TempleOS. All other operating systems are sinful.
I’m mainly privacy and security focused when it comes to software. My first Linux distro was Whonix. It’s like if Tor expanded from the browser into an OS. Its a bit clunky and outdated though, so not a great daily driver. My second and current distro was the KDE spin of Fedora. It’s been amazing top to bottom. Unfortunately Red Hat recently started some drama, but Fedora shouldn’t be impacted as its upstream. If Red Hat’s greasy paws do mess things up, I’m thinking about running OpenSUSE Tumbleweed. Hopefully it’s just me over thinking and Fedora will remain a stellar OS option for years to come.
If you want the security/privacy of whonix capabilities with the flexibility of fedora you should checkout Qubes OS. As long as you have the correct hardware to run Qubes it can make for a secure and unique experience.
I’ve given Qubes a go, it’s a bit much for my threat model. Fedora is a well ranked OS from a privacy and security standpoint, not on the same level as Qubes, but Qubes uses it as the base OS. Fedora’s easier on the eyes and straight forward. Is Qubes your daily driver?
Windows. Everything is straight forward and I can still make some custom or niche stuff work.
I don’t like Linux, because a lot of programs don’t work, and I don’t want to create my own 3D application or DAW from scratch. Not worth my time.
I don’t like Apple because the money I’d put into that I’d rather put to better use.
All three of your answers are (wrong) stereotypes.
How is thst wrong? I second this, and 1 and 2 are the reasons i am not on Linux yet wirh my main PC. Win 11 runs without issues for me, i cant install Essential Software and Hardware thag i use on Linux and Apple is expensive and i really dont like the Windowmanagement and some other Quirks of macOs. btw i use all three of them, win 11 on my main pc, linux on my old laptop and macOS at work.
The comments are so vague as to be useless.
Windows. Everything is straight forward and I can still make some custom or niche stuff work.
I can say the same thing about Linux.
I don’t like Linux, because a lot of programs don’t work, and I don’t want to create my own 3D application or DAW from scratch.
This sounds like a 2005 opinion. There is professional grade software on Linux (for example Pixar RenderMan). If there is a specific application a person needs that is Windows only (and there are many) that’s fine, but suggesting the need write your own application for Linux from scratch is ridiculous.
As for “a lot of programs don’t work”, I have no clue what that’s supposed to mean… XD
-
No one said linux doesnt work, the Person just said this is one point why He uses Windows.
-
Building your own Software is definitely exaggerated.
-
My graphics applications dont work properly (Affinity Suite), my Video Tool barely works although its supported natively (davinci), my DAW (maschine) and my music Hardware (maschine mk3) dont work at all. Installing my vsts is very Tricky (aome dont work at all). My cloud storage has no linux Client (proton drive). This is just the most important stuff for my use case, which keeps me from switching to Linux.
What you’re describing in 3. is the exact reason why I said “build software from scratch” btw. Some software just will never work properly or never work period. And usually, every Linux compatible software can technically do 80% of the stuff you need, but even that takes 10x the time and effort. I’m talking 3d applications like AutoCAD, cinema4d, DAWs like FL Studio and Ableton, video cutting like Sony Vegas or Adobe Premiere Pro, and this is not even talking about use cases where there’s highly specific, proprietary or custom software.
You either use Windows, or you pay with your time, effort and sanity.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m a data scientist and software Dev and I know there are good reasons why Linux should be the golden standard. But I’m also a realist and while I love the idea of what Linux’ goal is, it’s a really hard sell for most non computer science people.
-
I’d just like to interject for a moment. What you’re refering to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX. Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called Linux, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project. There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine’s resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux!
I don’t stop there. I like to give the FULL name of my operating system when I use it. Example:
“What distro are you running?”
“Oh on this laptop here? This laptop is running Mint, daughter of Ubuntu, son of Debian, daughter of Linux, son of GNU! Her ancestors hail from the mountains of Copyleft, where the mighty Stallman wields his hammer Emacs to forge her people’s legendary tools!”
Anything shorter is just disrespectful.
