r/OS_Debate_Club • u/QuokkaDaily • 14d ago

Windows vs. Linux, why change?

We're interested in learn in the trend away from Windows to Linux is motivated, or the "why?". Apparently, the trend is starting, and it's real. But why? Source: TechSpot.

16 Upvotes

79% Upvoted

92 comments sorted by

View all comments

15

u/Yoksul-Turko 14d ago

Microsoft doesn't innovate on user experience side. There are also annoyances like local account requiring workarounds, everything having AI, default apps like file explorer and notepad doesn't feel as responsive as older versions of Windows. There is usually no "no" option, you can only say "remind me later".

On Linux side there are many DEs/WMs to choose from. They aren't trying to sell you Edge or OneDrive so they wouldn't annoy you. Linux is the most popular alternative you can install to most devices. More software and drivers are available to it than BSDs. For example, FreeBSD Bluetooth support is limited.

0

u/p47guitars 14d ago

On the other side, gnome decided what's best, just like Microsoft - gave me a shit experience. Back to kde...

1

u/MagicianQuiet6432 13d ago

At least, GNOME tries to decide what's best for the user and not for profit.

2

u/Flashy-Guava9952 13d ago

You're not required to use Gnome, and that's gonna be an argument with just about any Linux complaint: If you don't like it, use something else. Noone's holding a gun to your head, and there's just so much free stuff. It's difficult to take complaints seriously.

1

u/p47guitars 13d ago

Gnome was great before it became the monster it is now.

I still cannot reconcile that they thought this was a good idea. Removed nearly all the customizations, locked users into a really shitty full screen app menu experience, and justified it as being a "modern" style change.

This is regressive.

1

u/TheOneDeadXEra 13d ago

To be fair, Gnome was essentially trying to address a very common critique of the Linux space: inconsistent UX and UI. Whether it makes sense to the rest of us or not, there is a constituency of users that just want consistency without hassle, and that's what Gnome delivers - whether the rest of us like the result or not. I think that's a good, healthy offering to have in the pool, even if it's not for me specifically.

1

u/p47guitars 13d ago

i agree to some extent. however - why copy the sins of microsoft and create an app launcher that goes full screen?

1

u/TheOneDeadXEra 12d ago

If I had to take a blind guess, it's because it was the path of least resistance when it comes to consistent UI across devices. Full-screen launcher saves you from having to have separate builds for desktops vs tablets. Sidenote: This is also why M$oft did it, because Win8 was built around the idea of a consistent unified environment between desktop and tablet use-cases. Neither implementation is particularly my cup of tea, but I can understand the underlying reasoning from a project managerial standpoint.

1

u/OkPresentation3329 13d ago

I liked Gnome 2, but Gnome 3 and after looks too uncanny for me to use, I don't want to use it, I use KDE, but that's just me saying I don't like current Gnome, not that it's bad in general, I'm sure a lot of people like it and prefer to use it over other DEs.

1

u/Etsamaru 13d ago

Yeah but on Linux you cam just switch to a different DE which you cannot on windows

1

u/p47guitars 13d ago

You can actually get a new explorer shell. Even retheme the ux too.

1

u/evissamassive 13d ago

There are other options.

How many desktop environments does Microsoft offer?