3 ms·

If you need Windows software, why not just run Windows? Why make life more difficult?

by throwawayboise 5y ago

dijit 5y ago
Windows is kinda crap. The cost of it not withstanding, the OS itself is just janky. So. I’d prefer not to.
- dartharva 5y ago
  People keep saying that, but the only stable experience I have had is with Windows. Every single Linux distro I have tried (Ubuntu, Debian, Manjaro, Fedora) has been inherenty more sluggish and painful to use than Windows for me (even if you were to ignore the initial setup problems with various hardware). Windows unactivated is actually free to use (just use a generic key from its official documentation) and most of its preloaded bloatware can be removed with single-use scripts.
  - dijit 5y ago
    I guess it depends where you are? It’s so much of a surface area that it’s hard to be objective on all fronts, nothing is perfect and I could come up with 1000 ways that Linux is better or that macos is better or that windows is better. But it largely doesn’t matter. The parent postulated “why not use windows”. Well, I don’t like using windows but often I need to run software developed for windows. The same way that windows now has an emulation/virt layer for Linux, people want to use Linux programs from windows. I dont begrudge those users for using Linux software on windows or look down on them for that. Enjoying the Experience of the operating system you use is just so incredibly subjective… I recently had the mispleasure of reinstalling a windows machine and kept getting frustrated at the requirement to have a Microsoft account, drivers that didn’t seem to find my drives (?) but could with an Intel computer from the same brand (and similar model) of motherboard. I got frustrated when trying to use the win32 api because it expects WTF16, padded and null terminated strings but only passed as mutable pointers. And if you want to pass a strict to a function, you must pass a raw pointer. Which is inherently unsafe in rust. These things annoy me. Then: I tried to activate windows and saw the jaw dropping price. The price is more than a quarter of a reasonably priced home PC. No wonder the OEMs install bloatware to get the price down.
nu11ptr 5y ago
Many people (like myself) are very happy with Linux and have been for years. We have no interest in "auto rebooting for security patches", "treating file locking like it was security" or having "relevant ads" shown to us. However, there might be 1 or 2 Windows apps we wish to run, so things like this are nice. I assure you that my overall experience is not "more difficult" than Windows (the exact opposite in fact).
jpeloquin 5y ago
Because we need some Windows-only software and some Linux-only software. And the occasional Mac-only (or whatever else) software too. Life is less difficult when it all works in the same window manager and accesses the same filesystem, if that is possible.
mackrevinack 5y ago
not sure if you are trolling or not but i have around 60 programs that i use on linux and 1 program that only supports windows, so having to dual boot just so i could run 1 program would make things a lot more difficult
GhettoComputers 5y ago
Windows can run Linux in the subsystem and has a better Android emulator than Linux. Windows doesn’t run old windows programs as well as wine though, and if it hasn’t happened yet I can’t wait for the day you run legacy windows programs in the Linux subsystem through wine. You’re not wrong, using virtualization like a Windows VM in Linux is still using windows and is the best way for compatibility. Wine either works ok (mostly), needs lots of weird configuration to get it to intergrate into Linux or look ok, or it doesn’t work at all most of the time.

If you need Windows software, why not just run Windows? Why make life more difficult?

dijit 5y ago

Windows is kinda crap. The cost of it not withstanding, the OS itself is just janky. So. I’d prefer not to.

dartharva 5y ago
People keep saying that, but the only stable experience I have had is with Windows. Every single Linux distro I have tried (Ubuntu, Debian, Manjaro, Fedora) has been inherenty more sluggish and painful to use than Windows for me (even if you were to ignore the initial setup problems with various hardware). Windows unactivated is actually free to use (just use a generic key from its official documentation) and most of its preloaded bloatware can be removed with single-use scripts.
- dijit 5y ago
  I guess it depends where you are? It’s so much of a surface area that it’s hard to be objective on all fronts, nothing is perfect and I could come up with 1000 ways that Linux is better or that macos is better or that windows is better. But it largely doesn’t matter. The parent postulated “why not use windows”. Well, I don’t like using windows but often I need to run software developed for windows. The same way that windows now has an emulation/virt layer for Linux, people want to use Linux programs from windows. I dont begrudge those users for using Linux software on windows or look down on them for that. Enjoying the Experience of the operating system you use is just so incredibly subjective… I recently had the mispleasure of reinstalling a windows machine and kept getting frustrated at the requirement to have a Microsoft account, drivers that didn’t seem to find my drives (?) but could with an Intel computer from the same brand (and similar model) of motherboard. I got frustrated when trying to use the win32 api because it expects WTF16, padded and null terminated strings but only passed as mutable pointers. And if you want to pass a strict to a function, you must pass a raw pointer. Which is inherently unsafe in rust. These things annoy me. Then: I tried to activate windows and saw the jaw dropping price. The price is more than a quarter of a reasonably priced home PC. No wonder the OEMs install bloatware to get the price down.

nu11ptr 5y ago

Many people (like myself) are very happy with Linux and have been for years. We have no interest in "auto rebooting for security patches", "treating file locking like it was security" or having "relevant ads" shown to us. However, there might be 1 or 2 Windows apps we wish to run, so things like this are nice. I assure you that my overall experience is not "more difficult" than Windows (the exact opposite in fact).

jpeloquin 5y ago

Because we need some Windows-only software and some Linux-only software. And the occasional Mac-only (or whatever else) software too. Life is less difficult when it all works in the same window manager and accesses the same filesystem, if that is possible.

mackrevinack 5y ago

not sure if you are trolling or not but i have around 60 programs that i use on linux and 1 program that only supports windows, so having to dual boot just so i could run 1 program would make things a lot more difficult

GhettoComputers 5y ago

Windows can run Linux in the subsystem and has a better Android emulator than Linux. Windows doesn’t run old windows programs as well as wine though, and if it hasn’t happened yet I can’t wait for the day you run legacy windows programs in the Linux subsystem through wine. You’re not wrong, using virtualization like a Windows VM in Linux is still using windows and is the best way for compatibility. Wine either works ok (mostly), needs lots of weird configuration to get it to intergrate into Linux or look ok, or it doesn’t work at all most of the time.