I’ll even upvote your comment because you make some good points, but there are other things I must elaborate on. Just for context I use Windows, macOS and Linux in different occasions and I like them all in some way shape or form but I also know that none is perfect.
I disagree with the wording here. All the “professional” software works because it’s made for that system. Blaming Linux for lack of Adobe support is like blaming Windows for not supporting valgrind or zsh. It’s up to the program’s developers to support it.
While I agree with you here and I exaggerated the thing a bit… the lack of Adobe and others is also Linux’s fault, not only on those companies. It is really fucking hard to develop and support software for Linux when you’ve to deal with at least two major half-assed desktop environments (KDE and GNOME) and one of them decides to reinvent the wheel every now breaking APIs with little to no regard for software. To make things worse you’ll end up finding out that most of the time people are running KDE + a bunch of GNOME/GTK/libadwaita components creating a Frankenstein of a system because some specific App depends on said components.
Some time ago I did a simple test, installed Photoshop 6.0 (from 2000) and MS Office 2003 on Windows 10 and guess what? Both worked just fine at the first attempt, zero hacks required, zero effort. Linux doesn’t offer this.
True, but in my experience, the Windows installer can be more difficult to use and makes things very unfriendly for people who want to dual boot, when compared to Ubuntu and distros
You’re citing the advanced special use case where the Windows installer isn’t nice. C’mon regular people don’t dual boot, they just have an OS and that’s is. This also makes me question one thing, why is that Linux users are always so focused on “attacking” the Windows installer and saying their is better because it handles dual boot better? It does, but tell me, how would you know if your system is so perfect? Why would you ever need to dual boot? :)
If you mean updates, that is kinda true. Only kinda because you can use, say CTT’s winutil to switch to security updates only, with feature updates delayed by a few months.
I’m not sure if Windows will handle itself correctly even with that. It looks like the thing requires to be powered on everyday or it will eventually fail to boot, be slow, still ask for some kind of update or some other random issue. All the Windows machines I see failing (software wise) are always the ones that aren’t daily driven.
Things will get there, to the point where I can see Linux being better than Windows 11 by the time Windows 10 goes EOL (2025).
That’s essentially because Microsoft decided to make Windows 11 considerably worse than every other version before it. I don’t believe they’ll EOL Windows 10 that soon, after all Microsoft will have to support Windows 10 in some way shape or form after 2025 because there will be some stubborn governments and large businesses that will pay for it. They’ll make those update available for everyone else because, from a business perspective, it makes much more sense to keep supporting those millions of systems than have their reputation crushed by the amount of security vulnerabilities that will pile up.
The issue is that Windows 12 is coming with all sorts of AI marketing gimmicks. It’s yet unclear how Linux will respond to that.
I hope Linux doesn’t react to that at all. But well we don’t know what the absurdly funded and inept GNOME team will do. They’ll most likely come with some bullshit about how AI is the the way to come up with their messed up view of a DE.
Over the years, Microsoft has used ruthless business practices (United States vs Microsoft Corp., the Halloween documents, EEE) to build up and maintain expansive market dominance.
Oh yeah and they’ll continue to do so and somehow that makes them great. Without the amount of ruthless business practices they’ve been employing Windows would not have the position it has nowadays and we wouldn’t have so much productive tools as we do. Even considering the Office case, the format thing is bad but frankly do you think (the community and open-source companies) would’ve ever be able to build something to complex, solid and feature-rich as MS Office is? Who would’ve set to finance and develop such a complex spreadsheet software for instance? Mind that LibreOffice doesn’t have all the features Excel does and even when it does they sometimes aren’t as good. Look at Google’s pathetic attempt at spreadsheets, its still a for profit entity with a large interest and ecosystem capable of developing something better than MS but still it even lags behind Libre/OnlyOffice. And this is just the tip of the iceberg, suddenly we’re talking about Dynamics NAV and other very complex solutions that all integrate very well with Office.
telemetry that you can’t even fully disable
This isn’t true. Microsoft, unlike, let’s say Apple, has all the spyware very well documented here and it can be disabled. In fact Microsoft has to have those things documented and toggles in place to disable them because they’ve a lot of costumers (some govt agencies) that wouldn’t be able to use Windows without disabling those things.
What does MacOS have to offer? Nothing really. I mean, it’s kind of a middle ground between the two. It’s a Unix system meaning the terminal experience is similar to Linux (aka it’s actually good) and it has the “professional” apps the OP was talking about
Yes, that’s a very good description of macOS. That’s why I called it the “toaster OS” and is good for your weekend surfing but still has a better position on the market because there’s “professional” software for it. Too bad you can’t disable the spyware.
but also suffering from a distinct lack of power user features or even decent window management features in the default desktop experience that it comes with
You should try macOS for a month or so, because their DE is way better than GNOME.
At least Apple isn’t delusional about desktop icons, doesn’t force people into the activities view and provides toggles to manage the DE. If the GNOME team decided to just do a pixel-perfect copy of macOS and removed most of the customization, 3rd party themes / all the crap that makes GNOME unusable and focused on making it properly then KDE would’ve already faded away and we had the chance to have a single, solid and stable Linux DE for the masses.
All the current themes, versions and tweaks of GNOME are inconsistent bring a very poor experience and thing every looks good. Here’s a good example, both macOS and Windows have the ability to run containerized desktop applications but it is only on Linux that you launch an App and suddenly it doesn’t respect your theme and goes back to some basic thing because it runs on flatpak and there’s some bullshit about it. Or… your password management can’t communicate with the browser… Or there’s some incompatibility between the GKT version the app uses and something else on the system.
And btw, this video is bullsht. The guy goes to review macOS in 2023 and instead of using the latest version of the system, macOS 14, goes for macOS 11 that isn’t even supported anymore. This is the same as taking Windows 7 or Mandriva Linux reviewing it and saying “FEELS OLD”. lol