I'm pretty sure Microsoft didn't waste time making sure that if someone tried to delete the whole system, there would be a protocol for it. Rather, I believe what he's seeing is the nature of the Windows file-system, protecting the system from catastrophic failure.
I honestly don't let the logout screen bother me. Instead, I am more interested in the fact that Windows went into the grave peacefully, rather than blindly dive-bombing into the grave like Linux did.
Anyway, as for the way Linux locks out the root tree, you wouldn't be able to perform this function without unlocking that. Since the test was to see what either OS would do in the event of someone trying to blast the whole file-system from inside, the root had to be opened on the Linux machine.
Who would want to do this anyway? I know it's a joke, but in the real world, who would want to do this? Linux locks the root, while Windows doesn't. *shrugs*
Personal users of Windows, Microsoft assumes they want actual control of their machine. For the corporate environment, most individual users don't have rights to do these actions, and doing so anyway isn't as big of a deal. Plus, in a corproate environment, there's always a systems admin to do work on the computers. Everyone else just handles the application side of things. I would also argue that Linux locks their root by default because it is so easy to execute commands without a logical check by the system beforehand. Linux simply won't let you do something unless you're the admin, and at which point you simply unlock things and do what you want. In Windows, if you try to do something like formate the root directory, you'll get a warning. Based on the situations above, what difference does it make if they have to enter a password beforehand or not? Home users are expected to want control of their machine, and business users don't have enough rights to do anything in the first-place.
I'm not forcing anyone to read this stuff. I just thought it be interesting for all the OS fanatics on this forum.
Anyway, the pink garble (not always pink, btw) is debatable. Some claim it's an explosion of the graphics drivers for the VGA. Others (ironically mostly anti-Windows posters) claim it has to do with the xWindows emulation interface dying (basically saying it's Window's fault that Linux deleted itself and caused a mess).
I'm not trying to be anti-Linux, here. I seriously don't mean anything by this thread. I think most people can agree that in this scenario, Linux lost. It's not the end of the world. It's not even entirely relevant, considering the idiocy of the scenario. It's amazing the lengths people will go to, to avoid admitting that Windows actually did something better than Linux. LOL