This person just wrote like 1,000 words describing all the activities that they think are easier to do on Windows versus Linux and the first sentence of your comment is “I don't know why folks think Windows is easier to maintain than Linux.”
Like, is there some alternative format you need it explained to you in?
> Every one of these posts boils down to "I wanted to play Fortnite, now I can, that makes me happy."
Dude, what?
Like ok, just imagine for a second, take something you do every day, maybe reading HN, and pretend that this just simply stopped working on Linux. How would that make you feel? Frustrated? Annoyed? Maybe you would, I don’t know, look for alternative software which would enable you to do the things you want to do?
> This person just wrote like 1,000 words describing all the activities that they think are easier to do on Windows
Keeping a Windows machine updated is a nuisance. You can do it manually or leave Windows to do it by itself. It's less of a nuisance than it used to be, but, still, you'll find the machine rebooting for no good reason from time to time because updates can't be applied while running, because the file system can't rename/delete/move a file that's open. Programs downloaded from the app store (the "package manager") will, sometimes, restart without warning, for the very same reasons.
Installing software that's not in the app store involves chasing down the company's website, navigating it, finding the appropriate executable, and running it. Sometimes it is not happy with the power to overwrite and erase all your files, it also wants to be able to do that with all files on the machine, and asks for administrative permissions, which, usually people grant them.
Then you are happy until your flow state is interrupted by the program asking to download an update, because each program manages its own updates, and can't install updates while the program is running, because the toy file system it uses can't do anything with open files. And all the DLLs the program uses are open.
If you are happy with all that, there is gaming, which is a nice thing Windows has that Linux isn't great at. I brought a console. It's simpler and more convenient. Also makes sense - my computer is my workstation and the console is my PlayStation. Even though it's not a PlayStation.
I'd argue that keeping Linux updated is at least as much of a nuisance.
Who is keeping a Linux machine updated without regular restarts? I've never heard of that.
Yeah, many applications on Windows update themselves. I've never seen one restart without warning, though I also don't use the windows "app store".
Meanwhile, on Linux, you often do have a package manager with packages available for a bunch of third-party software. Except the version is often years out of date. If you'd like a more recent version, the instructions for that (on the project website) are usually either to run a bunch of CLI commands to install and approve keys for another external package source, or pipe a command from a website into a root shell.
And then sometimes you end up with 20 of those extra package sources. And one randomly breaks, and you have to do a bunch of debugging to figure out why and fix it.
And then some package may either fail to initially install, or an update fail to install, due to some bug or config error, and you're stuck until you can figure out why.
> Who is keeping a Linux machine updated without regular restarts? I've never heard of that.
You only need to restart when the kernel has a security update, and you can do it at your own convenience. Same happens with some fundamental components (such and Gnome session manager). My Fedora box usually has a 30 day-ish uptime. The Ubuntu laptop a little less because of its usage pattern, but it signals when a restart would be a good idea, and leaves the decision to me. When it’s time, shutting down and restarting is just a couple seconds. Fedora is more cautious and does updates on startup or shutdown, and never automatically.
A distro is a curated work. All the bits and pieces are known to work well together. The price is that you might get behind the latest and greatest from time to time. If you are using 20 PPAs or package sources with varying levels of testing, you shouldn’t blame the distro for your self-inflicted wounds. Unless you actually know very well what you’re doing, use the packaged versions. I actually know what I’m doing and I use the packaged versions, because I’m paid to work, not to debug my setup.
> And then some package may either fail to initially install
I had experiences like that with Debian Sid. As is well known to anyone familiar with the Toy Story universe, Sid breaks your toys. I’ve never seen anything like that with Debian testing, Ubuntu, RHEL/Centos/Fedora in the past 20 years or so. But I never actively tried to break the package system by having 20 different sources for stuff.
I think you’re missing the point here. I agree Windows can be a pain.
What this person essentially did was describe why their workflow is the best for them. You responded by saying “I don’t understand why people like things that work for them” and then described the reasons that you like your workflow and how it is more comfortable for you. Do you not realize that you are doing the same thing? You are saying you “don’t understand” this person who is doing exactly what you are doing, solving the same puzzle and just arriving at different answers.
It’s not about which OS is better, I regularly use like four different OS for work and play, I get they all have strengths and weaknesses. It’s about the complete and total inability of hardcore Linux desktop users to empathize with anyone who disagrees with them. Which happens to be something like 95% of computer users.
This is one reason why I really appreciate people like Nate Graham and his work on KDE, he seems quite invested in making KDE polished and usable for everyone, not just Linux dweebs like us.
It works for them, that's not up for debate. That doesn't mean it works for anyone else, or even for most people (most people endure Windows either for lack of options, or for not knowing anything better). Most people also don't think about their operating systems, and just use whatever comes with the computer. It's not they don't know of better options - they actually don't care and think life is too short to bother with things we passionately debate.
> It’s about the complete and total inability of hardcore Linux desktop users to empathize with anyone who disagrees with them.
I empathize. I also disagree with their analysis. Windows is still an objectively terrible OS and people just learned to live with all its misfeatures.
I think the parent comment is right, no matter how many words the poster used to describe his problems. This is a key take:
> I was pretty hardcore with Linux. I’ve gone through countless distributions, preaching Linux as the good news to everyone.
This guy complains that Windows is easier after self-inflicting unwanted experimentation instead of staying with something stable that works, and ironing whatever quirks are left. Experimentation was not aligned with his needs.
Furthermore, it was gaming indeed. It's always gaming.
Like, is there some alternative format you need it explained to you in?
> Every one of these posts boils down to "I wanted to play Fortnite, now I can, that makes me happy."
Dude, what?
Like ok, just imagine for a second, take something you do every day, maybe reading HN, and pretend that this just simply stopped working on Linux. How would that make you feel? Frustrated? Annoyed? Maybe you would, I don’t know, look for alternative software which would enable you to do the things you want to do?