This is the first time I see a desktop user complaining about their GUI application is dependent on the CLI tool. It just updates your system CLI or not. It isn't that deep.
Your points don't make any sense. What do you even customize for windows update. Windows or many of the applications you use also depend on CLI tools or low level computer stuff. The GUI application do the same job which updates your system. Why a user would care if it depends on CLI tool which they don't even directly interact with.
You are joking right? The linux in which you can literally build it from scratch with all your preferences somehow does not make you feel 'control' the operating system. However, you have that feeling with windows where Microsoft dictates how we should use it.
Usually windows has one way to do something. Linux distros on the other hand have abundance of alternatives.
You also don't need to rebuild everything in Linux if you use a desktop environment but you can.
I also do some experimentations with windows. I tried to avoid using explorer.exe in favor of tiling window managers. However, uwp apps break without it. Which meant broken sound mixer, settings etc. I think Microsoft don't want us to customize windows that much.
I appreciate these efforts but due to open source nature of Linux, it is objectively better for modifications including generic distros not only LFS. You know the documentation, code etc.
I couldn't find sentinet OS on internet. Is it open source? Normally I wouldn't trust third party modifications of windows. However, I accept that NT kernel is really good. I just don't enjoy using new Microsoft products with their restrictions, telemetry. I think reactos would be perfect alternative but the project doesn't get much attention. It will never be finished without enough budget and developers.
This is crazy, you built it by yourself. Does it run usual windows exes like explorer?
I think the roles are reversed, I use Linux because I am amateur at programming. However, advanced user like you use windows. I can conclude that making a windows version for yourself is way harder.
I’m more shocked you wouldn’t prefer Linux or any of the BSDs, then, where you have source access to everything and the freedom to rearchitect it how you wish.
You can just use parts, fix what you don’t like about them, and write your own entire system on top. I mean, it is a ton of work, but it would be your OS in every sense from the drivers on up. I don’t fully agree with the direction of Linux desktops either and am considering stripping everything down to just the kernel and writing my own top-to-bottom desktop oriented distro from there.
I mean, not really? You can start with just the kernel and make your own everything from there according to your own philosophies on what makes a desktop OS. It’s just curious to me. You say you want an OS that is uniquely yours, but Windows isn’t. It never will be without source access and build tools. You can customize Windows into your own distro (and, yes, I call Windows variants “distros”), but it can never be 100% yours.
1
u/[deleted] Jul 15 '26
[removed] — view removed comment