> was mainly talking about how development on Linux Kernel can be tedious, the adoption of the drivers is usually limited You literally provided an example th

> was mainly talking about how development on Linux Kernel can be tedious, the adoption of the drivers is usually limited You literally provided an example that does not work in your favor to prove your point. > Realtek is one huge manufacturer of network chips, but their drivers on linux are still crap? That's not the case for years, rehashing the same arguments you had a decade ago, or simply being this clueless does not help your case. > the only thing I hear about Intel/Nvidia from Linux people is complaints about how shitty they are, and why they dont open up their stuff. You don't really know what you're talking about and it shows. Intel is fine, they have dedicated developers supporting Linux with open-source code, the problem is an Intel+NVIDIA laptop combo and this is due to NVIDIA, not Intel. NVIDIA support is crap, because NVIDIA wants it to be crap, since they sell enough GeForce GPUs to gamers not to care, nothing Linux can really do about that, it seems that Intel and AMD have no problem shipping a kernel driver. It's a culture thing, more than anything. And yes, we want the driver to be open, caring about free software is one of the major reasons to go with Linux. > One key thing might be that debugging of kernel things is not easy on Linux, as listed on the Original Post url? Much, much easier than on Windows, you even get DTrace, get to inspect the code etc. That's not the issue. Anyone who wants to provide a driver has no problem providing one. ARM is its own beast, but as I said earlier, this is mostly due to there not being a standard way to i.e. probe hardware like there is on x86 and that's ARM, not Linux at fault here. Does Linux have problems, sure. But as someone who had family members with Windows 10 call me that they lost their files after an update and the internet is full about the latest macOS being the new Vista, I wouldn't be too sure the competition fares better. > Yes, i said it. 99% of the people don't care if theres telemetry reported if it can improve the product. Maybe they don't care, but I'd argue they seldom even know about it or understand the implications. > As a developer myself, I would _love_ to have _real world issues_ reported to me, automatically. Part of the free software movement is about equality between users and developers because developers have unquestionably more power. This is more of an ideological thing than anything. Nobody's saying telemetry isn't useful, just that one should be up-front, opt-in, full disclosure about it. A large part of us care about that, about privacy and the future of unrestricted, general-purpose computing. I am sure many don't and for them Windows and macOS are there. If Linux doesn't work well for you, that's fine, what I find annoying is pretending that Windows/macOS are somehow way less annoying to use, when every time I use them, I come across crappy behavior.