Obviously, a bit of clickbait. Sorry.
I just got to work and plugged my surface pro into my external monitor. It didn’t switch inputs immediately, and I thought “Linux would have done that”. But would it?
I find myself far more patient using Linux and De-googled Android than I do with windows or anything else. After all, Linux is mine. I care for it. Grow it like a garden.
And that’s a good thing; I get less frustrated with my tech, and I have something that is important to me outside its technical utility. Unlike windows, which I’m perpetually pissed at. (Very often with good reason)
But that aside, do we give Linux too much benefit of the doubt relative to the “things that just work”. Often they do “just work”, and well, with a broad feature set by default.
Most of us are willing to forgo that for the privacy and shear customizability of Linux, but do we assume too much of the tech we use and the tech we don’t?
Thoughts?
Sorry, but no. 300 USD for an OS is absolutely absurd. Just to be “on the safer side” from MS and its shitty tactics?
“Recall won’t be coming to enterprise or server and if it does, it will be disablable”
Sweet summer child, I pity you. How anyone can still have any trust in MS is beyond me, but so be it.
$300 for the most important piece of software on the hardware that you interact with every day, sometimes all day, for years? That’s a steal.
And again, as an OS, Windows just works and Linux doesn’t. Even if you wanted to set things manually in the registry to disable the bad consumer “features”, you’d still spend less time than configuring a standard Linux install and it would be more stable.
It’s like Apple fan bois nowadays. Ridiculous.
