Ubuntu:

It has strong security, automatic updates, and great hardware support.

As basically all distros (or in the case of auto updates: all DEs) have.

Mint:

It’s stable, lightweight

As every Linux is compared to Windows.

Zorin OS:

supports many Windows applications through Wine

Is there a reasonable distro that doesn’t?

Pop!_OS:

it has built-in NVIDIA and AMD driver support

So again like basically all distros that don’t go out of their way to only use free-software… for NVIDIA that is, AMD drivers are part of the kernel anyway.

Debian:

supports several desktop environments like GNOME, KDE, and Xfce

Same, same… again.

Seriously… How many sloppy “Which distro is for you?” articles do we need to finally get a single one competently describing differences and not trying to pin general Linux features to specific distros? 🥱

I just saw that bind now comes with tls support (for quite some time actually…), which was the reason I originally went with unbound instead. So I guess I have an excuse to look at it again… 😀

So one in five doesn’t do proper backups. That’s much better than expected… 😅

Isn’t that the whole point of containerised solutions? Having some pre-setup, auto-updating solution with very little requirement to dive into the details like what your database is and which dependencies you need to manage…

was very popular on 90s

This feels like you just called my PC old…

And the newer ones then “removed” the color coding by doing one half of the circle in green, the other half in purple…

but generally people just don’t install Windows, it’s already there

In my opinion that’s the main point.

People love to discuss how Linux isn’t fit to replace Windows (yet) or how it needs to be more user friendly or how it needs to work better out-of-the box.

Yet in reality 90% of the users couldn’t install and properly set up either OS from scratch. But with Windows they simply don’t have to as it’s already pre-installed and set up. And so they somehow fool themselves into thinking one just runs automatically while the other needs additional work…

Yes, they often do… implicitly.

Every time someone pretends that it’s a Linux problem that he had to look up and install a certain driver because it “wouldn’t work properly out-of-the-box” he is basically lying because guess what… Windows doesn’t work properly without the right (externally downloaded) driver, too. Or it required you to install the newest DirectX version for decades before you could even start any game… Yet somehow I never read complains about Windows being unfinished and needing to improve because you could not start gaming out-of-the-box.

There’s a RAT in Arch Linux (because someone made one downloadable in the Arch User Repository) is about the same level of non-sense as telling the story of how Windows ships with hundreds of viruses because those can indeed be freely downloaded as .exe-files from the Internet which you can access via Windows. 🤣

Now that I think about it… It’s even worse. You cannot actually get an AUR package without explicitly installing the tools to get them (and most likely reading the disclaimers and warnings for using the AUR on the way), while you can can in fact download and execute malicious content with the pre-installed Windows tools.

The actual problem is (and has been for a long time) the enormous amount of absolute trash-level uefi implementations.

Updating keys is easy. Alas… a lot of them are completely broken beyond repair and fail everything but running with the pre-installed keys, which includes updating (or adding new) keys (bonus points for the really screwed up devices that even sign some their own hardware with the pre-installed MS keys thus bricking themselves if those keys are changed).

Linux users who have Secure Boot enabled on their systems […]

No.

Some Linux users lazily using shim-based Secure Boot implementations provided out of the box by some distros. Mostly exactly because that’s a setup that came with their install where they don’t have to do anything and they also don’t actually care.

Everyone actually caring for Secure Boot has the option to setup and use their own proper keys easily.

The real problem is (and has been for a long time) the amount of absolute trash level UEFI implementations still in use nthat are basically non-functional once you try to use any Secure Boot funtionality beyond just using the pre-installed MS keys.

You forgot the one that is still compiling…

What do you mean by poor long term stability? It’s a rolling release. I run the same installation for basically forever, while fixed releases’ life-time is measured in just a few years before you lose support and need to do a full distro upgrade… which rarely seems to work without problems.

PS: I just looked it up. The first date in my pacman log in from 2014…

But why is this thing wasting so much electricity on my side with black text on bright white background?

That’s not wrong but a seperate problem mainly caused by lock-in strategies that are not exactly the same as marketshare or industry standards and are explicitly distinct from the actual OS’s capabilties.

I know enough people who have the exact same problem but with Apple as their employer forces them to use software only available there. Yet their marketshare for desktops is just a tiny fraction of what we see for Windows (~15% if we are optimsitic).

So will we pretend that Linux with a 10 or 15% marketshare (not that far off for an OS with already 5+%) is suddenly a valid alternative. Or are we honest and acknowledge that this is indeed NOT about Linux’ capability to be a valid Windows replacement but purely about the fact that there isn’t (an never will be…) a massive corporation spending billions in marketing and lobbying to create perceived standards simply by throwing money at the problem for even higher future gains?

But what will I do if marketshare of Linux does not increase properly? Oh, wait… who cares? I just use Linux for my daily work but are not a shareholder that needs constant massive growth of imaginary numbers.

by factor of 3 obviously…

Nazis are only pro-power. Everything else is just a means to an end.

They don’t actually care who they are advocating against. There is only one constant: They are the ones at the top, destined to rule, and the masses need to be controlled by pitting them against some “enemy”. That enemy is always replaceable because it needs to be replaced every time they accidently “solve” a problem or need a change of narrative.

Did an AI write these bullshit ramblings just parroting PR fluff texts provided by those distros?

This is just a theory but maybe worth a thought:

Could it be possible that acceptance in a certain community up to the point where it’s just a non-issue that is totally separated from what the community does, bring a lot of people to the public view that exist everywhere else, too, just not that openly?

There was in fact some minor friction on IT events some years ago where people objected to stuff partly looking more like a pride event. Yet the majority didn’t care and there was barely any active pushback. And so it normalised very quickly and now it is just how it is. In my personal view at least for the benefit of all involved.