Obviously, a bit of clickbait. Sorry.
I just got to work and plugged my surface pro into my external monitor. It didn’t switch inputs immediately, and I thought “Linux would have done that”. But would it?
I find myself far more patient using Linux and De-googled Android than I do with windows or anything else. After all, Linux is mine. I care for it. Grow it like a garden.
And that’s a good thing; I get less frustrated with my tech, and I have something that is important to me outside its technical utility. Unlike windows, which I’m perpetually pissed at. (Very often with good reason)
But that aside, do we give Linux too much benefit of the doubt relative to the “things that just work”. Often they do “just work”, and well, with a broad feature set by default.
Most of us are willing to forgo that for the privacy and shear customizability of Linux, but do we assume too much of the tech we use and the tech we don’t?
Thoughts?
Kinda, however Linux is always better in one regard - we can change it and it generally serves the needs of its users since its users build and change it. Windows and macOS on the other hand serve the needs of Microsoft’s and Apple’s major shareholders and only in part of their users to the degree they can get away with. The goal is always gaining and retaining market share while extracting the most value from the users - money, data, etc.
If enough of us wanted a sleek, uber smooth desktop that has all UI bases covered, we could totally do it. We just don’t give enough shit and we’re content with what it is. Case in point, I know multi-monitor support isn’t amazing, so I buy a bigger monitor and use more windows. 🥹 Personally I’ve been content with the mainstream desktop Linux UX since 2012-14. You won’t see me digging into features in GNOME or Wayland.