Well at least I’m not here perpetuating the delusion that desktop Linux desktop is as user-friendly and productive for every use-case as Windows and macOS are. If one lives in a bubble and doesn’t to collaborate with others then native Linux apps might work and might even deliver a decent workflow. Once collaboration with Windows/Mac users is required then it’s game over – the “alternatives” aren’t just up to it.
Windows licenses are cheap and things work out of the box. Software runs fine, all vendors support whatever you’re trying to do and you’re productive from day zero. Sure, there are annoyances from time to time, but they’re way fewer and simpler to deal with than the hoops you’ve to go through to get a minimal and viable/productive Linux desktop experience.
It all comes down to a question of how much time (days? months?) you want to spend fixing things on Linux that simply work out of the box under Windows for a minimal fee. Buy a Windows license and spend the time you would’ve spent dealing with Linux issues doing your actual job and you’ll, most likely, get a better ROI.
Just buy a windows license next time.
Here’s the thing, I can get a legit Windows license by various means. I don’t need to go into microsoft.com and get it for 300$, a second hand windows machine with an old i5 CPU will sell for 50$ and that includes a valid Windows license. Computers selling on retail stores also include a Windows license, students can get them for free etc. what else?
Oh yes, I value and like Linux a LOT… just not for desktop as it doesn’t deliver as everyone says it does. To be fair I believe that only someone who values Linux as much as I do would be comfortable to criticize what’s wrong with it.
Well I can’t spend all my time trying to fix ridiculous issues that would’ve been fixed by now if people had the balls to look at Windows XP source code…
You’re doing something worse, complaining about something that no one really does. The average Linux user doesn’t want the average computer user to install Arch Linux. Stop spamming this garbage.
Well at least I’m not here perpetuating the delusion that desktop Linux desktop is as user-friendly and productive for every use-case as Windows and macOS are.
Wait, are you saying Windows and macOS are user-friendly and productive for every use-case? That’s hilarious!
It is called free because it allows you the freedom to hack the code and make it fit your needs, not because of cost. Like you say, freedome can be expensive, so go cheap and use authentic windows with a paid license, closed code binary blobs, and blind trust to the megacorp selling it.
Too bad time isn’t refundable. Free software is only free if you don’t factor in the time you spend making it work.
Wow, you’re the most entitled user of free software I’ve met in a while. Just buy a windows license next time.
Since when is having standards being ‘entitled’?
Just because something is free doesn’t mean it has to be janky.
Well at least I’m not here perpetuating the delusion that desktop Linux desktop is as user-friendly and productive for every use-case as Windows and macOS are. If one lives in a bubble and doesn’t to collaborate with others then native Linux apps might work and might even deliver a decent workflow. Once collaboration with Windows/Mac users is required then it’s game over – the “alternatives” aren’t just up to it.
Windows licenses are cheap and things work out of the box. Software runs fine, all vendors support whatever you’re trying to do and you’re productive from day zero. Sure, there are annoyances from time to time, but they’re way fewer and simpler to deal with than the hoops you’ve to go through to get a minimal and viable/productive Linux desktop experience.
It all comes down to a question of how much time (days? months?) you want to spend fixing things on Linux that simply work out of the box under Windows for a minimal fee. Buy a Windows license and spend the time you would’ve spent dealing with Linux issues doing your actual job and you’ll, most likely, get a better ROI.
Here’s the thing, I can get a legit Windows license by various means. I don’t need to go into microsoft.com and get it for 300$, a second hand windows machine with an old i5 CPU will sell for 50$ and that includes a valid Windows license. Computers selling on retail stores also include a Windows license, students can get them for free etc. what else?
deleted by creator
@TCB13 @lemmy_user_838586 he really wanted to say that to someone
Oh yes, I value and like Linux a LOT… just not for desktop as it doesn’t deliver as everyone says it does. To be fair I believe that only someone who values Linux as much as I do would be comfortable to criticize what’s wrong with it.
deleted by creator
Well I can’t spend all my time trying to fix ridiculous issues that would’ve been fixed by now if people had the balls to look at Windows XP source code…
deleted by creator
You’re doing something worse, complaining about something that no one really does. The average Linux user doesn’t want the average computer user to install Arch Linux. Stop spamming this garbage.
Wait, are you saying Windows and macOS are user-friendly and productive for every use-case? That’s hilarious!
Sir, this is a Linux community.
I agree with the parent comment 100% but yours at least 110%
Oh no, and here I was thinking this was a Wendy’s.
It is called free because it allows you the freedom to hack the code and make it fit your needs, not because of cost. Like you say, freedome can be expensive, so go cheap and use authentic windows with a paid license, closed code binary blobs, and blind trust to the megacorp selling it.
@TCB13 @troyunrau
Free software is about freedom, not price. To be free is not the same as free stuff.
So true.