I use Apple because their OS is a Unix AND their hardware is nicely built and well integrated with the OS.
I use Linux because it’s a way to run a good Unix-like OS on non-Apple hardware.
The overwhelming majority of people who use Windows (or macOS) is because their computer came with it. As long as it mostly works, people don’t care about which OS they are using.
The overwhelming majority of people on Windows are there because Microsoft bent over backwards to give businesses what they needed so that they could beat out Apple and IBM to win the desktop wars of the 80s and 90s. If businesses had never used Windows, nobody else would have and computers wouldn't come pre-installed with it. Personally, I use all of them for different purposes.
I like Windows because it's more compatible than other OSes with any hardware that I can throw at it. It's also more stable than any other OS. My Macs have been broken multiple times throughout their life by simply upgrading to the next version of macOS, but Windows has always just kept on trucking along year after year. Another reason I love Windows is that it's got a high degree of flexibility. While Apple hides APIs and does everything they can to prevent you from doing things that they don't approve of, Microsoft does the exact opposite and publishes APIs to help you get it done. Mostly though, I just love the Windows UI and the Windows way of doing things. I find it to be very simple and obvious. The things I don't like are largely unseen, like the forced telemetry and updates.
I use my Mac when I need to build or test something for iOS or macOS. Outside of that, I just can't stand the way they do anything. I find the UI and the UX of macOS to be absolutely hideous. The fact that you have to install third party stuff just to get basic features like "decent window management" is simply beyond the pale to me.
For work, I started using a Linux desktop a few years ago because Windows was annoyingly slow when doing anything with npm/yarn/node_modules or Docker and I was doing more and more work with NodeJS and less with .NET/SQL Server/etc. So, I installed Manjaro with XFCE and that's when I found out that XFCE does a minimalist Windows style desktop better than Microsoft does. They have all the Windows features that I want, like Window snapping and none of the Windows features that I don't want. They even have a feature that I usually installed 7+ taskbar tweaker to get: They let you middle-click taskbar items to close the window (also you can drag/drop them), similar to how Chrome treats browser tabs. I've had Manjaro installed on multiple systems (desktops and laptops) for years now and I haven't seen any of the issues that people complain about here, like having to fiddle with their system to get it to work. Everything just worked for me since day one.
Now I just use Windows for entertainment - I've got a NUC style PC at every TV and I have one gaming PC.
You must not have been around for the 80s and 90s' "desktop wars." Microsoft did everything they could to undermine innovation and they didn't help businesses, they locked them into inferior technology that cost more and undermined productivity. The Microsoft you grew up with was not the Microsoft of Gates and Ballmer. Those were dark years.
That Microsoft created new APIs, runtimes, and frameworks not for technical reasons but in order to lock customers in or disadvantage competitors. That's a big reason why Windows is an unmanageable mess of inconsistent interfaces and DLLs--they were short-term tactics, not well considered approaches.
> The overwhelming majority of people on Windows are there because Microsoft bent over backwards to give businesses what they needed so that they could beat out Apple and IBM to win the desktop wars of the 80s and 90s.
That’s one case of “it came with the computer”.
But Microsoft was really clever at giving all the functionality companies want for their corporate issue computers. In the mid-2000’s very few companies offered Macs as desktops because of that. I only have a work MacBook because it can authenticate against AD and has all the management automation required by my employer. That’s also why a Linux laptop wasn’t an option.
The only way of MAYBE having a consistent experience on linux is to only use applications written for the DE of your choice isn't it? Use firefox on KDE and the consistency is already gone.
Is that any different to Firefox on macOS? In a way Firefox's current UI design aligns with the win 10 modern stuff, but that's more luck for MS than Firefox making a big effort to fit in, since it's mostly the same everywhere
No it hasn't. Just buy a phone from let's say Samsung and install any Google app. Google app will have a different UI look and feel than rest of the system.
I use Apple because their OS is a Unix AND their hardware is nicely built and well integrated with the OS.
I use Linux because it’s a way to run a good Unix-like OS on non-Apple hardware.
The overwhelming majority of people who use Windows (or macOS) is because their computer came with it. As long as it mostly works, people don’t care about which OS they are using.
The overwhelming majority of people on Windows are there because Microsoft bent over backwards to give businesses what they needed so that they could beat out Apple and IBM to win the desktop wars of the 80s and 90s. If businesses had never used Windows, nobody else would have and computers wouldn't come pre-installed with it. Personally, I use all of them for different purposes.
I like Windows because it's more compatible than other OSes with any hardware that I can throw at it. It's also more stable than any other OS. My Macs have been broken multiple times throughout their life by simply upgrading to the next version of macOS, but Windows has always just kept on trucking along year after year. Another reason I love Windows is that it's got a high degree of flexibility. While Apple hides APIs and does everything they can to prevent you from doing things that they don't approve of, Microsoft does the exact opposite and publishes APIs to help you get it done. Mostly though, I just love the Windows UI and the Windows way of doing things. I find it to be very simple and obvious. The things I don't like are largely unseen, like the forced telemetry and updates.
I use my Mac when I need to build or test something for iOS or macOS. Outside of that, I just can't stand the way they do anything. I find the UI and the UX of macOS to be absolutely hideous. The fact that you have to install third party stuff just to get basic features like "decent window management" is simply beyond the pale to me.
For work, I started using a Linux desktop a few years ago because Windows was annoyingly slow when doing anything with npm/yarn/node_modules or Docker and I was doing more and more work with NodeJS and less with .NET/SQL Server/etc. So, I installed Manjaro with XFCE and that's when I found out that XFCE does a minimalist Windows style desktop better than Microsoft does. They have all the Windows features that I want, like Window snapping and none of the Windows features that I don't want. They even have a feature that I usually installed 7+ taskbar tweaker to get: They let you middle-click taskbar items to close the window (also you can drag/drop them), similar to how Chrome treats browser tabs. I've had Manjaro installed on multiple systems (desktops and laptops) for years now and I haven't seen any of the issues that people complain about here, like having to fiddle with their system to get it to work. Everything just worked for me since day one.
Now I just use Windows for entertainment - I've got a NUC style PC at every TV and I have one gaming PC.
You must not have been around for the 80s and 90s' "desktop wars." Microsoft did everything they could to undermine innovation and they didn't help businesses, they locked them into inferior technology that cost more and undermined productivity. The Microsoft you grew up with was not the Microsoft of Gates and Ballmer. Those were dark years.
That Microsoft created new APIs, runtimes, and frameworks not for technical reasons but in order to lock customers in or disadvantage competitors. That's a big reason why Windows is an unmanageable mess of inconsistent interfaces and DLLs--they were short-term tactics, not well considered approaches.
1 reply →
> The overwhelming majority of people on Windows are there because Microsoft bent over backwards to give businesses what they needed so that they could beat out Apple and IBM to win the desktop wars of the 80s and 90s.
That’s one case of “it came with the computer”.
But Microsoft was really clever at giving all the functionality companies want for their corporate issue computers. In the mid-2000’s very few companies offered Macs as desktops because of that. I only have a work MacBook because it can authenticate against AD and has all the management automation required by my employer. That’s also why a Linux laptop wasn’t an option.
1 reply →
Oh come, Linux's UI is completely inconsistent, between toolkits, desktops, distros and the like.
The only way of MAYBE having a consistent experience on linux is to only use applications written for the DE of your choice isn't it? Use firefox on KDE and the consistency is already gone.
Is that any different to Firefox on macOS? In a way Firefox's current UI design aligns with the win 10 modern stuff, but that's more luck for MS than Firefox making a big effort to fit in, since it's mostly the same everywhere
Android had a pretty consistent UI experience.
No it hasn't. Just buy a phone from let's say Samsung and install any Google app. Google app will have a different UI look and feel than rest of the system.
what? people are going to switch to linux for a more consistent UI?
UI consistency just isn't that important to most people.
See: electron applications.