New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
I could not agree more. When I run linux (well, BSD, but lets not confuse the younglings) on my workstation I still use Enlightenment. It's old as f*ck, has absolutely zero cool "features" but its rock solid and it does everything I need it to do, which is launch my applications and then stay out of the way.
windows 11 looks like Linux desktop now, so stopped using linux.
Which one? Since there are about a dozen DE. They all look the same, correct?
Does anyone remember the bug in Windows 95 and Windows 98 that caused Windows to crash after 49.7 days of running? (It was a timer overflow error.)
It took four years to find that bug. Most people assume that it took so long to find the bug because very few Windows 9x systems would actually run 49.7 days without crashing for some other reason first.
... and then there was a running joke that Microsoft considered selling advertising space on the Blue Screen of Death (BSoD) because it appeared so often.
kubuntu. yeah initially it was fun and all, but now i just find it a hassle to be dual booting yet selecting windows mostly. there's still slight difference in UI fluidity on a current generation PC.
back when i had a discrete GPU, display drivers broke from time to time between updates.
i mean in terms of privacy, if you have an iOS/android phone, ditching windows probably not gonna do much in that department.
The expected use case was that people would reboot at least once a week (if not daily). It was not intended or expected to run a long uptime, that's what servers are for.
ubuntu dde
I would not have believed it if I had not found it for myself. Here is a document from Microsoft's website. It dates to 2015:
https://social.technet.microsoft.com/wiki/contents/articles/30572.windows-how-to-educate-your-users-to-regularly-restart-their-pcs.aspx
While searching for sources, I found various references to automating reboots or reminders in Windows. In addition, I found general articles centered around "It's a good idea to reboot your computer regularly ...". Windows predominated when an operating system was mentioned. Even some of the generic articles included details for rebooting Windows without mentioning other platforms. I found very little that was specific to Linux or Mac.
I had an entire career in tech and never heard of this before. Ya' learn something new every day. Thanks.
Win 10 +. Ubuntu 22 (dual boot)
I tried to run popOS but had sleep/standby issues. Ended up going back to windows and use Kasm for all my Linux needs.
I tried popOS too, because I love gnome, to be honest it's not a great distro, I found it buggy for my use case and level of customisation. I alos found battery life was almost 50% less then i get on Arch as standard. I think the issues are probably because it's based on Ubuntu, which has seen better days. Canonical seem to have just been riding a wave, and it died a while ago along with snaps and zfs. Ubuntu no longer does anything better than the competition.
Ubuntu had it's place once but now i would only use it for a server, Id still use it over windows for home use though, if there were no other Linux distros available.
same goes for all it's derivatives popOS, mint etc. Canonical don't seem to want the best solutions, they seem to want a Canonical linux. for example, not using BTRFS as default, it really is the best file system out there. Maybe even Debian will use it as the default filesystem in the future (probs not for the bookworm release). Instant snapshots and restore function. can even switch distos without need to dual boot.
Just my opinion, but pure Debian, Arch based or Fedora based is all i would use for desktop, although i would like to try openSUSE one day too.
I knew there are a lot of Ubuntu, Mint, and popOS fans, so sorry if i ruffled any feathers here.
All tho I use windows as my main pc but I am still a diehard fan of linux
I used to think the same. Workstations are for working 8 hours a day.
The advent of windows 2000 changed my optics. I did not manage to convince people at work to use linux, even those who only needed basic DOS tools for their work. Open Office, Thunderbird, yes, here and there. Firefox? Oh, yes, was a smash hit, but Linux, no.
After windows 2000 I was no longer telling people who's computer crashed with win 9x making them lose their work to install linux, I offered windows 2000 instead. They agreed and never looked back.
Today I also have to admit that Windows travelled far from win 9x/Millenium, I am only rebooting my main laptop once a month or so and I run tons of shit. Last time I rebooted because Opera spawned 100+ processes and I was too lazy to terminate them, a reboot was a faster solution.
In the times of win 9x I was using linux for everything except games which were on a separate desktop, now I use Windows as my main workhorse, just never for a server. I have never ever purchased a windows server license, I did use VPSes or trials to test from time to time (especially I have tested Hyper-V extensively), but never thought that is worth it. Linux is faster, more modular, more secure and when it fails it rarely does so mysteriously, requiring you to browse hundreds of pages of forums to find a similar case.
Windows
I'm forced into using Windows on my work laptop, but for my personal laptop and PC, I run Linux. Right now my laptop is Kubuntu but I'm looking to move to an Arch-based distro. I used to run Manjaro, but I'm not a fan. My PC runs Fedora.
I like Linux for servers, but when it comes to desktop there is just no competition. I've tried it, and maybe it's good for weak hardware that doesn't run Windows well, but you just don't get that nice polished feel you do with Windows
Was also sticking with 10 because I missed the ability to ungroup taskbar icons and show window names, but apparently they readded that feature now so I'll upgrade soon
Windows 10 + Ubuntu 18
I use Windows but once used Lubuntu before
Windows is currently the best Desktop OS for me. Unless you have low spec, windows is the way to go. Windows can emulate linux better than linux can emulate windows. It can even emulate Android better than Linux emulate Android, despite Linux has more similarity to Android than Windows.
Same for me
Windows is like China, powerful, well polished and slick but you are being watched, and the rules are quite rigid.
Are you sure you're talking about emulation in windows / linux and not compatibility layers or nested virtual machines?
Ive not used a windows emulator for Linux or vice versa, just used windows compatibility layers on Linux, wine / proton.
Are you referring to WSL on windows? Not used it but seen some positive reviews. It runs the Linux terminal well and is apparently runs just as fast if not faster, but you can't control everything as there is no Systemd or equivalent. As far I i understood the only reason to use it is for people that need a linux terminal in a windows environment for productivity. That's as far as I know , but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong here. As for Linux native games and 3D stuff in WSL, it's miles behind proton in the reverse scenario, but then again why would you want to run linux games, as 99.9% of all games are windows native anyway.
As for android, what did you base this on can you send a link? I'm using waydroid on linux and it runs in a container, just need android kernel binder headers, it feels like it's native. Where as Windows needs to emulate the android/linux kernel as far as I know.
Debian on arm, Debian for servers and Debian for the desktop. I keep one Windows box for gaming.
so... you're a Debian man.
WSL is emulation, it's a vm. The same as android. It's even called android subsystem. Also google play games is official in windows. The apps both linux and android feel like a native apps.
in linux if you want to run windows you have to boot a vm, wait it for boot, it will take a permanent huge chunk of your ram. you need to shut it down when finished, etc etc.
This thing doesn't happen in wsl.
Windows can emulate linux better than linux can emulate windows. This is an indisputable fact. Because linux can pretty much run anywhere.
Also consumer hardware support in windows is way better than linux. Doesn't matter how obscure or weird or no named brand create something. They will always come with driver for windows. Macos is second. Linux is pretty much none.
@yokowasis
Are you talking about running a windows desktop? Because, I really don't see any use case for this. Why would any linux user want to use a windows desktop? If you really need that then yes you need a VM.
But if you are just running windows software you don't need a VM. You simply run a compatibility layer, wine or proton, no VM is used. It doesn't use a VM or emulation. I don't even know of a windows emulator for linux.
Also with btrfs you can change your distros instantly, no need to dual boot.
As for driver support, everything works out of the box, on all distro's ive tried on my laptop and other PC. The only issue I had was with Debian, but you just need to download the non-free firmware version and that works too.
Also Linux is not packed with spyware as almost all distros are FOSS.
I am a hardcore Linux server user/admin/developer but all my desktop and laptop PCs run Windows. Totally different use cases. I can't imagine using Linux for desktop stuff just like I can't imagine using Windows for server stuff. I've tried doing both and they suck at it imo.
Yer Windows i great as a desktop, never tried it as a server, wouldn't know where to start.
I get your feelings, but I also get the feeling most people that say Linux sucks as a desktop, generally haven't tried it other than maybe a live USB for 30 mins. Would be good to know what really sucks about it. I honestly think it's just down to familiarity with windows in most cases.
Based on the answers so far in the tread, it really does seem like Windows is just what they are used to. It's the same as if I were to use macOS, loads of people swear by it, but I would say it sucks.
The only valid argument for windows in imo is that there is some software that just won't run on Linux, and no viable alternative.
Linux is faster than windows in the majority of scenarios, only place windows has a noticeable the edge is gaming. Specifically windows DirectX games on windows vs windows DirectX games on Linux using proton where windows has about 5-10% FPS advantage. That's obviously going yo be the case though, because Linux has to translate all DX to OpenGL or Vulkan. Games that have a native Linux and native Windows version, generally Linux has the edge.
GIMP is a good example it's takes 3 seconds on my Ryzen laptop in Arch Linux to open. It's used to take over 30 on Windows 10. Also a viable argument that wifi runs faster on Linux, battery last longer ect.
That is not fair. Libre office, GIMP were made for linux. Maybe should include loading a windows game as well...
Battery lasting longer when running linux on a laptop? In my experience, windows usually wins. That said, all the laptops I use run linux...