I'm linking to the discussion on Hacker News because the original site seems to be down.
Gaming is looking a lot better in linux these days.
A surprising number of steam games are actually native now, but more importantly, wine (which I use with playonlinux as easy-mode) actually works pretty damn well. I've been able to start various games simply by doing "right click -> open with -> wine" on an .exe in my home directory. Apparently, DX11 support is coming to wine later this year. Up until today, I simply dual-booted for the two games which absolutely wouldn't work in Linux (Arma 3 and DayZ). I noticed that I couldn't be bothered to boot into crappy old windows to play them and there are better ways to fill that hdd space, though. Still, if there are any Windows-only games you really like, dual-booting for a while might be an option. I'm a complete newbie myself compared to long-time linux guys, but I'll still be happy to help in any way I can if you decide to go penguin.
Oh I know dualbooting is an option. I actually go a step further and have two physical computers right next to each other, one running windows and the other linux. I used to run 100% linux before, but switched back to my current setup a little while ago. Blizzard games (WC3, Hearthstone) and Rocket League are my current holdouts. I haven't tried them in Wine yet, but I bet they'd all work pretty decently.
When Microsoft lost the war against sypware, I guess they just said "if you can't beat them, may as well join them." if and when their database gets hacked, it will be quite something. especially since "everything you type into the keyboard" includes all your passwords to everything.
http://pastebin.com/NjicmPjT Make that a .bat file. Let it uninstall the updates. Look at the numbers. Go to control panel and then Windows updates, and compare the KB numbers in the pastebin to the updates available. DISABLE all of these moving forward. Then, install Linux Mint either in a virtual box or on a second computer/laptop and get used to it. And if all this stuff pisses you off, don't look into the crap Apple takes away from your privacy.
Ubuntu, here I come. Already checked, and Steam and the main games I play run on Linux. Only concern left is how to handle Microsoft Word documents. I know there are Microsoft Office equivalents (OpenOffice and its brethren) but last time I tried using them, ran into formatting, compatibility issues.
https://www.libreoffice.org/ Libre office seems to work better than Open office for me. Works on just about everything.
So far with OpenOffice the only formatting issues I've come across is headers/footers (particularly page numbers) and drawings using those flowchart lines and such. For most basic things, I don't think there's much of an issue that I've come across. I'm thinking of switching to OpenOffice full time too on my PC.
Unfortunately, one of my main job possibilities is doing word processing, which requires all the advanced features of Microsoft Word: footers, headers, TOCs, footnotes, outline styling, etc. And also complicated charts and graphs either using the embedded charts functionality in Word, or created in Excel and imported into Word (said Excel spreadsheets including VBA scripting and pivot charts).
I had to google the terms you mentioned, and in case anyone else is interested, this is a link I found about firewalls and VMs: https://superuser.com/questions/727486/is-it-recommended-to-run-a-firewall-router-on-a-virtual-machine
I'm under the impression I'd need to reformat my computer to Ubuntu, then install Windows in a VM. And I think by that point I'd no longer have a legal copy of Windows. And I can't afford to buy one. I do believe, however, that there are decent VM programs for Linux that are free. My brain is mush right now, so I might be wrong. edit: just occurred to me that instead of wallowing in my mind mushed stupidity, I should probably do research about this. Thanks for the prompt.
Have a look at Linux Mint. It's based on Ubuntu, so you get full compatibility (which is good, since Ubuntu is targeted by many developers) and solutions to any issues can quite reliably be found by doing a quick "Ubuntu problem xyz" search. It comes well configured with everything you need to get started out of the box, it's stable (based on Ubuntu's long term support version) and has its own very helpful community. Definitely a good place to get started. Mint's default desktop environment "cinnamon" will also feel a lot more familiar (and functional) than Ubuntu in its default setup. With cinnamon, you get a taskbar, a start menu, a system tray with a clock next to it and so on. Unity (Ubuntu's default environment) imho feels more like some kind of desktop/tablet hybrid UI. It is disliked by many. Other decent choices include KDE (my current choice, needs customization to really shine but is extremely feature-rich), XFCE (a simple environment that gets the job done, is pretty light on resources and can look good with a bit of tinkering) or LXDE (really fast and light on resources, but visually it'd be Windows98 all over again). Erm, sorry if this was a bit too much of an answer to a question you didn't ask. Basically what I'm trying to say is that Ubuntu or (especially) Mint will be fine, but don't get scared off by Ubuntu's Unity. In any case, Oracle's Virtual Box can be downloaded from the comfort of your software center and running Windows in it should be trivial.
Thanks for all the detail. Yep, not so much about the question I asked, but no harm, no foul, I do the same thing too. =) I have Ubuntu installed on a small laptop I have, and from the get-go I found it easy to use. And the fact I had to do sudo type things thrilled the geek in me. At long last that famous "sudo make me a sandwich" XKCD comic made sense. When I researched Ubuntu before installing it on the laptop, I'd discovered the Unity/KDE/XFCE/LXDE kerfuffle, and did research about each before deciding on Unity. Off the top of your head, can you see any benefits/problems regarding installing a VM to run Windows, if one were to choose one of the five over the others?
To be honest, I don't think your choice of DesktopEnvironment will make much of a difference either way. Your package management is going to pull any libraries needed anyways and the underlying stuff doesn't really change just because you chose Unity over another environment. Depending on your PC, it might make sense to go with one of the lighter options to give that VM all the horsepower it needs. I have read comparisons where Unity turned out to be rather heavy on RAM compared to the competition. But since you and Unity obviously get along well and it was your intuitive choice, I'd say go with it and just slap that virtualized Windows in there. Chances are, sooner or later you'll be curious about other DEs or distros, anyways - especially if there's already a VM just waiting for tasty disk images. Oh, in case you haven't installed it yet, I recommend you get a (Windows-)tool called Unetbootin and use an USB stick. As you may know, Ubuntu/Mint (and most modern distros) can boot from their installation medium without even touching your hdd, so you can test-drive in peace. That can also be quite handy in case you need to fix something - I usually have a distro on my keyring. You do however also get the option to create some space for persistence on that stick, so you could effectively test over several days and keep your changes between reboots. If you manage to break anything important, just write a fresh installation to the stick... Nothing like simply booting into the real thing when it comes to finding the right flavor of Linux.
I second the opinion for mint. It's very user friendly due to the fact that it's almost plug and play right out of the box. Add in the fact that the GUI is pretty much a Windows clone and you have a system people can use easily. There are some stability issues here and there and I've given up trying to get my computers to recognize my printer and phone. Other than that, it's a nice little system.
It's almost always better to install Windows first, then Linux on top of that - because Linux is aware of Windows, and it's careful to preserve it; Windows is not nearly as good at preserving a pre-existing Linux install (e,g, installing Windows will usually shit on your bootloader - which is recoverable, but a PITA).