Best way to disable Windows 10 tracking: Switch to GNU/Linux.
You know, Linux is not a pretty exciting gaming platform at the moment :p
But maybe it's just more fun to spread FUD?
Linux is not a good platform for games. Steam does a good job at improving the current state, but it's far from ideal. For many people it matters, and expressing their sentiment is far from being FUD.
Allot of them aren't natively ported by rather use middle ware like the one offered by Transgaming which is no more than an optimized version of Wine.
Not to mention that many of the "AAA" titles will have either a much higher system requirement for Linux or outright just not support hardware which is supported on Winodws.
For example Borderlands The Pre-Sequel doesn't supports AMD cards at all on Linux and has double the minimum requirements of the Windows version.
So sorry while Linux gaming has come a long long way it's still not something that you can call viable for "Gamers".
If you only play old titles and indie games you are probably fine tho...
More and more games are showing up on Linux. I'd say its becoming more of a gaming platform each day.
Yes, thanks to Steam, gaming experience on Linux is better than before. That's said... my favourite games like Grand Theft Auto, Devil May Cry, Resident Evil, Wolfenstein are unfortunately Windows (and consoles only) games.
Maybe one day Square Enix/Bethesda/Rockstar/etc will port their games to Linux, and untill that day happen, I'll stick with Windows for gaming :D
I don't even mention 3th party tools such as Chromium with their microphone spy activities...
1) None of the software most people need is available for Linux, and
2) "GNU/Linux" sucks at providing a rich and stable API/ABI on which proprietary software can be built and supported, and
3) Usability of what does exist generally sucks, because unsurprisingly, not charging for your work makes it very hard to hire artists and designers.
Also unfortunately, that means the majority of people are stuck choosing between relinquishing privacy to either Apple, MS, or Google.
Care to elaborate on this one? I don't see what sucks about it. You can build proprietary software and run it on Linux. See also: Steam games.
> 3) Usability of what does exist generally sucks, because unsurprisingly, not charging for your work makes it very hard to hire artists and designers.
I've personally found the latest editions of Debian-based OSes (such as Linux Mint) to be very intuitive and beautiful.
I've run into this before many times. Binaries for proprietary apps, from 20 years ago, will probably still work today on Windows 10 if they didn't do anything too crazy or need low-level system functions (e.g. disk defragmenters). I don't think the same can be said of proprietary apps on Linux; there, the vast amount of diversity is also its greatest weakness and apps tend to have these massive (version-locked) dependency chains attached to them.
Do you really want to run 20 year-old software?
> I don't think the same can be said of proprietary apps on Linux
So, you don't know then.
-------------
In my experience, getting something to run on Linux is easier than getting it to run on Windows. The only reason that more software isn't built on Linux is the network effect.
"All of our paying customers use Windows, why would we want to build on Linux? Only free software hippies use that!" - Caricature of the average IT manager
Steam for Linux is going to gradually be a... game-changer. B)
Yes.
Games? Line of business applications? Other applications that still work for me and I have no reason to upgrade?
Yes. Yes I do.
<post type="rant" intensity="105%">
Try compiling old code on a new linux - prepare to be stuck in dependency hell for hours as you try to find libraries that the distro maintainers ever-so-helpfully deleted outright or renamed with no pointer.
Apple shamelessly breaks things every time there's a point release to iOS or OSX. Killing this API, turning on that "security" feature which breaks your addons, etc etc.
People do want to do this. Go and look at those who are already doing it.
Your experience is quite obviously very limited if you've got problems installing software that's built for Windows, on Windows. And Steam for Linux has been out for a couple of years now yet the majority of game devs aren't building games for Linux since next to nobody is running Linux for games or buying the lackluster Steam Machine - http://www.theverge.com/2015/6/5/8733139/valve-steam-machine...
This works if you:
- Ship all your dependencies yourself (the distribution-provided dependencies can't be relied upon to stay compatible)
- Spend a lot of effort keeping your app and its dependencies working with the surrounding desktop environment (even when shipping your own libraries, IPC protocols, configuration mechanisms, and interoperability behavior are all unstable)
- Expect that your users will be technically proficient enough to deal with the inevitable breakage, and
- Can afford to spend the extra resources to use the inconsistent and often poorly documented/implemented/designed OSS application libraries that are available.
2) It's a difficult situation for drivers, but for most software you can just package the shared libraries you need (or statically link). This is what most people do on Windows / OS X anyway...
3) This is often a matter of personal preference and experience, but I find Gnome 3 perfectly usable....
For the record, people on OS X / Windows package a VERY SMALL NUMBER of shared libraries with their application, if they use any at all.
The majority of application requirements are met by stable system APIs.
This is very different than having to ship the entire dependency graph above the syscall/libc level.
You're a software developer in a particular, small segment of the industry for which tooling is available, not "most people".
> That the kernel, libc and other APIs are actually quite stable
The kernel and libc are not enough to meet application developer requirements, not by miles.
This is why any usable Linux desktop relies on a massive set of fragile packages that have to be managed via a package manager in lock-step to maintain compatibility across the entire dependency graph.
That, in turn, assumes that everything participating in that dependency graph can be rebuilt (and patched) by the package maintainers, at-will, to maintain compatibility across the entirety of the graph.
If that doesn't work for your software, your only choice to is to ship your own large set of incompatible dependencies, and spend a lot of effort keeping those working with the surrounding distribution-managed dependency graph.
> ... usability is greatly enhanced by being able to configure my system the way that best suits my workflow and without OS features that think they're holding my hand and helping me but only get in my way of doing actual work?
That's a different metric of "usability" than the metric most people apply (and benefit from).
Of course, the kernel and libc are not enough. There are de facto standard libraries for all other subsystems, with variations and granularity in different areas (e.g. that of the largely one display server to the many types of widget toolkits), not unlike any other OS.
The package manager is simply an effective way of controlling software installations with fine-grained control from curated repositories with dependency resolution and querying capabilities. Just about all systems have package management in some way, but not the full picture. Windows had the Windows Installer, which was the equivalent to dpkg, without the advanced frontend dependency resolver and other mechanisms. I understand there is now a Windows Store.
Yes, there are issues, largely intrinsic to shared library versioning and maintenance. Windows has them and it too had to supply hideous workarounds (WinSxS, etc.), with privately shipped DLLs still being a standard practice to get around it.
Concerning usability, you already do have environments that are fully compliant with the "standard" metric that most people "benefit" from -- there are highly sophisticated DEs such as GNOME 3 and Unity that are perfectly usable by average end users, and I have personally installed and attested the results to this from several friends and acquaintances who are non-technical. At least a couple are even fine with using Cinnamon.
Still, depending on your area, you can use Linux to get your job done, but it does not come without nuisances.
I am already using Linux on servers and smart phones (but I won't call it GNU/Linux, sorry). If there is ever a decent desktop GUI for Linux, I'll try that out but if I still like Windows better then I'll continue using that.
I'm positive that most people here would agree if my post said "OS X" instead of "Windows".
My grandmother could use Ubuntu, and wine makes cross platforming with windows stuff (mostly) seamless. Unless all you use is enterprisey crap or play AAA titles from bad companies then chances are with a week of practice you will be right at home with Linux. No one is asking you install slackware with xmonad on your first go.
Even if you do play AAA titles like battlefield 4, Wine and/or a well emulated windows machine will do you wonders.
Windows is objectively worse than both OSX and Linux in more ways that I care to enumerate here. Unless you have a specific reason to be on it, you're missing out on better security and performance.
P.S. No one calls it GNU/Linux except RMS fanboys. Quit your pretentious holier-than-thou mocking.
I tried using Eclipse on Ubuntu Linux and some how Ubuntu stuck in gimpy scrollbars that almost worked.
I was really impressed with the first betas of KDE, like wow, a good desktop was possible on Linux. However, since then things have just gotten worse. What you expect to have happen on Linux is that the font metrics are all screwed up and there are just zillions of things wrong with the UI that never get fixed or get substituted with other problems.
Confront Linuxers with this, and they sound like Scientologists, they completely deny there is a problem... And that is the problem. If Linux hardcores would admit the GUI sucks, maybe somebody ould try to fix it.
My experience (as a 10+ year Linux user) is similar. As a workstation/desktop OS, it's unbearable how many things break on a regular basis. My Ubuntu 14.04 (LTS, mind you) installation has constant issues with the update manager crashing. This is on a pretty lightly-tweaked 3-month old setup. In order to get dual monitors to work, I had to plug in one to the motherboard's DVI input, and the other to the dedicated GPU's (AMD) DisplayPort input. And I can't for the life of me get the color profiles to match on both displays, nor to fix issues with screen tearing (also inconsistent on both displays). There are many more issues like this that pile on and on, but these are just two I remember from very recent experience. The fact that this happens on what is supposed to be the best Linux has to offer to the mainstream consumer (I'm judging by Ubuntu's mainstream popularity here) is just terrible.
However, you can't beat Linux as far as the developer environment goes. I live in zsh, Git, Vim/Emacs, Python, Docker, and friends. I'm countless times more productive and trouble-free as a developer in Linux than I would be by using native Windows tools (unless I was a .NET developer I guess). In fact, the times I've tried to replicate my workflow on Windows, it's usually with MSYS2 and installing everything I use in Linux.
Anyways, just my experience. The fact is every OS has its pros and cons. Windows offers by far the better consumer experience, while Linux does the same for developers.
(1) The downvoting is close to the root of the problem here.
A long time ago there were a lot of people in the U.S. that would never buy a foreign car. As a result, American cars did not have to compete on price and quality and the carmakers grew fat. Slowly the customers died off or got sick of the abuse, and even before the 2008 crisis even the rental car companies were starting to buy ricers. Police departments are the one institution that still buys American cars, but our local sheriffs department did trial Hondas for undercover work because after 2008 it seemed possible American cars would disappear from the market.
Today there are lots of people who would never buy an American car so that's how it goes.
By lathering vitriol over anyone who says the emperor's clothes aren't there for the linux desktop, the Linux community continues to fall behind. If you look at Windows and Linux in 1995 vs 2015, you see that Windows has come far ahead and Linux has stayed still or even gone backwards.
(2) So far as a dev environment goes I used to run Linux under Virtualbox all the time, but these days I use Vagrant and for various reasons I am more likely to fire up a Linux box in AWS. If you are working in Java the experience on Windows is not too different from what it is to use Visual Studio and you have the ability to deploy on Linux, which is what I do.
The distinction actually makes sense when talking about, e.g. Android versus GNU/Linux. Android uses the Linux kernel, but it doesn't use GNU tooling. Contrast to what are typically referred to as "Linux distributions", which do use GNU and are thus usefully distinguished as GNU/Linux. The GNU part actually makes a practical difference if you're a hacker.
But you couldn't be more wrong about Windows being somehow objectively worse than OS X or Linux.
Well, you can't put "objectively" in front of your opinion and call it a day. That's not how this works. I make my living writing software in C++ and there's nothing,absolutely nothing that gets close to performance ,comfort and tools of Visual Studio. I would also subscribe to the idea that Windows "just works" and any linux installation I had so far also just works, if you disable automatic updates - my only bad experience was always with updates breaking stuff, sometimes leaving me with a terminal input because the gpu driver wouldn't start anymore. But hey, YMMV and I wouldn't want to call one or the other "better".
Is Photoshop a AAA title or enterprisey crap? How about all other common software that many, normal people use daily that doesn't run under Wine?
Dont know about your grandmother- could be grace hopper, so the granny scale doesent say much.
The reasons why users are there is they sub-conciously disagree with the core philosophy of linux. Not everyone wants to become a comp sience major and learn.
Microsoft is making simple to use software for a society of specialists that accepts that not everyone has to learn everything and still should have the ability to delete his systes-core files. Windows is not here to stay because M$ is good , but because open source never challenged them.
At any rate, even if I have to spend extra time making a Linux box useable when compared to protecting myself on Windows from the prying eyes of Microsoft and god knows who else - and even then just hoping I didn't miss something - I consider it time better spent.
- Visual Studio.
- Faster than OS X on same exact hardware.
- Less bugs than any Linux desktop.
- Not tied into one brand of overpriced hardware.
- Runs the majority of popular web browsers.
- More extendable GUI than OS X.
- Better window management than OS X.
- Better keyboard acceleration than OS X.
- More high-quality dev tools that are free than OS X such as Paint.NET.I've used Windows and Linux since 2006.
I've yet to understand what makes Linux a better development environment. When I have a choice (or barring other factors, like the portably-sized Linux VM I'm using for a personal project, which would probably be much bigger if a WIndows VM), I use Windows for development.
Can you elaborate on what makes Linux a better development environment? Most Linux tools run fine on Windows (though I believe Git is perpetually behind on Windows; I personally prefer Mercurial, for other reasons, which doesn't have that problem), and I think Ruby is also usually behind as well, but I can't really think of anything else. On the other hand, Windows has Visual Studio exclusively. If it's about the command line, Powershell has so far sufficed for development purposes(and sometimes pleased), though I'm much better in bash.