I think you meant: "The user friendliness of Windows combined with the stability of Linux.".
That's the kind of stability I need.
P.S.: Turns out the RAM was bad and replacing it fixed everything.
I had the opposite. I got a Thinkpad with a broken RAM IC. Windows was booting and working 99% normally with the desktop apps. However running a browser caused it to completely freeze. Linux didn't even boot. It didn't move past the early stage. So it is Linux' fault now?
So you were just "unlucky"? ;)
I won't claim to be an expert in either kernel but if you take both our cases (anecdatum) it seems that Linux is better at recognizing a problem and either mitigating it or failing hard. The latter sitatiion is much better than Windows just happily trying to use faulty hardware and rolling the dice. In my case, when running under Windows I was getting file corruption too.
My story is kind of old and so this was Windows 7, I think. Maybe Windows is better now.
90% of hard drives that windows does not detect Linux can detect and copy 99% of the data with some IO errors for the rest. Can handle hardware instability like bad rams or too high of an overclock for ages while windows crashes very easily.
The simplest thing is to buy a machine with Linux preinstalled.
I think you meant: "The user friendliness of Linux combined with the stability of Linux."
You know, like when you're not forced to link your system to a Microsoft account. Or when you cannot reboot because a 30 minute update is pushed down your throat. Or when you cannot start working because an other 30 minute update is pushed down your throat at startup. Or when you have a 2 minute warning before a forced 1h update is pushed down your.. ..you get the picture. And the long, long list goes on.
Once you're using it for >month, it's easy to see the BS as just an occasional inconvenience because saying yes is so much easier.