I have tried to move to Linux twice so far, but during both attempts I found myself drawn back to Windows for a few reasons.

• Applications just work
• There is only one version of Windows XP
• There are more applications to choose from
• Driver work better
• There is less mucking around

I am a programmer by trade, and found that Linux to be quite different.

Too many distributions

The first problem that user face when installing Linux is what distribution to install. This can be a big choice in itself as some are more technical and others are less flexible. 

One Linux site states that "MEPIS and Xandros are considered the best for new Linux users who want to get productive in Linux as soon as possible without having to master all its complexities. On the other end of the spectrum, Gentoo, Debian, Slackware and FreeBSD are more advanced distributions that require plenty of learning before they can be used effectively. Mandriva, Fedora, Ubuntu and SUSE can be classified as good "middle-road" distributions. Knoppixis a so-called live CD - it is great for trying out Linux without getting your hands dirty as it runs directly from a CD, no installation required.". 

To most new users this is already too confusing, and the have not installed anything yet.

Application Requirements

If you want to run firefox 1.5 on Windows, you download the setup and away you go. To run Firefox 1.5 on Linux you need to download the setup and download any of the following you do not have:

• glibc 2.3.2 or higher
• XFree86-3.3.6 or higher
• gtk+2.0 or higher
• fontconfig (also known as xft)
• libstdc++5

There are some linux systems that will aways download the program requirements that you do not have. This only works for common applications that have been entered into the system. Often you need to pay a fee to have access to these systems to have everything up to date.

I also found that while one application required the newest version of a library, another required an older version. Just my luck that the 2 versions were not compatible.

To get some software working, you might even need to compile the sourecode. A simple user should not need to know to do this or even what a command prompt or console is.

Games?

If you go into a store and buy a computer game, it will most likely only work on Window. This is a problem as for many people, games are the reason that they have a computer.

Out of the box support for old Windows software

When a person with basic computer skills tries to run an old program on their new Linux system, it will not work. The would have put the software CD in the drive, and waited for the autorun to kick in. Linux should really detect that a Windows Application is in the CD Drive and run it automatically in a Virtual Environment. 

Resistance to change

Most computer users are conservative and want to use the software that they are used to using. They do not want to have to learn how to use new systems, grasp new concepts and have to solve old problems. They would rather have something similar to their old system with the old concepts and the old problems that they know how to solve.

Older people are even more resistant to change and it was hard enough to get some older people using computers, let alone switching operating systems.

Lack of functional applications

Although there are a quite a few good applications made for Linux, most are complete compared to their Windows counterparts. If you user Photoshop, you will try to use Gimp. Most users will have problems with Gimp and many ask basic questions like where is the tool to draw a circle?

If you try to replace Microsoft Office with Open Office you will find that there are some functions that you miss. Open Office does not have exactly the same keyboard shortcuts as Microsoft Office to start with, and things are just not where you are used to.

Linux does not need updates as often

Most PC makers thrive on the fact the most computers get replaced every 3 years. Linux does not have the track record of encouraging users to upgrade there computers or change enough. It is theoretically good for IT managers, who would keep employees on the same hardware for nine years if they could, but it's bad for hardware vendors.