*Arbitrary is harsh, they did a lot of heavy lifting to get Windows, but it's still early and still rough imo.
Alternatively, when I use Windows now I'll get both PowerShell and a full Unix environment. For my development work so far, none of those arbitrary drawbacks have stopped WSFL from being a champ. On the plus side, I don't constantly have to edit configuration files after every update because my wireless card/window manager/etc broke.
I was talking about my home workstation.
Things like bpf if you're doing performance profiling Ready access to PMCs (The Intel PMC stuff is a pain in the ass to get working in Windows, because you have to build a signed driver for MSR access) without paying the $900 for vTune Access to perf
There's really no way to do performance engineering on Bash/WSL
When you have Intel wifi you'll have to enable the non-free repo, and that's about the extent of it.
I had a friend ask me about installing a distro the other day. I told him to buy a Linode/DO box or use WSFL instead of finagling with hardware. My Dell XPS 13 is sold _as_ a Linux machine, and there aren't drivers for everything.
The Fedora support definitely has me excited. Will try it out on my home computer before making the real jump.
Using Windows to write software that runs on Ubuntu servers is not really much harder than using a Mac to do the same thing. You have to use a VM either way.
By the way, I like Powershell so much I installed it on my Macbook Pro.
Why did you bring this comment here? Is your hope to convince other people, or to reaffirm your decision to yourself?
It seems off topic.