Linux kernel -vs- Windows kernel

[oldskool]

I wonder what the REAL reason is why the Linux kernel is supposed to be such better code than the Windows kernel, according to some people anyway. Linux doesn't seem to crash as much as Windows, and though it occurs less frequently than older Windows versions, it still happens more compared to Linux. Is the Linux kernel better ?

*Fact preferred over opinion, though I can accept opinion as well. I am interested in what you think....

 

[kmote]

One of the problems with asking which is the better kernel is that we can't see the windows one and for some people this is reason enough already to prefer Linux. Then take in the value for money - even if the Linux kernel were not as good as the windows one you can't argue with the price.
The Linux kernel is both mature and uncompromised by things like deadlines and accountants (at least not in the way the windows one is) it has no secrets. It is also very "runable" and has proved itself to work on everything from the largest supercomputers and server farms to the smallest integrated devices spanning many architectures.
Additionally Linux could not have a better background, it is a clone of unix (itself incredibly stable) but written from scratch and freely released. Most likely the only reason Linux is not POSIX and SUS compliant is that it is expensive to get a certification rather than any technical reason. Linux is a joy to write code on due to certain parts of it's lower level implementation, not only that but it's a joy to administer because of it's stable and secure multitasking, multiuser approach, journalising file systems and it's flexable plain sight permission structure.
I <3 Linux.

 

[oldskool]

thank you kmote, for your input. Very much appreciated, mate.