Hacker News Reader

Comment by cosmotic | Hacker News Reader

Windows' reliability has improved significantly over the past 20 years so maybe this author needs to revisit.

I'm happy the author's mother is happy using GNU/Linux, but as someone that's used Windows, MacOS, and Linux, I don't think this article is giving Windows a fair shot. I'd rank all Linux distributions I've used relatively recently (Mint, Ubuntu, Rasbian) a distant last place when it comes to reliability and robustness. Even trivial things like upgrading minor versions of hugely popular distributions with out-of-box configurations is fraught with highly technical problems that need hours of internet searching. I'd say my experience might be an outlier, but it's consistent year after year.

View on HN

I use windows 10 for a gaming PC that I turn on once every few weeks. Almost every single time, windows update and defender scan bring disk and CPU usage to their knees. I can’t game until it’s done, sometimes an hour and one or more reboots.

I’ve spent significant time trying to turn these off and allow me to run them manually. No luck. I think I was able to turn one of them off but not the other, don’t recall.

So it might be stable but it’s not usable unless you leave the device powered on 24/7.

I’m curious. I dual boot both windows and Linux and when I switch over to my windows vm I don’t have these issues. Then again I’m running decent hardware and my boot drive is on an nvme drive. Are you running windows on an HDD? I’ve noticed probably since Microsoft dropped all support for Windows 7 that Windows 10 runs horribly on an HDD, but if you swap the HDD for an SSD it’s like a whole new machine.

I get the same problem on a machine with an SSD. The only time I hear the fans is when Windows update is running.

This problem cuts both ways. I have a Ubuntu VM I use occasionally and the last time I allowed it to update it took literal hours and died halfway through and I lacked the expertise to figure out what went wrong.

It still boots so I just ignore the update nags since I don't really use it for much that is important.

But the install is extremely vanilla and I'm a little shocked the update had issues.

I'm primarily a windows user with a couple of linux-based servers. I just went through this very thing, except I ended up spending hours Googling after failed updates to ensure I could jump to latest LTS from two LTS versions behind.

Half way through I cursed myself for not having documented my set up well enough to just wipe and install clean latest LTS image so I wouldn't have to wade through various forum question/answers.

That may be specific to apt or your hardware? Recently I updated a laptop I hadn't touched in a while with pacman and it went through in a few minutes (decompressed update size was around 11GB iirc). Download phase took longer than the install phase.

For a while I did the opposite to you. Ran Windows full time with the occasional boot into Linux. Every time I booted in Linux I'd find hundreds of packages were out of date and needed updating. Even a week of not booting in Linux can see a large number of packages needing updates especially on rolling distributions like Arch. Even Debian would have many packages needing updates despite their very conservative package update policies.. I think it just part and parcel of running a modern OS that there are regular updates. When you run it daily it's easy enough to do a few updates every day rather than do a lot of updates all at once. Not a Windows specific thing. Heck, even Apple is not immune. I have a MacBook for work I have not touched since my last day of work in mid December. I bet you When I open it again soon Mac os will nag me to install all the updates that have been released in the last few weeks.

Those packages generally don't "need" updating. I generally go months between updates on Linux systems with 100% uptime the entire time.

The big difference is that in the Linux world, updates are in your control and the other way around. You're free to skip the updates, disable the notification, uninstall the thing that auto-fetches the package list, uninstall the package manager even. You can install a package that will silently install security-critical, or other updates for you. There's an upgrade that can even update the kernel itself while running. Simple updates will tell you to restart, but you don't have to - it's fine to use the machine even if it tells you you better restart.

Updates are frequent in both worlds because the high-speed always-on internet enables and requires it. But while Linux gives you options to deal with this, Microsoft decided to remotely manage your computer instead.

Are you using a mechanical disk? I can't even remember the last time windows updates or defender made a meaningful impact on my day to day usage. Even after a year of being off line, I anticipate the problem and just leave it sit for an hour and it's ready to reboot to install all the updates. It does indeed take numerous reboots often, as does MacOS, which is imperfect. Though I'll take automatic reboots over cryptic package compiler errors any day.

Yes mechanical disk because i could not get a ssd with 5 year warranty, although they are now available and i have not upgraded yet

The problem with windows updates + windows defender seems to be that they interact synchronously and only use a single thread. Even on my work laptop with an NVMe drive updates bring a single core to 100% for several minutes and it's nowhere near saturating IO bandwidth or IOPS.

> Windows' reliability has improved significantly over the past 20 years so maybe this author needs to revisit.

That is the one thing that drives me nuts about Linux advocacy. Windows is not the same thing as it was 20 years ago, or even 5 years ago, so stop criticizing it based upon outdated experiences. Heck, stop criticizing it altogether since Linux has many benefits of its own.

In my case, I like how it works perfectly on my two year old laptop and how its lighter footprint allows me to do more with less. I deeply appreciate how open source software makes my life easier since liberal licenses let distribution makers automate things that are difficult to automate with restrictive licenses (such as software installation and updates). It is wonderful that I can freely use software, especially for those one-off tasks that I would not do otherwise.

I find Windows bloated and user unfriendly. Lightweight? Sometimes it’s doing some bizzare shit that you have no control over and the system slows down to a crawl. Not to mention nagging pop-ups, restarts and worst timed ever forced updates. Windows 7 was quite okay if I remember correctly but 10 and 11 not so much. Nowadays I dual boot and find myself doing what I need to do in Windows then immediately boot Ununtu where it remains on 24/7.

I agree that Ubuntu and co. feel far less stable than they used to. I recently installed Ubuntu on a work laptop and had a ton of problems: interface locking up under heavy CPU load when compiling, insane amounts of RAM utilization, unexpected problems with software updates. My wife installed Ubuntu on a laptop a few months prior, and had a similar experience.

Recently I switched to NixOS and she to Arch, and it’s stunning how much better everything runs. All of my issues disappeared, and everything is super smooth now. Definitely neither NixOS nor Arch is for the non-tech-savvy, but it seems we may be in a time now where you’ve got to search out the more minimal distributions if you want an actually pleasant, stable Linux install. I have heard good things about Manjaro in that regard.

> I have heard good things about Manjaro in that regard.

Unfortunately, Manjaro's been... not the greatest.

A little while ago they forgot to upgrade their SSL certificate. Their suggested work around? Users setting the clock back.

I switched from Debian to Arch and I've been very impressed with the stability of Arch as well. I wonder how much that is due to Arch packaging versus perhaps the simple benefits of running more current Linux kernel directly and software directly from upstream.

I was primarily a macOS user prior to Windows becoming my daily driver for personal computing due to game availability, but I'm about to switch back. The other day I tried to set up a Zoom call with friends. Normally, I either Zoom from my work computer or use my phone to join, but this was an extended personal call, so I tried to set up my Dell laptop for Zoom for the first time in 3 years. Process:

1. Connect external webcam due to poor quality of laptop camera. Looks like a grainy 90s CRT TV.

2. Connect AirPods because speakers on laptop sound blown out.

3. Start Zoom. Zoom stops responding during test call and continually crashes every time I try to re-launch.

4. The Windows audio system itself crashes. I can't hear any audio or attempt to switch audio devices.

5. Restart computer. Now, the audio system is running, but Bluetooth isn't running, and I can't connect my AirPods.

6. Restart computer. Now, the audio system and bluetooth are both available, and Zoom starts! Hooray!

7. Have Zoom call.

Don't even get me started on printers. I've been dealing with this for years. It may just be a Dell driver thing, since my husband claims to have no problem with Windows stability with his PCs. I'm buying a Mac next week.

Nothing against Linux, either. I love it for software engineering. I just find Macs nice to use for their integration with my phone for personal use.

I've never had apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade create any "highly technical problems"

Jumping major release version, yes there are always new things to learn. Windows is no different in that regard.

I agree that the Windows kernel is pretty stable. The driver and application landscape is another story altogether.

> Windows' reliability has improved significantly over the past 20 years

The amount of telemetry installed and ran within Windows is obscene. That, alone, should drive people away.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com