In a lot of ways the different OSes have cross-pollinated their advantages and disadvantages among each other.

Mac OS 9 famously had no command line, now they do (albeit they do a good job of insulating normal users from it).

NT initially de-emphasized command line, now Windows network administrators are all into PowerShell. I don't see why a "power user" should refuse to learn command line, it really kneecaps their abilities to get into more advanced things.

Registry hacks (like to bypass Win11 Microsoft account or other install requirements) are reminiscent of hacking config files in /etc on a Linux system.

A major traditional disadvantage of Linux was the various UI toolkits just thrown together with no consistent look and feel (file open dialog), keyboard shortcuts, etc. The Windows 10/11 settings vs. control panel dichotomy is that kind of amateurish situation a 90s or early 2000s Linux distro could have produced. The hodgepodge of traditional Win32/comctl32/MFC interfaces vs. Metro vs. Electron is just like Qt vs GTK. In both Chrome and Firefox, the print dialog is now not only a modal dialog (ties up the UI while it is open), but has its position hardcoded so you can't even uncover what you were looking at, e.g. to remember which page of the pdf it was you wanted to print.

Mac OS 9 famously had no command line, now they do (albeit they do a good job of insulating normal users from it).

The development tools had a command line included, though.
It was part of the SDK. I don’t have it, though. Merely read about that online.

Apple's A/UX operating system of early 90s had one, too.
It was Unix with a Macintosh GUI, Finder and System 7 applications compatibility.

Even ran ordinary Mac OS games of the time.
Just had high HDD and memory requirements (because of Unix being Unix).

Well, more or less. System 7.5 had similar high requirements, too. But for a reason.
Things like QuickDraw GX (PostScript derived) were very sophisticated.

Ran it almost all day yesterday live session. So far the only issue is that it doesn't want to shut down properly. I have read that COULD be due to a rufus-formatted USB drive, will see what happens on a permanent installation.

One of the major hurdles of Linux is old GPU support.

On Nvidia side we have open source Nouvea, which is just shit even for really old card, after many years of development. Nvidia's own old drivers are not compatible with new kernels and don't support anything but X11 too.
On AMD side everything works, on paper, even really old stuff like Radeon X800, but pre-DX11 stuff has shit performance, especially DX9 hardware and pre-GCN DX11 stuff has too many issues for Wine/Proton to work normally, also there's a bunch of visuals bugs which never will be fixed.
On Intel side it's kinda ok, I guess, for integrated graphics anyway, although I doubt it matches already weak Windows performance.

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2025-09-15, 17:18:

One of the major hurdles of Linux is old GPU support. […]
Show full quote

One of the major hurdles of Linux is old GPU support.

On Nvidia side we have open source Nouvea, which is just shit even for really old card, after many years of development. Nvidia's own old drivers are not compatible with new kernels and don't support anything but X11 too.
On AMD side everything works, on paper, even really old stuff like Radeon X800, but pre-DX11 stuff has shit performance, especially DX9 hardware and pre-GCN DX11 stuff has too many issues for Wine/Proton to work normally, also there's a bunch of visuals bugs which never will be fixed.
On Intel side it's kinda ok, I guess, for integrated graphics anyway, although I doubt it matches already weak Windows performance.

You know, I was going to say "Is that really so much worse than Windows?" but then when I actually started looking, it sure seems to be. For example, Geforce 700 through 1000 cards had driver support ended this year. But there still exist drivers for them for Windows 11. Some cursory research shows that the recommended Linux drivers for the 700 series is 304.137, and those don't work on a kernel newer than 4.13? Which I don't even see as an option in Linux Mint. Nothing older than 6.8 is available. So good luck with that, you'd need to be using a pretty old distro of Linux for that to work I guess. Not an expert, but that's how it seems.

I'm sure someone knows how to either make the drivers work on newer kernels, or ala cart the correct linux components to make a newer distro work with them. But however it's done definitely cuts down on the user friendliness I experienced getting Linux Mint running on my relatively newer machine.

I prefer EPEL, and use Rocky Linux on a business-class laptop. RL9+Plasma just gives you usable desktop, all the laptop things work.

In the past, for laptops ACPI support and some wireless interfaces were problematic for Linux. They still are for FreeBSD, but not for Linux.

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2025-09-15, 17:18:

One of the major hurdles of Linux is old GPU support. […]
Show full quote

One of the major hurdles of Linux is old GPU support.

On Nvidia side we have open source Nouvea, which is just shit even for really old card, after many years of development. Nvidia's own old drivers are not compatible with new kernels and don't support anything but X11 too.
On AMD side everything works, on paper, even really old stuff like Radeon X800, but pre-DX11 stuff has shit performance, especially DX9 hardware and pre-GCN DX11 stuff has too many issues for Wine/Proton to work normally, also there's a bunch of visuals bugs which never will be fixed.
On Intel side it's kinda ok, I guess, for integrated graphics anyway, although I doubt it matches already weak Windows performance.

This is easy on FreeBSD since every archived release has archived ports and packages.
For example the nvidia-driver archived port will want a nvidia FreeBSD driver tgz download, which will probably be not accessible on the URL, but is easy to find a second source and just manually download it to work directory.

I've used FreeBSD 5.5 on Pentium MMX with TNT2 or GeForce2 using that approach.
For FreeBSD the hardware support should remain frozen in time if some of the 3rd party source driver archives haven't been lost alltogether.

I wasn't serious about Windows drive letters and legacy cruft.

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2025-09-15, 17:18:

On AMD side everything works, on paper, even really old stuff like Radeon X800, but pre-DX11 stuff has shit performance, especially DX9 hardware and pre-GCN DX11 stuff has too many issues for Wine/Proton to work normally, also there's a bunch of visuals bugs which never will be fixed.

10+ some years ago, I was using Radeon HD 4890. It was sad on Linux, fglrx required jumping through hoops to install and was a glitchy mess. Open-source driver was just slow in games.

Some memories though, that was once fastest single-core card from red camp.

Changed my main OS to Linux ever since Windows 8 appeared (more than a decade now). Still have Windows 11 now in one of the drives of my laptop and desktop (though rarely boot into, and sometimes just boot them to update), just for compatibility sake or for trying out games that can't run in Linux via WINE/Proton or needed too much workaround. (Which are becoming less nowadays.)

I was already experimenting with Linux those days since the days of Windows 7. Puppy, SLitaz, Mint, Ubuntu and it's variations, etc. I was hooked from the beginning. I was using Arch for a long time, but got tired of the rolling release concepts and the constant need to check if something gets broken after an update.

Now using Debian Stable XFCE in my Laptops and Fedora XFCE in my desktop, mainly for playing Steam Games under Linux since Fedora has more updated drivers and libraries. (I also find running games like Assassin's Creed and Red Dead Redemption II runs even better and smoother in Fedora under Steam-Proton than Windows itself.)

Hmmm...feel like I have written something similar like this quite a number of times here recently.

Coming back to the topic, Linux Mint is one of the best (if not the best) OS for those Windows users wishing to take the leap and change the main driving OS to a Linux ecosystem. It's stable enough to prevent initial problems and has a good helpful community. Cinnamon is quite solid and resembles Windows Start Button Menu. It even comes with the primary default panel at the bottom to look like Windows taskbar. (I like to use top panels though).

well, i like linux mint and i was fine with ubuntu too

unlike some linux users i become basically 'a simple user' when on linux, default everything is fine - i'm happy if sound, graphics, storage devices are recognised. I'm fine with the gui applications, install only what mints software manager offers and if something seems to require research and extensive command line things, I'm often fine to just leave it. I keep the whole thing simple.

As such i'm rewarded with an easy to use and undemanding OS for a few machines where it makes sense, just for browsing, a little bit of light programming and some occasional multi media and light office type stuff

I'm aware i'd be missing the many depths of the OS and i'm fine with that

UCyborg wrote on 2025-09-13, 06:19:

UCyborg wrote on 2025-09-13, 06:19:

Jo22 wrote on 2025-09-13, 05:32:

How is this difference being justified? 😟
Why does Raspbian of 2012 needed so much less, while having same feature set?

The crazy amount of programmers think it's NORMAL for used CPU cycles to scale with CPU advancements, for the same task! They're nuts!

Adding to that, old hardware is simply irrelevant for the most part outside of community visiting obscure forums such as this one.

It's not just about old hardware, I think, but a fundamental problem. 😟

I've noticed the bloat in the year 2000 already.:
While a Windows 3.x program was 200KB in size and ran quick,
a similar Win32 application on 98SE now was 2 MB in size. And less snappy running.

There's a saying for this phenomenon: "software is getting slower more rapidly than hardware is becoming faster."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirth%27s_law

If Linux or Open Source community really was advancing,
then there would be at least an attempt to break this cycle somehow.

Because otherwise, I'm afraid, the true capabilities of modern computers may be never utilized.
The ratio between bloat and fast hardware may always remain same or similar.

Then there's the scalability problem.
In order to manage many processes and cores, computing power is required too.

Just making more cores and use more threading and more memory doesn't fix the issue.
It rather increases the pressure on the operating system's scheduler and the virtual memory managment.

PS: Then there's the design of Linux/Unix: Everything is a file.
Seems fine at first, but there's a catch. Millions of (tiny) files put a pressure on the filesystem and the mass storage devices.

If for example, there's an SSD which must erase blockwise, then lots of read-write-modify requests may happen.
It's not just about wrong alignment, but also about physical sector size.

In order to having things running smoothly,
the OS should work with sector sizes that match the internal sector size used by the flash memory. 4KB, for example.

Edit: Speaking of Linux, it's kinda funny.
Every few years Linux users look back and say "how far we have come!".

Back in 2000, Linux users told how far it had advanced since early 90s and that modern Linux can't be compared with it.
In the 2010s, the same had been said about "early' Linux from 2000: "how far we have come!"

Now in 2025, same thing happens about Linux from ~2008 (when Ununtu was rising)..
In 2050 someone will surely say that now-current Linux was in its infancy and that it can't be compared to then-current Linux.

By 2050, Linux will have moderate resource requirements of 64 CPU cores, 16 TB RAM and and 500 TB holo drive. In the name of "progress".

It's same principle as farther, faster, higher perhaps.
Or the fairytale of unlimited economic growth (even if resources aren’t endless).
People assume that there is no limit and act accordingly.
That explains why software is so bloated and uneccesarily complex.

Here's the thing. The way I see it, anyway. It kind of ended it for me when micro$oft started the product activation. The OS had to be tied down to that particular computer. Before, you were always free to experiment. If something messed up, you always had the option op just wiping everything and reinstalling. That option becomes removed, or becomes a lot more difficult. And for a long time I had no internet. And then it got worse when they stopped shipping install disks with the OS. Left afraid to change anything for fear it will mess up beyond the ability to repair. And then finally, we arrive at having to have a micro$oft account. They can keep it. And their office suite.

One thing is for sure.

Breaking away from current status of Windows ecosystem and able to successfully migrate to a Linux environment is so much rewarding.

It's like you have total control of how you want your OS to work. All the Linux distros I have tried so far are a snap to boot (boots to workable desktop within seconds... (Much much more faster than any Windows even in the fastest SSD) and very responsive.

I actually timed various Linux boot times comparing with Windows 10 boot.

Or maybe, I'm just used to Linux already.

So much so that, even when I buy a new laptop, which almost invariably comes installed with Windows, the first thing I do is format the drive and install my favourite Linux distro. If it's touch screen compatible, I install a Gnome based DE distro. Otherwise XFCE.

Malik wrote on 2025-09-17, 00:37:

So much so that, even when I buy a new laptop, which almost invariably comes installed with Windows, the first thing I do is format the drive and install my favourite Linux distro. If it's touch screen compatible, I install a Gnome based DE distro. Otherwise XFCE.

XFCE doesn't fully support Wayland yet, though. That's becoming increasingly problematic. It's especially an issue when you have a system with multiple monitors with different DPI per screen. I guess that's not really an issue on most low-spec systems, I guess. But the future of the Linux Desktop is really Wayland.

In terms of lightweight desktop environments with Wayland support, labwc might be a good window manager (or compositor) to build one on. Raspberry Pi OS has recently switched from Wayfire to labwc, which is a pretty good endorsement, as far as lightweight desktop environments go.

One thing is for sure.

Breaking away from current status of Windows ecosystem and able to successfully migrate to a Linux environment is so much rewarding.

There's also BSD, still. In several flavors. Gratefully.
A world being fully Linux dominated is same as with Windows in the 90s.

Mono cultures are never good, I think.

It's dangerous to believe in the superiority of just one piece of software.

Especially in terms of Linux, because the fan base tends to blame the users rather than aknowledging the flaws.

The situation with Rust in the Linux kernal is such a thing, maybe.
A change is needed, but difficult to make. Too many sensitive spots, such as memory related things.

As-is, the Linux kernal is bloated and may fall apart if nothing is done.
That's why the creator welcomes Rust as rejuvenation treatment, I think.

Here's some information about the issue:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Linux

PS: I have no hate for Linux whatsoever.
It's just that I'm sceptical since late 90s, when I first used Linux.
It's such a change from commercial Unix world in which everything was pre-built and tested.

Imagine the Amiga 1000 ran on Linux.. Users certainly would feel different about the machine.
Not necessarily in a positive way, maybe.

Edited.

digger wrote on 2025-09-17, 09:57:

Malik wrote on 2025-09-17, 00:37:

So much so that, even when I buy a new laptop, which almost invariably comes installed with Windows, the first thing I do is format the drive and install my favourite Linux distro. If it's touch screen compatible, I install a Gnome based DE distro. Otherwise XFCE.

XFCE doesn't fully support Wayland yet, though. That's becoming increasingly problematic. It's especially an issue when you have a system with multiple monitors with different DPI per screen. I guess that's not really an issue on most low-spec systems, I guess. But the future of the Linux Desktop is really Wayland.

In terms of lightweight desktop environments with Wayland support, labwc might be a good window manager (or compositor) to build one on. Raspberry Pi OS has recently switched from Wayfire to labwc, which is a pretty good endorsement, as far as lightweight desktop environments go.

I actually never liked the problematic Wayland. It still has some rough edges.

Besides, X with XFCE just works without workarounds, including running the latest games via Steam Proton.

My systems are probably overkill for the humble XFCE, but the snappiness is as fast as the blink of the eye. KDE-Plasma also good, but I feel it's slightly bloated, though also has many configurabilites. Maybe it's just me.

@Jo22
Your writings brought this to my mind: https://tonsky.me/blog/disenchantment/

@Malik
Interesting, at least in my case with KUbuntu from 2020, boot time isn't much better compared Windows 10. I'm on spinning rust and Phenom II is also quite rusty at this point. But this computer (year 2009) generally takes longer to boot with new systems, I have a cheap laptop from 2014 with 5400 RPM disk (the 2009 computer has 7200 RPM disk) and somehow the laptop with its poor 1,35 GHz APU and 2 GB of RAM still boots noticeably sooner. Though it's also 32-bit OS vs 64-bit OS. There were times I had 35 seconds from Windows boot screen to login screen, that's the best time, but it's not often in the mood to boot in such time.

This thing reminds me a bit of the old Windows XP computer from 2001 or 2002, this one just behaved oddly until it warmed up...booting to Windows XP, then taking some good time before taskbar was responsive.

But maybe I should have spent more time with something other than *Ubuntu. I tried Manjaro couple of years ago. I'm more comfortable with apt for package management though. Back then I was compiling one of the Quake II engines that was only for Windows that I managed to hack some time before that to work natively on Linux, basically modifying source code by replacing Win32 code with code calling SDL2 library. For some reason, I couldn't alt-tab out of the game on Manjaro while I could on KUbuntu, both had Plasma desktop. On the other hand, Flash Player was crashing on KUbuntu with hardware acceleration enabled while it worked on Manjaro. So who knows how many such quirks one could encounter between distros.

@gerry
That sounds like a healthy approach. Some of us have surely become spoiled over time.