> If you want to run an alternative operating system, you got to learn how it works.
The typical user doesn't know how Windows works, and they can run that. These days, users can run a friendly GNU/Linux distribution not knowing how it works. So, disagree with you here.
> The typical user doesn't know how Windows works, and they can run that.
That is because Windows for the most part manages itself and there are enough IT professionals, repairs shops and other third support options (including someone that is good with computers that lives down the road) where people can problems sorted.
This is not the case with Linux.
> These days, users can run a friendly GNU/Linux distribution not knowing how it works. So, disagree with you here.
Sooner or later there will be an issue that will need to be solved with opening up a terminal and entering a set of esoteric commands. I've been using Linux on and off since 2002. I have done a Linux from Scratch build. I have tried most of the distros over the years, everything from Ubuntu to Gentoo.
When people claim that you will never have to know how it works. That is simply incorrect and gives a false impression to new users.
I would rather that other Linux users tell potential users the truth. There is trade off. You get a lot more control over your own computer, but you will need to peek under the hood sooner or later and you maybe be on your own solving problems yourself a lot of the time.
> That is because Windows for the most part manages itself
Windows is the least "manage itself" OS out of all OS available today. It needs pretty constant maintenance and esoteric enchantments to keep trucking.
That’s not my experience with it. I have 2 windows installations at home and they both seem fine.
I must admit - I spent about an hour figuring out how to turn off telemetry and other junk after installation. But since then, windows has been trucking along just fine.
I wonder why! Has your workplace installed weird junk on the machine which is gumming it up? Are you using some set of configuration options that microsoft doesn't regularly check?
My experience of windows is that it works pretty well these days. But I don't develop on windows - I just use it for entertainment (steam, vlc, etc). So there's probably a lot of edge cases that I'm not hitting.
It wasn't ever different when I ran windows on my personal computers, although granted that was back in 8.1. 8.1 was just bad for a variety of reasons, but it definitely still had the rot problem.
The latest in my saga of Windows being annoying is applications just randomly killing themselves when I'm not looking. I don't reboot my work computer because I have far too much precious stuff open.
But, every other day or so, an application or two will mysteriously disappear from my taskbar. Silently. I never catch it, then I get the "hey did you see this email??"
Why no, no I did not. Outlook committed suicide at some point and I'm not pocket watching the windows taskbar. My mistake.
For a while I thought I just hallucinated me closing the application, but I don't close applications, like, ever.
To put into perspective, my work has a policy which forcefully reboots windows once every 14 days. It helps, but not much, because by day 2-3 it's already breaking down. My Debian machine has an uptime of a few hundred days. I legitimately still have applications open from last year.
Maybe I use my computer like a psychopath, or maybe my expectations are too high, but I don't consider windows to take care of itself. Its the most babying-an-OS I ever have to do. iOS and Android are much better as well.
No it doesn't. I barely do anything to manage my Windows Installation. I install loads of garbage (I mostly still run the same programs as I did 15 years ago).
I don't understand why people propagate these falsehoods.
Windows rots. Even a few days without a reboot and things will just stop working or be really slow. No idea why.
But if you don't clean install once every few years you'll just have a ton of shit everywhere. Programs don't clean themselves up.
Also every program has its own update mechanism. Great... now I don't just have to manage windows update, but also a few dozen other esoteric update mechanisms.
iOS and Android are self managing. Windows? Can we be for real? Why get on the internet and lie to people?
Anybody who is good with computers should be able to install linux, it's easier than to install windows, because you don't need to jump through capitalist dark patterns.
>Sooner or later there will be an issue that will need to be solved with opening up a terminal and entering a set of esoteric commands.
That's what I did to export drivers from previous windows installation in suspicion of regression.
>Installation is not the same as support and isn't the same as trouble shooting.
The meme is still alive that windows accumulates garbage and becomes slower with time, so you need to reinstall it periodically. Reinstallation is also how you fix regressions, because ms is busy with cloud services.
>It isn't unusual situation in Linux.
As I remember, on linux I have an ample choice of kernel versions, but I didn't encounter regressions. For windows intel provides only the latest drivers.
> The meme is still alive that windows accumulates garbage and becomes slower with time, so you need to reinstall it periodically.
I've not needed to worry about this since Windows XP. Which was what? 25 years ago almost.
> Reinstallation is also how you fix regressions, because ms is busy with cloud services.
I've never had hardware regressions with Windows. I've had plenty of weird and annoying bugs return with Linux.
e.g. My Dell 6410 has an issue where the wifi card would die after suspend with kernel 6.1. However it would get fixed by a patch, and then get unfixed the next patch.
> As I remember, on linux I have an ample choice of kernel versions, but I didn't encounter regressions. For windows intel provides only the latest drivers.
"Swings and Roundabout".
Again. It is a pretty niche problem. I've had plenty of weird hardware regressions with the Kernel. Recently there was a AMD HDMI audio bug, IIRC it was kernel related.
I’ve had the same experience. Never had a regression with windows. Had plenty with Linux.
One Linux kernel version broke hdmi audio and another fixed it. Recently a change to power management has made my Intel Ethernet controller stop working about an hour after the computer boots up. And so on. Each time I’ve needed to pouring through forums trying to find the right fix. That or pin an older version which worked correctly.
>I've never had hardware regressions with Windows.
Until recently I didn't either. Windows resizing to 640x480 when display turns off and sound resetting to 100% after a toast notification.
>It is a pretty niche problem.
I think hdmi audio is a niche problem. What do you even use it for? With linux you can at least try a different version, with windows you have to just eat it.
The typical user doesn't know how Windows works, and they can run that. These days, users can run a friendly GNU/Linux distribution not knowing how it works. So, disagree with you here.