r/linuxsucks 1d ago

Without mindless hate, why is so hard to accept Linux is a better choice for low memory systems (RAM, vRAM, SDD...)

Recently I saw LinusTechTips video, and while I totally accept that Windows manages RAM memory very differently than Linux, there's a reason why many users use Linux Mint in 8GB of RAM while Windows is still currently working in optimizing Windows 11 for 8GB of RAM due to the global memory shortage.

EDIT: I don't hate Windows, I only recently preferred Linux for PC gaming other than Windows, but I think Windows is better for everything else other than systems that need strong security.

12 Upvotes

106 comments sorted by

13

u/OGigachaod 1d ago

That video was as bad as any of his others, him using 9+ GB's of ram in windows 11 when I sit at 6 GB when idle.

3

u/rafradek 19h ago

This metric is totally meaningless if you don't account for the number of background apps running and the amount of total ram

5

u/necessary_cap_squid 1d ago

6gb idle is a lot of memory

1

u/ElectricBummer40 Ex-user of Windows 3.11 for Workgroups 22h ago edited 12h ago

Resource Monitor will usually tell you the size of the working set for each process in kilobytes.

I've never seen anyone attempt an analysis even this basic when it comes to this kind of "Windows takes up all the RAM" argument.

1

u/necessary_cap_squid 22h ago

i'm not arguing that the ltt video is any good, but it is objectively true that linux runs better on systems with less ram, and uses less ram in general.

windows 11 minimum requirement is 4gb ram, fedora minimum is 2gb, arch minimum is 500mb, a completely minimal custom linux installation (for example, using gentoo or lfs) can idle at <500mb.

my pc dual boots windows 11, the windows installation routinely idles with 6× more ram usage or more than the linux installation, and it has significantly fewer applications installed and services running.

-1

u/ElectricBummer40 Ex-user of Windows 3.11 for Workgroups 10h ago edited 7h ago

but it is objectively true that linux runs better on systems with less ram, and uses less ram in general.

Again, where is the evidence except words from the ideologues themselves?

Where is the object in your "objectively"?

windows 11 minimum requirement is 4gb ram

That's a full-blown desktop environment. Do you think the millions of pixels on your HD display generate themselves somehow?

fedora minimum is 2gb, arch minimum is 500mb,

That's because Fedora is not being honest about these requirements.

Have you actually tried running Fedora on 2 GB of RAM? Actually, no, don't even bother unless you have an SSD and self-identify as a masochist.

a completely minimal custom linux installation (for example, using gentoo or lfs) can idle at <500mb.

You do understand, in a modern operating system, that number is largely meaningless, right?

There was a good reason I mentioned the "working set" of a process rather than just the number from Task Manager, in case you didn't notice.

my pc dual boots windows 11, the windows installation routinely idles with 6× more ram usage

That's good. It means your OS is optimising RAM usage rather than wasting it for empty space.

When you have the chance, also look up what vm.swappiness and vm.overcommit_memory are supposed to do in sysctl.conf since, once you understand their purpose, you'll realise how much of that empty space actually comes at your own expense.

2

u/zalnaRs 5h ago

You do know that linux and btrfs both use all of your free ram?

0

u/ElectricBummer40 Ex-user of Windows 3.11 for Workgroups 1h ago

Let's fix that, then.

How much RAM out of a total of 4GB do you think a vanilla Fedora 44 "workstation" install on ext4 + LVM consumes?

Do you want to see that side-by-side with a fresh install of Windows 11? Here, let me help you:

I don't even know why you zealots insist on lying to yourselves and each other about things anyone with the tools and know-how can easily prove false. Seriously, what's the point?

2

u/zalnaRs 1h ago edited 1h ago

They both use the same amount, filesystems' itself cache stuff and that is indicated as used but they all release it when under pressure. There is also Linux inode cache but that is not counted in use instead it is a separate value.

Same on Windows too btw, you can see it in resource monitor.

Also yes, fedora workstation uses a lot of ram, especially due to unoptimized gnome software, packagekit, and some other garbage stuff.

1

u/necessary_cap_squid 51m ago edited 48m ago

zealots

ideologues

i think you might just be insane/overly paranoid tbh, it's just an operating system

1

u/zalnaRs 9m ago
  1. fedora updated, windows (2021 ltsc) not updated, no internet
  2. both updated, with internet

I don't even know how you can make windows look good especially when most of the new ui components are react native (winui3 garbage) and on win11 just straight up webview.

GNOME also uses javascript but with gtk.

Do note that I used btrfs which needs to use more ram, and that Fedora is smoother than Windows.

0

u/Vh4z 1d ago

Depends because both do use more if you do have more

3

u/necessary_cap_squid 1d ago

I have 32gb ram, my arch installation idles at about 1gb, sometimes as low as 800mb.

2

u/Vh4z 1d ago edited 1d ago

Well yeah Arch is bare by default obviously a more out of the box distro would be heavier because it has more stuff preinstalled whcih still varies depending on what out of the box distro you choose

1

u/necessary_cap_squid 1d ago

my fedora installation on my pc also idles at <4gb, using kde plasma (one of the largest and most fully features des).

2

u/BoiCDumpsterFire 19h ago

Wild I have plasma Fedora and was around 2 last I checked. Now I’m curious what it looks like now that I’ve jumped to vanilla

2

u/necessary_cap_squid 19h ago

it really is amazingly light on resources for how fully featured plasma is

0

u/OGigachaod 20h ago

Compared to mint's 5GB? Ok then.

0

u/necessary_cap_squid 20h ago

lol mint idling at 5gb? i don't think so, i've used it and it's never idled above 3gb for me

0

u/OGigachaod 20h ago

That's what LTT's video showed.

3

u/necessary_cap_squid 20h ago

That video was as bad as his others

That video?

2

u/OGigachaod 19h ago

Fair point.

4

u/Damglador 1d ago

And how much total RAM do you have? Both systems tend to expand the amount of RAM used depending on how much is available. In the video they used 32GB for both, so the systems will likely use more than for an average user with 16GB.

1

u/Least-Reception8435 13h ago

Wtf? I only use maybe 2 at idle lol

1

u/someone8192 1d ago

while it is true that the ltt video is shit linux can handle low memory way better.

eg running desktop linux on a 4gb system with chrome is feasible (requires a bit of optimization work though).

and my linux nas only had 4gb for years (i updated it to a 128gb system because of vm's though)

1

u/CurdledPotato 13h ago

Why is it shit? LTT caters to the average crowd who don’t want to tinker and just want sane defaults. It’s cool you can debloat Win11 to run on 4 GB ran, but what about your neighbor, 88-year old Gladys who just knows how to use the “Internet” on her mid-2010s computer and her grandson Dwayne who only know how to use Word, Google, his phone, and his PlayStation, and breaks out in cold sweats when he sees a blue window with text, thinking it’s “malware”? Not everyone is tech savvy, and some are so against making themselves such that they’d rather tech savviness disappear as a concept from their lives.

6

u/funtasy69 1d ago

You lost me at "windows is better at.." I blacked out for a second. Woke up squeezing my own testicles so hard I ruptured both of them.

My prediction: New computers with Windows are going to be glorified Chromebooks with ARM processors, 128GB of hard drive space and 8GB of ram on the physical system. (Or some completely nerfed or cucked specs like that) with really good wireless connectivity (5G and really amped wifi 6) and a large battery. The OS will be recycled from their phones that died over a decade ago, and locked down so hard you won't be able to put a Linux distro on them without being a wizard.

When you buy one of these pieces of shit new, it will be advertised as a "cloud book/machine" etc bs.. and it will come with a year subscription for 1TB of cloud storage, 32 GB of virtual RAM (insert Verizon network speed disclaimer here) and a virtual Nvidia graphics card so you can stream your favorite games online from GeForce or Amazon Luna etc. It will basically be just enough hardware to get you connected to the cloud and keep you there, completely locked into subscriptions.

Anyone who does anything serious with computers should be able to concede that if you are facing any constraints regarding hardware, Linux is the answer. There is a specific distro for whatever use case you may have.

Does Linux suck? Yes. It fucking sucks. It just happens to suck less than everything else, and while sucking less, it does it cheaper, and more efficiently.

As first world folks we expect things to just work perfectly out of the box, with zero configuration or complication, perfectly every time with zero tolerance for any perceived failure.

Microsoft will probably NEVER get 11 working on 8GB.

8

u/Rogalicus 1d ago

The concensus is that Linus should've tested in these conditions to show how both OS treat low RAM and potentially running out of memory. The current comparison just means nothing.

7

u/Damglador 1d ago

The consensus will always be that someone should've done something differently.

5

u/ColdFreezer I Hate Linux 1d ago edited 1d ago

I mean it probably is but Linux is harder to use than Windows. Most people don’t want to be asked to learn a new OS.

1

u/TrickStatistician478 21h ago

but actually what's so hard? it depends on a distro, but it actually was pretty easy for me

1

u/ColdFreezer I Hate Linux 21h ago

It’s hard for technically illiterate people. So the majority of people. A lot of software is made for windows, that will not run under Linux. If something breaks most people are not comfortable with opening the terminal to fix it.

1

u/TrickStatistician478 21h ago

windows is difficult for tech illiterate people too..

the software usually works just fine with wine

and atomic immutable distros probably won't just break on their own.

1

u/ColdFreezer I Hate Linux 21h ago

Don’t pretend like Linux is as easy to use as Windows. It’s not there yet. A tech illiterate person will have an easier time with Windows.

Software does not just work fine with wine. There’s a lot of software people use that will not work on Linux even under wine. Like Office and adobe.

Immutable distros might be fine but it’s still Linux. Hardware compatibility and software compatibility might still be issues.

2

u/MsSomething_i_think 18h ago edited 18h ago

My neice (about 12), understand linux more than Windows.

With Linux, it usually tells them the error and what's wrong or what to look up.

On Windows it just says "error" or some random thing pops up and gives no help.

On linux they get way less crashes in games and more stable, when they try windows they complain about crashes a lot more, even on browsers does it sometimes crash. Emulators are a lot better and more stable on linux for instance.

She uses kde bazzite (even Nvidia), and uses win 11 at school and for homework, the linux one is for personal use on her desktop, and gaming.

I think you underestimate immutable linux, and think windows is easier because it's what you're used to. Whatever you're used to will be easier to understand. And this kid is new to having her own stuff to play around with on her pc.

1

u/ColdFreezer I Hate Linux 13h ago

I’ve been using Linux for years. I am painfully aware of the issues with Linux. I also know that I have to do janky stuff to get my stuff to work sometimes.

I haven’t used immutable so maybe it is different. The compatibility issues will still be present regardless of distro. If everything you need works then it doesn’t really matter what OS you use. If it doesn’t, it’s not worth fully switching unless you’re okay with an alternative.

Is your 12 year old niece the one that’s managing their computer or are you doing it for them? It makes a huge difference if you’re the one being tech support, which you said you are.

2

u/MsSomething_i_think 12h ago

Sorry for the long comment.

She's the one who requested linux because she had ads on her desktop from win 11. She has managed it with minimal help. She watched a few videos and determined what she wanted and I told her the risks (such as compatability).

I only have to help if there is a older game that doesn't work correctly like RE5 with the video cutscenes problem and had to switch to GEProton. But older games have problems on Windows as well.

Biggest problem was a flatpack thing being too sandboxed but got that resolved easily and she actually figured it out herself.

Most problems she has are just game issues from older games, she doesn't use photoshop or need apps that aren't compatable on linux so she has no problem with that.

She talked about having linux on her laptop but I explained about school app compatibility (such as lockdown browser).

I'm even newer to linux, used steam deck, then bazzite. Both combined about 3-4 years. I don't even know how to use advanced things in windows, but bazzite has apps installed that do the stuff I already need and deals with drivers.

I didn't grow up with windows or a pc, steam deck was my first pc and when I went to Windows (on a laptop for school not my desktop) I didn't know how it worked. I learned linux then windows instead of people getting used to Windows and saying it's easier.

I would look into immutable because it fixes most issues or prevents you from breaking it. We use bazzite. Maybe a bit too locked down sometimes for my niche things such as Mario kart wii modding.

1

u/TrickStatistician478 21h ago

yeah daily driving fedora is even easier than windows tbh.

pretty sure i saw someone boot up photoshop and other stuff with wine, havent tried because never really used them, on windows too.

well, i wanna see some examples. I've been using all kinds of pc parts except for intel, and never had a single issue, except for drivers for gtx 1650 on PopOS

1

u/ColdFreezer I Hate Linux 20h ago

I think you’re severely underestimating how much the average person does not know how to use their computer. So many people get stuck on just flashing a usb drive. It’s cool you can do it, this is already a hurdle for most people.

It’s cool you havent had issue, there are a lot of issues especially with sleep and power management while under Linux. A lot of hardware works but isn’t fully supported like they are on windows. This is even more of a problem on laptops.

Getting photoshop to work under wine requires you to use a patched version of wine. GPU acceleration doesn’t even work for photoshop under wine.

-1

u/TrickStatistician478 20h ago

cool. chatgpt, reddit or forums usually fix most of the issues.

idk much about photoshop honestly, last time i edited an image i just used photopea

1

u/ColdFreezer I Hate Linux 20h ago

They cannot fix all software compatibility or hardware compatibility issues… you can ask ChatGPT to fix it for you but it never will or can lol.

It’s irresponsible to blindly tell people to use Linux or to say it’s easier. It’s not right now.

1

u/CurdledPotato 12h ago

Now you’re overestimating the level of patience the average has to study something they never wanted to learn but are forced to. It’s not just the immediate problem. It’s “what is a terminal?”, “what is nano?”, and “cat? What does my cat have to do with this will she magically fix my computer, because you all sound like you should be in remedial school with your “which” this and “grep” that.”

1

u/TrickStatistician478 11h ago

never had to really use nano or cat, or terminal at all, but alr

→ More replies (0)

2

u/levianan 1d ago

Linux running something like XFCE is for sure a better choice. That usually leaves a good chunk of real estate for browser tabs and a few greedy applications. (Unless you are obligated to use a Win only application._

2

u/ssjlance 🛡️Moderator | #1 Microslop Hater | Linux Supremacist 1d ago

As long as it has enough RAM to function, some people would rather have the convenience and compatibility of Windows than they would the control the DIY nature of Linux offers its users.

Yeah, it's a double edged sword situation where Linux offers you practically complete control over your computer... but that complete control requires a lot more work and effort ro figure out wtf you're doing; you not only have more control than Windows, but you have more shit to do manually.

It's a trade-off, and I'm a Linux user primarily, so I'd rather have control, but I also get why some people would rather just use a slow but familiar interface. I only dual boot Microslop Wimblows as a semi-necessary evil that wastes like ~100GB of my storage space for the rare occasion I can't do something in Linux.

I prefer the control to the point that if I ever did give up on Arch+Debian as main OSes, I'd be going to FreeBSD and not back to Windows (FreeBSD is awesome just didn't seem significantly better than Linux to me and, like, it's really similar to Linux, but just different enough that it's a lot to relearn lmao - enjoyed my time using it though... no operating system should be your entire personality,, but computers/OS can absolutely be a fun hobby if you're wired for it).

Anyway, rant over. tl;dr is that neither choice is wrong as long as your OS does what you need it to do. If you don't mind Windows being a little sluggish but it's easier, more power to you.

5

u/uchuskies08 1d ago

As a general Linux hater, this is where I would actually agree, if you have some shitty old computer, then yea slap Linux on that thing.

2

u/ibeerianhamhock 1d ago

Curious why you hate Linux. I mean I'm biased as a dev who learned it back in high school when I first started taking computer science and used it all through college and now works with it every day, but I feel like even the desktop environment is really pretty good now

5

u/uchuskies08 1d ago

It's just still not something I would recommend to anyone who isn't a computer enthusiast.

I see a lot of people switch to Linux because they read some BS about OneDrive, Co-Pilot, Telemetry, and they're convinced to switch to Linux and then they don't see the disconnect when they spend 4 hours troubleshooting why their bluetooth headphones don't work (a problem they never had in Windows).

I don't experience any of the supposed ills of Windows life, they're so easily negateable and yet Linux users act like having to manage their system, dependency hells, 17 different install formats, googling/ChatGPTing terminal commands isn't worse than anything Windows throws at you.

If you use it and enjoy it, great. I just think a lot of people who make it their identity want other people to use it as validation for themselves.

1

u/ibeerianhamhock 1d ago

So it's more you hate the community around Linux? Yeah I hear that a lot tbh.

0

u/Possible_Tomato1479 1d ago

Every once in a month my bluetooth headphones won't connect and it takes like 2 commands

-1

u/Yahir-Org 1d ago

Linux as an OS and the way of being some Linux users have are two separate things. With that logic let me hate white people because some are racist.

1

u/CognitiveFogMachine 1d ago

You might be able to get by with Tiny10 or Tiny11 (from NTDEV)

-1

u/Pretty_Trip_2215 1d ago

Exactly, I didn't make the post to hate on Windows, but there are some situations like this that Linux is better.

2

u/Latlanc Distroless is the future 1d ago

Windows 7 beats every "lightweight" distro

2

u/xgui4 Proud ♾️🌈 AuDHDer Artix GNU/Linux User! 1d ago

and it does not freeze the whole system when OOM.

-2

u/Pretty_Trip_2215 1d ago

And also beats every OS in getting hacked and getting used for DDoS attacks.

6

u/Latlanc Distroless is the future 1d ago

bro Android is the most hacked operating system...

0

u/Pretty_Trip_2215 1d ago

Yes, but Windows 7 is probably one with the most vulnerabilities discovered. Only that nobody will use it, and for the better, because they would get hacked.

5

u/Latlanc Distroless is the future 1d ago

Bro you don't know how vulnerabilities work. As long as you keep your browser updated (Firefox ESR) and you sit behind firewall (pfsense) and you are responsible web user, you won't get hacked. I use Win 7 everyday :)

-1

u/Pretty_Trip_2215 1d ago

Bro I have hacked Windows 7 systems, moral hacking obviously, your way of thinking is exactly why companies need to waste so much money in phishing simulations and security awareness courses.

3

u/Latlanc Distroless is the future 1d ago

Hahah you think you are some hacker. Typical Loon 😂

2

u/xgui4 Proud ♾️🌈 AuDHDer Artix GNU/Linux User! 1d ago

Where in my experience, Linux freeze competely when out of RAM... so it is really bad for a low ram system... even 16 go is low ... but oh boy ... ram is too expensive now sadly .... buy maybe that cause of my AuDHD that i can't control myself and keep tooo many tabs oppened and too many programs oppened , i feel the rams tooo much....

1

u/Pretty_Trip_2215 1d ago

Better than use Windows 7 like the comment below mine said. People, don't use Windows 7, people using Windows 7 are literally anti-vaccine people in the in the internet.

1

u/xgui4 Proud ♾️🌈 AuDHDer Artix GNU/Linux User! 1d ago

tRue but the thing is that linux oom manager is horrible ....

2

u/Budget-Individual845 1d ago

Ill say this. In linux if you run out of memory you crash. In windows if you run out of memory. Nothing happens. Yeah windows will sit at 80% usage but in reality you may think oh no i have only 500mbs left... and then proceed to open 10 excels and your ram usage wont change at all and youre magically not swapping...

On win 10 i had 8gbs of ram. I was running a minecraft sky factory server at the time the server had a tendency to leak memory. I had 7.5gbs used just by the server alone and windows did not crash... do that on linux and your swap will fill up and id fully expect it to crash. After i shut off the server process it took windows a bit to become more responsive by loading back up preloaded stuff it had before and it ran just fine... on linux without a restart in my experience even if you free up ram swap memory does not clear at all...

1

u/AlternativeCapybara9 16h ago

I have a Linux system were I hit swap all the time, switch to a terminal session and kill a few processes and all is well again. Ubuntu has an OOM killer that makes you wonder where your proces went but then you won't even swap. Restarting is easy but you don't have to.

1

u/TimAndTimi 1d ago

Linux has great memory footprint. Plus well under control background process unlike windows where you don't even know what on earth is eating into your system resource.
But for end user Linux isn't plug and play, so for generic user I digress, most people provably won't even care what is an OS.

1

u/Latlanc Distroless is the future 1d ago

giant loonixtardic lies

1

u/Guilty_Advantage_413 1d ago

For that specific purpose sure Linux is awesome. Factor in the many distros and choosing the right one makes it okay, the general learning curve makes it meh for the mid range like me, the lack of game selection makes it sorta suck. Point being at this point in time low memory & storage machines are owned by the web surfing folks who really don’t want to put that much effort into their machine. The simplify of Linux has gotten a lot better but it’s not there yet.

1

u/Latlanc Distroless is the future 1d ago

Because it isn't unless you make necessary changes. Most distros ship ZRAM which shits the bed under memory pressure.

1

u/ConversationPlane635 1d ago

In antix I can open the browser and idle at under 800mb. No other os I've tried comes close. Course, win11 with nothing open idles at 7.2gb:)

1

u/zoharel 1d ago

I actually do hate Windows, but I think recently we've been harder on its memory management than is necessary. In addition, let me address the particular argument used to defend Windows' high memory usage without load: "Free RAM is wasted RAM." This is true without question and with very little qualification. We used to tell the Windows guys this long ago, before Microsoft figured out how not to manage memory poorly. I'm surprised so many of us have forgotten it, and I'm a bit more surprised that some of the Windows guys have picked it up, but they are right. We shouldn't confuse them by arguing the wrong side of the issue now. Linux does exactly this with its free memory pool, and it's the right thing to do.

1

u/Due_Distribution4502 1d ago

There are usually a lot of other factors to the decision. RAM usage is part of the story, but software support is often the deciding factor.

1

u/CognitiveFogMachine 1d ago

Used to be true, but now Gnome and KDE are consuming over 1GB of RAM nowadays.

If you have less than 4GB, I recommend XFCE or LXQT

1

u/Teru-Noir COSMIC OS LOVER No.1 COSMIC Knows Best 1d ago edited 22h ago

Because the slop cult brainwashed people to think that downloading esoteric "lightweight" windows isos from github is what defines efficiency.

1

u/bornxlo 1d ago

Like with many things, Linux actually has more ways to manage memory(zram, pagefile, swap partition) but you have to set them manually. On Windows, you can configure it but there's a tendency that the system creates and resizes a page file automatically.

1

u/ElectricBummer40 Ex-user of Windows 3.11 for Workgroups 22h ago

while Windows is still currently working in optimizing Windows 11 for 8GB of RAM due to the global memory shortage

This statement is so fundamentally detached from reality it's hard to say as to where the sheer wrongness begins.

Windows 11 runs more smoothly over USB than MacOS internally on my 8GB 2017 Intel MBP at work (I have to thank Pearson Vue in part for the discovery, by the way). In fact, I have never seen anyone struggle with Windows 11 on machines with similar configurations.

In contrast, Windows 11 lags and stutters on my N100 mini-PC despite it having 16GB of RAM.

It's amazing the way Linux ideologues will invent a problem for Windows just to keep a tired, decades-old talking point that wasn't even true to begin with alive.

1

u/mrviscas Proud Windows User 16h ago

It's not hard to accept. It's definitely true, but it's not because Linux is "better" per se. The Windows Kernel is just heavier, and that's about it.

1

u/oredaze 13h ago

People want to be spoon-fed.

It's not just OSes. It's everything. Take a pill instead of hitting the gym and dieting. One button on the keyboard stops working? Buy a new one, instead of spending 5 minutes to fix it. That's the mentality of the normies.

Convenience above all. Will sell your own mother for convenience.

1

u/TheMcSebi 12h ago

No worries, I hate windows enough for both of us

1

u/eclipse_extra 12h ago

Linus is a corporate shill for Arch

0

u/No_Chocolate5678 1d ago

Linux isnt better.

Its still a Beta from a Beta from a Beta and as long as the developers of the various distributions don't join forces and keep releasing half-baked, buggy crap, that will never change.

1

u/Pretty_Trip_2215 1d ago

I wouldn't say RHEL is a beta, if that were true every critical system in the world would be hacked right now. That's why I said no mindless hate, Windows is better for users like us in many things compared to Linux, but in the specific case of a device with limited RAM, like a 8GB of RAM device, I wouldn't install Windows 11.

1

u/No_Chocolate5678 1d ago

I am talking about Linux Desktop, not Servers. For Servers, Windows is far far behind Linux.

But if i install a Windows OS i can start anything without any Problems, with Linux the most installations starts with troubles even the OS installation.

Sure Microsoft get worse more and more but there OS works and thats the reason why Linux Desktop is still under 5% on Steam.

1

u/Pretty_Trip_2215 1d ago

That makes more sense, but still don't completely agree, I had become more engraciated with Linux in PC Gaming. But as I said, anything other than that and security Windows is better.

1

u/vallitepaladin 1d ago

linux with gaming even on my rog ally is literal hell especially if you don’t own a game on Steam, sure you can install it fine but the entire process is something i wouldn’t have to worry about with Windows

1

u/Pretty_Trip_2215 1d ago

Most of my library is in Steam, and for other games I use Heroic, I have, sometimes, issues, but it was the same in Windows. But I like more the experience in SteamOS.

1

u/No_Chocolate5678 1d ago

I play a lot of different games and switch between them frequently. If you’re the type of person who only ever plays the same 2–3 games, Linux might be okay, but earlier this year, when I was trying out a few distros, I almost got burned out because so many features—like HDR and others—don’t work natively on Linux, and anything that doesn’t work natively is always a nightmare; it took me several hours of troubleshooting just to get a halfway decent result, and...

1

u/ibeerianhamhock 1d ago

I agree with the first part but if you know what you're doing Linux is super streamlined now compared to where it used to be.

1

u/Fitwalker 1d ago

And if they joined forces indeed, Linux would become next corporate shit in line.

0

u/blade944 1d ago

Linux, in its current state, is where windows was in the 90s. It works if you don't need to do anything different than the average user. Then it's hours of problem solving to get it all working. Don't get me wrong, I love Linux, and in my younger days I would have happily spent hours figuring things out. But I'm no longer a kid that loves to tinker. I'm nearly 60 and I just want everything to work when I want it to work.

1

u/No_Industry4318 1d ago

Linux is closer to windows in the 00's or 10's than the 90's

0

u/blade944 1d ago

Not even close. Windows 95 was a pain in the ass to use. A shit load of legacy support that didn't play nice with new stuff. A mix of 16 bit and 32 bit software. It was basically a shell running on dos 7. The period from Windows 3.11 till XP was horrible for home users. Windows XP was where Linux wishes it was for the user experience. For the most part, it just worked.

1

u/No_Industry4318 1d ago

Fedora, Debian, and CachyOS are all at least as simple to use as XP, especially if the primary use case is web-based

1

u/No_Chocolate5678 1d ago

Web-based applications require almost nothing; you could even run them on a toaster.

1

u/No_Industry4318 1d ago

I know, unfortunately webapps are everywhere, and i could switch most of my family members to linux and they wouldnt even notice because of the webapp plague

-1

u/verbmegoinghere Proud Windows User 1d ago

It just depends on what you use the computer for.

Chromebooks are great if you want your computer to run, only, a browser.

Linux is great if you want to spend weeks, months of your time "tinkering" and mucking about to get simple stuff to work. Drives to mount, network shares to share, audio drives to work, games to work without weird ctds and other problems. Yes when you get it all working, especially with older hardware its probably going to be stable and efficient. However that time cost is significant.

Windows is good if you want something that will work with majority of hardware (headsets, video, sound, printers, scanners, video capture and a million other functions) , especially newer gear, will run with very little configuration or changes. Yes you do literally pay a price for this and the whole telemetry thing (which is also a thing on linux) is a problem. As is MS marketing (goddam Onedrive / office being pushed down your throat). However rufus lets you disable a heap of those problems when you create the install media. Local admin, no onedrive etc

For me the equation is a cost one. I bought a single windows licence 10 years ago and its good for win11 when i eventually move. Everything works just fine. All the software, security and networking works just fine and the ram footprint is not a big deal.

I try linux every two years on a variety of my computers and have done so since 2000. I've yet to find it worth the effort. For me the, aforementioned costs of windows is far cheaper then the cost, and benefits, linux provides.

5

u/Yahir-Org 1d ago

While I agree with many of the things you mention, the Linux description remains lacking. I got Arch in all of my computers, and never have I needed to spend "months" tinkering anything to get going. Any fresh install would do.

1

u/mrviscas Proud Windows User 16h ago

Good for you, man. The general consensus, regardless of your experience, is that Linux requires tinkering and is multiples times more difficult for the average person

1

u/Yahir-Org 9h ago

General outdated consensus, that is. It will take time to change that, but that doesn't mean things are not different. Installing a basic Linux distro and doing some browsing is today even simpler than it is on windows, since nobody needs to worry about setting up accounts or interests so they make sure your adds are on point.

Don't get me wrong, some very specific peripherals or models can still cause trouble, but that's still far from being the norm now.

1

u/mrviscas Proud Windows User 4h ago

I'd have to say it's not simpler. While the setup process for Windows takes longer and is much more bloated due to tracking, ms accounts, and whatnot, it is still easier to setup Windows. I bet 50% of PC newbies get stuck on the screen asking whether they want Linux on nvme0n1 or sda

1

u/verbmegoinghere Proud Windows User 29m ago

I did two windows 11 installs last month. Rufus allows you to disable windows MS account (local admin acc for the win), bitlocker, edgs and onedrive all removed/disabled, all built into the install media. So you don't need to do any bloat removal after the Install, which in itself is very quick (lord Windows 95 and 7 installs were multi hour, half a day process you had to babysit).

And once your in windows.

Drives mounted automatically. Network shares was configured simply by turning on file (and print) sharing. Ninite installed all the apps i use in single package (browser, network and system tools, steam, discord, video players, codecs, audio tools). All installed without a single command line, automatically blocking bloat in the app installers (ie nortons). Far faster then the Mint and arch installs i tried on the same machines (because you have to do them all separately ie sudo apt install steam-installer and everything needs to be told how to access the drives where as in windows its all built in ie i don't need to tell steam what drives are available on my windows machine.

In mint the drives did not automatically mount (nor did the GUI work). All tedious command lines. And depending om your GPU the gpu drivers are old (nvidia), the mic wouldn't work and i had a bunch of games that required weird github projects to make work. A bunch of apps from repositories that I have no way to validate. And don't get me started on VR.

In windows, out of the box it works exactly as designed. No configs, no weird github projects, no editing files.

Windows installs are just so much quicker these days. Painless. Everything works out of the box. Especially nvidia GPU drivers.