3 ms·
I too value my time. And yes, MacOS or Windows allow you to be productive almost right away compared to say Arch Linux. Compared to something like Ubuntu, I'm n
by vladvasiliu 5y ago
I too value my time. And yes, MacOS or Windows allow you to be productive almost right away compared to say Arch Linux. Compared to something like Ubuntu, I'm not so sure. And things which I use daily don't seem supported on Windows (using the GPG app on my Yubikey for SSH access).
But this is just an upfront cost. With Windows, which I've tried to use regularly, there are many annoyances which introduce friction in the day to day. So the "opex" if you will is much higher.
Just this morning I started my Windows machine to play a quick game and wanted to check out something on the internet beforehand. It started bugging me about some "recommended browser settings" in some Edge window that showed up half off-screen that I couldn't move. Then there's the Windows Terminal app which sometimes takes forever to start up. And windows that pop up and look active but aren't.
Then there's a bunch of other little annoyances which I now forget but over a work day end up aggravating. Of course, YMMV as they say, and I know people who aren't as bothered by those. But in case you are annoyed, the upfront cost of setting up your Linux DE just right may be cheaper in the long run.
I've spent a while setting up i3 a few years ago, just out of curiosity. I had been a MacOS user at the time for a very long time. But then something happened, and it grew on me. Now I only use my mac from time to time when idly watching a movie in bed, because I find it slower to use. I hate having to hunt around for windows, move then around, click on some Dock icon which sometimes doesn't show, others shows up while it shouldn't (in the full-screen Mail window usually).
I guess the point is that different people have different needs and are willing to pay different prices for those. There's also a case to be made about high upfront cost + low maintenance vs low upfront cost + high maintenance.
> Turns out paying professionals for quality goods is an alright business model, and I'm not losing any sleep by not having source code access.
Well, of course. Only issue is how you define quality, as related to what you need. For me, the price of the Windows license was lumped in the same bin with the GPU. Have to buy it to be able to play a game I wanted to play. But I'd feel robbed if I had to pay for it and than have to use it for my job. In my case, I haven't looked under the hood of the Linux kernel or the DE or the terminal app or anything, for that matter. It just works better for me. And I'm also OK to invest some time if it means I'll be more confortable down the road.
- tomnipotent 5y agoI've used Linux DE far less than Windows/OS X, but I've spent more time setting up Linux than I ever have on many multiples years more use of the others. This doesn't even include things like digging into systemd or other supporting ecosystem players. Wifi, Bluetooth, HiDPI, and other common DE experiences are not always consistent with Linux distros and across hardware. Wouldn't be surprised if I've spent more time alone on Linux just figuring out network file sharing than all other DE-related configurations combined. On the other hand, I wouldn't deploy software against any other OS (unless it's an app). There's no world where I don't want or see Linux. I'm just not sold on it's DE experience so far. There is no customization you can make to a DE that saves me so much time and energy long term that it makes up for all the other time and energy needed to invest in Linux DE as a daily driver. Most of my energy seems to be devoted to task-specific regiments, more influenced by that tasks software. In twenty five years, I've probably spent less than $3,000 on Microsoft products personally. I've got my moneys worth.
- xupybd 5y agoI've found Linux filesharing easier to work with than Windows but that's about it.
- tomnipotent 5y agoWindows and OS X come ready for both SMB and NFS, which is the bulk of experiences I encounter. Apple AirDrop has also been very useful. Mounting remote file systems can be done easily in the GUI, as can sharing. Like any such software, it's going to have a learning curve. I can't remember the last time I was on Linux and didn't have to start off by installing cifs-utils, and then hunting down instructions on writing an .smbcredentials file. Windows also makes it (relatively) easy to administer file sharing if you're on a AD domain. All said and done, I personally use Unraid for my home NAS.
- xupybd 5y agoYeah using samba is just as hard on Linux. I've struggled to get AD to work correctly with older PC's. We run CNCs with Win 98. NFS is simpler and easier to manage.