Thinking About Windows 10 Alternatives

[boomslang06]

Who does serious work with Adobe?

oh i'm sorry let me replace adobe with Avid

 

[BulletDust]

I don't expect phones or tablets are going to replace that work on their own screens though.

There is nothing at all stopping someone from casting their phone screen right now. All it is going to take for the switch to happen will be one vender like say Samsung (who also sells computer monitors) to add wireless casting to a line of monitors and open source the standard. They build the tech into their phones from their out. At that point they sell the full sized bluetooth keyboard... and have the phone switch to a "desktop" mode when its in cast mode.

They market that product right... and if they convince other monitor and television manufacturers to include the tech. I wouldn't think it would take more then a generation or two of phones shipping with that for the majority of joe averages to be sold. As long as the mobile hardware is fast enough to make things smooth for things like Google Docs ect.

I don't think this is something they will push this generation of phone hardware... but in the next few cycles everything will be in place hardware wise. Even if it involves a cheap chromecast type adapter instead of being build in... it still might sell.

ARM processors are a great mobile processor, from a power efficiency perspective nothing can touch them. But from an outright performance perspective they still have a bit of catching up to do before they can really compete with x64.

What you're proposing may well happen, but I think we're a bit away from that just yet. Right now, I'm personally happy to keep mobile and desktop platforms segregated and find that I have enough continuity between devices to make mobile devices without a doubt useful while reserving my desktop PC for the more serious tasks.

 

[BulletDust]

When I was looking into this last summer, I didn't see too many people recommending SATA III raid 0 over NVMe, here's an example: https://hardforum.com/threads/sata-iii-ssd-in-raid-0-vs-nvme.1857300/

There's also NVMe to pcie 16x adaptors that are quite affordable now as an alternative to keep what is still an exceptional platform more than useful. I only run my OS off SSD's, everything else is still stored on spinners - They're reliable, affordable considering their capacity and work absolutely fine as a mass storage solution.

 

[ChadD]

Hell, I can do this on my lowly and failed Lumia 950 Windows Phone with Miracast. The experience is NOTHING like a real PC, and this is with the mobile Office apps which actually run WAY better on a Windows 10 PC than any mobile device. I'm not so much disagreeing with you as I'm simply not sure what it would take to make something like this work to the extent that people who do these kinds of things would be happy with the experience. Multitasking, cutting and pasting and moving between apps quickly and seamlessly, things that mobile doesn't do well compared to desktops now, that's all got to be solved.

Basically phones today are app islands that are designed for small screens. Larger screen experiences, file systems, multitasking, keyboards and mice, just not sure how adding all of that in into devices that were never designed to be desktops are going to replace desktops.

Google is moving apps over to Chrome... so I think it will depend what develops there. If the software developers start building more apps with larger screens in mind. The hardware I believe will catch up. I mean what you and I find "laggy" many people are fine with. As lost of people like to point out people are making due with 8-9 year old desktops right now... and ya mobile can already = that.

 

[ChadD]

ARM processors are a great mobile processor, from a power efficiency perspective nothing can touch them. But from an outright performance perspective they still have a bit of catching up to do before they can really compete with x64.

What you're proposing may well happen, but I think we're a bit away from that just yet. Right now, I'm personally happy to keep mobile and desktop platforms segregated and find that I have enough continuity between devices to make mobile devices without a doubt useful while reserving my desktop PC for the more serious tasks.

You may be right... I believe it will happen at some point. I don't think it is far off as we would hope. I could be way off and what I'm talking about may still be 20 years out.... I really doubt it though. All they have do do is make a product that just works and is powerful enough for the masses. It doesn't have to please us.

 

[SmokeRngs]

So? That doesn't prove Windows is bad. It just proves what I have been saying. That the ecosystem is what really matters.

No one can break into an established market with dominant ecosystems, without a revolution advantage. Not Microsoft and Not Linux (and Not OS/2, not NextStep x86, Not BeOS).

The GUI and minutia of an OS doesn't matter. The OS is a launcher.

This is not changing, not for Windows Phones, nor for Linux on the desktop. They are both essentially irrelevant in the market place for the exact same reasons. They aren't part of the dominant ecosystem, and not even part of the distant 2nd place ecosystem.

Again, you're missing the point. The ecosystem is only there because of entrenchment. It's not there due to a superior product. Even the MS zealot, heatless, states this. Hell, he repeats it over and over again. It's only because of the software. It's only because of the support. Well, MS has been sitting on its ass for quite a while now and in some cases has definitely gone backwards. The past two MS OS releases have garnered a lot of backlash and derision from a lot of different sectors and MS is not remedying those issues but instead adding even more.

There's a point when even as a monopoly that you can't do that anymore without consequences. Linux hasn't been sitting on its ass for a long time like MS and has advanced. Many distros are much more polished and easier to use. The overall quality has gone up. The software ecosystem has moved forward quite a bit and it continues to improve. There's more support than ever. Simply put, Windows has at best been stagnant while Linux has moved forward. If this continues much longer you will start to see reversals.

MS has to hope like hell that gaming on Linux doesn't progress much farther because that's still one of Linux's cons. That could very well be the tipping point. If a large enough segment is able to and does drop Windows for Linux simply because they can now game on Linux as well as do the rest of their regular daily stuff it will send ripples through the OS world. Right now I simply don't care that there are few if any AAA games which run native to Linux. That's an absolutely stupid and naive metric to use. I would think it's rather common knowledge that the larger companies simply don't take much in the way of risks very often. These companies are usually late to the bandwagon.

I don't expect Linux to takeover anytime soon. Hell, I don't care about Linux dethroning Windows. What I care about is having the option to dump Windows to run something else and right now games are the only thing stopping me. It's called choice and having options.

 

[ManofGod]

Again, you're missing the point. The ecosystem is only there because of entrenchment. It's not there due to a superior product. Even the MS zealot, heatless, states this. Hell, he repeats it over and over again. It's only because of the software. It's only because of the support. Well, MS has been sitting on its ass for quite a while now and in some cases has definitely gone backwards. The past two MS OS releases have garnered a lot of backlash and derision from a lot of different sectors and MS is not remedying those issues but instead adding even more.

There's a point when even as a monopoly that you can't do that anymore without consequences. Linux hasn't been sitting on its ass for a long time like MS and has advanced. Many distros are much more polished and easier to use. The overall quality has gone up. The software ecosystem has moved forward quite a bit and it continues to improve. There's more support than ever. Simply put, Windows has at best been stagnant while Linux has moved forward. If this continues much longer you will start to see reversals.

MS has to hope like hell that gaming on Linux doesn't progress much farther because that's still one of Linux's cons. That could very well be the tipping point. If a large enough segment is able to and does drop Windows for Linux simply because they can now game on Linux as well as do the rest of their regular daily stuff it will send ripples through the OS world. Right now I simply don't care that there are few if any AAA games which run native to Linux. That's an absolutely stupid and naive metric to use. I would think it's rather common knowledge that the larger companies simply don't take much in the way of risks very often. These companies are usually late to the bandwagon.

I don't expect Linux to takeover anytime soon. Hell, I don't care about Linux dethroning Windows. What I care about is having the option to dump Windows to run something else and right now games are the only thing stopping me. It's called choice and having options.

Until Linux has one all encompassing Distro, centralized hardware management and one well supported, singular way to install things, Windows will always be a superior product on the desktop. Being entrenched does not mean that the product is not superior for its intended use. Linux had a chance to become entrenched at the same time that Windows did, how did that work out for them?

 

[Snowdog]

Again, you're missing the point. The ecosystem is only there because of entrenchment. It's not there due to a superior product. Even the MS zealot, heatless, states this. Hell, he repeats it over and over again. It's only because of the software. It's only because of the support. Well, MS has been sitting on its ass for quite a while now and in some cases has definitely gone backwards. The past two MS OS releases have garnered a lot of backlash and derision from a lot of different sectors and MS is not remedying those issues but instead adding even more.

I am not sure how I am missing a point, that I have made myself, likely 10 times by now:

I don't love Windows. If the software situation was reversed and Linux had all the software, I would be using Linux, and questioning why anyone would suggest Windows. It's the software/HW support, not minutia about where your taskbar is, or about how evil corporations are.

The thing you are missing, is that simply makes using Windows the rational choice, given the Software/Support. There is NO chance of this reversing in the foreseeable future.

OTOH, choosing Linux is almost always an emotional choice, rather than the rational one above. You choose to forgo go the Software/Support because you are Angry about what Microsoft is doing with Windows. So using Linux is your "Screw you Microsoft" reaction to what you don't like.

 

[heatlesssun]

Again, you're missing the point. The ecosystem is only there because of entrenchment. It's not there due to a superior product. Even the MS zealot, heatless, states this. Hell, he repeats it over and over again. It's only because of the software. It's only because of the support. Well, MS has been sitting on its ass for quite a while now and in some cases has definitely gone backwards. The past two MS OS releases have garnered a lot of backlash and derision from a lot of different sectors and MS is not remedying those issues but instead adding even more.

LOL! You say I'm a zealot, then point out that I'm not as I've pointed out time and time again in very specific terms why I use Windows and specifically Windows 10 these days. I have five main personal x86 devices, all on Windows 10, an 8" Asus tablet, a Surface 3, a Surface Pro 3, a Surface Book 2015 and this sig rig. Of course some of the pro-desktop Linux folks will call me a Microsoft zealot for having 3 Surface devices, however overall these devices were well received and there's plenty of pro-Linux folks that discuss running Linux on Surface devices, as much as any 2 in 1s out there. In any case, you talk about Microsoft going backwards but what single OS can run across this array of devices and do all of the same things? I've looked into installing Linux on each one of these devices. Sure it's possible to install it, but there are no guarantees about much. Installing Linux on my sig rig would be the easiest device to install on, but the one that would lose the most in terms of support for gaming. What's the point of installing Linux on a higher end dual GPU setup with a VR HMD with a software library from games to Acrobat to OmniPage, etc. that's got no native Linux versions of these apps?

There's a point when even as a monopoly that you can't do that anymore without consequences. Linux hasn't been sitting on its ass for a long time like MS and has advanced. Many distros are much more polished and easier to use. The overall quality has gone up. The software ecosystem has moved forward quite a bit and it continues to improve. There's more support than ever. Simply put, Windows has at best been stagnant while Linux has moved forward. If this continues much longer you will start to see reversals.

Linux in and of itself can't fix the entrenchment issue as you call it. You need 3rd party support. Like VR, a year into it now and still nothing even from Valve.

MS has to hope like hell that gaming on Linux doesn't progress much farther because that's still one of Linux's cons. That could very well be the tipping point. If a large enough segment is able to and does drop Windows for Linux simply because they can now game on Linux as well as do the rest of their regular daily stuff it will send ripples through the OS world. Right now I simply don't care that there are few if any AAA games which run native to Linux. That's an absolutely stupid and naive metric to use. I would think it's rather common knowledge that the larger companies simply don't take much in the way of risks very often. These companies are usually late to the bandwagon.

I don't expect Linux to takeover anytime soon. Hell, I don't care about Linux dethroning Windows. What I care about is having the option to dump Windows to run something else and right now games are the only thing stopping me. It's called choice and having options.

Yes, Linux has more games than ever. So does Windows. Windows gaming titles are growing at over 6 to 1 versus Linux on Steam as of the beginning of the year to date and that's not even including VR only games, which is growing faster than Linux games right now. With VR titles included that's well over 7 to 1 to date since 01/01/2017.

So yes, choice. And when it comes to choice in games and other software the OS is largely irrelevant. If people want to use Linux that's cool, that's their choice and what makes them happy. At the end of the day, for people in a forum like this, they've tended to put a lot of thought, effort and money in their PCs and what they want from them. Calling me a zealot or Windows being entrenched at the end of the doesn't matter to people who simply want certain things. I want the best access to hardware and software for PCs as a spend a lot of money on this stuff. Windows gives me that, even tons of open source software like LibreOffice and GIMP, both of which I have installed on multiple Windows 10 machines though LibreOffice mostly for testing and backup purposes.

 

[heatlesssun]

OTOH, choosing Linux is almost always an emotional choice, rather than the rational one above. You choose to forgo go the Software/Support because you are Angry about what Microsoft is doing with Windows. So using Linux is your "Screw you Microsoft" reaction to what you don't like.

People need to keep in mind that this desktop Windows/Linux debate is about two decades old now. I remember very well in the late 90s when Microsoft was facing it's huge anti-trust issues and reports of malware like Melisa were a daily thing. While many will say today that Windows security doesn't exist it certainly didn't in the late 90s. So then Red Hat became a big deal. Linux advocates were telling everyone how great Linux was, the community, the many eyeballs looking at code, the security and free. These folks were convinced that the days of Windows were numbered and at the time I agreed with them. I got big into Linux because I thought it was the future on the desktop. On servers it made even more sense.

So 20 years later, here we are. Linux on servers, yep, that was easy to see. The desktop, all that was needed was the support for hardware and software and that would be all she wrote for Windows. And that just didn't happen. And I'm not blaming Linux on a technical level but I do think the Linux community had a lot to do with that. Just like we see here, Linux folks aren't particularly good listeners. You tell them you want or need something specific and then there's a hundred rationalizations about why you really don't. As though anything that's not supported under Linux is pointless, niche and there's some many better free alternatives, most of which are Windows compatible anyway.

 

[tetris42]

Until Linux has one all encompassing Distro, centralized hardware management and one well supported, singular way to install things, Windows will always be a superior product on the desktop. Being entrenched does not mean that the product is not superior for its intended use. Linux had a chance to become entrenched at the same time that Windows did, how did that work out for them?

I don't think it's Linux's endless distros that are holding it back. As long as there is a clear one for beginners to use and that's the only you can expect general support on, you can have infinite other flavors and it won't disrupt things. I think the biggest barrier is actually getting Linux in the hands of the average user in the first place. If somebody just wanted to browse the web, watch videos, type emails, and do some other misc. things, I would have no problem suggesting Linux for them. People like that are likely the majority of desktop users. But the system is set up so that if you buy a computer, you're getting Windows. Linux isn't compelling enough by itself to make Joe Average switch, because he already has Windows.

The reasons I personally can't make the jump to Linux is because I do a hell of a lot of different things with my system under Windows; my needs are too specialized. I'd love to see more average people start jumping to Linux though, I think most would be happy with it. I just don't see what's going to bring them over. The Windows entrenchment is absolutely gargantuan, which is why I'm always pessimistic about the situation changing, no matter how many missteps MS seems to make.

 

[ChadD]

Until Linux has one all encompassing Distro, centralized hardware management and one well supported, singular way to install things, Windows will always be a superior product on the desktop. Being entrenched does not mean that the product is not superior for its intended use. Linux had a chance to become entrenched at the same time that Windows did, how did that work out for them?

This is just silly. One of Linuxs greatest strengths and the windows people always have to point to it as a weakness. lol

The software that runs on Ubuntu runs on Fedora runs on Arch runs one Slack runs on Gentoo. There is zero issue with having multiple distors. Because they are all running on the exact same open source code. Now a windows user will point to software downloads on companies sites and say look look unbuntu version fedora rpm ect ect. This isn't because the software is different... its simply a different install package because those distros have their own package managers that track dependencies ect. Most software you don't have to go get it from the manufacturers websites... the Distro package managers have every major software package in a nice sorted list for you to one click install. (some like Arch have all the odd ones as well)

No one is running their own kernel. Some run a different version that is true... but its not rocket science understanding that. The distros all tell you what they are in that regard. LTS means life time support and that the distro is going to be running a recent yet slighly older kernel all the time as they favor releases that are long term and tend to be the most stable as they don't add every little bit of new code as it is added. Rolling release distros run the absolute latest kernel as they get updated by the Linux foundation they are updated in your distro. That isn't hard to understand even for lay people.

(this has even become an issue for Windows... they have started pushing updates as if the system where a rolling release changing features and not just providing fixes and security anymore. MS used to make it clear when we have new features we will release a new version... that is exactly how LTS Linux distros work. Rolling release distros push everything new all the time... just as MS is now trying to do. The problem is some people don't want the always changing version. Linux you have the option Windows you now don't)

The other options you have.... File systems. Every distros defaults to one for you and 99% of the time the default choice is the way to go... windows at one time had a choice here as well when say NTFS was newer and FAT was still a thing. Most distros default to EXT4 which has become the defacto, a handful of server distros and some business distros like OpenSUSE will default to BTRFS or XFS which tend to be used in larger servers more often. However if you know you want to use say BTRFS for its improved SSD speed go ahead and run that. If you wanna install your OS on a EXT4 drive and put all your data on a XFS drive because you work with huge files all the time go for it. Choice is yours.

The desktop... this isn't as confusing as windows boosters make out. This is a strength, not a weakness. Windows users are forced into a UI that many at this point claim to hate and some claim to love. The advantage when you run Linux is you can choose which Linux desktop you prefer. Almost every piece of Linux software doesn't care which desktop you use... the exception is a handful of KDE software. (however if you install that software in another desktop like gnome EVERY Linux file manger will simply install the dependencies you need to run it so its no big deal cause Linux package managers are smart and will never install you software with anyhing missing to run them and if you uninstall them and nothing needs those things it will remove them) All a person new to Linux needs to know is... your Disro is going to have a default Desktop setup, if you don't like it you can install with ONE click 7 or 8 other options and try them out... if you don't like them you can uninstall them with ONE click and you can run every single one on one system if you wish and change your Desktop daily, it will all just work.

Could you imagine if Windows had an option where with one click you could switch to the Windows 7 UI... or Windows 8... or 8.1 or XP even if you want. Yet all the underlying tech was still Win 10. Is that not a feature Windows users have been asking for ? Linux already has that... and it isn't complicated. Windows users are not used to having the choice so perhaps they get confused looking at distros with X or Y desktop and they don't want to choose wrong.... they can't wrap their heads around being able to choose after the fact and not having it be a pain I guess.

 

[tetris42]

Could you imagine if Windows had an option where with one click you could switch to the Windows 7 UI... or Windows 8... or 8.1 or XP even if you want. Yet all the underlying tech was still Win 10. Is that not a feature Windows users have been asking for ?

Come on, stop teasing, that's been one of my most-wanted features for decades and have to make do with really hacky solutions like litestep, windowblinds, visual styles, nexus dock, etc. to approximate what I'm after. Windows fights you tooth and nail on this sort of thing, it seems like such a no brainer for MS to add it in as an option.

 

[heatlesssun]

Come on, stop teasing, that's been one of my most-wanted features for decades and have to make do with really hacky solutions like litestep, windowblinds, visual styles, nexus dock, etc. to approximate what I'm after. Windows fights you tooth and nail on this sort of thing, it seems like such a no brainer for MS to add it in as an option.

What's ironic about this type of thing is that it goes to the point of SmokeRngs about entrenchment. For all of the mistakes that Microsoft makes, it seems like one if its biggest ones isn't supporting every UI it's ever created for Windows. I think it's a much better idea on paper than reality because I don't think the UI has really ever been that big of draw for Windows. I get the issues with 8.x and 10 and the hybrid touch/keyboard and mouse approach and that some think for whatever reason that approach just sucks and is so inefficient with a pure keyboard and mouse interface. And there were certainly issues with what they did in Windows 8, even a supposed Windows zealot like me pointed out that full screen elements were problematic and that was addressed in 10.

Entrenchment is all about comfort. And ironically Microsoft has in some cases left that entrenchment behind in some cases. I don't have an issue with tons of different UIs, I simply don't think that they really are as big of deal as some make it out to be. It's mostly a matter of comfort not inherent superiority of one UI over another.

 

[tetris42]

What's ironic about this type of thing is that it goes to the point of SmokeRngs about entrenchment. For all of the mistakes that Microsoft makes, it seems like one if its biggest ones isn't supporting every UI it's ever created for Windows. I think it's a much better idea on paper than reality because I don't think the UI has really ever been that big of draw for Windows. I get the issues with 8.x and 10 and the hybrid touch/keyboard and mouse approach and that some think for whatever reason that approach just sucks and is so inefficient with a pure keyboard and mouse interface. And there were certainly issues with what they did in Windows 8, even a supposed Windows zealot like me pointed out that full screen elements were problematic and that was addressed in 10.

Are you honestly sitting here telling me that them hard-locking the OPTION of customizing your GUI is a good thing for people who don't like it? You say it's better on paper, but I'm sitting here with a VERY modified GUI that's far more efficient for me than the Windows norm. If I had to go back to the standard Windows way of doing things, it would slow me down a lot, even after I got adjusted. I simply can do some common tasks much more efficiently with my customized GUI than the norm Windows hands you.

Look, I'm all for them having a default theme that is the norm on 95% or more of systems out there. And who said anything about supporting any other UI? They wouldn't have to support shit besides their own GUI. If I mod Skyrim to have more wolves or something and it crashes, that's on me, not Bethesda. What I'm talking about is the OPTION of users to customize it as opposed to locking down the files, burying icons inside system DLL's, the list goes on. Christ, if they had been more forward thinking about the GUI, you wouldn't see the DPI issues that STILL exist in some capacity on Windows even now

Entrenchment is all about comfort. And ironically Microsoft has in some cases left that entrenchment behind in some cases. I don't have an issue with tons of different UIs, I simply don't think that they really are as big of deal as some make it out to be. It's mostly a matter of comfort not inherent superiority of one UI over another.

Bullshit, comfort can be part of it, but entrenchment is about being there first and establishing things, so any latecomer is at an inherit disadvantage. I'll gladly give up a familiar system that's a pain in the ass if the new one is easier and can do all the same things. Windows entrenchment comes from it having decades' worth of software that's not always replicated elsewhere (and as others have mentioned, simply being the default option for most systems). Again, Microsoft can have a standardized default theme AND allow people to modify the GUI. The two are not mutually exclusive and for god's sake I think it could be used to great effect.

 

[heatlesssun]

If somebody just wanted to browse the web, watch videos, type emails, and do some other misc. things, I would have no problem suggesting Linux for them. People like that are likely the majority of desktop users. But the system is set up so that if you buy a computer, you're getting Windows. Linux isn't compelling enough by itself to make Joe Average switch, because he already has Windows.

I don't think that's really the heart of the debate when it gets deep. Even supposed Windows zealots like me have FOR YEARS said that for basic PC tasks like you've described, Linux would generally be fine. Where the debate gets much more inflamed is at the higher end, like gaming. As Chad has pointed out, the PC dying. He's right, for basic stuff. Where it's doing well and should for the foreseeable future is where PCs do things smartphones can't, like high end PC gaming.

Desktop Linux replacing Windows where smartphones are already capable of doing it doesn't matter that much. Desktop Linux being a solid replacement for Windows in gaming, even if gaming is a niche use of PCs, is far more consequence.

 

[Snowdog]

Come on, stop teasing, that's been one of my most-wanted features for decades and have to make do with really hacky solutions like litestep, windowblinds, visual styles, nexus dock, etc. to approximate what I'm after. Windows fights you tooth and nail on this sort of thing, it seems like such a no brainer for MS to add it in as an option.

It is also considered a bad idea to try multiple Desktop Environments on Linux. I messed up one of my Linux installs like this, trying to find a DE that Didn't look like garbage.

Like most things stated by the Linux Apologists here, this view of DE switching ease, is somewhere between exaggeration and fabrication.

This is part of the reason you have 4 different version of Linux Mint, with 4 different DEs, instead of one version where you just "push one button" and switch between them.

 

[heatlesssun]

Are you honestly sitting here telling me that them hard-locking the OPTION of customizing your GUI is a good thing for people who don't like it?

Not at all, I'm simply saying that I don't think it's nearly as big of deal as some would say. The big issues in Windows 10 are updates and privacy concerns. The UI is a distant 3rd.

Bullshit, comfort can be part of it, but entrenchment is about being there first and establishing things, so any latecomer is at an inherit disadvantage. I'll gladly give up a familiar system that's a pain in the ass if the new one is easier and can do all the same things. Windows entrenchment comes from it having decades' worth of software that's not always replicated elsewhere. Again, Microsoft can have a standardized default theme AND allow people to modify the GUI. The two are not mutually exclusive and for god's sake I think it could be used to great effect.

Entrench: establish (an attitude, habit, or belief) so firmly that change is very difficult or unlikely.

 

[tetris42]

Not at all, I'm simply saying that I don't think it's nearly as big of deal as some would say. The big issues in Windows 10 are updates and privacy concerns. The UI is a distant 3rd.

I agree for most people you're right, however I think people could also be underestimating just how big a difference an open GUI format could make. It's one of those things where it doesn't seem like a big deal unless you can actually see the impact from it. Many features people don't know they want until they have them. In my eyes, opening up the GUI for customization would be a great feature to have and could add a lot of legs of the system for many users. I mean christ, how many debates are there on hardocp alone of people saying they prefer one windows over another just because of something in the start menu? That shouldn't even be part of the OS debate, but it is, because the GUI is so locked down and only fringe GUI psychos like myself seek out real customization options.

Entrench: establish (an attitude, habit, or belief) so firmly that change is very difficult or unlikely.

Well I said "establish" in what I wrote, so I'm not sure what you're driving at. I guess what we're debating here is the "comfort" part. If something is a pain in the ass, but the alternative is an even BIGGER pain in the ass, that doesn't make the norm comfortable. Or if the reason something is entrenched has nothing to do with all its features, but just a couple specific roles it fills. My point is, Windows having a locked down GUI has NOTHING to do with its popularity. In case there's any confusion, locking things down is not the same thing as a standardized theme. I think the general Win95 interface standard has benefited MS over the years, but again, not things like burying icons inside critical system DLLs.

 

[ChadD]

Desktop Linux replacing Windows where smartphones are already capable of doing it doesn't matter that much. Desktop Linux being a solid replacement for Windows in gaming, even if gaming is a niche use of PCs, is far more consequence.

One will follow the other though. MS knows this which is why they tried so hard... even to the detriment of desktop sales with Win 8 to try and bridge the gap and steal back the mobile sector.

Yes for now gaming is better in Windows... we can argue that Linux is good enough, gets the games we tend to like on PCs and is supported by free developers that we want to $upport. Still sure we do have to concede that for now at least and for likely a few more years Windows will be the best place for the newest AAA style games. However will that be the case if the install base isn't using Windows for everything anymore. Right now if I publish a game that I expect to sell 100,000 PC copies... I know only 10% of those people will be gamers of the "hardcore" variety that have a GPU that is less then a year old and 3x the min spec requirements. Everyone else will likely be short of the recommended spec for the game. As more people abandon the idea of a full size Desktop and only own Laptops and smartphones... who are those game developers going to target ? I mean we already know the answer as they target PS4 and Xbox.... game publishers aren't stupid they understand only a small % of their purchases are by people running super high end PCs.

 

[ChadD]

I got some windows users arguing about UI at least.... Win for the Linux guy.

It does prove my point though... the multiple Desktop environments that some believe to be a Linux weakness. Is quite the opposite. I can make Linux look just like XP or Win 7 or Mac or a Unix server from 1971. Or like a modern version of Linux. Log out Log in and I have a new UI again. Not sure Microsoft could really do it the same way to be honest. The way their OS is coded everything is all linked and tied together with messy DLLs and Registries. It highlights another advantage of Linux that gets listed as a conn by some Windows boosters. The modularity of its development. It may seem fragmented to someone not really familiar with how Linux fits together. Its why we say yes Android is Linux and some argue it isn't. It is running the Linux kernel on a Linux file system... Google has changed out the UI interface and init system. That doesn't not make it Linux, its just another (more locked down) distro.

 

[ChadD]

It is also considered a bad idea to try multiple Desktop Environments on Linux. I messed up one of my Linux installs like this, trying to find a DE that Didn't look like garbage.

Like most things stated by the Linux Apologists here, this view of DE switching ease, is somewhere between exaggeration and fabrication.

Generally if you want things to work well. Stick with the DE of your distribution.

I am not sure which distro you where running or what issues you ran into. In general most Distros give you a simple list of the desktops they *support". Some distros have added bits of software that may not play nice with x or y env.
I currently have Gnome KDE XFCE LXDE and Openbox running on my system with no issues. All of them with the exception of Openbox are zero issue... of course a new person to linux should stay away from Windows Managers like Openbox until they know what they are doing.

As is often the case with anything always read the instructions. (if a distro isn't going to play nice with X or Y desktop or window manager chances are that distro makes that clear)

One example... if you run Manjaro (a popular newbie frinedly distro .... follow the simple instructions and your golden)
https://wiki.manjaro.org/index.php/Install_Desktop_Environments

 

[BulletDust]

I don't think that's really the heart of the debate when it gets deep. Even supposed Windows zealots like me have FOR YEARS said that for basic PC tasks like you've described, Linux would generally be fine. Where the debate gets much more inflamed is at the higher end, like gaming. As Chad has pointed out, the PC dying. He's right, for basic stuff. Where it's doing well and should for the foreseeable future is where PCs do things smartphones can't, like high end PC gaming.

Desktop Linux replacing Windows where smartphones are already capable of doing it doesn't matter that much. Desktop Linux being a solid replacement for Windows in gaming, even if gaming is a niche use of PCs, is far more consequence.

Gaming isn't really an advanced task, it's just better supported under Windows due to years of being the default install for users, however that is changing. The way I see it, Windows does what it has to do for most users, if you want a more advanced OS and can accept loosing a couple of AAA titles than Linux may well be an option for yourself. When it comes to UI, IMO Linux reigns supreme as you can literally get that OS looking any way you want, in fact Windows 10 completely falls down in this regard by running two completely different UI's in the one OS with little options for customisation whatsoever - An incredibly confusing scenario for most users made worse by allowing for a 'tablet mode' on a desktop machine, have you ever seen what happens when a user accidentally enables tablet mode on their Windows PC? It's a mess and they have no idea what they've done.

In claiming that alternate software is available under Windows so you may as well stick to Windows highlights that you've at least partially missed the point of 'Windows 10 alternatives'.

 

[heatlesssun]

My point is, Windows having a locked down GUI has NOTHING to do with its popularity.

I totally agree. The GUI situation is a matter of mass production. And in the case of Windows 8 moving into Windows 10, a GUI that's trying to work on devices Windows was never originally designed for. Which is obviously problematic. But in the middle of trying to make Windows work with different input capabilities for which it was never intended while simultaneously supporting UIs that don't work well with those new input capabilities? The only solution that will make everyone happy is to support every UI that's ever been in Windows, keep those fresh and then support UI capabilities that don't work with the classical ones. When you think it through it's a mess whichever way you go unless you just stick to a desktop design solely for a keyboard and pointing device.

And that's why a lot of people say Apple is doing it right with different OSes. At this point there's too many Windows devices that work with touch and pen to go back.

In case there's any confusion, locking things down is not the same thing as a standardized theme. I think the general Win95 interface standard has benefited MS over the years, but again, not things like burying icons inside critical system DLLs.

Sure, and Windows 8 didn't do it right but Windows 10, is it really that far off, at least with the basics from Windows 95? I'd say not as much as some would say.

 

[Snowdog]

I am not sure which distro you where running or what issues you ran into. In general most Distros give you a simple list of the desktops they *support". Some distros have added bits of software that may not play nice with x or y env.
I currently have Gnome KDE XFCE LXDE and Openbox running on my system with no issues. All of them with the exception of Openbox are zero issue... of course a new person to linux should stay away from Windows Managers like Openbox until they know what they are doing.

As is often the case with anything always read the instructions. (if a distro isn't going to play nice with X or Y desktop or window manager chances are that distro makes that clear)

One example... if you run Manjaro (a popular newbie frinedly distro .... follow the simple instructions and your golden)
https://wiki.manjaro.org/index.php/Install_Desktop_Environments

Manjaro may handle this better. What is the chance someone ends with Manjaro today?
It's seems like the flavor of the month is Mint (first link is obvious, second is install advice after wrecking his install trying ONE DE):
Why shouldn't one mix different Desktop Environments?
Reinstalling Linux Mint

It is my experience that subtle things start going wrong when switch DEs at first, but it can lead to a mess when you make changes and switch DEs. Sometimes they show up, sometimes they don't. Most DEs also use different forked versions of programs, or entirely different programs to do the same tasks, so you you are NOT just changing the UI, and it is NOT a clean transition.

So again, like with ChadD downplaying the issue with using Wine, he downplays the pitfalls of switching DE's on Linux.

 

[ChadD]

What is the chance someone ends with Manjaro today. It's seems like the flavor of the month is Mint:
Why shouldn't one mix different Desktop Environments?
Reinstalling Linux Mint

It is my experience that subtle things start going wrong when switch DEs at first, but it can lead to a mess when you make changes and switch DEs. Sometimes they show up, sometimes they don't. Most DEs also use different forked versions of programs, or entirely different programs to do the same tasks, so you you are NOT just changing the UI, and it is NOT a clean transition.

Again you want to read the instructions... as the Manjaro ones state most Full Desktops include their own file managers ect. Yes if you install a few together you will end up with 2 file managers. Where the issues CAN arise. It can be the system switching say your default file manager... so the one KDE is expecting you to use is really the one Gnome uses. Which isn't honestly an issue as it runs on either... but it can lead to confusion. Sure can't deny that. Again read the instructions most distros make it clear which ones are best to run. In the case of Manjaro as I sited it... they clearly state KDE 4 isn't really ready for prime time on Manjaro right now. It should be clear if your going to try to get the beta version running your going to have to do some dancing.

https://community.linuxmint.com/tutorial/view/1079

As is the case with Windows... everyone has an opinion. Most of them are wrong. Multiple desktops do work fine... yes it can be messier if you go extreme and really install 8 or 9. Most people don't go that crazy. Also its one area where most distros have really really improved the qol issues around doing this. I think it may be one of the things most improved the last few years with many of the major distros. The issues people have run into mostly involve improper installations... not through their own fault in most cases. Pack managers look for dependencies but don't really know to do that unless the install script has been told to do so. The major distros have all gotten much better with those scripts the last few years... so that when you install say KDE the dolphin file manager (wait its konqurer now I think whatever) doesn't become your default in every other DE on your system. Mint is one distro where mulitple DEs do work pretty well right now... at least the major ones. Again if your new to Linux I would always suggest staying away from the Geekier Openboxes or Flux boxes... or any DE that ends in BOX. lol

 

[heatlesssun]

Gaming isn't really an advanced task, it's just better supported under Windows due to years of being the default install for users, however that is changing.

Yeah, it's a pretty advanced task at the highest levels. Custom PCs with, multiple GPUs, multiple 4k, 144hz, Gsync/Freesync, 3D screens, overclocked GPUs and CPUs with liquid cooling, multiple terabytes of storage just from the games and VR HMDs.

The way I see it, Windows does what it has to do for most users, if you want a more advanced OS and can accept loosing a couple of AAA titles than Linux may well be an option for yourself.

A couple of AAA titles isn't even the tip of the iceberg.

When it comes to UI, IMO Linux reigns supreme as you can literally get that OS looking any way you want, in fact Windows 10 completely falls down in this regard by running two completely different UI's in the one OS - An incredibly confusing scenario for most users made worse by allowing for a 'tablet mode' on a desktop machine, have you ever seen what happens when a user accidentally enables tablet mode on their Windows PC? It's a mess and they have no idea what they've done.

I've not really seen anyone used to the classic Windows desktop confused by Windows 10, that much Microsoft fixed. For a person like me that have a mix of devices, Windows 10 is pretty cool. Keyboards, mice, trackpads, touch, pens, voice. From an 8" tablet to a 10 core CPU/dual GPU, multiple monitor non-touch system. And I get that things are smooth for a lot of people that post here. But I don't know of a single OS that can support this array of hardware and software besides Windows 10.

 

[BulletDust]

Yeah, it's a pretty advanced task at the highest levels. Custom PCs with, multiple GPUs, multiple 4k, 144hz, Gsync/Freesync, 3D screens, overclocked GPUs and CPUs with liquid cooling, multiple terabytes of storage just from the games and VR HMDs.



A couple of AAA titles isn't even the tip of the iceberg.



I've not really seen anyone used to the classic Windows desktop confused by Windows 10, that much Microsoft fixed. For a person like me that have a mix of devices, Windows 10 is pretty cool. Keyboards, mice, trackpads, touch, pens, voice. From an 8" tablet to a 10 core CPU/dual GPU, multiple monitor non-touch system. And I get that things are smooth for a lot of people that post here. But I don't know of a single OS that can support this array of hardware and software besides Windows 10.

I don't agree with any of this, but you're entitled to your opinion.

 

[heatlesssun]

As is the case with Windows... everyone has an opinion.

Much of this goes well beyond opinion. I really couldn't care about how many DEs one can run in Linux before problems. What I care about is can I do the things I like to do with my PCs? For me, I'll take VR support over 50 different ways to copy a file.

 

[BulletDust]

Much of this goes well beyond opinion. I really couldn't care about how many DEs one can run in Linux before problems. What I care about is can I do the things I like to do with my PCs? For me, I'll take VR support over 50 different ways to copy a file.

i'm over discussing anything with you Heatlesssun, it's quite simply pointless as you refuse to even acknowledge facts unless they work in favour of Windows. As stated, you're entitled to your opinion and I in no way agree with it.

 

[heatlesssun]

I don't agree with any of this, but you're entitled to your opinion.

This isn't opinion, it's fact. PC gaming as I've described is at the very end of PC complexity.

 

[BulletDust]

Read above.

 

[92miata]

This thread proves how stupid human beings are. Seriously. Windows 10 with Classic Shell here on 6 machines.

 

[heatlesssun]

i'm over discussing anything with you Heatlesssun, it's quite simply pointless as you refuse to even acknowledge facts unless they work in favour of Windows. As stated, you're entitled to your opinion and I in no way agree with it.

And how many things have I stated what work in the favor of desktop Linux? Free, far more configurable, no real local malware problems. Again, these are not matters of opinion. The problem is rabid pro-desktop Linux advocates is that they have a very, very hard time acknowledging strengths in Windows. For 20 years the desktop Linux community has had this problem and that's one reason why desktop Linux still flounders.

 

[BulletDust]

And how many things have I stated what work in the favor of desktop Linux? Free, far more configurable, no real local malware problems. Again, these are not matters of opinion. The problem is rabid pro-desktop Linux advocates is that they have a very, very hard time acknowledging strengths in Windows. For 20 years the desktop Linux community has had this problem and that's one reason why desktop Linux still flounders.

That's great.

 

[Snowdog]

Again you want to read the instructions... as the Manjaro ones state most Full Desktops include their own file managers ect. Yes if you install a few together you will end up with 2 file managers. Where the issues CAN arise. It can be the system switching say your default file manager... so the one KDE is expecting you to use is really the one Gnome uses. Which isn't honestly an issue as it runs on either... but it can lead to confusion. Sure can't deny that. Again read the instructions most distros make it clear which ones are best to run. In the case of Manjaro as I sited it... they clearly state KDE 4 isn't really ready for prime time on Manjaro right now. It should be clear if your going to try to get the beta version running your going to have to do some dancing.

https://community.linuxmint.com/tutorial/view/1079

As is the case with Windows... everyone has an opinion. Most of them are wrong

I am observing that yours is the one that is most consistently wrong.

Check the comments at the bottom of the link you provided. One guy says thanks. Everyone else says there should be significant warnings about issues/side effects from DE switching.

Yet when you tell it, we get your standard BS that it just magically works without issue, install 8 of them and it all just works perfect: "your Disro is going to have a default Desktop setup, if you don't like it you can install with ONE click 7 or 8 other options and try them out... if you don't like them you can uninstall them with ONE click and you can run every single one on one system if you wish and change your Desktop daily, it will all just work."

It really gives me the impression you are trying to fool people who have never used Linux before.

 

[BulletDust]

This thread proves how stupid human beings are. Seriously. Windows 10 with Classic Shell here on 6 machines.

I'm fairly certain everyone knows about classic shell. the fact remains that it's literally a hack and stability cannot be guaranteed especially between updates as MS has a tendency to break everything between updates. So, for example, while it's fine to use such hacks on your own personal machine they're something I could never use on a clients machine if there's even the slightest chance of it introducing an issue due to Microsoft's overhanded tactics.

 

[heatlesssun]

This thread proves how stupid human beings are. Seriously. Windows 10 with Classic Shell here on 6 machines.

Indeed. People in a forum like this, whatever side of this particular debate, probably know exactly what they are doing and why. If Linux works for you, if Windows 10 with Classic Shell works for, if a Mac with macOS works for you, that is what is for a reason.

By beef with some here, this notion of Linux gaming as being viable. That's nonsense. Hell Windows phones have some games, have some of this and that. My phone is a Lumia 950. But damn, even I get that it's not viable in the current market. You can like Linux and hate Windows for whatever reason but when it comes to PC games, Windows gets pretty much 100% of all PC games. Windows and just a little bit less of all other desktop software. I'm guessing that offerings like LibreOffice have at least as many Windows users as Linux or macOS users looking at the forums.

No, that doesn't technically make Windows a superior OS, I never said that, no one here has. It simply means that when it comes to choice of software that desktop Windows is as good as it gets. Like pretty much 100% PC gaming support.

 

[heatlesssun]

That's great.

It is pretty great that a guy like me that's constantly accused of being a Windows lover can point out the obvious strengths of Linux. Desktop Linux will be better off with the that community can deal with the obvious strengths of Windows instead of trying to rationalize them away.

 

[BulletDust]

It is pretty great that a guy like me that's constantly accused of being a Windows lover can point out the obvious strengths of Linux. Desktop Linux will be better off with the that community can deal with the obvious strengths of Windows instead of trying to rationalize them away.

Rationalise?! You're far too biased to rationalize.