After you log in to iCloud, of course. And then you have to download the Xcode tools, which is fine because it only takes ~8 hours. You'll probably want to reboot after the latest version of Monterey downloads, but make sure you do this after the Xcode tools are done downloading. While you're at it, you should also disable SIP so you can use the filesystems on your external drive, and you'll also want to double-check that your docks/Ethernet components are all MacOS-compatible. You'll also need a copy of GNU's coreutils, so grab those after installing Homebrew/Nix or else you'll get dozens of bash errors. Can't forget Docker, either! That's okay, just go to the Docker website and download their Commercial Client, and only run it when you need a container. We can't just run Docker in the background of a modern OS, can we?

Depending on your workflow, MacOS is fully capable of wasting your time. Especially if you're a developer, MacOS will frequently go out of it's way to deliver you a worse UNIX environment than Linux. If MacOS makes you happy, use it - but nobody is deploying their web infrastructure to MacOS. You're beholden to Linux usage whether you like it or not.

This was true 3-5 years ago, but you can now buy OEM laptops with Linux preinstalled that "just work" the same as a Mac. Granted, in the long run I don't expect many to be able to maintain Linux unless they're pretty technical. But the whole "waste hours" idea just isn't true these days.

“Just works”, unless you’re doing anything remotely technical. I like macOS, I use it daily, but unless you’re popping open a browser and checking email and that’s it, there’s nothing out-of-the box about it. You’re likely going to set aside some time to set it up for actual work.

Installing Ubuntu takes 15-20 minutes.

I enjoy KDE more than Gnome nowadays but it's far from being more minimalistic; it has way too much options, applications, dropdowns, buttons, etc. compared to Gnome and pretty much any other DE.

It DOES run great though, but I think they'd do a good job by simplifying some aspects of it, too bad the community seems to be mostly opposed to that as they want KDE to remain a more power-user friendly desktop.

I prefer Gnome but I also use KDE because that's what's on my Steam Deck.

Both work great and have all the features I need, but KDE feels a bit boring, a bit "Windows XP" while Gnome seems like a more modern desktop to me. I much prefer Gnome's dock to KDE's "start menu" with so many things cramed at the same place (well, like Windows).

I think the parent comment's choice of "minimal work" was key. In my experience, KDE requires quite a bit of work to set up because it encourages you to adapt the system for your workflow. GNOME, on the other hand, encourages you to adapt your workflow to the system, which is minimal out-of-the-box, and IMO doesn't take much effort or work to do so.

Regardless, I think once KDE is set up to one's workflow properly, it stays out of the way and can remain out of the way on new systems by transferring the config files. It just may take a lot of upfront work to get to that point and you can get easily distracted tweaking the minutiae over time. For that particular reason, I also prefer just using vanilla GNOME (with only the AppIndicator extension for DropBox and Steam tray icons). Granted, that's a "me problem" because I get easily distracted and can never stick with a specific setup when there's so many options available for me to tweak.

TL;DR: Both KDE and GNOME can be minimal, but the latter requires "minimal work" because it's minimal out-of-the-box and there's not much work that can be done.

> If I were less addicted to web browsing I would probably use plan 9.

You can run a linux vm using vmx on 9front and run a browser in there. Not fast as lots of vm work is still needed to improve guest performance (send patches.)