, they don't want to learn the caveats of some right-click menu or how triple-clicking on a paragraph in word selected the entire paragraph- they learn the basic operating instructions and use them to a T.
While some beginners choose to use Linux, it is almost always by choice- and in nearly every case, even the greenest novice has the initiative to learn more then the basics; again, not necessarily a reflection on the operating system itself but rather a result of the uneven user demographic between the two. If somebody doesn't choose an OS or doesn't even know what one is- they get windows. If somebody wants Linux they probably know what an Operating System is which is more then we can say for a good percentage of the windows user base, where we even have people in the highest levels of academia saying that the registry "interacts" with other parts of windows, which is the most incorrect thing that can be said. The registry is data, it is manipulated by running processes, not the other way around. This sort of backwards and incorrect terminology only seems to pervade the world of windows, because users will master the right-click drag and suddenly call themselves and expert, and start parroting off random nothings that are likely just quotes right out of some technical magazine whose "technical" advice borders on the insane. This is why we have so many myths about windows, such as registry cleaners and the proper size of the pagefile- how many Windows users even understand Ring 0 versus Ring 3? Not a lot. over Half of all Linux users DO understand and those that don't have the appropriate mindset and the initiative to learn.
It's not a question of user stupidity- if that's the case, we were all born stupid, but we all know that's not the case. Just because, for example, somebody hasn't had the concept of a file system or a file or a folder or the heirarchal file system click in their head doesn't make them stupid- Intelligence is the potential to learn, not the ability to morass vast stores of useless and trivial information. Many windows users that I class as uninitiated simply haven't considered that the PC is something that, with proper study, could make their jobs easier- rather then, for example, rushing through the copying of 50 templates and customizing each Dear <username> section, they could learn how to properly do a mail merge and save themselves time. Their devotion of less time to learning how to properly do a task is not a reflection on their intelligence but rather a reflection on their motivation to learn about it.
