• 1 Post
  • 18 Comments
Joined 10 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 26th, 2024

help-circle











  • It’s definitely possible to make windows suck less. But no matter how proficient you are with windows, I don’t think it is possible to recreate the look-and-feel of Linux. Fundamentally, it is just not a modular system where you can switch out e.g. the bootloader, filesystems or the desktop environment. And even if you tried to, there is no source code, no mailing list, no comprehensive wiki, no Github issues where people already figured out the exact problem you’re facing, and it feels like the OS is fighting you every step of the way.

    So what I’m saying is this: If you have very low knowledge about computers, windows kind-of works, but many things feel out of your control and you learn to hate your computer rather than like it (why does it want me to create an account, why does it update without me telling it to, why is all this crap preinstalled etc.). And even if you were to learn more about the inner workings of windows, it’s way less accessible due to its closed source and you still don’t get the same customizability that Linux would give you.


  • ftbd@feddit.orgtomemes@lemmy.worldI get that
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    13 days ago

    I was so shocked when I learned that in the same country that gives guns to children because muH FrEedOmS, you cannot let your lawn grow out on your own property because some Karen down the road doesn’t like the way it looks.


  • Well, anything is easy if you stay within the boundaries of the OS as it is shipped. For arch, that means no desktop environment at all, just the TTY – which is super easy to use if that happens to be exactly your use case. IMO a reasonable test is not whether is it easy to use if you stay within the boundaries (as that is true for everything), but whether those boundaries are reasonable.

    I completely agree that ripping out system components does not have to be easy. But not wanting Cortana, OneDrive, Edge or other microsoft programs to be preinstalled, hard to remove, and constantly nagging you to use them over other programs is not an unreasonable request. Last time I installed Windows for a friend, you needed a workaround to be able to use the computer without a user account tied to some microsoft account. And that triggered the same response in me as in the meme – this is not some cloud service where I make an account and they provide the hardware. I want to use the computer that is sitting in front of me, in my house. Why should I need a microsoft account for that?


  • Well, isn’t their whole sales pitch essentially that windows is super easy, everything has a GUI and you don’t have to use the sCaRy TerMiNal? If you then have to change some cryptic registry entries to disable behavior that shouldn’t be enabled in the first place, the argument for using it just collapses. It shouldn’t be hard to uninstall the default browser, but somehow microsoft manages to make it hard




  • That’s true, but nothing does. Once someone receives a message, you have no control over what they do with it (regardless of communication channel, encryption, etc.). I read the comment above more like “instead of jumping through hoops to get around the spyware in your operating system, use an operating system that does not come with built-in spyware instead”.