I read through the nearly 400 comments and no one brought up using the LTSC edition of Windows, which actually gets out of your way or that you don't own the OS when you use a proprietary operating system.
I'm not really sure what to make of this as it seems people prefer to complain as if they were hostages to the whims of others.
I buy my computers with Linux pre-installed on supported machines. All those complaints of Linux "still not working" in 2022 effortlessly glide over the obvious: you're already making it an unfair fight when you adopt an OS to a non-native machine.
If you don't own the OS what's the point of complaining? MacOS and Windows will never have the best interests of the user at heart because that's not where the capital incentives are. It's really as simple as that. Are you going to develop a patch for Windows that makes Windows do as you want? If you do, who at Microsoft is going to take your PR? No one?
This behavior should be blindingly obvious to anyone who thinks for a second where the incentives are. If the incentives are not aligned with yours, it's time to a. consider paying for a volume license for LTSC so you can get the experience you want that you pay for and vote with your dollars or b. use an OS that isn't abusive.
C. moan and complain isn't actually a productive strategy because the money bundled into your OS cost is neglible to the value of your metrics and pushing a subscription to Office that actually makes Microsoft money. People keep smashing this button in the vain hope something will change. Stop and think. Follow the money. Do something about your situation that doesn't enrage you so often.
> I buy my computers with Linux pre-installed on supported machines. All those complaints of Linux "still not working" in 2022 effortlessly glide over the obvious: you're already making it an unfair fight when you adopt an OS to a non-native machine
I did as well, an Asus 1215B netbook, remember those?
The wlan still has issues to work properly to this day, the graphics card should be able to do OpenGL 4.1/DirectX 11, yet the AMD driver only does OpenGL 3.3.
Good that it was shipped with official Linux support.
I think that's a cherry-picked example of a very old machine. I've had a bug-free experience with the XPS 13 Developer Edition and Purism's line of laptops (I won't comment on the hardware quality of Purism's laptops here because that's a separate issue).
I'm expecting a Framework soon, which touts official support for Fedora so looking forward to yet another bug-free experience there.
Yes but it's an extremely old example and not at all indicative of the environment around owning a Linux-shipped laptop today.
Have you owned and used an XPS 13 Developer Edition? Because now it just looks like you're driving around the internet for examples of things that prop up your argument.
I have one I use every day and have for the three years I've owned it. It works great on Ubuntu and Arch Linux. No complaints.
Not at all, showing that it isn't the walk in the part that gets sold even when buying hardware that is shipping with Linux in the box, and far from what most people get at best buy and friends with other desktop OSes.
It is always the other people's fault that Linux doesn't quite work, but "my system works just perfectly", when in reality keeps being the same hit and miss as always.
No, it's not your fault and that's not what I'm saying. I also think people often fall victim to selective amnesia for what doesn't work well on their Windows or macOS machines. Off-hand I can recount an Xbox app that will fully freeze my system often enough to be annoying and a macOS work machine that would completely freeze when waking up from deep sleep while docked to my monitor.
What I am saying is that most people looking to make comparisons should start by comparing Linux-shipped machines for a baseline standard. I've just told you that everything on my XPS 13 Developer Edition shipped fully working, without any user intervention. Am I the lier and your Medium article the true arbiter? That's up to you to decide. But maybe go out there and give one a shot yourself that isn't ancient, like a Framework (Framework is Linux-supported but not shipped; other alternatives include the Star Labs' line, System76, and Tuxedo) and tell me your experience. You can always install Windows after.
Both are right and both are wrong, that is the whole point with Linux Desktop since forever.
My anecdotes are also based on hardware bought with Linux pre-installed on them.
While System76 and Tuxedo are good options for technical users, the best buy audience will never get to them, at very best they will buy an Android or ChromeOS based device.
I don't think even the LTSC edition avoids the UX problems discussed here. All the LTSC does is freeze the features Windows had at release and give you security updates. You're still stuck with whatever was there at launch.
Suggesting switching to an entirely different OS to someone who's complaining that their habitual OS no longer behaves as it used to isn't very useful.
>I'm not really sure what to make of this as it seems people prefer to complain as if they were hostages to the whims of others. I buy my computers with Linux pre-installed on supported machines.
You don't understand because you're failing to empathize with what people are saying, because it's not a problem you personally experience. Let's see if this works: suppose you find a shoe manufacturer that makes these really neat shoes that you love. You love them so much that every time they wear out, you buy the next model from that manufacturer. Each model is slightly different from the last, but you like all of them better than the competition. As you've gotten used to them, you've started to develop certain habits with these shoes, such as a technique to tie the laces that makes you do it very fast. But over time, the manufacturer has started to change the way it makes the shoes, such that they're not as comfortable as they used to be, or some of your habits no longer work with them. Now, you don't want to buy from a different manufacturer. At this point your feet are accustomed to the way these shoes fit, and other shoes feel completely different, even if in some ways they're objectively better. You don't want shoes from a different brand, you want the shoes this one used to make, which used to be so much better than this.
TL;DR: Something can be worse than it used to be, and still be better than the alternatives.
> You don't understand because you're failing to empathize with what people are saying, because it's not a problem you personally experience.
To be clear I support my wife's LTSC install and use Windows 11 with WSL and WSLg for work.
> I don't think even the LTSC edition avoids the UX problems discussed here.
I think it does but please highlight which problems it doesnt avoid.
> suppose you find a shoe manufacturer that makes these really neat shoes that you love.
Do they respect me as a user? What are their capital incentives? If not aligned with mine why do I love them? Can I change my purchasing habits so their capital incentives align? If not, I should probably do something less rage-inducing for my own health.
>I think it does but please highlight which problems it doesnt avoid.
I've never used it, I was guessing based on my understanding of what LTSC is.
>Do they respect me as a user? What are their capital incentives? If not aligned with mine why do I love them?
The thing you love is the shoes, not the shoes' manufacturer.
>Can I change my purchasing habits so their capital incentives align?
Can you, as in, is it possible for you at a reasonable cost? Maybe, maybe not. It depends on the user. "Would you?" is the real question. If we're assuming that your shoes fit you best, why would you switch to a different brand that would fit you worse? Are you implying that the natural tendency of a product is to get worse until it's no better than its competitors?
> Are you implying that the natural tendency of a product is to get worse until it's no better than its competitors?
Yes! And I'll get a little philosophical here but if we really take an eagle's eye view on the source of this problem it's that capitalism insists on growth to keep the machine of prosperity running. On a microcosmic scale you can see this at work inside companies, which must pursue new growth streams as existing markets become saturated. With single digit growth in OS licenses, Microsoft pursues cloud/Office/SaaS to continue offering investors big returns. This leads to the inevitable downward spiral of the quality of former core products and desperate moves to monetize essentially a delivery vehicle to sell SaaS products.
Stepping outside Microsoft for a moment and looking at Apple we can already see this emergent behavior in Apple's pivot to services and the marketing of those services inside its SaaS/subscription delivery vehicles, such as iCloud+, Apple TV, Arcade etc.
Returning to Microsoft, this is why we see Windows licenses now being sold basically for free and Microsoft removing virtually all burdens to a user running an unlicensed OS. It no longer matters to their new core business.
Given this duopoly of OSes with a new service fetish it behooves a user of these OSes to either pay so much money to Microsoft for respectful OS editions they can't help but notice (volume licensing LTSC) or explore alternatives that aren't beholden to these vicious imperatives.
Fair enough. I don't think capitalism is the source of the problem, though, but public trading of company shares. And more specifically, the concept of fiduciary responsibility. I honestly think that's poison in how it misaligns incentives and that it's socially a net negative, if we assume that the societal purpose of a company is primarily to provide services to its customers.
I think your take on the root cause is more nuanced and better than my own. That said, I don't know how we change an industry entrenched in this poison field.
Windows knows full well LTSC is pain free but also less profitable. Sales will act really difficult, to sell it to a business unless they complain they are doing something mission critical. Also as far as I know it's difficult to buy LTSC as a private costumer.
Anyone can buy a volume license. You'll need to pay 200ish dollars or so but for an OS you use every day and provided the 400 comments here are indicative of a real desire to use a non-abusive edition of Windows, it's a bargain!
I'm not really sure what to make of this as it seems people prefer to complain as if they were hostages to the whims of others.
I buy my computers with Linux pre-installed on supported machines. All those complaints of Linux "still not working" in 2022 effortlessly glide over the obvious: you're already making it an unfair fight when you adopt an OS to a non-native machine.
If you don't own the OS what's the point of complaining? MacOS and Windows will never have the best interests of the user at heart because that's not where the capital incentives are. It's really as simple as that. Are you going to develop a patch for Windows that makes Windows do as you want? If you do, who at Microsoft is going to take your PR? No one?
This behavior should be blindingly obvious to anyone who thinks for a second where the incentives are. If the incentives are not aligned with yours, it's time to a. consider paying for a volume license for LTSC so you can get the experience you want that you pay for and vote with your dollars or b. use an OS that isn't abusive.
C. moan and complain isn't actually a productive strategy because the money bundled into your OS cost is neglible to the value of your metrics and pushing a subscription to Office that actually makes Microsoft money. People keep smashing this button in the vain hope something will change. Stop and think. Follow the money. Do something about your situation that doesn't enrage you so often.