8 ms·

Windows is pretty much alive and kicking. The best it has been since Windows XP. WSL2, running Linux on Windows, VS Code, VS 2022, it's all good. Windows 11 i

Windows is pretty much alive and kicking. The best it has been since Windows XP. WSL2, running Linux on Windows, VS Code, VS 2022, it's all good. Windows 11 is VERY solid and you can play lots of games on it too :) I am dead serious. I have been using Windows since 3, using betas of Microsoft products since Longhorn - right now, Windows is reaching it's PEAK in terms of performance, ecosystem. Sure, they will need 2-3 more UI/UX iterations, but who cares - I use the terminal, File Explorer, Visual Studio 2022, Office apps and Outlook :D

kelnos 5y ago
I started running Windows back with version 3 as well, but gave up after 2000. I won't run an OS that I can't trust, and and OS that pulls the kind of thing that happened to OP is not one that I can trust. I don't care how "solid" or performant it is. And I don't need WSL2 when I can just run Linux directly.
rbanffy 5y ago
> WSL2, running Linux on Windows, VS Code, VS 2022, it's all good. As someone who also has a Linux desktop and laptops in addition to the Windows machine, WSL is terrible next to the real thing. Unless you need software that only runs on Windows, I advise against using it as a reason to stay on Windows.
- SantiagoElf 5y ago
  I have been using Linux since Redhat 6.2 back in 1998. I have had my share of xconfig edits, bash scripts, etc explorations. I am now reaching 36, I just like 'things that work' - like Windows. Windows works with all my hardware, with all my 7 laptops, with all my 2 towers, I can install Visual Studio 2022 on it, I can install Ubuntu in WSL2 and I can play Dota2/Civ/Baldur's Gate/Warhammer 40k Insquisitor Martyr/listen to Spotify/debugging/deploying to Azure/writing an email/writing a Presentation in Power Point. And then go back to my family - because not worrying about Wayland, that new driver or that new update or "that new thing "- suprsingly leaves a lot of time that you can spend with your family :) And of course I am using the .NET stack with Angular- all smooth, all good, no hassle, just smooth sailing :)
  - square_usual 5y ago
    It's not 1998 any more. Nobody worries about their linux setup unless they want to. My pop os tower has been set up and forget for years now.
    - SantiagoElf 5y ago
      - kelnos 5y ago
        > That's the issue with Linux desktop users - they are fanatics and obsessed with their 'freedom of choice'... taking 2-3 hours per week to perfect their desktop with the perfect background and then post it on some Linux community site. Oh please, that's absurd. I probably spend 2-3 hours per year cumulatively on system maintenance tasks, and the rest of the time I get my work and play done. > Spending more time on forums defending their 'right choice' that doing actual work Pretty sure that's what you're doing right now. I don't think Linux is right for everyone, but your criticisms don't make sense. You're not even criticizing the platform itself, you're making up weird things about the people who use it, which kinda says a lot about you right there. > Let's move on. Been there, done that, moved on from Windows, never looking back.
      - rbanffy 5y ago
        > they are fanatics and obsessed with their 'freedom of choice', by using desktop environments that mimic the same thing they migrated from :) Have you ever met a Linux user in person? I ask you because most Linux users I know just run whatever came with their distro and, when unhappy, change distro. I'm running both Fedora and Ubuntu and I'm quite happy with both. The biggest change was to use the Gnome wallpaper because I didn't really like the Ubuntu one. My Fedora laptop is mostly vanilla. > Spending more time on forums defending their 'right choice' that doing actual work ;) We just like to correct people who write some baseless criticism and attacks on our professional attitudes, because, you know, these kind of comment is not really nice. Or professional. Or even correct. > Been there done that. Windows just works. Let's move on. Been there, done that, Linux just works better, and keeps working. Let's move on.
- misja111 5y ago
  Of course WSL2 can never be as good as running Linux natively. But as someone who needs software that runs on Windows, I like WSL2 a lot. For me the choice was native Linux + Wine or native Windows with WSL2. I have tried both, and I have to say that the WSL2 option runs much better in terms of both performance and stability.
  - rbanffy 5y ago
    > But as someone who needs software that runs on Windows It boils down to which OS you want to be the "second-class citizen" on your machine. With Wine, it's Windows. With WSL, it's Linux.
    - cesarb 5y ago
      > It boils down to which OS you want to be the "second-class citizen" on your machine. With Wine, it's Windows. With WSL, it's Linux. That equivalence is only valid for WSL1. Since WSL2 runs the real Linux kernel on a VM, the equivalent for it on Linux would be running Windows on a VM.
      - rbanffy 5y ago
        > the equivalent for it on Linux would be running Windows on a VM. Not quite. When Windows is on a VM, you mostly run only Windows-specific software on it. Within the VM, everything works mostly flawlessly. Most platform-neutral software will be running on the Linux side, which makes accessing data from the Linux environment a non-issue. And don't even get me started on Windows-1252 and CRLF line endings. WSL2 still has some issues with VPN software and my company doesn't support it on my corporate Windows laptop.
- Octabrain 5y ago
  > ...WSL is terrible next to the real thing... I am genuinely interested on knowing your reasons for saying WSL is terrible. Just for clarification, I'm a Linux/MacOS user but the times I've had to use WSL in the past whether experimenting at home or in some companies where I was force to use Windows, I though it is actually one of the most decent things Microsoft has created on its entire existence. It is easy to enable, to operate, it integrates well with the network stack of Windows (kubectl port-forwarding or docker run -p8000:80 works out of the box) it performs very decently (with exceptions on IO filesystem operations) etc.
  - rbanffy 5y ago
    > I am genuinely interested on knowing your reasons for saying WSL is terrible. It's just that it's poorly integrated with the host environment (because there is a host environment). On Linux and Macs, the Unix side is the machine itself. With WSL1, you have a Windows kernel pretending to be a Linux one (I kind of prefer this approach) but my home folder is not my Windows home folder, but terminal still opens the Windows home anyway. On WSL2 (which I can't use on my corporate laptop because the VPN software breaks something in DNS and networking I haven't had the time to debug) the Windows side needs a network share to get access to the WSL environment (which is not present until the environment starts - and there are other side effects whether WSL starts before the VPN or after). A Linux box (or Mac) is a so much simpler (to understand what happens) Unix environment it's not even funny. Having said that, when you overcome those impedance mismatches, it mostly works for the typical use cases. Like you mentioned, Docker works (I need to set a DOCKER_HOST variable to point to the Windows box). And Windows Terminal is excellent (double height and width chars are still missing, but they have overline support).
    - Dylan16807 5y ago
      Sorry about the VPN trouble (which may or may not be WSL's fault) but having to stick "cd ~" in .bashrc and not liking network drives isn't enough to get close to "terrible".
      - rbanffy 5y ago
- dudewritingcode 5y ago
  I own a XPS 9500 I can tell you that even though I have dual boot I use windows and wsl2. Ubuntu is worse than wsl2 at running exactly same stuff, even the X apps through Vcxsrv are snappier on Windows compared to Ubuntu. To that, add lack of features in Linux apps, Discord lack of Krisp for example, poor cpu usage for videos in and outside browser, really bad BT, poor wireless performance and others. I am a power user and I don't like windows but it's just better any way you look at it, apart from customization. However, even there it starts to catch up, with apps like PowerToys.
  - rbanffy 5y ago
    Let me guess: Nvidia graphics?
- dboreham 5y ago
  Curious: in what way is WSL terrible? I've been using it daily for several years so wondering what I'm missing.
smackeyacky 5y ago
The tech that pushed me off windows on my dev machines was WSL2. My productivity lifted so much I started to wonder why I was using Windows at all for .NET development. Did the switch to debian a couple of months ago. First two days was weird, after that the only thing I use Windows 11 for is gaming, and Lutris is making me think twice about that too.
127 5y ago
Yes, the bait in the hook is definitely more delicious.
CodeArtisan 5y ago
I find Windows 11 to be the most bloated of all windows version with such stuff as Microsoft store, xbox app, cortana, or security center getting nastier on the user; You turn them off in the settings panel but they still keep running in the background. Now you have to fiddle with obscure registry variables, manually turn off services, ... to get rid of them.
hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
> WSL2, running Linux on Windows, VS Code, VS 2022, it's all good. Actually, I decided to downgrade to WSL from WSL2. I often need to do some quick work in a Linux environment, and sometimes this even involves some files on my Windows machine, so WSL comes in handy. The problem is, WSL2 startup time is terribly long when compared to WSL. With WSL, i type wsl and a second later I run a couple of commands. With WSL2, once it has finally started, I already forgot what I wanted to do.
- baq 5y ago
  I've got a wsl2 shell in startup and never close it; it consumes relatively little memory (<1GB) and 0% cpu when idle.
hutzlibu 5y ago
"The best it has been since Windows XP ... it's all good" As far as I remember, XP had no tracking and advertisement build in by default. And it left control on when to update and when to invoke antivirus with you. Is this really all good to you? Or are you so deep invested in windows, that you can just disable them? Because I surely can disable most of that shit, too - but it takes a while and one update later it can be all back.
pcdoodle 5y ago
I disagree. This is the dark ages for windows, basic users and power users alike.
throw8932894 5y ago
Sure. Trivial stuff like disabling automated updates on Linux takes single command. On Windows you have to find tutorials on some shady sites, dig into binary registry. And a few months latter this settings gets reversed anyway, because Microsoft knows better. Last solid Windows very Win Server 2003. PS: I prefer to update once a month in controlled mode.
cies 5y ago
> I am dead serious. Thanks for adding this, as I thought you made a joke. Ads, spyware, NSA backdoors, who still trusts them? Also alternatives are just too readily available these days.
matheusmoreira 5y ago
This user hostile mess is peak Windows? At least back then Microsoft had backwards compatibility as a core value.
cerved 5y ago
I'd say it's pretty far from all good. WSL2 has major IO issues outside of ext4, which is detrimental. It also doesn't support mounting NFS. It doesn't have systemd so lots of stuff doesn't work in a normal way. To get a terminal that doesn't f*#& up you need to switch code page to utf-8. Visual studio is almost as garbase as SSMS. Windows is a pain

kelnos 5y ago

I started running Windows back with version 3 as well, but gave up after 2000. I won't run an OS that I can't trust, and and OS that pulls the kind of thing that happened to OP is not one that I can trust. I don't care how "solid" or performant it is. And I don't need WSL2 when I can just run Linux directly.

rbanffy 5y ago

> WSL2, running Linux on Windows, VS Code, VS 2022, it's all good. As someone who also has a Linux desktop and laptops in addition to the Windows machine, WSL is terrible next to the real thing. Unless you need software that only runs on Windows, I advise against using it as a reason to stay on Windows.

SantiagoElf 5y ago
I have been using Linux since Redhat 6.2 back in 1998. I have had my share of xconfig edits, bash scripts, etc explorations. I am now reaching 36, I just like 'things that work' - like Windows. Windows works with all my hardware, with all my 7 laptops, with all my 2 towers, I can install Visual Studio 2022 on it, I can install Ubuntu in WSL2 and I can play Dota2/Civ/Baldur's Gate/Warhammer 40k Insquisitor Martyr/listen to Spotify/debugging/deploying to Azure/writing an email/writing a Presentation in Power Point. And then go back to my family - because not worrying about Wayland, that new driver or that new update or "that new thing "- suprsingly leaves a lot of time that you can spend with your family :) And of course I am using the .NET stack with Angular- all smooth, all good, no hassle, just smooth sailing :)
- square_usual 5y ago
  It's not 1998 any more. Nobody worries about their linux setup unless they want to. My pop os tower has been set up and forget for years now.
  - SantiagoElf 5y ago
    - kelnos 5y ago
      > That's the issue with Linux desktop users - they are fanatics and obsessed with their 'freedom of choice'... taking 2-3 hours per week to perfect their desktop with the perfect background and then post it on some Linux community site. Oh please, that's absurd. I probably spend 2-3 hours per year cumulatively on system maintenance tasks, and the rest of the time I get my work and play done. > Spending more time on forums defending their 'right choice' that doing actual work Pretty sure that's what you're doing right now. I don't think Linux is right for everyone, but your criticisms don't make sense. You're not even criticizing the platform itself, you're making up weird things about the people who use it, which kinda says a lot about you right there. > Let's move on. Been there, done that, moved on from Windows, never looking back.
    - rbanffy 5y ago
      > they are fanatics and obsessed with their 'freedom of choice', by using desktop environments that mimic the same thing they migrated from :) Have you ever met a Linux user in person? I ask you because most Linux users I know just run whatever came with their distro and, when unhappy, change distro. I'm running both Fedora and Ubuntu and I'm quite happy with both. The biggest change was to use the Gnome wallpaper because I didn't really like the Ubuntu one. My Fedora laptop is mostly vanilla. > Spending more time on forums defending their 'right choice' that doing actual work ;) We just like to correct people who write some baseless criticism and attacks on our professional attitudes, because, you know, these kind of comment is not really nice. Or professional. Or even correct. > Been there done that. Windows just works. Let's move on. Been there, done that, Linux just works better, and keeps working. Let's move on.
misja111 5y ago
Of course WSL2 can never be as good as running Linux natively. But as someone who needs software that runs on Windows, I like WSL2 a lot. For me the choice was native Linux + Wine or native Windows with WSL2. I have tried both, and I have to say that the WSL2 option runs much better in terms of both performance and stability.
- rbanffy 5y ago
  > But as someone who needs software that runs on Windows It boils down to which OS you want to be the "second-class citizen" on your machine. With Wine, it's Windows. With WSL, it's Linux.
  - cesarb 5y ago
    > It boils down to which OS you want to be the "second-class citizen" on your machine. With Wine, it's Windows. With WSL, it's Linux. That equivalence is only valid for WSL1. Since WSL2 runs the real Linux kernel on a VM, the equivalent for it on Linux would be running Windows on a VM.
    - rbanffy 5y ago
      > the equivalent for it on Linux would be running Windows on a VM. Not quite. When Windows is on a VM, you mostly run only Windows-specific software on it. Within the VM, everything works mostly flawlessly. Most platform-neutral software will be running on the Linux side, which makes accessing data from the Linux environment a non-issue. And don't even get me started on Windows-1252 and CRLF line endings. WSL2 still has some issues with VPN software and my company doesn't support it on my corporate Windows laptop.
Octabrain 5y ago
> ...WSL is terrible next to the real thing... I am genuinely interested on knowing your reasons for saying WSL is terrible. Just for clarification, I'm a Linux/MacOS user but the times I've had to use WSL in the past whether experimenting at home or in some companies where I was force to use Windows, I though it is actually one of the most decent things Microsoft has created on its entire existence. It is easy to enable, to operate, it integrates well with the network stack of Windows (kubectl port-forwarding or docker run -p8000:80 works out of the box) it performs very decently (with exceptions on IO filesystem operations) etc.
- rbanffy 5y ago
  > I am genuinely interested on knowing your reasons for saying WSL is terrible. It's just that it's poorly integrated with the host environment (because there is a host environment). On Linux and Macs, the Unix side is the machine itself. With WSL1, you have a Windows kernel pretending to be a Linux one (I kind of prefer this approach) but my home folder is not my Windows home folder, but terminal still opens the Windows home anyway. On WSL2 (which I can't use on my corporate laptop because the VPN software breaks something in DNS and networking I haven't had the time to debug) the Windows side needs a network share to get access to the WSL environment (which is not present until the environment starts - and there are other side effects whether WSL starts before the VPN or after). A Linux box (or Mac) is a so much simpler (to understand what happens) Unix environment it's not even funny. Having said that, when you overcome those impedance mismatches, it mostly works for the typical use cases. Like you mentioned, Docker works (I need to set a DOCKER_HOST variable to point to the Windows box). And Windows Terminal is excellent (double height and width chars are still missing, but they have overline support).
  - Dylan16807 5y ago
    Sorry about the VPN trouble (which may or may not be WSL's fault) but having to stick "cd ~" in .bashrc and not liking network drives isn't enough to get close to "terrible".
    - rbanffy 5y ago
dudewritingcode 5y ago
I own a XPS 9500 I can tell you that even though I have dual boot I use windows and wsl2. Ubuntu is worse than wsl2 at running exactly same stuff, even the X apps through Vcxsrv are snappier on Windows compared to Ubuntu. To that, add lack of features in Linux apps, Discord lack of Krisp for example, poor cpu usage for videos in and outside browser, really bad BT, poor wireless performance and others. I am a power user and I don't like windows but it's just better any way you look at it, apart from customization. However, even there it starts to catch up, with apps like PowerToys.
- rbanffy 5y ago
  Let me guess: Nvidia graphics?
dboreham 5y ago
Curious: in what way is WSL terrible? I've been using it daily for several years so wondering what I'm missing.

smackeyacky 5y ago

The tech that pushed me off windows on my dev machines was WSL2. My productivity lifted so much I started to wonder why I was using Windows at all for .NET development. Did the switch to debian a couple of months ago. First two days was weird, after that the only thing I use Windows 11 for is gaming, and Lutris is making me think twice about that too.

127 5y ago

Yes, the bait in the hook is definitely more delicious.

CodeArtisan 5y ago

I find Windows 11 to be the most bloated of all windows version with such stuff as Microsoft store, xbox app, cortana, or security center getting nastier on the user; You turn them off in the settings panel but they still keep running in the background. Now you have to fiddle with obscure registry variables, manually turn off services, ... to get rid of them.

hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago

> WSL2, running Linux on Windows, VS Code, VS 2022, it's all good. Actually, I decided to downgrade to WSL from WSL2. I often need to do some quick work in a Linux environment, and sometimes this even involves some files on my Windows machine, so WSL comes in handy. The problem is, WSL2 startup time is terribly long when compared to WSL. With WSL, i type wsl and a second later I run a couple of commands. With WSL2, once it has finally started, I already forgot what I wanted to do.

baq 5y ago
I've got a wsl2 shell in startup and never close it; it consumes relatively little memory (<1GB) and 0% cpu when idle.

hutzlibu 5y ago

"The best it has been since Windows XP ... it's all good" As far as I remember, XP had no tracking and advertisement build in by default. And it left control on when to update and when to invoke antivirus with you. Is this really all good to you? Or are you so deep invested in windows, that you can just disable them? Because I surely can disable most of that shit, too - but it takes a while and one update later it can be all back.

pcdoodle 5y ago

I disagree. This is the dark ages for windows, basic users and power users alike.

throw8932894 5y ago

Sure. Trivial stuff like disabling automated updates on Linux takes single command. On Windows you have to find tutorials on some shady sites, dig into binary registry. And a few months latter this settings gets reversed anyway, because Microsoft knows better. Last solid Windows very Win Server 2003. PS: I prefer to update once a month in controlled mode.

cies 5y ago

> I am dead serious. Thanks for adding this, as I thought you made a joke. Ads, spyware, NSA backdoors, who still trusts them? Also alternatives are just too readily available these days.

matheusmoreira 5y ago

This user hostile mess is peak Windows? At least back then Microsoft had backwards compatibility as a core value.

cerved 5y ago

I'd say it's pretty far from all good. WSL2 has major IO issues outside of ext4, which is detrimental. It also doesn't support mounting NFS. It doesn't have systemd so lots of stuff doesn't work in a normal way. To get a terminal that doesn't f*#& up you need to switch code page to utf-8. Visual studio is almost as garbase as SSMS. Windows is a pain