3 ms·

After having been on Linux for years (Debian server and Arch desktop), and MacOS for work. Having to use Windows is downright jarring. Every time I have to fix

by kjuulh 4y ago

After having been on Linux for years (Debian server and Arch desktop), and MacOS for work. Having to use Windows is downright jarring. Every time I have to fix something, or do regular tasks it become apparent how little windows is suited by itself for power users. As mentioned in the article, it can't get used to ads or tabloid news everywhere, it just feels wrong. I could spend some time removing them, but I'd rather not have to fight with Microsoft every time the product updates, I'd rather just avoid using it entirely. It is insane that you pay for a product, but is still served ads or tabloid news. When I use debian for my server usage, I have most of the essential tools available, but when I use windows I either have to install a whole bunch of tools, or make do with the lackluster experience. I dread having to fix a windows server installation. MacOS as well feels overrated, the UX has gotten noticeably worse over the years, unnecessary notifications that doesn't go away themselves, lackluster window management out of the box. MacOS is best for me when it exposes its unix roots so I can just get to work, the native stuff feels half baked at best. It does feel fast at least (m1 is a beast, by far the best laptop I've ever owned) Linux (Arch) feels like it puts the user in control, I've had less errors for my arch home-server (which does see quite a bit of traffic), it does have sharp edges but I always feel in control of what is going on, or at least have the tools to fix it. The desktop side is not quite as reliable, I've had to tinker with the bluetooth settings more than I'd like, that and audio (which may be a kde issue). Steam has been great, and I rarely have to jump into windows anymore. Linux (Debian) feels solid, it has been super reliable over the years. I may have become too used to the Linux way, which is why I am shitting a bit on Windows and MacOS, and those product definitely aren't for me. So take my rant with a grain of salt.

Helmut10001 4y ago
Windows + WSL works pretty well. I have all kinds of distros installed using Lxrunoffline, e.g. Debian Bullseye, Ubuntu etc. and WSL1 + WSL2 in parallel. I also start most of my Windows programs through WSL these days.
- kjuulh 4y ago
  It really is a blessing. I feel like I can in good conscience publish my tools as *Nix only these days, because I know that my windows users can just launch it through wsl without problems. Now I don't have to deal with msvc and so on. Super nice. That said I don't even know if it is a viable option for windows server, but probably not =D
DuckFeathers 4y ago
I had been using Linux and macOS for many years mostly because as a developer, you were not supposed to use Windows. In late 2019, when I got my new work computer, I decided to try it out. The Windows 10 experience was surprising. Imagine never having problems with wireless bluetooth, WiFi, graphics card etc. Imagine everything always working and never having to worry about updates breaking anything. That is what I got with Windows coming from Linux. Thankfully, I had given up on macOS a long time ago after a few years of use, because it is deliberately developer-hostile. Added bonus is the fact that I don't have to take the label of an Apple user... and it is not based on what non-Apple users think of Apple users. I couldn't care about it less had the devices worked for me. It is entirely based on how other Apple users talk to you when they think you are an Apple user. It always made me wonder how otherwise intelligent people can be like that about a brand. They act like they are "different" in a way that they should feel better about themselves because they bought this product. It somehow feels disgusting to be associated with them.
- kjuulh 4y ago
  I agree. Window especially was nice compared to the previous version (7 was great too). Wsl2 is a blessing. The drivers often just work. The sad thing is for desktop usage you often have to choose the drivers preferred way of updating. I.e. downloading graphics card updates, as opposed to through the package manager. I haven't investigated whether it is possible via. chocolatey yet. Linux desktop still feels quite grassroots. Especially as it is community effort to bring a lot of drivers to it. It is still quite sad that the Nvidia support is as poor as it is. I have only experienced the elitism or whatever you want to call it from non-tech friends and family. Apple's marketing definitely worked. Also the entire Intel saga was quite bad for their brand in regards to developers. At work some of us have been upgraded to m1, and others are still on intel the last few generations before m1 was published. It really is apparent how different those machines are. Intel macs are loud, overheat and unstable as all hell, while m1s are super solid for the most part. I wish I could buy a Linux laptop with the same specs and quality, I would pay a pretty penny for it, I have to give asahi a shot one of these days, if the company allows =D
- superhuzza 4y ago
  >Imagine never having problems with wireless bluetooth, WiFi, graphics card etc. Imagine everything always working and never having to worry about updates breaking anything. That's exactly how I felt when I started using MacOS after many years on Windows laptops!
M95D 4y ago
And Linux is different? Do you have ANY IDEEA how hard it is to prevent the installation of dbus or systemd?
- BenjiWiebe 4y ago
  It's also pretty hard to prevent installation of libc. It's part of the OS, like dbus and systemd. There are distros of Linux that don't use systemd. And I'm a power user who loves systemd. :)
  - M95D 4y ago
    Except when you say "Linux", it's just a kernel. Everything else is... not linux. It may be GNU, or a specific computer program that uses that kernel. The original post I replied to argued that Linux puts the user in control, unlike Windows or OSX/Apple. My point is that for the last 10 years or so, it has become increasingly difficult to avoid certain parts of a linux-based OS, such as systemd and dbus, that reduces user's control over the system in the name of convenience. I would like a Windows without scheduled tasks - no longer possible. In the same way as Windows does things on it's own, I would feel less in control if a NON-ROOT app could open a connection to a wireless network, or auto-mount a block device, or start a service/daemon, or change audio settings. It's less about how dbus or systemd is set up, but more about capabilities. I can't say much about how a Linux with those things installed could again be made secure, private and obedient to root user, because I never had them installed. That's not the point. I simply don't like what it CAN do. PS: I have 3 Linux systems. 2 of them run musl. It's actually A LOT easier to change glibc with something else than have a desktop without dbus.
- kjuulh 4y ago
  To be fair I don't mention those because I've never hard problems with them. That said there are definitely some architectural thing I don't agree with in regards to systems, but overall I am fine with it. I will also take the ini format over xml anyday. Though scripting may be more intuitive. The different libc backend is a bit of mess though and it can be quite cumbersome to get good compatibility of programs between libc variants.

by kjuulh 4y ago

Helmut10001 4y ago

Windows + WSL works pretty well. I have all kinds of distros installed using Lxrunoffline, e.g. Debian Bullseye, Ubuntu etc. and WSL1 + WSL2 in parallel. I also start most of my Windows programs through WSL these days.

kjuulh 4y ago
It really is a blessing. I feel like I can in good conscience publish my tools as *Nix only these days, because I know that my windows users can just launch it through wsl without problems. Now I don't have to deal with msvc and so on. Super nice. That said I don't even know if it is a viable option for windows server, but probably not =D

DuckFeathers 4y ago

I had been using Linux and macOS for many years mostly because as a developer, you were not supposed to use Windows. In late 2019, when I got my new work computer, I decided to try it out. The Windows 10 experience was surprising. Imagine never having problems with wireless bluetooth, WiFi, graphics card etc. Imagine everything always working and never having to worry about updates breaking anything. That is what I got with Windows coming from Linux. Thankfully, I had given up on macOS a long time ago after a few years of use, because it is deliberately developer-hostile. Added bonus is the fact that I don't have to take the label of an Apple user... and it is not based on what non-Apple users think of Apple users. I couldn't care about it less had the devices worked for me. It is entirely based on how other Apple users talk to you when they think you are an Apple user. It always made me wonder how otherwise intelligent people can be like that about a brand. They act like they are "different" in a way that they should feel better about themselves because they bought this product. It somehow feels disgusting to be associated with them.

kjuulh 4y ago
I agree. Window especially was nice compared to the previous version (7 was great too). Wsl2 is a blessing. The drivers often just work. The sad thing is for desktop usage you often have to choose the drivers preferred way of updating. I.e. downloading graphics card updates, as opposed to through the package manager. I haven't investigated whether it is possible via. chocolatey yet. Linux desktop still feels quite grassroots. Especially as it is community effort to bring a lot of drivers to it. It is still quite sad that the Nvidia support is as poor as it is. I have only experienced the elitism or whatever you want to call it from non-tech friends and family. Apple's marketing definitely worked. Also the entire Intel saga was quite bad for their brand in regards to developers. At work some of us have been upgraded to m1, and others are still on intel the last few generations before m1 was published. It really is apparent how different those machines are. Intel macs are loud, overheat and unstable as all hell, while m1s are super solid for the most part. I wish I could buy a Linux laptop with the same specs and quality, I would pay a pretty penny for it, I have to give asahi a shot one of these days, if the company allows =D
superhuzza 4y ago
>Imagine never having problems with wireless bluetooth, WiFi, graphics card etc. Imagine everything always working and never having to worry about updates breaking anything. That's exactly how I felt when I started using MacOS after many years on Windows laptops!

M95D 4y ago

And Linux is different? Do you have ANY IDEEA how hard it is to prevent the installation of dbus or systemd?

BenjiWiebe 4y ago
It's also pretty hard to prevent installation of libc. It's part of the OS, like dbus and systemd. There are distros of Linux that don't use systemd. And I'm a power user who loves systemd. :)
- M95D 4y ago
  Except when you say "Linux", it's just a kernel. Everything else is... not linux. It may be GNU, or a specific computer program that uses that kernel. The original post I replied to argued that Linux puts the user in control, unlike Windows or OSX/Apple. My point is that for the last 10 years or so, it has become increasingly difficult to avoid certain parts of a linux-based OS, such as systemd and dbus, that reduces user's control over the system in the name of convenience. I would like a Windows without scheduled tasks - no longer possible. In the same way as Windows does things on it's own, I would feel less in control if a NON-ROOT app could open a connection to a wireless network, or auto-mount a block device, or start a service/daemon, or change audio settings. It's less about how dbus or systemd is set up, but more about capabilities. I can't say much about how a Linux with those things installed could again be made secure, private and obedient to root user, because I never had them installed. That's not the point. I simply don't like what it CAN do. PS: I have 3 Linux systems. 2 of them run musl. It's actually A LOT easier to change glibc with something else than have a desktop without dbus.
kjuulh 4y ago
To be fair I don't mention those because I've never hard problems with them. That said there are definitely some architectural thing I don't agree with in regards to systems, but overall I am fine with it. I will also take the ini format over xml anyday. Though scripting may be more intuitive. The different libc backend is a bit of mess though and it can be quite cumbersome to get good compatibility of programs between libc variants.