The real reasons I use Linux are mostly out of convenience. For example, updating all my software and OS using one command rather than clicking on 50 updaters.
This is it for me too. On my desktop where I play some windows-only games it makes sense to go with windows because it's less hassle. On my laptop, it's just easier to use ubuntu or fedora than to manage another windows installation and keep it up to date & click through another set of installers for each piece of software.
Linux has its conveniences but I think I definitely spend more times on updates. Some break things and some like Nvidia's drivers can take me ages to actually apply (though with that one the usual trick seems to be to remove --purge nvidia-* first).
> Linux has its conveniences but I think I definitely spend more times on updates.
That depends on which distro and hardware you're using. I use laptops that are known to work well with Linux and Ubuntu LTS releases. This way, I spend perhaps 3-5h a year on admin tasks and it's mostly easy stuff.
It's actually amazing how GNU/Linux allowed me to gradually transition from configuring everything (when I was a student: XFree86, custom kernels, ...) to using GNU/Linux productively with almost zero housekeeping effort.
On my optimus laptop fedora+nvidia work quite well, I recommend you give it a try. Use official instructions for adding nvidia drivers from the rpmfusion repository.
You can even try Silverblue. On the off chance something breaks, i do an rpm-ostree rollback, reboot and the system is on it's previous working state. I could troubleshoot stuff If I want to but I usually wait for an upstream fix before I update again.
Silverblue is a desktop os not a server.
There is the coreos version that is intended for server use. It does need a different paradigm however. On normal fedoara server you are installing packages for applications you want to use, however on an rpm-ostree based system it is intended that you install applications by using containers.
Depending on what you want to do, you use the appropriate version.
Indeed if one is not willing/able to climb the learning curve of this paradigm shift, then they shouldn't use it.
Well I was setting up a desktop machine as a server. The idea of silverblue is great, only it sucks to actually use. Updates are slow, and everything is just needlessly harder.
I get why maintainers want to push flappypacks, I just don't care, it's a shit solution that leaks all over your users. Find a better way to fix your problems.
You might want to look into something less unstable.
I've had arch running unattended upgrades in a Cron for years.
Worst case I have to find my USB stick and do some debugging, not that an update has ever broken anything.
There is some minor maintenance I run maybe once every 6-12 months to clear caches or fix up any configs that need updating but I've never run into anything that prevents booting.
Just Ubuntu though admittedly I use a lot more packages than average so there's more that can break across updates. Also a lot of things that have caused me problems over the years are getting more stable.
Ubuntu is famous for breaking spectacularly as soon as you start install PPAs or non-stock packages. I'm still convinced that APT is not the right tool for a desktop OS, it's way too complex and has too much automagic to withstand a user that wants stuff like the latest versions of GCC, etc.
Once you learn to avoid NVIDIA, your life gets way easier. I've bought an RX 580 4 years ago and it's been a pleasant plug'n'play experience ever since.
Interestingly for me it is the other way around. I have Windows 10 on the main PC, KDE Neon on a NUC and "obviously" several Raspberry Pi's doing various things.
I spend far more time maintaining the Linux machines, while my Windows box just works.
KDE Neon has been much better last year, but still every now and then some conflict pops up which requires manual command line intervention.
Clearly YMMV...
That said, I'm quite happy with KDE Neon and would most likely be quite content if I had to use it as my primary OS and didn't have any need for RDP. Sadly the latter is a showstopper for me.
What exactly are you doing to maintain the Linux system? Configuring it? I haven't done much of any Linux maintenance over the past decade, and I'm nearing two decades of full time use.
The only issue I could sink time into is the lack of deep (S3) and that's completely an issue caused by Microsoft's capture of most laptop manufacturers (they have forced new hybrid sleep states that don't even work on windows machines).
Well I try to update packages every now and then, security and that jazz, which has a non-zero chance of requiring manual intervention. Merging config file changes is a common one, every now and then some package mess to clean up.
Not saying it's a huge deal, though I do worry about screwing up the config changes, but it's a lot more work than what I have to do to keep my Windows machine running.
Try different distro, e.g. Fedora. Fedora heavily uses "convention over configuration" principle, which helps to avoid issues with merging of configs, because each piece of config is stored in it own file in .d-directory.
I always found KDE to be too much of a moving target. Maybe I should have mentioned linux mint xfce over a thinkpad without fancy hardware nor fancy software config.
But even then, the same machine with the same programs on windows would require a lot more care to avoid rot.
This still doesn't make sense. What type of software do you have installed that's messing with other "apps configuration"? Furthermore, what does "bloatware has the rights to change boot settings" have anything to do with "apps configuration"?
I do it out of respect for my hardware. On Windows, it wasn't unusual to be idling ~45c with Spotify and Discord open. That same workload stays well under 35c on Linux, even with my rather paltry 6-year-old CPU.
I've never heard anyone advocate Linux out of convenience! Windows is way more convenient overall even if it doesn't have a package manager because you spend so much less time dealing with hardware and compatibility issues.
I just went back after 3 years of Ubuntu. Admittedly I am a dilettante but I never did anything very "hacky" and still ended up with a broken upgrade path, twice. I can't have this in a work desktop machine.
My employer gives zero f's about my privacy concerns.
After using Arch for years every other package manager enrages me because it is so hard to rollback/undo bad changes or to pin versions. I use MacOS for reasons but I still miss pacman :(
I love Arch, and have always considered Debian + debian derivatives to be subpar because of packages + community issues. I need to go check out Debian rolling, never knew that existed. Could be a useful hybrid for coworkers who believe rolling releases break things often.
I missed an upgrade cycle and didn't upgrade for like 18 months*. turns out EVERYTHING BREAKS. They actually delete the f'ing repos and you can't upgrade, you just get a wall of 404s.
I understand the "We only to support on LTS releases" argument but I didn't think that meant "We actively sabotage our short-term releases".
Huge huge huuuuge barrier for normies IMO.
* FWIW, I didn't upgrade when it was prompted because I was "too busy sawing to sharpen my saw" so-to-speak. I was on a major project, have known video card issues with upgrading, and was worried I'd be unavailable for work for 3 days trying to fix my UI. So I waited until the next LTS to upgrade. Turns out you can't go from an old STS to the next LTS and you have to baby-step through the STS's ... which no longer exist. wtf.
Well he is right. Linux is not for everyone. It's for people who can learn how to double click an icon that looks different from the one in Windows. That excludes probably 50% of Windows users right there.
I totally agree. I am still a Linux user, but at home I use a Mac now. Why? Because I got sick of having to work out why my laptop couldn't print things anymore after an update. Not once has that happened to the Windows or Apple devices that my family own. Linux is great for doing all sorts of clever stuff; it's not so good at doing the ordinary stuff reliably.
No, he's right. It's like maths. A vast majority of people like to not like / learn it.
I've spent a lot of time with average users of all kinds. They couldn't care less. To them it's a thing that has less value than a coffee cup.
I could, and would sit down and explain to them everything that is cool, cute about every layers of a computer, with simple language and pragmatic use, with history context, and bits of benefits for their lives. They just don't want to hear it.
Some will say it's geek stuff. Some will say "I'm too scared". Some will try and forget 13 seconds later.
The insane side of this is that these people will spend grands on a new machine that will tickle their sense of free improvement (which will not happen). Again every 3-5 years.. forced by ecosystemic pressure to push old stuff out.
ps: I agree that GP was a bit smug, but even then, the population is what it is.
pps: even at work, if I offer to explain something, or write a script, or a macro to help, most people will react negatively for various reasons (very often its petty emotions, like jealousy, or disdain).
No, he's not right. A computer is a tool. A tool should help you accomplish tasks. A well-designed tool that is meant to be used in the average household should be easy to use and hard to screw up. It shouldn't feel like it's getting in the way.
There's no reason why anyone should need to know the details of how a computer works to use the computer. The history you're so eager to tell should just be trivia.
> There's no reason why anyone should need to know the details of how a computer works to use the computer.
Paraphrasing the CEO of Sun Microsystems (IIRC): you don't need to know how to operate a nuclear power plant to get light when you flick the light switch.
Have you ever tried to teach people how to use a computer or is that paper talk ? because in theory everything is well designed, but very few things are.
Of course "in theory" good tools are solid and simple.. in reality bro how insane the world is. Every update, every fix, changes the poor ground of habits users tried to build. Just yesterday I had to help a neighbor because she couldn't grasp a word document embedding a invisible table as layout forbidding the caret to move right as she used too. I think you're very much misunderstanding the vastness of psychologies, of tooling variations, of hidden variables and parameters and the immense layering of software.
People are confused by the slightest change in computer interaction. How do you want to make them understand when to click, double click, right click, drag, press. What's an URL, what happens when they click save, why errors or not ? people don't even know what saving a file is. Really, go in any office you can pick 30% of users totally clueless about folders and files.
Every attempt at hiding information causes trouble, it taps into shallow understanding and rote memory. People become mere users and it sucks. History is interesting, details are interesting, your brain loves it, if it's tied to a tangible concept and use for the people. It's not about making VBA6 classes or a talk about Linus Torvalds acrobatics for the sake of geek pleasure. It's to situate what are the reasons (as in reasoning) for why things are the way they are. Even your keyboard has a long history.
It's quite easy to be smug when dispensing advice to a random internet recipient behind the wall of anonymity. It's much more so when someone comes to you, in person, asking for help.
I spent the better part of an hour this week helping a family friend over Zoom, trying to help her digitally sign a document. Her browser's PDF viewer couldn't render the form input boxes, so I had to help her download Adobe Acrobat Reader (yuck, I know, but, I'm not going to argue with her employer about alternatives). She's not dull by any stretch--she has a PhD. Just unfamiliar with the process. And when you see the process through fresh eyes, you get the sense that, oh, maybe this actually isn't intuitive at all if you've never done it before.
I don't know why so much of the Linux community lacks that feeling of empathy. Perhaps because their journey through Linux was a giant hazing ritual, and they feel like they've earned the right to haze the next generation? I have no idea.
Software for the masses seems to always be dumbed down, lose functionality, or otherwise become less useful over time as its targeted at the lowest common denominator. I'm good with there being an OS that's primarily for people who have the time and desire to understand their tools and want to get the most out of them.
This isn't some dig at casual users, it's about market segmentation. Not everything needs to be for everyone, and that's okay. With few exceptions, the average PC has plenty of choice in its operating systems.
Honestly, it's true. People are creatures of habit. My mother has been an accountant for 20 or so years and will still call me to complain about having to learn a new Excel version (when they moved to the 'stripe' interface? God help me...), or moving to a job where they use any software that's different from what she's used to. God forbid her iPhone changes absolutely anything when it upgrades.
And yes, Windows users have complained mightily about nearly every upgrade (remember the Windows 8 fiasco? Windows 10 was lesser, but people still found fault, now 11...) but still use it. Oh well.
Also, there was a lot of bitching about Ubuntu moving from Gnome 2 to Unity. It led to a DE fork and an entire distro picking up the cause. So Linux users bitch too. But with OSS you can change what you want and the companies can also tell you to piss off...
This is the exact elitist mentality that the article writer is talking about. Not only are you saying everyone who can't figure it out is dumb, but you forget, there are actually people who probably can't understand it because its a different icon like very elderly people. My grandma would only use a browser if I set the icon to the little IE6 icon. lol
Right. I was going to comment "Reason #12 to switch to Linux: you love reformatting the entire system every once in a while, typically after struggling to fix a driver for hours and completely screwing everything up in a way you can't figure out how to undo."
I have updated my laptop across 4 major releases of Debian now, never reformating the system. And the copy of my home directory (think user profile in windows) is even older. If you don't know what you are doing, saving a full system backup to an external hard drive is actually easy so you can try things and revert if it doesn't work.
Same here. The only reason the last install was a fresh one was because I upgraded the storage on the laptop.
My home folder has files that have been with me since 2006 or so. This laptop is 7 years old and this is the third fresh OS install it has in its lifetime - With one exception, it's always been updated to the latest Ubuntu version as needed with the Ubuntu tooling.
What I have been doing to prevent data loss (that never happened) is to keep the interesting parts of my home folder on a separate filesystem and symlink them into my home folder. This allowed the previous fresh install to format the root partition and I didn't need to worry about my data being deleted.
This is an interesting observation, considering that traditionally Windows has had these opaque failure and degradation modes that are "unfixable" unless you reinstall. Personally, it doesn't ring true to me - I've been using the very same OS install for around a decade now, I just kept moving it from machine to machine and I think my laptop install is actually a duplicate. I've restored it from backups a few times, though the leading cause is "accidentally powered off during system update".
Yeah; one of my favorites in recent history was the Windows 11 developer preview. I installed it ahead of time to test an application my company distributes. Eventually, Windows 11 is released, and I think: Well, I'd like to get this machine off of the "dev channel" and on to stable, so I can (1) run what my users are running, and (2) not deal with instability.
You can't. Their official recommendation, in the Windows 11 Settings app, is to reinstall Windows 11. There's no way to migrate "backwards" on update channels, you can only go "more unstable".
I wonder how much this has to do with first impressions.
Back in the late 90s when I first started experimenting with Linux, the parent's post definitely described my experience. I remember booting up into a text-mode login prompt and running 'startx' and having to do a lot of messing around with manual configuration files. One mistake with an init file could leave your machine un-bootable and you'd have to use a rescue shell to recover. Driver support was a mixed bag for sure.
In current year it's literally the exact opposite experience. I have more issues with installing Windows apps that will make driver changes or add stuff to the registry that causes weird unexpected issues than I have with Linux. Linux is quick and easy to install and tends to "just work" for me once it's up and running.
I'm sure choice of hardware still has something to do with mixed experiences. I did have one bad experience in recent memory with a work-issued laptop and the track-pad not working with Linux. I had to use a personal device while I was employed there since it was a known issue with that particular brand and the fix was an upcoming kernel update. But that seems to be the extreme rare exception for me. Most devices I've installed Linux on have worked perfectly right out of the install and have required me to do zero configuration to make it usable.
I haven't done that once in 25 years of desktop Linux use. One of the reasons I use Linux is that I can actually understand and fix problems.
On my main desktop the image has been rolling forward since 2008 when I switched to 64 bit. Naturally the hardware has been replaced around it several times since then.
This is a good article. This very thread has a ton of examples of what the author talks about.
I've used Linux as my main OS for years now and I love it, but I've stopped trying to evangelize it. Just use whatever OS you want, I'm happy on Linux.
Unfortunately it is not catching up by the way of 1st party support. The compatibility layers are getting pretty good, don't get me wrong. But if to you a computer is just a tool that runs specific programs you need, then you should probably stick with what the software developer recommends you run their software on.
The top reason NOT to switch to Linux should be "Because someone told you to." The Linux community has a terrible problem with proselytizing and then gatekeeping ("Welcome to Linux! Oh, you're using Linux Mint? Get fucked, then.")
I just want to say that I thoroughly enjoyed that site. It feels incredibly grounded and a place where the author can have some fun. It tweaks some sort of nostalgia nerve while still having some good insights in his writings. The page on Aesthetics[1] makes me happy to see.
I'm surprised you can't see that this counter-article is just plain old FUD.
It should be a no-brainer that an operative system that is free, open, democratic, well documented and consisting of over 50,000 quality software packages---Debian, for example---is better than an OS which isn't any of those things.
Of course software is (also) about ideology. If you find yourself advocating putting more money in the pockets of the already super rich, or pretending that there isn't a digital part of human life where people have rights, well then obviously you have picked sides.
> I'm surprised you can't see that this counter-article is just plain old FUD.
Content-less emotional manipulation - just the kind of thing that I hate to see on HN.
You answered none of the points in the article itself, dismissing the entire thing out of hand with an acronym describing a concept that you provided no evidence actually applied to any of the arguments.
> It should be a no-brainer that an operative system that is free, open, democratic, well documented and consisting of over 50,000 quality software packages---Debian, for example---is better than an OS which isn't any of those things.
No. I've been using Linux as my daily driver for over a decade (and have spent far more time using it than Windows), and gotten a few other people on it, so I can say that, for actually getting things done and software just working, Windows is far better than Linux. An operating system where you have to struggle to get things done is a bad operating system.
Linux isn't "democratic", either - Linus Torvalds controls kernel development, and the userspace components have wildly differing development practices.
Nor is it "well documented" - Linux-related documentation is generally terrible to read. Technically correct? Sure - but that's not "well documented", that's an encyclopedia.
Neither can you say that those "50,000" software packages are "quality" - the vast majority of open-source software that I've seen is buggy, under-documented, incomplete, and difficult to use. (I mean, so is the vast majority of proprietary software - but that software being "also bad" doesn't make OSS software "good")
> Of course software is (also) about ideology. [...] well then obviously you have picked sides.
Please leave your manipulative speech out of HN, and don't try to drag me (or anyone) into your idealistic flamewar.
Microsoft is a company that is predatory towards its users, and that's why I recommend Linux despite all of its problems. Pretending that it has no problems, or is technically superior to Windows, and then piling on inflammatory dialog, does nobody any good.
Well, Debian is free, open source, is more or less fully documented (and translated!) and has over 50,000 software packages that meticulously tested before the stable release every two years. That's not me being emotional or manipulative. It is a fact.
I don't actually need to prove that software is (also) about ideology, as you just acknowledged it. But anyway, it is also a fact that if you use Windows, you are giving even more money and power to 1 American company that currently has like 85% total market share. Distribution of wealth and power over human (digital) life are clearly ideological issues.
What is emotional is your statement that you think Windows is far better, that you think Linus Torvalds work somehow makes Debian undemocratic, that you think the documentation is terrible to read and that the vast majority of OSS you've seen is buggy etc. Being a software guy, I'm sure you can recognize a pattern, here :).
Also, I understand that your time with GNU/Linux is supposed to impress. But to me it just means that you came in at least a decade after the FUD-era in the late nineties, which may explain why you can't see how the counter-article maps near perfectly to the old arguments about community, hardware support, lacking software and "not for everyone."
Lastly, I'm not trying to start a flamewar. I'm just pointing out that the counter-article, which some other posters found well written, is classic FUD.
The deceit and misdirection present in your response is astonishing.
> Well, Debian is [...] That's not me being emotional or manipulative. It is a fact.
You know very well that "emotional manipulation" was in response to your statement "I'm surprised you can't see that this counter-article is just plain old FUD." because I wrote me response directly after your quoted statement.
This is one of the most deceitful things I've seen on HN in a while. Other HN readers: look at the beginning of my comment[1] and you'll see what a blatant mischaracterization this is.
And, no, claiming that Debian is "more or less fully documented" and that those packages are "meticulously tested" is not "a fact"; those are highly subjective terms that I happen to strongly disagree with.
> I don't actually need to prove that software is (also) about ideology, as you just acknowledged it.
Yet another claim without any evidence.
> What is emotional is your statement that you think Windows is far better, that you think Linus Torvalds work somehow makes Debian undemocratic, that you think the documentation is terrible to read and that the vast majority of OSS you've seen is buggy etc.
False, false, and false. My belief that Windows is far better is not "emotional" - it's just that, a belief (believing that the earth is round is not emotional), based on my personal experiences, which are factual. Similarly, the fact that the vast majority of OSS that I've seen is buggy is also factual - it might not be representative, but calling it "emotional" is a false statement. Finally, it's a fact that having a benevolent dictator at the head of a project makes it undemocratic, unless you actually care to make an actual argument about it.
> Being a software guy, I'm sure you can recognize a pattern, here :). Also, I understand that your time with GNU/Linux is supposed to impress.
More manipulation, and snide comments. Pretty clear you're not acting in good faith.
> which may explain why you can't see how the counter-article maps near perfectly to the old arguments
I read the Halloween papers? However, I'm also capable of rational thought, and making arguments, and seeing logical fallacies - and you haven't presented a single actual argument that any of the points in the article are invalid, nor have you justified your assertion that the article is FUD - you've just claimed it and stopped.
> Lastly, I'm not trying to start a flamewar.
Your statement "well then obviously you have picked sides." suggests that that's false. If you're not actually trying to start a flamewar - your behavior suggests otherwise.
> I'm just pointing out that the counter-article, which some other posters found well written, is classic FUD.
False. You haven't "pointed out" anything - you made a claim that the article was FUD without actually addressing any of the points or providing any evidence whatsoever.
Future HN readers: notice how cleverly this poster avoided making any logical arguments, or answering any of my points, or justifying their claims that the article was FUD. Beware - there are a lot of people who like to use labels to slander a person or organization without actually being able to show that those labels are accurate (because they're not). When reading a response to a comment, watch out to see if the response actually addresses the points made, or whether it tries to libel the previous comment, or strawman arguments, or just straight-up say things that are false.
Dude, you seem to think you have a big audience :).
The reason you think my posts are astonishing, misdirecting, examples of clever deceit, manipulative, snide etc. is because you fail to counter them properly. And as it is apparently unthinkable for you that it has to do with anything on your side, it must be my fault. But consider the below points:
+ Saying something is similar to another thing because they have the same shape is an argument. That is what I did when pointing to the similarities (made explicit for your benefit in my second post) between the counter-article and classic anti-Linux FUD. You can't counter that with "prove it!", because it only indicates that you can't distinguish between a discussion about an article and some query about pointers and memory objects.
+ It is factual that people have personal experiences, strong emotions etc., but that doesn't turn these things into factual states of affairs.
+ Nobody gets to decide whether their actions, opinions, choices etc. are ideological or not. That is a judgement passed by others. For example, if you want to call LT a dictator, there isn't much I can do about it. But I can at least---gently---point out that he open sourced the Linux kernel decades ago. If you want to fork it and build and OS without GNU on top of it, go ahead. If you just want to look inside and change something, go ahead. If you want to make a commerical endeavor out of it, go ahead. My point about taking sides is that you can't do any of that with Windows.
As said in the thread it (currently) works if you do not setup internet until after the installation completes. If you set up internet before, you end up doong a full re-install.
I don't disagree with switching to linux, but this isn't a great list.
Points 1 & 2 are the same (don't buy a new PC), and quite a few of the rest are fixed as you can run all Linux software in the Linux subsystem for Windows.
The fact that those clowns insist on calling it the "Windows Subsystem for Linux" because marketing tells you everything you need to know about whether or not you should invest your time in it.
I always wonder who these people are who pick the OS first and applications second? If you need to run GarageBand, Visual Studio, or Returnal, Linux is not an option.
Yeah, that start menu area (not sure what the real name is) has panels (I bet they have a real name too) for games and junk. Not to mention how the OS is really pushing people to only use the MSFT Chromium (aka Edge) browser now, similar to how it used to push IE. I'd call that an ad as well, though not exactly what you might think of an ad.
By default, yes. I always quickly follow the instructions online to disable all of that on a new install so I've never encountered them. For me it's no more hassle than the things I need to do on a fresh Linux install.
I haven't seen it push for Edge, in fact I don't think I've opened Edge since install day.
In my experience, ads appeared in the start menu as well as ad notifications on occasion. I removed the ads from the start menu but after an update some of them seemed to return. Similar experience with the ads in the notifications tab. Although a minor experience to re-disable the ads, it was enough to get me to switch. I paid good money for windows, only to get MORE ads than the free alternative
Performance and telemetry if you don't need anything Windows-centric like games are very good reasons. Upgrades though? Even if they are not explicitly forced I'd bet way more people (as a %) are fine using XP or 7 today than whatever version of Ubuntu or other popular distros came those years.
Telemetry is a problem, yes. Should be at least opt-in.
I believe that forced upgrades are a necessity if you have the end-user market penetration of Windows. It's a different thing for servers, and one could argue about the implementation details.
I don't see ads on Windows (and I'm on the 11 beta channel).
Less bloat. No random upgrades at inopportune times. More consistency WRT the file system, installing software, etc... Not being bombarding by start menu ads or Cortana randomly popping up.
Games would've been the big one, but that reason is disappearing pretty quickly. Proton is pretty incredible, and I believe there's been a recent development to allow games that use anti-cheat to work in the near future. More people on Linux for games means more attention to the Linux desktop, which hopefully means faster improvement to it.
We'll see what actually happens of course, but Valve taking an interest really gives me hope (big company with lots of resources to throw at problems).
You can run Adobe software on it for cheaper than the cost of getting a Mac. And you can run an enormous number of games which aren't available on Linux or Mac at all. At least that's why I do it.
Never had problems with any. Ok, hibernation was a tough nut to crack, but you just have to make sure that your swap size matches your memory size... then it's just
No, it never even had a resizable terminal until early win 10. Unix terminals are an economic powerhouse in themselves and binutils like sed/awk/grep (which windows never had and you need to modify windows to have these tools).
They have 2 built in ones. powershell and cmd. CMD has been there forever and works mostly like MSDOS (mostly). powershell is pretty neat and is in many ways better than bash once you understand it. They have also in the past 2-3 years actually fixed up some very long standing issues with the shells. There is also an experimental shell manager in the windows store which is kind of nice. You can also install other unix shells if you want. But being different systems they can get a bit quirky.
And iTerm2 on macOS is a better terminal than any I've come across on Linux. The lack of iTerm2 is actually the reason I daily drive macOS at work instead of Linux in the first place.
It does, the new Windows Terminal app is pretty nice. What it does not have is a good set of command line tools. Powershell is powerful and great in its way, but it is cumbersome to use for little tasks. And the lack of a command-line text editor like vim is a huge pain in the ass.
However, if you install Windows Terminal you will find that Start menu behavior changes in a annoying way that the Terminal developers can’t fix without changes to Windows itself[0].
With Terminal installed, if you search for a directory from the Start menu — hit the Windows key, start typing, press enter — the menu won’t close automatically.
That is not my experience. I just tried it twice, searched for Notepad, it opened right up both times and closed the start menu, and I have terminal open with two WSL sessions.
EDIT: OK, now I see it. It is specific to pinned folders in the Start Menu, not search or pinned Apps. I don't generally pin folders to Start so that's why I wasn't seeing it.
Interesting. It was happening for all of my folders, IIRC, although it’s possible the ones I tried happened to be pinned. I don’t use the pins on purpose anyway.
As someone with RSI who uses speech recognition to control most software on my desktop, X11 -> Wayland has been a massive roadblock. Ad-infested Windows isn’t great, but at least it doesn’t feel like I’m fighting any devs just to be able to use my computer in an accessible manner.
I’ve only ever used Windows and Linux so I couldn’t say for sure, but my impression is that it’s pretty good. Talon or Dragonfly with the Kaldi backend handle speech recognition and provide nice Python APIs for controlling the keyboard, mouse, windows etc.
Oh, yes, enterprise windows cuts out most of the ads. The personal additions fill the start menu with ads for various windows products (and paid placements, iirc? I can't remember, since them I disabled them all a long time ago).
Wayland is still very green, most distributions haven't switched yet, why did you? I can understand that you would want to try Wayland, but when you encountered problems why did you decide to move to Windows instead of going back to X11?
Wayland has been around for a decade and X.org is in maintenance mode. Linux users have to decide between barely maintained software with a problematic security model or an actively-maintained project that is still somewhat half-baked in places.
What speech recognition system did you use on Linux? I'm interested in using speech recognition more after getting used to it on iOS devices (where it works amazingly well).
I had the most success using Dragonfly with the Kaldi engine, which handles the heavy lifting of speech recognition and provides a nice API on top of xdotool for desktop interaction. You can also check out Talon, although I think its Linux support is still somewhat experimental.
Thank you. These keywords (Kaldi, Dragonfly) put me on the right track and I found nerd-dictation [1] which is easy to use and hackable. Perhaps not useful for your programming purposes, but I need something for writing prose and it's a decent start for that.
For some of these, Windows wins against MacOS as well.
And I have the impression, every Mac OS release, I have to debug the C++ dev environment of my students. 3 years ago I was praying that a new student had a MAC, because I could get them going easily. Now I'm praying they are on Windows, because WSL+Ubuntu just works. (I'm not praying they have Linux, because that realistically never happens. Would be great though.)
Everytime Apple upgrades Xcode I am worried something in my development workflow breaks (as has happened many times in the past). Same is true for every major macOS release the last 5 years or so.
I’m getting to the point that I consider switching to Linux, but the biggest show stopper for me is my work as iOS dev. Hopefully can move to some other tech in a couple of years so I don’t have to rely on the Apple platform for my income.
That sounds pretty painful, I've always felt bad for the people who are forced to use xCode as part of their job. I really hope Apple is forced to make cross-platform tooling, because while it's great for lock-in, it makes it really difficult for outsiders to publish cross-platform apps.
I triple boot; there are things I can only really do on Windows with full support (commercial art programs, Unreal Engine), but for software development and general usage Linux wins hands down; even the ability to switch out a wm and have it customized for my workflow is a major win, and the command line utilities and environment aren't even comparable. My third is OpenBSD, since I run that on my servers.
I personally have very strong opinions on what OS I want to use, on my own computer. (Not Linux, and not Windows either.)
However, I recognize that this is a matter of opinion. I don’t really care what OS other people choose. There will probably never be an OS that everyone will love.
So my stance is this: Just let people use whatever OS they’re happy and productive with. And where they can find applications they like. IMHO, having a nice selection of applications is just as important as the OS itself. For me, that is a compelling argument in favour of macOS. But if people can find applications they enjoy on Windows and Linux, then bully for them.
And when it comes to regular users who just want something that works – then it might be wise to not even use a traditional desktop OS. iOS/iPadOS and Android/Chrome OS are much more user-friendly than Windows/Mac/Linux will ever be.
Off topic: since I've never developed apps for Linux, what is the popular language/API that people use for Linux (or better, cross platform) development these days?
(Ha ha, I'm already feeling like the is hardly a question that there is a simple answer for.)
I thought to myself, reminds me of the ol' "This is the year of Linux on the desktop"! But then I wondered, how long have I been reading THIS is the year?
Found this old headline on Slashdot: "Linus Says 2004 is the Year for Desktop Linux"
For me, at least, 2015 was the year of Linux on the desktop. I could get the sound and fans to work (Finally!) all the time without much work. The graphics card was finally stable. I could do nearly everything I needed to do on Linux and it more or less "just worked" most of the time. That's all I really want in an OS. Windows is probably required for most work and no small number of people get along just fine on MacOS. Linux gets the job done now, and it's stable and things tend to work really well without any major problems. Or so I've found, I know not everyone agrees and depending on what your work is like, things will be different. I've written before about how I find Linux to be a better OS on a home build desktop than my nearly new M1 Macmini. Just yesterday this damn thing gave me a greenscreen kernel panic for no apparent reason in the middle of an important meeting.
in a world that had its mental faculties intact even one of those reasons would have been enough: e.g. windows 11 requiring a front-facing camera.[0]
but we don't live in such a world. we have entered the downward spiral of unaccountable tech oligarchies and it is not clear where the bottom lies.
[0] I pressume if you cover the camera you will get automatically blacklisted as someone having "something to hide" and you are tortured with daily updates
To clarify Microsoft will require OEMs to include a front-facing camera in new portable devices starting in 2023 if they want to be certified as Windows 11 compatible.
Windows 11 itself won't require a front-facing camera.
The first point I think is one of the main arguments. I've been using Ubuntu on a computer I bought in 2007. Worked like a charm (until the PSU blew up a few months back). Linux is a system that outlast its hardware!
One can also turn the argument around. What would be the reason to use Windows instead of Linux (if, like most of the people on HN I assume, you are computer literate) ?
A lot of people apparently run into hardware support issues with Linux.
Personally, I have not had any issues in about fifteen years, but I cannot blame people for expecting their hardware to Just Work (tm). Back in the day, I enjoyed spending a weekend getting sound or wifi to work, but these days not so much.
At the same time, hardware support has gotten so much better over the twenty one years I have been using Linux, so it is much less of a hassle today.
>Not having to worry that upgrading one app will break things for other apps.
That's subjective.
>Safe screen locking.
Slock.
>Not having to spend hours getting hardware working properly but unreliably.
No issue with Void. Good luck with Windows and old harware.
You don't have your wifi drivers on your laptop reinstall? You are fucked. Yes, SDI Tool Origin, but you need an extra USB drive about 16GB to do so.
>Not having to deal with audio issues when you want sound from multiple apps.
That's bullshit, I solved that in 2004.
>A responsive interface that doesn't feel like a clunky children's toy from the early 2000s.
You mean, Windows 10 with UI latency and everything being felt as if it was ran over a layer of tar?
Because, in comparison, MATE flies. And I don't even use a DE.
Not the GP, but just because you solved it in 2004 doesn't mean others don't have issues. There are still hardware/app configurations that are broken on Linux. Pipewire is helping, but it's not perfect.
For me it's the "it just works" factor. Just tons of tiny issues I have on Linux:
- I have to disable the compositor to get 144 Hz in programs
- With the compositor disabled, animations become very drawn out and pixelated
- Konsole's layout breaks on a new version so I have to keep downgrading it manually
- Audacity takes like 10 seconds to load
- I have to run modprobe every time I want to use my webcam
- The cursor is different in login screen and main desktop
- Spectacle (screenshotting tool) needs to be invoked twice to actually do a screenshot
- I can't print double sided pages on my network printer
- Dolphin can't connect to our household's Windows file share server (or maybe the fault lies in samba?)
- VLC hard freezes every once in a while and needs to be killed with -9 flag
At one point I maintained a txt of these issues but I don't have access to that right now
Windows works on my new laptop(3 year old with TPM) perfectly. This doesn't mean Linux doesn't work too. I tried PopOs for a month. If in future I switch to linux completely this distro is going to be the one. But there are still bugs which aren't fixed yet on linux. Battery backup is also an issue on Linux (tried TLP too). There were many other problems too. To summarize it Windows was a way better experience for me with this specific hardware. And WSL is really a game changer for me as I can keep on using Linux without worrying about hardware issues.
Absolutely. Our company issued us Windows laptops but all of our devops/SRE/cloud services and workflows were developed and built by and for MacBook users, with no thought as to the other half of the company that would need to work with them. It took me twenty minutes to get WSL installed and running, and now I can actually support the things I’m paid to support! I have inadvertently also become the SME and one-stop WSL support shop, for everyone else in the same boat. Which, as it turns out, is a great many people….
I was planning to switch but Windows is still restarting after an update. The screen has instructed me to not turn off or unplug my laptop. I'm compliant but it's getting more difficult as the years go by.
349 comments
[ 3.6 ms ] story [ 239 ms ] threadA hardware and software config + the goal (print)- and a dialog pops up, offering your solution as a line by line shell script.
All this stored in a trustworthy DB and even complex problems could be plug and play on windows. Add a "support" button to finance the whole thing.
Voila. Year of the linux desktop.
That depends on which distro and hardware you're using. I use laptops that are known to work well with Linux and Ubuntu LTS releases. This way, I spend perhaps 3-5h a year on admin tasks and it's mostly easy stuff.
It's actually amazing how GNU/Linux allowed me to gradually transition from configuring everything (when I was a student: XFree86, custom kernels, ...) to using GNU/Linux productively with almost zero housekeeping effort.
You can even try Silverblue. On the off chance something breaks, i do an rpm-ostree rollback, reboot and the system is on it's previous working state. I could troubleshoot stuff If I want to but I usually wait for an upstream fix before I update again.
I wanted to like silverbluez used it on the homelab as a host os for a while, went back to a normal server in the end, way less hassle.
Depending on what you want to do, you use the appropriate version.
Indeed if one is not willing/able to climb the learning curve of this paradigm shift, then they shouldn't use it.
I get why maintainers want to push flappypacks, I just don't care, it's a shit solution that leaks all over your users. Find a better way to fix your problems.
You might want to look into something less unstable.
I've had arch running unattended upgrades in a Cron for years.
Worst case I have to find my USB stick and do some debugging, not that an update has ever broken anything.
There is some minor maintenance I run maybe once every 6-12 months to clear caches or fix up any configs that need updating but I've never run into anything that prevents booting.
I like windows for various reasons but it's a constant maintenance chore. Linux is more like a stone wall.. set and forget.
I spend far more time maintaining the Linux machines, while my Windows box just works.
KDE Neon has been much better last year, but still every now and then some conflict pops up which requires manual command line intervention.
Clearly YMMV...
That said, I'm quite happy with KDE Neon and would most likely be quite content if I had to use it as my primary OS and didn't have any need for RDP. Sadly the latter is a showstopper for me.
The only issue I could sink time into is the lack of deep (S3) and that's completely an issue caused by Microsoft's capture of most laptop manufacturers (they have forced new hybrid sleep states that don't even work on windows machines).
Not saying it's a huge deal, though I do worry about screwing up the config changes, but it's a lot more work than what I have to do to keep my Windows machine running.
But even then, the same machine with the same programs on windows would require a lot more care to avoid rot.
What type of shady apps are you installing that is modifying boot settings?
My employer gives zero f's about my privacy concerns.
I understand the "We only to support on LTS releases" argument but I didn't think that meant "We actively sabotage our short-term releases".
Huge huge huuuuge barrier for normies IMO.
* FWIW, I didn't upgrade when it was prompted because I was "too busy sawing to sharpen my saw" so-to-speak. I was on a major project, have known video card issues with upgrading, and was worried I'd be unavailable for work for 3 days trying to fix my UI. So I waited until the next LTS to upgrade. Turns out you can't go from an old STS to the next LTS and you have to baby-step through the STS's ... which no longer exist. wtf.
:pretend-this-is-a-flame-emoji:
Reasons to consider NOT switching to Linux
https://corn.codeberg.page/notlinux.html
Who wants to learn something new when the people you need help from are going to treat you like a moron?
We both know its more involved than clicking a different icon.
I've spent a lot of time with average users of all kinds. They couldn't care less. To them it's a thing that has less value than a coffee cup.
I could, and would sit down and explain to them everything that is cool, cute about every layers of a computer, with simple language and pragmatic use, with history context, and bits of benefits for their lives. They just don't want to hear it.
Some will say it's geek stuff. Some will say "I'm too scared". Some will try and forget 13 seconds later.
The insane side of this is that these people will spend grands on a new machine that will tickle their sense of free improvement (which will not happen). Again every 3-5 years.. forced by ecosystemic pressure to push old stuff out.
ps: I agree that GP was a bit smug, but even then, the population is what it is.
pps: even at work, if I offer to explain something, or write a script, or a macro to help, most people will react negatively for various reasons (very often its petty emotions, like jealousy, or disdain).
There's no reason why anyone should need to know the details of how a computer works to use the computer. The history you're so eager to tell should just be trivia.
Paraphrasing the CEO of Sun Microsystems (IIRC): you don't need to know how to operate a nuclear power plant to get light when you flick the light switch.
Of course "in theory" good tools are solid and simple.. in reality bro how insane the world is. Every update, every fix, changes the poor ground of habits users tried to build. Just yesterday I had to help a neighbor because she couldn't grasp a word document embedding a invisible table as layout forbidding the caret to move right as she used too. I think you're very much misunderstanding the vastness of psychologies, of tooling variations, of hidden variables and parameters and the immense layering of software.
People are confused by the slightest change in computer interaction. How do you want to make them understand when to click, double click, right click, drag, press. What's an URL, what happens when they click save, why errors or not ? people don't even know what saving a file is. Really, go in any office you can pick 30% of users totally clueless about folders and files.
Every attempt at hiding information causes trouble, it taps into shallow understanding and rote memory. People become mere users and it sucks. History is interesting, details are interesting, your brain loves it, if it's tied to a tangible concept and use for the people. It's not about making VBA6 classes or a talk about Linus Torvalds acrobatics for the sake of geek pleasure. It's to situate what are the reasons (as in reasoning) for why things are the way they are. Even your keyboard has a long history.
I spent the better part of an hour this week helping a family friend over Zoom, trying to help her digitally sign a document. Her browser's PDF viewer couldn't render the form input boxes, so I had to help her download Adobe Acrobat Reader (yuck, I know, but, I'm not going to argue with her employer about alternatives). She's not dull by any stretch--she has a PhD. Just unfamiliar with the process. And when you see the process through fresh eyes, you get the sense that, oh, maybe this actually isn't intuitive at all if you've never done it before.
I don't know why so much of the Linux community lacks that feeling of empathy. Perhaps because their journey through Linux was a giant hazing ritual, and they feel like they've earned the right to haze the next generation? I have no idea.
Software for the masses seems to always be dumbed down, lose functionality, or otherwise become less useful over time as its targeted at the lowest common denominator. I'm good with there being an OS that's primarily for people who have the time and desire to understand their tools and want to get the most out of them.
This isn't some dig at casual users, it's about market segmentation. Not everything needs to be for everyone, and that's okay. With few exceptions, the average PC has plenty of choice in its operating systems.
And yes, Windows users have complained mightily about nearly every upgrade (remember the Windows 8 fiasco? Windows 10 was lesser, but people still found fault, now 11...) but still use it. Oh well.
Also, there was a lot of bitching about Ubuntu moving from Gnome 2 to Unity. It led to a DE fork and an entire distro picking up the cause. So Linux users bitch too. But with OSS you can change what you want and the companies can also tell you to piss off...
My home folder has files that have been with me since 2006 or so. This laptop is 7 years old and this is the third fresh OS install it has in its lifetime - With one exception, it's always been updated to the latest Ubuntu version as needed with the Ubuntu tooling.
What I have been doing to prevent data loss (that never happened) is to keep the interesting parts of my home folder on a separate filesystem and symlink them into my home folder. This allowed the previous fresh install to format the root partition and I didn't need to worry about my data being deleted.
You can't. Their official recommendation, in the Windows 11 Settings app, is to reinstall Windows 11. There's no way to migrate "backwards" on update channels, you can only go "more unstable".
Back in the late 90s when I first started experimenting with Linux, the parent's post definitely described my experience. I remember booting up into a text-mode login prompt and running 'startx' and having to do a lot of messing around with manual configuration files. One mistake with an init file could leave your machine un-bootable and you'd have to use a rescue shell to recover. Driver support was a mixed bag for sure.
In current year it's literally the exact opposite experience. I have more issues with installing Windows apps that will make driver changes or add stuff to the registry that causes weird unexpected issues than I have with Linux. Linux is quick and easy to install and tends to "just work" for me once it's up and running.
I'm sure choice of hardware still has something to do with mixed experiences. I did have one bad experience in recent memory with a work-issued laptop and the track-pad not working with Linux. I had to use a personal device while I was employed there since it was a known issue with that particular brand and the fix was an upcoming kernel update. But that seems to be the extreme rare exception for me. Most devices I've installed Linux on have worked perfectly right out of the install and have required me to do zero configuration to make it usable.
On my main desktop the image has been rolling forward since 2008 when I switched to 64 bit. Naturally the hardware has been replaced around it several times since then.
I've used Linux as my main OS for years now and I love it, but I've stopped trying to evangelize it. Just use whatever OS you want, I'm happy on Linux.
It should be a no-brainer that an operative system that is free, open, democratic, well documented and consisting of over 50,000 quality software packages---Debian, for example---is better than an OS which isn't any of those things.
Of course software is (also) about ideology. If you find yourself advocating putting more money in the pockets of the already super rich, or pretending that there isn't a digital part of human life where people have rights, well then obviously you have picked sides.
Content-less emotional manipulation - just the kind of thing that I hate to see on HN.
You answered none of the points in the article itself, dismissing the entire thing out of hand with an acronym describing a concept that you provided no evidence actually applied to any of the arguments.
> It should be a no-brainer that an operative system that is free, open, democratic, well documented and consisting of over 50,000 quality software packages---Debian, for example---is better than an OS which isn't any of those things.
No. I've been using Linux as my daily driver for over a decade (and have spent far more time using it than Windows), and gotten a few other people on it, so I can say that, for actually getting things done and software just working, Windows is far better than Linux. An operating system where you have to struggle to get things done is a bad operating system.
Linux isn't "democratic", either - Linus Torvalds controls kernel development, and the userspace components have wildly differing development practices.
Nor is it "well documented" - Linux-related documentation is generally terrible to read. Technically correct? Sure - but that's not "well documented", that's an encyclopedia.
Neither can you say that those "50,000" software packages are "quality" - the vast majority of open-source software that I've seen is buggy, under-documented, incomplete, and difficult to use. (I mean, so is the vast majority of proprietary software - but that software being "also bad" doesn't make OSS software "good")
> Of course software is (also) about ideology. [...] well then obviously you have picked sides.
Please leave your manipulative speech out of HN, and don't try to drag me (or anyone) into your idealistic flamewar.
Microsoft is a company that is predatory towards its users, and that's why I recommend Linux despite all of its problems. Pretending that it has no problems, or is technically superior to Windows, and then piling on inflammatory dialog, does nobody any good.
I don't actually need to prove that software is (also) about ideology, as you just acknowledged it. But anyway, it is also a fact that if you use Windows, you are giving even more money and power to 1 American company that currently has like 85% total market share. Distribution of wealth and power over human (digital) life are clearly ideological issues.
What is emotional is your statement that you think Windows is far better, that you think Linus Torvalds work somehow makes Debian undemocratic, that you think the documentation is terrible to read and that the vast majority of OSS you've seen is buggy etc. Being a software guy, I'm sure you can recognize a pattern, here :).
Also, I understand that your time with GNU/Linux is supposed to impress. But to me it just means that you came in at least a decade after the FUD-era in the late nineties, which may explain why you can't see how the counter-article maps near perfectly to the old arguments about community, hardware support, lacking software and "not for everyone."
Lastly, I'm not trying to start a flamewar. I'm just pointing out that the counter-article, which some other posters found well written, is classic FUD.
> Well, Debian is [...] That's not me being emotional or manipulative. It is a fact.
You know very well that "emotional manipulation" was in response to your statement "I'm surprised you can't see that this counter-article is just plain old FUD." because I wrote me response directly after your quoted statement.
This is one of the most deceitful things I've seen on HN in a while. Other HN readers: look at the beginning of my comment[1] and you'll see what a blatant mischaracterization this is.
And, no, claiming that Debian is "more or less fully documented" and that those packages are "meticulously tested" is not "a fact"; those are highly subjective terms that I happen to strongly disagree with.
> I don't actually need to prove that software is (also) about ideology, as you just acknowledged it.
Yet another claim without any evidence.
> What is emotional is your statement that you think Windows is far better, that you think Linus Torvalds work somehow makes Debian undemocratic, that you think the documentation is terrible to read and that the vast majority of OSS you've seen is buggy etc.
False, false, and false. My belief that Windows is far better is not "emotional" - it's just that, a belief (believing that the earth is round is not emotional), based on my personal experiences, which are factual. Similarly, the fact that the vast majority of OSS that I've seen is buggy is also factual - it might not be representative, but calling it "emotional" is a false statement. Finally, it's a fact that having a benevolent dictator at the head of a project makes it undemocratic, unless you actually care to make an actual argument about it.
> Being a software guy, I'm sure you can recognize a pattern, here :). Also, I understand that your time with GNU/Linux is supposed to impress.
More manipulation, and snide comments. Pretty clear you're not acting in good faith.
> which may explain why you can't see how the counter-article maps near perfectly to the old arguments
I read the Halloween papers? However, I'm also capable of rational thought, and making arguments, and seeing logical fallacies - and you haven't presented a single actual argument that any of the points in the article are invalid, nor have you justified your assertion that the article is FUD - you've just claimed it and stopped.
> Lastly, I'm not trying to start a flamewar.
Your statement "well then obviously you have picked sides." suggests that that's false. If you're not actually trying to start a flamewar - your behavior suggests otherwise.
> I'm just pointing out that the counter-article, which some other posters found well written, is classic FUD.
False. You haven't "pointed out" anything - you made a claim that the article was FUD without actually addressing any of the points or providing any evidence whatsoever.
Future HN readers: notice how cleverly this poster avoided making any logical arguments, or answering any of my points, or justifying their claims that the article was FUD. Beware - there are a lot of people who like to use labels to slander a person or organization without actually being able to show that those labels are accurate (because they're not). When reading a response to a comment, watch out to see if the response actually addresses the points made, or whether it tries to libel the previous comment, or strawman arguments, or just straight-up say things that are false.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28960936
The reason you think my posts are astonishing, misdirecting, examples of clever deceit, manipulative, snide etc. is because you fail to counter them properly. And as it is apparently unthinkable for you that it has to do with anything on your side, it must be my fault. But consider the below points:
+ Saying something is similar to another thing because they have the same shape is an argument. That is what I did when pointing to the similarities (made explicit for your benefit in my second post) between the counter-article and classic anti-Linux FUD. You can't counter that with "prove it!", because it only indicates that you can't distinguish between a discussion about an article and some query about pointers and memory objects.
+ It is factual that people have personal experiences, strong emotions etc., but that doesn't turn these things into factual states of affairs.
+ Nobody gets to decide whether their actions, opinions, choices etc. are ideological or not. That is a judgement passed by others. For example, if you want to call LT a dictator, there isn't much I can do about it. But I can at least---gently---point out that he open sourced the Linux kernel decades ago. If you want to fork it and build and OS without GNU on top of it, go ahead. If you just want to look inside and change something, go ahead. If you want to make a commerical endeavor out of it, go ahead. My point about taking sides is that you can't do any of that with Windows.
Laughs in Linux
Points 1 & 2 are the same (don't buy a new PC), and quite a few of the rest are fixed as you can run all Linux software in the Linux subsystem for Windows.
No telemetry
No forced upgrades
No intrusive ads
https://www.windowslatest.com/2021/05/30/microsoft-edge-nagg...
I haven't seen it push for Edge, in fact I don't think I've opened Edge since install day.
possibly security
free software (if one cares)
Telemetry is a problem, yes. Should be at least opt-in.
I believe that forced upgrades are a necessity if you have the end-user market penetration of Windows. It's a different thing for servers, and one could argue about the implementation details.
I don't see ads on Windows (and I'm on the 11 beta channel).
Basically just not having to deal with MS.
We'll see what actually happens of course, but Valve taking an interest really gives me hope (big company with lots of resources to throw at problems).
$ sudo systemctl hibernate
I run desktop computers and since I don't need to play video games on them, I just use the CPU graphics.
However, even when I did use a discrete GPU - every Linux distro I've used just prompts me to install the drivers and things just work.
I'm 35. Began with computers ~10. Spent my first 10 years using Windows, followed by 10 years of the Mac. I'm (hopefully) in my 10-year Linux run?!
There have always been plenty of terminal options on Windows.
With Terminal installed, if you search for a directory from the Start menu — hit the Windows key, start typing, press enter — the menu won’t close automatically.
0: https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/7122
EDIT: OK, now I see it. It is specific to pinned folders in the Start Menu, not search or pinned Apps. I don't generally pin folders to Start so that's why I wasn't seeing it.
I don't see any ads from windows. Not sure what you're talking about.
https://www.theregister.com/2020/10/30/x_server_lead_maintai...
[1] https://github.com/ideasman42/nerd-dictation
- 32-bit app support
- Nvidia GPU/CUDA support
- Encryption without a question mark at the end
- I can hide my topbar (or ostensibly move it wherever I want)
- I don't get a popup asking me to try Safari every week
I’m getting to the point that I consider switching to Linux, but the biggest show stopper for me is my work as iOS dev. Hopefully can move to some other tech in a couple of years so I don’t have to rely on the Apple platform for my income.
Use the best tool for the job.
However, I recognize that this is a matter of opinion. I don’t really care what OS other people choose. There will probably never be an OS that everyone will love.
So my stance is this: Just let people use whatever OS they’re happy and productive with. And where they can find applications they like. IMHO, having a nice selection of applications is just as important as the OS itself. For me, that is a compelling argument in favour of macOS. But if people can find applications they enjoy on Windows and Linux, then bully for them.
And when it comes to regular users who just want something that works – then it might be wise to not even use a traditional desktop OS. iOS/iPadOS and Android/Chrome OS are much more user-friendly than Windows/Mac/Linux will ever be.
(Ha ha, I'm already feeling like the is hardly a question that there is a simple answer for.)
Found this old headline on Slashdot: "Linus Says 2004 is the Year for Desktop Linux"
For me, at least, 2015 was the year of Linux on the desktop. I could get the sound and fans to work (Finally!) all the time without much work. The graphics card was finally stable. I could do nearly everything I needed to do on Linux and it more or less "just worked" most of the time. That's all I really want in an OS. Windows is probably required for most work and no small number of people get along just fine on MacOS. Linux gets the job done now, and it's stable and things tend to work really well without any major problems. Or so I've found, I know not everyone agrees and depending on what your work is like, things will be different. I've written before about how I find Linux to be a better OS on a home build desktop than my nearly new M1 Macmini. Just yesterday this damn thing gave me a greenscreen kernel panic for no apparent reason in the middle of an important meeting.
but we don't live in such a world. we have entered the downward spiral of unaccountable tech oligarchies and it is not clear where the bottom lies.
[0] I pressume if you cover the camera you will get automatically blacklisted as someone having "something to hide" and you are tortured with daily updates
Windows 11 itself won't require a front-facing camera.
One can also turn the argument around. What would be the reason to use Windows instead of Linux (if, like most of the people on HN I assume, you are computer literate) ?
Games I guess.
Personally, I have not had any issues in about fifteen years, but I cannot blame people for expecting their hardware to Just Work (tm). Back in the day, I enjoyed spending a weekend getting sound or wifi to work, but these days not so much.
At the same time, hardware support has gotten so much better over the twenty one years I have been using Linux, so it is much less of a hassle today.
Safe screen locking.
Not having to spend hours getting hardware working properly but unreliably.
Not having to deal with audio issues when you want sound from multiple apps.
A responsive interface that doesn't feel like a clunky children's toy from the early 2000s.
That's subjective.
>Safe screen locking.
Slock.
>Not having to spend hours getting hardware working properly but unreliably.
No issue with Void. Good luck with Windows and old harware. You don't have your wifi drivers on your laptop reinstall? You are fucked. Yes, SDI Tool Origin, but you need an extra USB drive about 16GB to do so.
>Not having to deal with audio issues when you want sound from multiple apps.
That's bullshit, I solved that in 2004.
>A responsive interface that doesn't feel like a clunky children's toy from the early 2000s.
You mean, Windows 10 with UI latency and everything being felt as if it was ran over a layer of tar? Because, in comparison, MATE flies. And I don't even use a DE.
Not the GP, but just because you solved it in 2004 doesn't mean others don't have issues. There are still hardware/app configurations that are broken on Linux. Pipewire is helping, but it's not perfect.
- I have to disable the compositor to get 144 Hz in programs - With the compositor disabled, animations become very drawn out and pixelated - Konsole's layout breaks on a new version so I have to keep downgrading it manually - Audacity takes like 10 seconds to load - I have to run modprobe every time I want to use my webcam - The cursor is different in login screen and main desktop - Spectacle (screenshotting tool) needs to be invoked twice to actually do a screenshot - I can't print double sided pages on my network printer - Dolphin can't connect to our household's Windows file share server (or maybe the fault lies in samba?) - VLC hard freezes every once in a while and needs to be killed with -9 flag
At one point I maintained a txt of these issues but I don't have access to that right now
I develop software on Ubuntu because the tools I use work out of the box.
I play games on Windows because the games I play work out of the box.