Windows 11 Will Soon Block All Default Browser Workarounds

lopoetve

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 11, 2001
Messages
32,950
How big is the performance delta typically for things that DO work these days?

It's been a while since I did any testing on my own, but when I did, there was still a 20+% performance hit in Linux compared to windows (and sometimes that was +++++) even for native ports, let alone using Proton/DXVK.

Has that improved at all?

I still dual boot to Windows simply because I can't afford to lose any performance at all if I want to keep certain 4k titles above 60fps.
Very small once the shaders compile; for things built in to steam (even those using experimental settings) that's done before the game launches - then you get +- 10% (some things run faster in vulkan, even if not written for it). That's for most games, at least, but YMMV.

For things that compile on the fly (Lutris), it tends to be slightly jerky the very first time the shader is needed, and then the same +- as before. They've gotten VERY good at this, DX12 aside - and this does tend to be a recent development. Star Citizen (before a patch broke it) was about 5% less than windows on teh same hardware. Other things are no different - granted, I'm doing this at 4k on a 3080+10980XE, so YMMV (Neo G9 monitor).

I do dual boot that system - anything I can run in linux though, I do. It's my main "work" workstation.
 

sed8em

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
2,676
Right here:
Uh, you’re response was an overly dramatic reply to my take on Windows. You’re the one who assumes wild dreams take place on a computer choice. Mine is an appliance.
I explicitly stated Mac isn’t perfect. But yes, my maxed out 14” MBP has no competition in the Windows world, and likely won’t for some time. The only thing it lacks is games, and I have an Xbox for that.
This thing can edit high resolution, stacked astrophotos from my observatory amazingly fast with the fans barely breaking a sweat.
At least the Mac OS doesn’t have a failed update like Win10 did and nuke my documents/photos, requiring me to waste time restoring the PC. And all the advertising and suggested apps crap, that has no place in an OS.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
34,949
Very small once the shaders compile; for things built in to steam (even those using experimental settings) that's done before the game launches - then you get +- 10% (some things run faster in vulkan, even if not written for it). That's for most games, at least, but YMMV.

For things that compile on the fly (Lutris), it tends to be slightly jerky the very first time the shader is needed, and then the same +- as before. They've gotten VERY good at this, DX12 aside - and this does tend to be a recent development. Star Citizen (before a patch broke it) was about 5% less than windows on teh same hardware. Other things are no different - granted, I'm doing this at 4k on a 3080+10980XE, so YMMV (Neo G9 monitor).

I do dual boot that system - anything I can run in linux though, I do. It's my main "work" workstation.

Hmm. Maybe I'll have to try it again.

I don't really play titles that rely on anti-cheat anymore (I haven't played a multiplayer game in ages). The DX12 thing may be an issue, but that is a minority of titles.

I generally run more mature distributions though, in order to keep things stable. It would seem like in order to keep up in gaming performance, one may need to be more bleeding edge, at least when it comes to Kernel's, mesa drivers, etc. I'll have to think about whether or not I want to do this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChadD
like this

lopoetve

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 11, 2001
Messages
32,950
Hmm. Maybe I'll have to try it again.

I don't really play titles that rely on anti-cheat anymore (I haven't played a multiplayer game in ages). The DX12 thing may be an issue, but that is a minority of titles.

I generally run more mature distributions though, in order to keep things stable. It would seem like in order to keep up in gaming performance, one may need to be more bleeding edge, at least when it comes to Kernel's, mesa drivers, etc. I'll have to think about whether or not I want to do this.
That is the trade off. I believe my Star Citizen issue is related to being on LTS with older software compared to bleeding edge, but everything ~else~ works great on LTS, so I'm not changing it any time soon.
 

dvsman

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 2, 2009
Messages
3,629
EDITL Never mind - old fart brain. Someone just told me that was Windows Media Player not Explorer.

I haven't read the whole thread but if its such a big issue try installing the N edition of Windows. That's the European version that doesn't come with a browser IIRC. MS already lost a lawsuit in the EU a few years back and had to release that version as a result.

Not sure if it will fix the OP's specific problem, but it should.
 
Last edited:

Armenius

Extremely [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
34,241
EDITL Never mind - old fart brain. Someone just told me that was Windows Media Player not Explorer.

I haven't read the whole thread but if its such a big issue try installing the N edition of Windows. That's the European version that doesn't come with a browser IIRC. MS already lost a lawsuit in the EU a few years back and had to release that version as a result.

Not sure if it will fix the OP's specific problem, but it should.
Ja, it doesn't come with WMP, Groove, Microsoft Video, Skype, or Voice Recorder. Ironically breaks a lot of things without those included, including many games that rely on the codecs they come with. You get a lot of people from Europe asking why their games don't work since they don't know they need to download the Media Pack separately. At the same time, is Apple OS allowed to still come packaged with their media suite?
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
5,783
How big is the performance delta typically for things that DO work these days?

It's been a while since I did any testing on my own, but when I did, there was still a 20+% performance hit in Linux compared to windows (and sometimes that was +++++) even for native ports, let alone using Proton/DXVK.

Has that improved at all?

I still dual boot to Windows simply because I can't afford to lose any performance at all if I want to keep certain 4k titles above 60fps.
20% no not in a few years has that been true.

However we do all have to admit their are outliers... yes some titles will run 20% slower I have no doubt. Also Linux isn't one homogenous OS.... if you are running wayland their are still some games that don't play well. Civ 6 comes to mine you can pull 100 FPS under a Xserver setup and only get 60 under wayland (which is now the default for many distros).

There are a few titles that are faster (not 20% like 2-5%) under Linux such as Doom, Doom eternal, shadow of the tomb raider and a handful of others. You can also turn AMD FSR on in any title... so there is that if you are gaming on something like a Radeon APU. And yes you may need to tweak a bit... and you will want to be on something like Arch (or one of its spins like Manjaro... or hopefully the upcoming SteamOS3). However lets all be realistic No one around here games on a stock windows install either.
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
5,783
Hmm. Maybe I'll have to try it again.

I don't really play titles that rely on anti-cheat anymore (I haven't played a multiplayer game in ages). The DX12 thing may be an issue, but that is a minority of titles.

I generally run more mature distributions though, in order to keep things stable. It would seem like in order to keep up in gaming performance, one may need to be more bleeding edge, at least when it comes to Kernel's, mesa drivers, etc. I'll have to think about whether or not I want to do this.
That is the rub with Linux... its such a broad scope of offerings. Yes one distro should technically be as the next. Of course we all know a distro created to sell to corp workstation isn't going to be the best option for cutting edge gaming. (The main reason I dislike Ubuntu.. it works fine but to make sure your gaming experience is on par you end up having to replace kernels mesa and other things that no longer make it "Ubuntu" anyway imo)
IMO Arch is the future... it isn't THE fastest (Intels distro is still that), however it isn't the unstable mess people think it may be (and probably was years back) and all the important stuff is kept up to date. Manjaro is my go too for now... arch with less hassle an a few week delay on updates which seems to catch anything show stopping. I haven't had a issue caused by an update in at least 3 years or so.
We all know now Valve will be moving to an arch base... I am looking forward to an official Steam OS3 release. If it can be defaulted to start in the KDE desktop... it might be a great option for all around desktop use.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
34,949
That is the rub with Linux... its such a broad scope of offerings. Yes one distro should technically be as the next. Of course we all know a distro created to sell to corp workstation isn't going to be the best option for cutting edge gaming. (The main reason I dislike Ubuntu.. it works fine but to make sure your gaming experience is on par you end up having to replace kernels mesa and other things that no longer make it "Ubuntu" anyway imo)
IMO Arch is the future... it isn't THE fastest (Intels distro is still that), however it isn't the unstable mess people think it may be (and probably was years back) and all the important stuff is kept up to date. Manjaro is my go too for now... arch with less hassle an a few week delay on updates which seems to catch anything show stopping. I haven't had a issue caused by an update in at least 3 years or so.
We all know now Valve will be moving to an arch base... I am looking forward to an official Steam OS3 release. If it can be defaulted to start in the KDE desktop... it might be a great option for all around desktop use.

I have come to really like apt for my productivity purposes. I just don't see myself switching away from the Debian/Ubuntu family of distributions.

I'll have to keep an eye on SteamOS3.

It would be rather ironic to stop dual booting Windows for games, only to still dual boot but with another Linux boot :p
 

lopoetve

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 11, 2001
Messages
32,950
That is the rub with Linux... its such a broad scope of offerings. Yes one distro should technically be as the next. Of course we all know a distro created to sell to corp workstation isn't going to be the best option for cutting edge gaming. (The main reason I dislike Ubuntu.. it works fine but to make sure your gaming experience is on par you end up having to replace kernels mesa and other things that no longer make it "Ubuntu" anyway imo)
IMO Arch is the future... it isn't THE fastest (Intels distro is still that), however it isn't the unstable mess people think it may be (and probably was years back) and all the important stuff is kept up to date. Manjaro is my go too for now... arch with less hassle an a few week delay on updates which seems to catch anything show stopping. I haven't had a issue caused by an update in at least 3 years or so.
We all know now Valve will be moving to an arch base... I am looking forward to an official Steam OS3 release. If it can be defaulted to start in the KDE desktop... it might be a great option for all around desktop use.
I like the idea behind arch, but every damned bit of documentation for getting things to "work" out there (on the weirder side) seem to be written for either Ubuntu or a Ubuntu derivative. IT effectively holds the same place as RedHat used to for "what people think of with linux." I used to be a slackware guy back in the day, but my desktop work now is a "must work" type of scenario - and that's where Ubuntu LTS comes in. Yeah, some games don't work the best - but enough do for my use cases so far, and the rest of it is pretty much just like you expect and works out-of-box.

I wish I was back in the time where I could just fuck around with it like the old days - when I ran slackware and wrote parts of the winmodem stack to get it working on the crappy $20 modem I could afford - but I need the thing to work, and things like VMware Workstation to work, and that's not worth fiddling with anymore :(
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
34,949
I like the idea behind arch, but every damned bit of documentation for getting things to "work" out there (on the weirder side) seem to be written for either Ubuntu or a Ubuntu derivative. IT effectively holds the same place as RedHat used to for "what people think of with linux." I used to be a slackware guy back in the day, but my desktop work now is a "must work" type of scenario - and that's where Ubuntu LTS comes in. Yeah, some games don't work the best - but enough do for my use cases so far, and the rest of it is pretty much just like you expect and works out-of-box.

I wish I was back in the time where I could just fuck around with it like the old days - when I ran slackware and wrote parts of the winmodem stack to get it working on the crappy $20 modem I could afford - but I need the thing to work, and things like VMware Workstation to work, and that's not worth fiddling with anymore :(

Same.

I used to be a huge Gentoo fan, but I got tired of spending the little time I wasn't working finding a workaround for the problem du-jour caused by me needing to run many packages unstable branch to get hardware support for my system.

Then I switched to Ubuntu back in 2007-2008 some time and it really did "Just Work".

Got pissed off and switched to Mint after Ubuntu moved to Unity as the default desktop environment, but that's a whole other story.

I find Mint is the best of both worlds. Prebuilt for the Cinnamon desktop, which is awesome and saves me time, only uses Ubuntu LTS releases as a base, and they hate snaps as much as I do, so no chance of any sneaking in!
 

lopoetve

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 11, 2001
Messages
32,950
Same.

I used to be a huge Gentoo fan, but I got tired of spending the little time I wasn't working finding a workaround for the problem du-jour caused by me needing to run many packages unstable branch to get hardware support for my system.

Then I switched to Ubuntu back in 2007-2008 some time and it really did "Just Work".

Got pissed off and switched to Mint after Ubuntu moved to Unity as the default desktop environment, but that's a whole other story.

I find Mint is the best of both worlds. Prebuilt for the Cinnamon desktop, which is awesome and saves me time, only uses Ubuntu LTS releases as a base, and they hate snaps as much as I do, so no chance of any sneaking in!
Amen. I have exactly one snap, and I think it's slack? Can't remember. Either way, LTS works well for most games - juts not the bleeding edge yet. ~shrug~
 

Whalter12

n00b
Joined
Jan 20, 2017
Messages
31
Edge gives me eyestrain not sure why probably something in the code but I haven't tried it with the Start is Back version having the task bar moved. If Edge looked just like Chrome and used the same themes I would use it.
Edge is just Chrome with a different skin (and less spying than Chrome for the moment). I blocked the stupid Edge new tab page with a Chrome plugin. Just find an extension theme in Chrome you like and add it in Edge.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Void
like this

Whalter12

n00b
Joined
Jan 20, 2017
Messages
31
This is why I am looking into Linux to, replace Windows in the future. I can only see any Windows version getting worse as MS tries to catch up to Google, Facebook, and Apple with the data collection.

I understand why MS is doing it though. A few years back they were earning more money from Bing being the default search engine in Windows than Youtube was earning for Google in ad revenue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this

GoodBoy

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 29, 2004
Messages
2,334
Non-issue.

It's only links that the OS itself is pointing you to, like when you click help-about or help.

"OMG I'M GOING TO MAC!" "OMG I am SO GLAD I went to MAC!" "Linux4ever!" *throwing a tantrum* "YOU CAN'T MAKE ME!"

Click-baity article has succeeded.
 

Shoganai

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 5, 2018
Messages
1,467
Non-issue.

It's only links that the OS itself is pointing you to, like when you click help-about or help.

"OMG I'M GOING TO MAC!" "OMG I am SO GLAD I went to MAC!" "Linux4ever!" *throwing a tantrum* "YOU CAN'T MAKE ME!"

Click-baity article has succeeded.
It's a bit click-baity as they're just stating something without an actual statement from Microsoft, but the current state of setting a default browser other than Edge is actually incredibly beyond obnoxious. Edge will arbitrarily change the default browser again after you've set it to something else. And it requires a third-party app or some registry tweaking to keep it from doing what the OP was talking about. The way that default apps are set in general in Windows 11 is one of the most obnoxious changes to Windows I've seen in a long time.
 

GoldenTiger

Fully [H]
Joined
Dec 2, 2004
Messages
26,000
Non-issue.

It's only links that the OS itself is pointing you to, like when you click help-about or help.

"OMG I'M GOING TO MAC!" "OMG I am SO GLAD I went to MAC!" "Linux4ever!" *throwing a tantrum* "YOU CAN'T MAKE ME!"

Click-baity article has succeeded.
Quoted for truth. There's a reason windows has been and stays #1.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
34,949
Quoted for truth. There's a reason windows has been and stays #1.

Lowest common denominator? :p

Doesn't Toyota also sell the most cars in the world? :p

More seriously though, Windows stays on top because it is entrenched. If you want to run big brand software there is no real alternative to Windows. Sure some of that big brand software is also available for the Mac, but in general no platform is as ubiquitous as Windows is. Being entrenched like that is difficult to overcome.

It's the same reason Facebook stays the biggest social media platform year in and year out. Because everyone you know is on it.

Who wants to be on a platform where you don't know anyone? The fact that a platform is dominant helps keep it dominant.

There was a time when Windows had actual advantages over the competition. In the early days Linux didn't even exist yet, and MacOS was niche and didn't have a lot of software for it, and could only be run on expensive computers with poor customize-ability.

Later, windows stayed dominant in large part because of inertia, and because the platforms were open and customizeable and more affordable. At this point in time Linux was niche and difficult to use.

Now Linux is every bit as easy to use as Windows if not easier, and it has free software. Microsoft better watch themselves. If commercial software vendoers start embracing Linux, there won't be much of a reason for Windows to still exist, except to run Microsofts own office products.
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
12,665
Someone please give me an example of this so that I may try to reproduce it, thanks.
 

sleepeeg3

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 4, 2004
Messages
5,251
I cant even think of one single moment in my history of using Microsoft products where I was like, "Ya, man... I could really just switch to Apple and all of my wildest dreams will come true".
We need an lol upvote on this forum.
 

viper_0307

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 8, 2016
Messages
250
Internet Explorer Part Deux. Grab some popcorn. Microsoft hasn't learned from its antitrust law case.
 
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
3,823
Install Linux.
The only problem with Linux on the desktop is it renders your PC completely useless for anything other than having Linux on your desktop for 99% of PC users.

It's fine for those of us that are knowledgeable enough to do the ENDLESS workarounds and willing to fuck around with the command line but for the vast majority of PC users Linux on the desktop is the one true cure for PC dependency. A company like Valve bringing more standardization and user friendliness might seem like a great thing but that also hurts one of Linux' greatest strengths: the lack of corporate poking. I just don't know that Linux on the desktop has any future greater than the fringe novelty it is right now while staying true to the very point of Linux on the desktop.
 

Tengis

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 11, 2003
Messages
5,550
The only problem with Linux on the desktop is it renders your PC completely useless for anything other than having Linux on your desktop for 99% of PC users.

It's fine for those of us that are knowledgeable enough to do the ENDLESS workarounds and willing to fuck around with the command line but for the vast majority of PC users Linux on the desktop is the one true cure for PC dependency. A company like Valve bringing more standardization and user friendliness might seem like a great thing but that also hurts one of Linux' greatest strengths: the lack of corporate poking. I just don't know that Linux on the desktop has any future greater than the fringe novelty it is right now while staying true to the very point of Linux on the desktop.
I tried to use Linux as a desktop replacement once... ended up spending HOURS trying to get a handful of programs installed and functional that would have taken 30 seconds in Windows.

People that convert to Apple will complain about changes in Windows and then in the same breath talk about going to a system they are completely unfamiliar with and spend months and months learning.

It still hurts my soul that I see people complain about control panel and misc windows when almost everything of use in Windows is accessible by right clicking the start menu.
 

jardows

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
2,188
Now Linux is every bit as easy to use as Windows if not easier, and it has free software. Microsoft better watch themselves. If commercial software vendoers start embracing Linux, there won't be much of a reason for Windows to still exist, except to run Microsofts own office products.
Thanks for the laugh. I mean, I could claim that FreeBSD is every bit as easy to use as Windows, once it's setup properly. And I can setup a FreeBSD desktop workstation for easy use in not much more time than it takes for me to configure a new Windows install. But you won't find me ever making the claim in general that FreeBSD is as easy to use as Windows. Besides, I'm sure you won't be handing your average computer user who is comfortable installing Windows an Arch or Debian installation drive and expect them to have an easy time. Really what you mean is Some Linux distributions are mostly as easy to use once setup as Windows is. And by "some" you really mean Ubuntu and its derivatives. And even that is a bit of an extreme claim. When I want to install and use a Windows program, all I have to do is download it, run the installer, then when the installer is finished, I find the launch icon in the start menu and run it. In Ubuntu, I have to first make sure that the program is in the official repository. If it isn't, I'll have to add the repository using a rather lengthy and non-intuitive name, then I can install it. Then, I may have to edit some config files that may break other things.

As to the free software available on Linux, it is a rare situation where there is a piece of software that a normal user would want that is available for Linux that isn't also available on Windows. All the stuff that I would run on Linux (GIMP, Firefox, OpenShot, Handbrake, Audacity, Open/Libre Office) is available on Windows.

Certainly, there are reasons why an individual would want to use Linux over Windows, but these misleading claims aren't doing the Linux community any favors. Click-bait articles like the OP fall under that category, creating mountains out of molehills.
 

cybereality

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
8,790
As a gaming machine how many games are actually supported?
Probably around 80% of Windows games on Steam work in Linux no problem. So thousands of games.

Sometimes there are small issues, but you can usually tweak some configuration and fix them.
 

cybereality

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
8,790
The only things that don't work are pure DX12 things (CP2077, for instance)
Cyberpunk 2077 runs fine in Linux, even supported on day one, but DX12 special features like ray-tracing still need to be implemented in Proton.
 

cybereality

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
8,790
The DX12 thing may be an issue, but that is a minority of titles.
DX12 works fine, in fact it probably gives better performance than DX11 (since DX12 and Vulkan are so similar).

But some newer features that came out on Windows haven't been ported to Linux yet, like ray-tracing, but the games do work.
 
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
3,823
I tried to use Linux as a desktop replacement once... ended up spending HOURS trying to get a handful of programs installed and functional that would have taken 30 seconds in Windows.
You and almost everyone else who tried Linux on the desktop. Linux is easier to set up and run on the desktop than Windows, but that's it. Linux in now all your machine is good for, need to do anything other than run Linux? Boot Windows.

Linux is kind of in a funny place. If you only use your machine for web browsing and emails Linux is awesome for those people Linux is a great way to turn a potentially powerful machine into a Chromebook. If you're an absolute expert on Linux it's an incredibly powerful and somewhat versatile OS. The majority of users that fall somewhere in between those two will find Linux to be an impediment to every non-trivial task they want to perform.

I love Linux but I'm not delusional, it's nowhere near the league of Windows or Mac OS when it comes to creating a versatile and convenient machine to use from day to day. Even if MS and especially Apple have taken to arbitrarily limiting the function of their operating systems.
 

cybereality

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
8,790
Besides, I'm sure you won't be handing your average computer user who is comfortable installing Windows an Arch or Debian installation drive and expect them to have an easy time.
Well average people would probably have problems installing Windows 10 from an ISO on a blank computer. For people that are doing average stuff on the computer, Linux works fine and is just as easy as Windows or Mac. Firefox (or another browser) comes installed, Wi-Fi and other drivers (like for printers, etc.) generally work no problem now, it's fine. They can browse the web, go on YouTube, Facebook or whatever and it works. If they need additional software, they can easily open the Ubuntu Software app (or similar on other distros) and use a GUI to browse the store and download free content. The command-line is not generally needed unless you are an advanced user. Most general OS settings are changeable in the OS menus, updating the OS, etc.

But if you are an advanced user and want to customize the OS, then you will have to use the command-line. But it's not scary, and it works well. I do all sorts of stuff on my computer, from developing 3D games, editing 4K video, designing websites, all with free software. I can play the vast majority of Windows games on Proton and they work well. Really, everything I need to do on the computer works in Linux, and works better than Windows (more stable, the software is free, I can customize everything, etc.). I even wrote a plug-in for the image viewer in Ubuntu so it worked more like I wanted, and published the code for free on GitHub. Try changing the functionality of the Windows Photo app and see how that goes.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
34,949
Thanks for the laugh. I mean, I could claim that FreeBSD is every bit as easy to use as Windows, once it's setup properly. And I can setup a FreeBSD desktop workstation for easy use in not much more time than it takes for me to configure a new Windows install. But you won't find me ever making the claim in general that FreeBSD is as easy to use as Windows. Besides, I'm sure you won't be handing your average computer user who is comfortable installing Windows an Arch or Debian installation drive and expect them to have an easy time. Really what you mean is Some Linux distributions are mostly as easy to use once setup as Windows is. And by "some" you really mean Ubuntu and its derivatives. And even that is a bit of an extreme claim. When I want to install and use a Windows program, all I have to do is download it, run the installer, then when the installer is finished, I find the launch icon in the start menu and run it. In Ubuntu, I have to first make sure that the program is in the official repository. If it isn't, I'll have to add the repository using a rather lengthy and non-intuitive name, then I can install it. Then, I may have to edit some config files that may break other things.

As to the free software available on Linux, it is a rare situation where there is a piece of software that a normal user would want that is available for Linux that isn't also available on Windows. All the stuff that I would run on Linux (GIMP, Firefox, OpenShot, Handbrake, Audacity, Open/Libre Office) is available on Windows.

Certainly, there are reasons why an individual would want to use Linux over Windows, but these misleading claims aren't doing the Linux community any favors. Click-bait articles like the OP fall under that category, creating mountains out of molehills.


Have you installed an Ubuntu or Mint distribution lately?

It just works. No driver installation, no configuration needed. Boot from the USB stick, click install, tell it which drive you want to install on and what your location and language are and it literally does the rest.

In stalling and setting these up is significantly easier and less work than installing Windows properly where you often have to chase down drivers, etc.

And once it is installed, using the GUI launching programs, installing new ones, etc. is just as easy as on MacOS or Windows. Network setup is GUI and just as easy.

What I will concede is that when something goes wrong, it can be a little trickier to figure out, especially if you are scared of the command line, but honestly that is exceedingly rare.

Back in the day I used to have to edit config files and chase down other compatibility issues, sometimes having to configure and compile my own kernel etc. etc. I haven't had to do this type of troubleshooting in well over 10 years.

Personally I choose to use command line tools because I like them better than the GUI alternatives, but there is nothing wrong with the current state of GUI tools and configuration applications, and if you want to use only them, that is not a problem.

FreeBSD is still a little bit more old school in that regard and not a good comparison.

I feel like many people are stuck in the early 2000's when it comes to thinking about Linux. From a ease of use perspective a lot of things have positively changed since then.
 

lopoetve

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 11, 2001
Messages
32,950
Cyberpunk 2077 runs fine in Linux, even supported on day one, but DX12 special features like ray-tracing still need to be implemented in Proton.
Fair enough - I haven't played it, it's just one of the examples the proton guys use. My only real complaint (since I play CoD for the single player side, and can do that on windows) is star citizen, and 1, alpha, and 2, I'm pretty sure that's just various patching/etc that needs to be bleeding edge for it to work right on the Linux side, since they keep changing things on the game.
 

lopoetve

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 11, 2001
Messages
32,950
You and almost everyone else who tried Linux on the desktop. Linux is easier to set up and run on the desktop than Windows, but that's it. Linux in now all your machine is good for, need to do anything other than run Linux? Boot Windows.

Linux is kind of in a funny place. If you only use your machine for web browsing and emails Linux is awesome for those people Linux is a great way to turn a potentially powerful machine into a Chromebook. If you're an absolute expert on Linux it's an incredibly powerful and somewhat versatile OS. The majority of users that fall somewhere in between those two will find Linux to be an impediment to every non-trivial task they want to perform.

I love Linux but I'm not delusional, it's nowhere near the league of Windows or Mac OS when it comes to creating a versatile and convenient machine to use from day to day. Even if MS and especially Apple have taken to arbitrarily limiting the function of their operating systems.

Have you installed an Ubuntu or Mint distribution lately?

It just works. No driver installation, no configuration needed. Boot from the USB stick, click install, tell it which drive you want to install on and what your location and language are and it literally does the rest.

In stalling and setting these up is significantly easier and less work than installing Windows properly where you often have to chase down drivers, etc.

And once it is installed, using the GUI launching programs, installing new ones, etc. is just as easy as on MacOS or Windows. Network setup is GUI and just as easy.

What I will concede is that when something goes wrong, it can be a little trickier to figure out, especially if you are scared of the command line, but honestly that is exceedingly rare.

Back in the day I used to have to edit config files and chase down other compatibility issues, sometimes having to configure and compile my own kernel etc. etc. I haven't had to do this type of troubleshooting in well over 10 years.

Personally I choose to use command line tools because I like them better than the GUI alternatives, but there is nothing wrong with the current state of GUI tools and configuration applications, and if you want to use only them, that is not a problem.

FreeBSD is still a little bit more old school in that regard and not a good comparison.

I feel like many people are stuck in the early 2000's when it comes to thinking about Linux. From a ease of use perspective a lot of things have positively changed since then.
I still say the BIG thing holding Linux back is corporate tools. Onedrive... doesn't really exist on Linux (not to the same level of collaboration tool). Office - doesn't exist (and while Open/Libre are excellent, there are compatibility issues and collaboration issues there that just don't work right in Linux land - although I'm fiddling with wine/etc to see if one could get them to, so much is built into the windows or Apple subsystems that it makes it hard - and even on Apple it doesn't work as well as Windows).

I have to either use a published desktop or published apps (and the tools for using THOSE have issues on linux too) to really get everything I need day-to-day personally working. The corporate world in the US still revolves around microsoft tools, and those just don't run on Linux natively or with the full collaboration suite functional. For personal stuff it's fine - but not for enterprise business. YET.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
34,949
I still say the BIG thing holding Linux back is corporate tools. Onedrive... doesn't really exist on Linux (not to the same level of collaboration tool). Office - doesn't exist (and while Open/Libre are excellent, there are compatibility issues and collaboration issues there that just don't work right in Linux land - although I'm fiddling with wine/etc to see if one could get them to, so much is built into the windows or Apple subsystems that it makes it hard - and even on Apple it doesn't work as well as Windows).

I have to either use a published desktop or published apps (and the tools for using THOSE have issues on linux too) to really get everything I need day-to-day personally working. The corporate world in the US still revolves around microsoft tools, and those just don't run on Linux natively or with the full collaboration suite functional. For personal stuff it's fine - but not for enterprise business. YET.

I will agree with that. Not just the Office suite, but the availability of commercial software in general. Because windows is so ubiquitous, just about all software will run on it. (except the creative tools Apple purposely bought out to prevent them from going cross platform because they couldn't have anyone on Windows using pro-tools or Final Cut pro)

With Linux, except for some cross platform browsers and other things, you have to be open to using open-source workalike tools which are pretty good considering they are free, but anyone with an open mind would acknowledge that they are not up to par with the real thing. (LibreOffice vs Ms Office, Photoshop vs Gimp, etc.) This - IMHO - is the biggest drawback to mainstream adoption of Linux right now.

People have an expectation that they can run any recognized brand of software, and Linux, short of some convoluted tinkering with Wine just can't do that in many cases.

You know, bring home that TurboTax box you bought at Staples and try to install it, and it is not going to work. (if that's even a thing anymore, or if it is all web based, not sure) but you get my point.

On a side note, it is sad to me that Onedrive is considered such an important corporate tool these days. I absolutely hate it (and teams) and find it causes nothing but problems. I prefer to work with email, a separate screen sharing conference software platform, and plain old network shares.

I have been able to avoid using OneDrive (I keep it closed on my machine) but Teams is sadly unavoidable. :(

I absolutely cannot stand when some project manager starts embedding a project and files in Sharepoint/Teams. It just makes everything so much more difficult to work with.

That, and as an instant messaging platform Team is absolutely atrocious. I often get chats that I don't see for days, because - unlike with Skype for Business - it is not apparent when they come in.You have to be actively looking at the damn Teams window to see that you have a new message in that little sidebar. There is literally nothing to draw my attention to a new message.

1637173774206.png


And maybe that is how some people use Teams, but honestly, because it is such a nuisance (and a resource hog) I usually only even open Teams when I need to, like if I am joining a meeting with a Teams link, or something like that, otherwise it remains closed or at least minimized. I'm not going to keep that awful all in one teams window open on my desktop consuming precious desktop real-estate just in case someone messages me.


Just maintain a folder on a company SMB/CIFS/Whatever shared drive for the project, and email me the location of the file you want me to look at (or even attach the file itself!). So much simpler and better than ever having to deal with Teams/Sharepoint.
 

jardows

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
2,188
Have you installed an Ubuntu or Mint distribution lately?
Yes. I use Ubuntu LTS regularly to create a USB utility drive for our HelpDesk technicians.
It just works. No driver installation, no configuration needed. Boot from the USB stick, click install, tell it which drive you want to install on and what your location and language are and it literally does the rest.

In stalling and setting these up is significantly easier and less work than installing Windows properly where you often have to chase down drivers, etc.
Windows installation is pretty much the same, with the exception of the obnoxious OOBE at first boot. I usually don't have to chase down drivers for Windows, as long as I have an Ethernet connection. In a way, you could say the Windows way is better, as it will not have a bunch of included drivers you don't use. Then again, most people using Windows aren't installing Windows, they purchase computers that have it pre-installed. And I guarantee you that if Dell, HP, Lenovo, et. al, started mass selling computer with a Linux distro pre-installed, they'd find a way to load it down with obnoxious OOBE's and crapware.
And once it is installed, using the GUI launching programs, installing new ones, etc. is just as easy as on MacOS or Windows. Network setup is GUI and just as easy.
That should be a no-brainer for any OS distribution that aims to be primarily desktop related. It's not hard, I can't believe how hard some people make it.
What I will concede is that when something goes wrong, it can be a little trickier to figure out, especially if you are scared of the command line, but honestly that is exceedingly rare.

Back in the day I used to have to edit config files and chase down other compatibility issues, sometimes having to configure and compile my own kernel etc. etc. I haven't had to do this type of troubleshooting in well over 10 years.
You should try regularly troubleshooting Apple devices when something goes wrong. Will take you way back in terms of frustration and difficulty!
Personally I choose to use command line tools because I like them better than the GUI alternatives, but there is nothing wrong with the current state of GUI tools and configuration applications, and if you want to use only them, that is not a problem.

FreeBSD is still a little bit more old school in that regard and not a good comparison.
FreeBSD is a good comparison to distributions like Arch and Gentoo, which took their distribution philosophies from FreeBSD. My point is that if you have someone put in the work to pre-configure things and write or install good working utilities, you can hand pretty much any OS to someone and it be "easy to use." In FreeBSD land, that's what NomadBSD and GhostBSD have done, and what helloSystems is attempting to do. I don't use those because it defeats one of my reasons for using FreeBSD, which is to intimately learn how my OS works and have as much control over it as possible. That's one reason I'm experimenting with Void to replace Ubuntu where I currently use that.

I feel like many people are stuck in the early 2000's when it comes to thinking about Linux. From a ease of use perspective a lot of things have positively changed since then.
I fell like many people on tech forums have forgotten (or never knew) what computing was like in the early 2000's, but still think like it should be the early 2000's. The way we use computers now is so much different, with so many devices, online accounts and such. While there are plenty of people (myself included) who resist that, it is clear that the mass usage of computers is going the way of always online, always connected, and remotely managed. Microsoft moving Windows into a more controlled (by Microsoft) environment is necessary to stay dominant. Take the Apple ecosystem, where you have significantly less control than on a Windows computer. So many people don't mind that lack of control because the MacOS "integrates so well with all of my other Apple devices." (I've heard that exact line so many times I want to puke). It's a fine line Microsoft has to walk in order to compete with that but at the same time not totally close off their system (like Apple has) which would cut off the bulk of their users.

So in the end, over what is a minor, minor issue, shouting "Switch to Linux" is going to fall on deaf ears.
 

lopoetve

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 11, 2001
Messages
32,950
I will agree with that. Not just the Office suite, but the availability of commercial software in general. Because windows is so ubiquitous, just about all software will run on it. (except the creative tools Apple purposely bought out to prevent them from going cross platform because they couldn't have anyone on Windows using pro-tools or Final Cut pro)

With Linux, except for some cross platform browsers and other things, you have to be open to using open-source workalike tools which are pretty good considering they are free, but anyone with an open mind would acknowledge that they are not up to par with the real thing. (LibreOffice vs Ms Office, Photoshop vs Gimp, etc.) This - IMHO - is the biggest drawback to mainstream adoption of Linux right now.

People have an expectation that they can run any recognized brand of software, and Linux, short of some convoluted tinkering with Wine just can't do that in many cases.

You know, bring home that TurboTax box you bought at Staples and try to install it, and it is not going to work. (if that's even a thing anymore, or if it is all web based, not sure) but you get my point.

On a side note, it is sad to me that Onedrive is considered such an important corporate tool these days. I absolutely hate it (and teams) and find it causes nothing but problems. I prefer to work with email, a separate screen sharing conference software platform, and plain old network shares.

I have been able to avoid using OneDrive (I keep it closed on my machine) but Teams is sadly unavoidable. :(

I absolutely cannot stand when some project manager starts embedding a project and files in Sharepoint/Teams. It just makes everything so much more difficult to work with.

That, and as an instant messaging platform Team is absolutely atrocious. I often get chats that I don't see for days, because - unlike with Skype for Business - it is not apparent when they come in.You have to be actively looking at the damn Teams window to see that you have a new message in that little sidebar. There is literally nothing to draw my attention to a new message.

View attachment 413507

And maybe that is how some people use Teams, but honestly, because it is such a nuisance (and a resource hog) I usually only even open Teams when I need to, like if I am joining a meeting with a Teams link, or something like that, otherwise it remains closed or at least minimized. I'm not going to keep that awful all in one teams window open on my desktop consuming precious desktop real-estate just in case someone messages me.


Just maintain a folder on a company SMB/CIFS/Whatever shared drive for the project, and email me the location of the file you want me to look at (or even attach the file itself!). So much simpler and better than ever having to deal with Teams/Sharepoint.
Yeah, but you can’t have version control (sanely given the file formats) and edit tracking and multiple people working on the same ~file~ simultaneously without OneDrive. That’s the magic of it, for better or worse, and that model has permeated the industry. It’s the closest thing to Git for office work that there is. I don’t use teams for file manipulation; we sync it to OneDrive, but it’s still the only way when you need multiple people working on the same thing at the same time. Or you have to manually merge.
 
Top