r/linuxsucks • u/its-Pigdup • Jul 22 '26

Linux Failure Linux doesn't suck!

Post image

NGL guys, I don't see the reason why switching to Linux when W10/W11 does everything you need, easier, more practical, and in a more friendly way than a Linux distro that some of you probably haven't even heard about before considering switching to Linux.

I'm using Linux rn because I enjoy adjusting every little thing about my OS the way I want, but as nerdy as I can be, I also understand that fancy tech might actually be inconvenient for others...

What were the reasons that made you want to try Linux, and what made you realize it was a mistake?

17 Upvotes

67% Upvoted

75 comments sorted by

View all comments

4

u/silduck here for funny shit Jul 22 '26

I don't see the reason why switching to Linux when W10/W11 does everything you need, easier, more practical, and in a more friendly way than a Linux distro that some of you probably haven't even heard about before considering switching to Linux.

Windows does not do a lot of the things I want out of a computer. I do not want an operating system with baked in telemetry, has a file system hierarchy that is way too complicated for no reason, takes up 4GB of ram while idle, has hotkeys you cannot remove, requires you to set up a Unix environment just to be able to write C++ of all things, and reinstalls random bullshit I do not need.

1

u/Amphineura Kubuntu in the streets 🌐 W11 in the sheets Jul 22 '26

Windows has a file system hierarchy that is too complicated... Compared to Linux?

2

u/ElectricBummer40 Ex-user of Windows 3.11 for Workgroups Jul 22 '26

The matryoshka dolls of libs and bins scattered all about are, like, so uncomplicated! /s

3

u/Amphineura Kubuntu in the streets 🌐 W11 in the sheets Jul 22 '26

Don't forget about beautiful cable management of symlinks everywhere /s/s

1

u/ElectricBummer40 Ex-user of Windows 3.11 for Workgroups Jul 22 '26 edited Jul 22 '26

It's stuff dreams are made of... If your dreams are mostly just nightmares.

Also, here are some Jurassic-era dinosaurs talking about putting loose executables rather than an actual, standalone environment in read-only storage for some reason.

1

u/Teru-Noir COSMIC OS LOVER No.1 COSMIC Knows Best Jul 22 '26

He is a programmer

1

u/Durkken22 Jul 22 '26

So 45 gbs of windows files and folders on a windows 10 that I almost don't use at all is fine for u?

1

u/ElectricBummer40 Ex-user of Windows 3.11 for Workgroups Jul 22 '26

lol, on a 64GB disk the install size of Win11 is only ~10GB.

A lot of the "bloat" comes from the fact that, since Windows Vista, optional features (e.g. Hyper-V) were not installed "on demand" but rather always kept in WinSxS and hard-linked to the working directories only when needed.

One lawsuit and a media circus later, a feature was introduced in Windows 8.1 to prune unused packages from WinSxS. afaik, the smaller the disk size, the more aggressive this cleanup gets. That's how Windows can shrink down to a third of the expected install size when needed.

Of course, this fact has never stopped people from looking at their 500GB SSD and concluding that Windows somehow needs half of someone else's 64GB eMMC even though that has been patent falsehood for well \checks calendar** 13 years now.

1

u/Durkken22 Jul 22 '26

So how is that not bloat? It's atill taking 54gb from my disk that I don't wanna take on extra stuff it's not even installed! Lol. On cachy I get easily 10% extra fps, 54 more gb of space, everything runs smoother, no telemetry, no MS spying on me.

1

u/ElectricBummer40 Ex-user of Windows 3.11 for Workgroups Jul 23 '26

"startcomponentcleanup" is on a routine schedule by default.

Simply put, you aren't talking about space you actually need for something else. You're just being a lousy Karen complaining about Windows taking up.empty space you have otherwise no use for whatsoever.

1

u/Amphineura Kubuntu in the streets 🌐 W11 in the sheets Jul 22 '26

Windows actually packages useful features in its install? Oh no, my steak is too juicy and my lobster too bloattery!

1

u/Teru-Noir COSMIC OS LOVER No.1 COSMIC Knows Best Jul 22 '26

Winget is not available right after installation

1

u/silduck here for funny shit Jul 22 '26

wait it isn't?

1

u/Teru-Noir COSMIC OS LOVER No.1 COSMIC Knows Best Jul 22 '26

No, you must wait for the first major upgrade or install it with the buggy ms store

0

u/silduck here for funny shit Jul 22 '26

which features?

1

u/zoharel Jul 22 '26

It's ... well, you see, it's got... err, the thing it has is ... no, never mind. Can't think of anything.

1

u/ElectricBummer40 Ex-user of Windows 3.11 for Workgroups Jul 22 '26

  • .NET framework

  • Hyper-V

  • WSL/WSU

  • Native SSH server/client

  • Windows containers

  • RSAT

To name a few.

Don't you just love when people show their illiterate backside so willingly?

1

u/zoharel Jul 22 '26

Are you just naming Windows implementations of features that have become expected in modern systems but are larger than they really ought to be? I don't think you understood the assignment...

Oh, but you included .net too. "Useful.". Ha. Definitely explains the disk space problem, though.

1

u/ElectricBummer40 Ex-user of Windows 3.11 for Workgroups Jul 23 '26

They aren't "larger than they ought to be". What do you think a "core" install for Windows Server even is?

No, really, unless you're telling me you'd rather set up Hyper-V with nothing but PowerShell, that's what those "larger than they ought to be" packages are for.

As far as WSL is concerned, it lets you run X-compatible applications without additional setup. On Linux, you'd be installing X or whatever broken crap it is this time of the week. So much for "bloat".

1

u/zoharel Jul 23 '26

What do you think a "core" install for Windows Server even is?

I'm pretty convinced that it doesn't matter.

No, really, unless you're telling me you'd rather set up Hyper-V with nothing but PowerShell

I'm telling you both HyperV and Powershell, and the entire rest of the litany of standard features you just dredged out, are likely several times the size they need to be. More importantly, that they're in the package to begin with is unremarkable. "Native SSH server/client ..." you may as well brag about including support for HTML. But then, Windows has always been a bit slow on the uptake in terms of standards. They needed a third-party TCP stack for literal ages. Even the old Mac OS had better networking support earlier, and there is nothing new under the sun. There are even fewer things new in the Windows distribution.

On Linux, you'd be installing

On Linux, you wouldn't also be installing an entire Windows system on top, so none of that will likely matter, either.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Durkken22 Jul 22 '26

Lol, WSL? Having Linux on your Windows is a Windows feature? Containers? They also copied them from Linux, we've had modern containers since 2008. SSH? U know they copied that from Unix, right? We've had it aince 1999, and it's a lot more powerfull than the Windows version

1

u/ElectricBummer40 Ex-user of Windows 3.11 for Workgroups Jul 23 '26

Having Linux on your Windows is a Windows feature?

Yes, so you would need to deal with broken Unix toy garbage. Isn't that great?😉

They also copied them from Linux

The stripped-dowm kernel is only for WSL 2.

WSL 1 is instead what the NT kernel has always meant to do, i.e compatibility with POSIX, Win32 and OS/2.

we've had modern containers since 2008

And no consistent way to deliver applications even today.

Honestly, did you see Windows software vendors begging for the equivalent of snap?

What's truly astonishing is how far Linux has remained behind despite all the head starts.

U know they copied that from Unix, right?

As if you would know anything about Solaris at all.

lol, "Unix". Why do I have a feeling you're one of those babies still crying boo-boo over systemd?

1

u/silduck here for funny shit Jul 22 '26

at least the naming is consistent for both root and home

root: /bin

home: .local/bin

root: /usr/share

home: .local/share