Is there a better way of ascertaining the superiority of one operating system over another than to compare how they implement "Hearts"? Though the correct answer to that question is "yes, in fact, many", let's explore this unlikely sidetrack anyway, for who knows what we might find on our journey. Possibly, even something vaguely useful. Few can argue against the effectiveness of "Hearts" as a tool to further the cause of procrastination, a human activity engaged in on a daily basis and hence requiring the appropriate tools, which is where "Hearts" plays a central and, potentially, decisive role when deciding whether Ubuntu is better than Windows. Keeping scores to establish the most inane statistics, such as the number of times various colleagues volunteer to get you something from the store down the road, is also an intrinsic part of procrastination, while simultaneously providing a good basis for making snap judgements, so let's also keep a score card for the pluses and minuses of various aspects of each approach.

Out of the box experience.

First off, let's state quite openly that Ubuntu does not support Hearts out of the box. One needs to make use of the Synaptic Package Manager first. After that, one finds it in the "Games" menu. Windows is, without question, better in this respect, since it always comes with Hearts. However, the fact that one needs to use the Synaptic Package Manager to get Hearts means that one learns how to use the Synaptic Package Manager, while one learns absolutely nothing when beginning to use Hearts under Windows. However, who wants to learn anything while procrastinating?

Full Story.