Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by user34283 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

user34283

To each their own, but Windows 11 runs flawlessly on my machine with high-end specs and a 240 Hz monitor.

The Start menu works great with no lag, even immediately after booting.

The only thing that I consider annoying would be the 'Setup' screens that sometimes show up after bigger updates.

---

Would I trade it all to get on Bazzite DX:

- lower game compatibility and potential bugs

- subpar NVIDIA drivers with the risk of performance degradation

- restricted development in dev containers relying on VS Code Remote

- Loss of the Backblaze Unlimited plan

+ system rollbacks if an update fails

---

That does not seem worth it to me.

View on HN

The start menu worked 30 years ago on a 32mb of RAM and a box of scraps.

Considering I found the win10 start menu too slow, the w11 one does not stand a chance. But I'm hopeful from your comment, it shows that w11 is not the complete shitshow people make it to be, though the few times I used it on relatives computers I found it not responsive enough.

I'm testing daily-drive on my main rig (high-end from a few years ago, 5900x + 3090), and honestly I'm rediscovering my computer. A combination of less fluff, less animations, better fs performance (NTFS on NVMe is suboptimal), etc. I was getting fed up by a few windows quirks: weird updates breaking stuff, weird audio issues (e.g. the audio subsystem getting ~10s latency for any interaction like playing a new media file or opening the output switcher), weird display issues (computer locking up when powering on/off my 4k tv), and whatnot. I'm still keeping the w10 install around, as having an unsupported OS is less of a problem for the occasional game, especially since I mostly play offline games.

As for the dev env, you're not limited to bazzite, I run Arch. Well, I've been running it for two weeks on the rig. But you really get the best devex with linux.

The start menu seems to respond instantly for me.

That's on a 7950X3D with 64 GB RAM and a Samsung 990 Pro SSD. Maybe it performs worse on slower hardware.

I have 14 TB of SSDs connected, so it's not like there is no content on my PC.

Notably I don't have any HDDs connected, maybe that plays a role here.

The few win11 I've touched were all on NVMe drives, but I'm pretty sure they're fast enough for a start menu. I mean, your gear should not be needed to get a responsive start menu.

I'm curious, did you clean up what's by default in the start menu? Stuff like "recommended", "candy crush", and the likes? On the win11 I tested, those parts loaded slower than the rest, I wonder if the start menu has a timeout of "load then open".

Had I switched to win11 I'd have slapped Classic Shell on it, as I did on win10. It's a reimplementation of the win7 start menu with windows-version-appropriate design, but with win7 reactivity (opens literally the next frame, in no small parts thanks to the absence of animation).

After checking the responsiveness of the start menu earlier, I uninstalled or unpinned the useless stuff in Pinned.

I don't think it made a difference, it was already lag free before.

It's annoying they put Office Copilot and Instagram there, but it uninstalled with just two clicks per item, taking a minute or so to get rid of everything.

> The Start menu works great with no lag, even immediately after booting.

The very fact that this has to be explicitly mentioned is laughable.

Like $100 Chinese phones can achieve the same, this is the bare basic for a modern system capable of running 240Hz monitor (I assume it can do so with most games).

The start menu bug is one of the few problems that windows has, compare that to Linux.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com