Useless platitudes. It's a bit of victim blaming. Yes, I believe any Windows user is a victim. However, do you really think this person on HN would not switch to Linux if they did not have compelling reasons for having to use Windows?
I actually love Windows (although I haven't used 11 yet and probably never will).
Maybe it's just what I grew up with, but all the native widget interactions feel perfect, even after the Win 8 style transition. The mouse acceleration is exactly what I expect. The taskbar behaves precisely how I want a taskbar to behave. The filesystem layout is refreshingly straightforward compared to the Unix/Posix FHS. Windows Defender does its job and gets out of the way (remember Norton/McAfee and Spybot?). And there are a ton of nice graphical "power user" applications available.
Part of the reason I like KDE so much is that it feels so Windows-like. But every time I boot into my Windows desktop, I feel a bit sad knowing that there is nothing quite like it in the GNU/Linux world.
There is that one Windows-API-compatible OS, but I have no idea if that will ever be viable as a daily driver.
> Windows Defender does its job and gets out of the way
WD is easily bypassed [1]. It's all smoke and mirrors - Microsoft has never cared about security. The OS is full of wontfix exploits (this is frowned upon to talk about in the security research community, especially among the big players, wonder why...)
One would benefit in exploring the thought that WD is valuable for MS in the way that it can be used to restrict 'personal computing' - the applications you download and use, the files you download and create, all recorded and hashed in some database, all under the guise of security. DeCSS is a good example [2].
One would also benefit in exploring the thought of the possibility that MS spends significant amounts of money in paying off MS partners, researchers, news outlets etc. to convince the public that defender will keep you safe.
I repeat, Microsoft does not care about security. That said, a properly hardened Windows 10 Enterprise LTSC with telemetry removed [3], along with a third-party/router firewall is the way to go, in my opinion.
The repositories shown on the first page of GitHub search are not actual exploits. They all expect to be run through an admin powershell/command line. Under normal conditions (default user and UAC on) you will get a warning before the script is able to gain administrative access. Try to run them again under a normal user and they won't be able to disable/bypass Defender.
It's the same as sudo'ing an unknown script you received in an email. At that point you're begging to be pwned.
Sort by Best match or Most stars. Those github repos are just examples. Pro malware creators wouldn't just copy and paste some code or else it would be detected fairly easily.
UAC is easily bypassed as well. In fact, the majority of wontfix exploits has something to do with UAC.
> They all expect to be run through an admin powershell/command line.
Admin rights will be acquired by using exploits (of which there are many) or by using built-in tools found in the Windows system directory, for example Wscript.exe. No internet connection required. No fetching of external files. You have no say in whether you can allow it to run or not.
> you will get a warning before the script is able to gain administrative access.
False. You wouldn't even know. Not a visible commandline window to be seen. It's all silent. A well-developed exploit will delete most of it's traces.
This is all pretty basic knowledge in the sec research community. Test it and verify it for yourself. I test hardening configurations using a Windows VM.
lol don't have to be coy about naming it, it's called ReactOS. It's an OS project that attempts to be a clean-room implementation of the Windows API. The latest news about it popped up yesterday for being able to run some old Battlefield games: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30888799
Progress is understandably slow but since Microsoft has significantly lowered investment in Windows itself and are pivoting away from it to Azure, I can imagine a possible but distant future where Windows allows Wine & ReactOS to catch up because little beyond surface-level UI changes happen on Windows anymore.
It's victim blaming in the same way the partner of an abusive spouse gets told to just leave the spouse. Yes, partner is a victim, but there is a clear action to end the abuse.
There are a variety of games for PC that just aren't on console. If you want to play them, you do not have any alternative.
There are a variety of games where you need a mouse, or have grown up using a mouse, and switching to constroller is like asking someone who runs marathons to switch to sack racing. This is not an alternative on consoles.
Games are frequently cheaper on PC. MUCH cheaper. If you're on a budget, it's hard to justify.
Not all multiplayer games are cross-system compatible, and many never will be. If your friends play on PC, you can't switch to console without agreeing to never play with them again. Maybe you'll be the one to start the exodus if you try, but maybe not. That's a lot to ask of people, to buy a new console, rebuy all their old games, and then be okay with all the above-mentioned issues, including the network effect of your friends' friends who all play on PC, etc.
In short, there are quite a number of valid reasons to run Windows on your PC, especially if you play games.
I too wondered about how switching away from Windows would impact my access to games. My earliest memories are about games. My entire childhood was spent playing games, to the detriment of any other activity. My first non-burger-flipping job was in the gaming industry. Games are constantly on my mind. I love video games. But today, in practice, I don't miss any Windows-only games.
The first observation is that we're in a golden age of video gaming. There are so many quality games coming out, for every platform, that you could spend the rest of your life playing only the games available today and barely even make a dent in the backlog. The world has too many games as it is (which isn't a bad thing, to be clear).
The second observation is that, even though there are so many objectively high-quality games, I've become bored of almost all of them. Almost none of them have anything new to offer, and are, at best, refinements on existing formulas. Now that I'm older, I've seen all the formulas. For younger people, maybe they would suffer from not getting to have some formative experience in some Windows-only game. But I've put in my 10,000 hours, twice over, making me an expert in video games, and in my expert opinion I'm not missing out.
> Games are frequently cheaper on PC. MUCH cheaper. If you're on a budget, it's hard to justify.
It's not really the truth anymore. At best it's a couple of bucks on sale, day 1 prices are typically the same and have been for 10+ years at this point, PSN/XBL regularly have sales that are just as or close to as steep as Steam or even cheaper. Plus you can still resell that physical PS5 game and get something back which you haven't been able to do on PC for a while.
You don't have to rebuy. You just keep the old console if you want to play the old game. I still have 20+ year old consoles and games that work fine. While PC backwards compatibility is nice sometimes it's also a giant pain where you're spending 4 hours to figure out WTF Sims 2 won't launch on your 4K monitor (true story).
No, the sales are just as competitive. It's been there for years. Take a look at sites that keep price histories for Steam, PSN and XBL. Only real value in PC gaming is free online.
Most people don't keep around a whole stash of old consoles, while keeping a 10-15 year old steam account is way more common. If you game on PC you will most likely have a steam acc.
Meaning whenever and whatever kind of PC you get, you have your library.
Plus the abandonware, freeware, and all the giveaways (Epic store front regularly gives away all sorts of great games for free, even new AAA titles sometimes) and other goodies that come from an open platform.
If you just go to a store and buy a console, you basically have nothing, other than the F2P lootbox games. It's a closed platform so you have nothing. And have to rebuy stuff from zero if you want to play the games you had in past.
The fact I can just go buy a PC and have the whole steam library dating back to almost two decades is the real value. And that i'm not locked out.
Games like FF7R, GTA, anmy RPG etc, sure I play on playstation.
Good luck playing CSGO, Valorant, Leauge of Legends and my already massive Steam library on PS4 lol
Why would you suggest this as a "solution"
I run Windows 10 as it runs the software I want. Im on an install from 2015 when it came out and after chaning the default browser, desktop background, some settings customization, its fine.
I can also use my own desktop hardware. I have a i7 4790k, 32GB RAM and a 1070ti 3x 1440p monitors.
Why should I get a Mac?
Why would I want to buy some box for hundreds of euros/dollars that only plays games:
- with worse quality
- with no mod support for basically any game
- requires you to pay extra for basic features (e.g. looking at you, Nintendo, with your "savegames are not on the SD card but locked to the console unless you pay a subscription to back them up online, so if your Switch kicks it, they're gone"; etc etc)
- last I heard basically no setting customizability and locked framerates all over the place, like Bloodborne locked at 30fps with no anti-aliasing
- exclusivity garbage
- almost always controller-only input: shooters and (other) first-person games with controller? No thank you!
- the list goes on and on
Nowadays, with Proton I can play basically anything I want on Steam on my Ubuntu PC with minimal if any added effort (actually none in recent memory) with no problems, parity in frame-rate and stability to when I was gaming on Windows years ago.
Granted, I mostly stay away from the garbage that is regularly barely warmed-up and churned out by those greedy MTX-peddling bloodsuckers known as the "AAA industry".
Yeah I fully agree... incidentally I started a new job april 1st, my employer provided me with a windows laptop. That's why I had this knowledge ready.
First windows experience in many years, it's been equally gross and amusing.
A domain joined Windows laptop should have GPOs to remove the ads and shit also SCCM/Intune software center / company portal to install the apps you need.
Gross because the lock screen insists on serving me dumb ass photos with """interesting""" factoids, in an attempt to ???
Gross because I clicked somewhere by accident and the bottom right of my screen was filled with news snippets and some MS ads.
Hilarious because I wanted to change the (default ?) UI scaling from 150 to 100%; there was no obvious way to just type "scaling" somewhere and get to the point, instead I navigated three layers deep through the settings panel, which had three different visual design styles. I read all the windows design snark on HN, without really knowing what is what... turns out it REALLY is as bad as people make it out to be, haha.
I’m so tired of hearing this ‘just switch to Linux’ bullshit.
If you are privileged enough to be in the extreme minority who can do that - you probably already have.
I know you know this - but people need proprietary software, and they need to not guess if it might possibly work through some interpretative layer like WINE.
May I remind you a lot of people pay for software they need to use, and sometimes need support or updates that they certainly won’t be guaranteed if they are trying to run software on unsupported systems.
If you are somehow privileged enough to not be in that group, you are an extreme - extreme - outlier, and good for you, but don’t bury your head in the sand and forget that for 99% of people, that’s obviously not a possibility - whatsoever - including at least 90% of the workforce who gets handed a laptop and use whatever they have to use.
It’s just so irritating to constantly hear this ‘just go to Linux’ bullshit when it’s not like Linux users aren’t aware that it can’t work for the majority of people.
If I switch to Linux, I lose Photoshop, Logic Pro, Final Cut Pro, Unity, as well as a handful of plug-ins. That’s $1k plus of software I have paid for and rely on, that I instantly lose access to?!
The value loss upon switching to Linux - alone - for most people, who have invested into software ecosystems that can’t be replicated in Linux alone would be astounding.
It’s not even the money spent on software, either - it’s the time invested in learning it.
I know people who run Linux know this - I wonder why they seem to have forgotten.
I would also add that even in 2022 (last time I had a Dell Linux machine) lots of stuff simply fails.
E.g. wake from sleep often doesn't, webcams often just stop between exiting one video call and starting another, Bluetooth often stops, CPU throttling often doesn't do anything so you have battery life of 1hr max, external USB keyboards often "disappear" etc.
This sort of shit never happens on my personal Windows machine, Chromebooks, or work MacBook Pro (that replaced the Linux dell). I trust the tech people at my place of work to not screw things up in terms of distro, and it has been something that I have observed time and time again over the years with Linux on different hardware, different distros and different corporate environments.
The answer if often "turn it off and on again" (much like windows 95) otherwise you are on an tedious trip down remote support sessions with dmesg/lsusb/blueman/pulseaudio command line messing about. I am sure someone will reply "ah you need to make sure you use foo instead of bar!" or "that version of Bar is not compatible with Foo" or " your distro needs to back port patch Quux" ... that is part of the problem and why "just use Linux" doesn't work (yet).
People in the workforce that get handed over a laptop with Windows usually don't have any control on it due to company policies, so this is a non-argument. For the rest, I doubt 99% of people actually "need" Windows. 50%? Probably, possibly. Also, proprietary software has nothing to do with Linux or not Linux, there is proprietary software that's not Windows only.
I also don't think any of this is about privilge, it's about control. If you want control, you have to work for it. That's how everything works in life. People will always try to take away from you control. Switching to Linux may take work, but it will give you control. Learning a bit more Windows (like the operations mentionned earlier, the registery) will probably be easier and give you less. Everyone can then adjust things depending on how much control they want and time/energy they have.
I don’t get how losing access to the software I need to do the things I need to do - have spent quite a bit of money on - and a lot of time learning - gives me ‘control’.
Actually - it doesn’t. Plain and simple. I actually laughed out loud a little at the comment, ngl.
It’s actually that Linux is controlling me and what I can do. :/ Specifically, what I can’t do.
I’d lose thousands of dollars and years of investment into learning and using these tools I rely on.
It would cripple me completely, professionally - overnight. For real. I’d also lose access to a decade and a half of project files from Logic, etc.
It’s completely privilege if you happen to be in the minority that can find the time and value loss that switching to an OS that doesn’t allow you to run any previous software you’ve used (except Firefox, maybe :P) somehow works for you.
It’s funny - I have complete control over my ability to do everything I want to do on my Mac.
Switching to Linux immediately takes my entire command deck (Logic Pro X, Final Cut Pro X, various plug ins, Photoshop, Animator, Maya, Unity3D…I could go on…) away from me.
And what’s funny is - I have the ability to run most of the software I’d run on Linux on my Mac anyway, due to its underpinnings.
Then I’ve still got WINE…
So, the fact is - there are almost only disadvantages for a vast number of, especially average users - to switch to Linux - and most of that is the time and headache involved in unnecessarily learning a new system.
Most people don’t want to even deal with computers to start. And this leads to the biggest reason we will never have the ‘year of Linux’, and the biggest reason I laugh off Linux evangelists as totally ignorant of the ‘real world’.
Us nerds really get stuck in our tiny little corner of a perspective sometimes.
Very little demonstrates that more than Linux switcher evangelists.
The average person literally knows the like 4-5 tasks they need to do on their computer and they don’t want to know or learn anything else! Like, people are not like we are, and any serious Linux evangelist forgot that a long time ago.
To be honest, your reaction is so dramatic and I am not sure is it something personal.
But I could agree with you on this point. A average person literally knows the like 4-5 tasks they need to do on their computer and they don’t want to know or learn anything else. That's true.
Modern software, be it Windows, Mac OS, or you productivity tool is going to ruin your workflow by introducing non-reversible UI changes that sure no purpose other than telling the world that our product is not staling. That's the standard practice.
While I am using Linux desktop, with customized config that is not changed for years, and I don't need to learn a new workflow for these years anymore. That's good and I like it because I am getting old.
> I don’t get how losing access to the software I need to do the things I need to do - have spent quite a bit of money on - and a lot of time learning - gives me ‘control’.
We're in a discussion about how you can get Windows to do the things you want because of user hostile decisions made by Microsoft.
> It’s actually that Linux is controlling me and what I can do. :/
I don't think it's called "control" when it's due to an unconscious agent. Life is not "controlling" you because you will die one day. It's how things are. You can influence it, like living longer by not smoking, or porting over software to linux, or trying stuff out with wine or sharing how it works.
> It’s completely privilege if you happen to be in the minority that can find the time and value loss that switching to an OS that doesn’t allow you to run any previous software you’ve used somehow works for you.
You're making the fallacy of thinking that switching OS means you'll loss all software, which is absolutely wrong. Unless you happen to only use desktop apps that only work on windows, which puts you in the minority. A good part of Excel works online for example, same with most of Microsoft Office. Alternative also exists. And again, considering the post we're in, people are frustrated at windows, they're already spending quite some time and energy in trying to fix things or being frustrated at things.
You and everyone else are free to invest their time however you want. That doesn't mean it's the correct or best decision. There's nothing about that that's privilege. Some people work with Excel all their life yet refuse to learn more of it, even when they are offered formations at work. That's not lacking privilege. And again, it's perfectly fine if they don't want to do it. But the people that instead learn more Excel are not privileged in any way.
Edit following yours:
> The average person literally knows the like 4-5 tasks they need to do on their computer and they don’t want to know or learn anything else!
I'm glad we agree that it's in their power to do it and that they actually refuse to do anything about it. If you consider windows to be becoming too anoying (which is what this whole thread is about) and keep complaining and not doing anything, this is not because of a lack of privilege. This is on you. If windows is working fine for you, great! I'm happy to hear it! Same for MacOS. However, people are having issues frequently with closed source OSes. This one about windows, a recent one about MacOS: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30864613. For them, switching might be a solution.
I'll add that I don't really see the point of editing your comment to be even more snarky and less based on facts that it was before. Maybe reading the guidelines again would help you?
You're also in the extreme minority. Most users don't have close to thousands of dollars in paid software and often what they do have is something like Microsoft Office that has alternatives or easy options to get working like the proprietary paid software Crossover (that's right! Linux has proprietary paid software!).
It's just as tiring to hear "Linux is unusable, it can't run X". For you maybe it can't work but it can work for a lot more than just coders.
Honestly I feel like desktop Linux market share would be a whole lot larger if the defacto office suite wasn't owned by the biggest OS maker...
Yup. I'm stuck at using Visual Studio (not Vscode) for a legacy codebase for work and it's the only reason that I still have to use Windows (though thankfully, in a VM) that doesn't work properly on Mono-rebranded-as-Visual-Studio-which-isnt-the-same-thing.
I'm a Mac user and can't even consider switching to Linux (eventhough I like it) as I use Photoshop, After Effects, Sketch, Logic Pro which anyone would probably agree that they are unmatched.
Anyone who can completely be on Linux are probably people who don't need ANYTHING other than open source software/terminals/code editors etc. which is much less in percentage (but overlapping with the demographics of here a lot).
These threads are pretty pointless as it is, but if we avoid mentioning the only solution that exists and how to do that, switching to Linux, then the thread is literally just a bunch of complaining
Switching to Linux is obviously not the only solution - and somehow trying to argue that it’s the case is not only ignorant - but straight-up what my core issue is with Linux evangelism.
There is such a lack of consideration for the average end-user - who would never deal with the layers that come with a Linux distro in the evangelical Linux community - it seriously drives me crazy sometimes.
Like - the only solution? …
There is an entire other OS and ecosystem called MacOS, that doesn’t have these issues like built-in advertising - allows for natively running the proprietary software most people need without some weird translation layer in between - and if you don’t like that - there are ways to tweak Windows into being semi-sorta-not-really-but-whatever level acceptable. It even runs most Linux software, to boot.
Almost like it’s the best of all worlds, or something.
And if you want to bitch about the proprietary hardware ‘needed’ for MacOS - to be frank - in about 15 years or so of playing with both Hackintoshes and various Linux distributions…I honestly found them to be about equal in terms of hardware support and annoyance of configuration.
In the last 4-5 years I’ve actually had better luck with plug and play hardware support on Hackintoshes.
(It’s amazing how fantastic that community is! Most of my computers are totally plug and play. My 80-year-old grandma did it last year, first try - after trying and failing several times with Ubuntu, on her bog-standard Dell tower…)
So, point in case - is the average person supposed to go fishing around for drivers or go out to purchase specific hardware so it works with their Linux distribution?
Do they want to dig through package managers to find whatever alternatives exist to the software they need and already know how to use?
Obviously not, and; no. :P
So is Linux even a ‘solution’ at all for at least 80% of people who don’t even get what a ‘driver’ is? Of course not!
So it certainly can’t be the ‘only’ solution.
Even convincing the average Windows user to go over to MacOS - even if you hand them a Mac - is pretty tough, honestly. (Speaking from experience…)
I’d never, nor have I ever - recommend(ed) any Linux distribution to anyone who wasn’t a serious techie.
Heck, I don’t recommend it in general, unless you’re lucky enough to be a programmer who doesn’t have to work on proprietary systems, and are dual-booting alongside an OS that can natively run the proprietary software 90% of people rely on and already know how to use.
If you’re curious and tech-savvy - of course - go for it!
I’ve recommended dual-booting to a few techie friends, and I have nothing against Linux - honesty except for the people who are blindly evangelical about it and forget about the real people in the world who aren’t techies.
For the average person - Linux is a perfect case of ‘free isn’t free’.
An aside:
You know what is likeliest to replace Windows, which sucks balls? Android. Because honestly, other than the built-in ads, on a default installation, with telemetry enabled, it would be tough to tell which OS is worse for your privacy.
I’d be curious to see a highly technical comparison on that!
You have a strange bias against Linux. I've convinced many non tech people to install Ubuntu and Mint without trouble. My grandma literally uses Fedora that I installed for her. During all these installations, it just worked; there was no driver issue to fix on any machine. In my experience talking to others, going from windows to OSX is infinitely more jarring than going to Linux (Cinnamon). I also think you're overestimating how many people need proprietary Windows software, by a lot.
If you're stuck on Windows, that sucks, but switching OS is the only solution to a hostile OS. You can tweak Windows however you want; it is still going to push updates that ignore your wishes and annoy you. We shouldn't stop recommending the best solution because you personally can't switch.
I agree, but I only have windows machines as exclusive gaming boxes.
No password on login, no web browsing period, no access to NAS/media/files, no cloud access etc. just has windows and steam/various launchers and peripheral software.
I’m are things like proton exist, but there are a million issues with gaming on Linux that I don’t feel like writing a book about in the comment section. Maybe in a few more years…
It's for the better, I think. Everybody gets so concerned about privacy and then gives Valve a blank check with the Steam launcher.
I almost prefer having it on an isolated system, along with the various other game launchers.
I also wish I didn't have to use it to buy games, but it seems like any/most PC games are available only through Steam, or some equivalently distasteful proprietary launcher/platform/portal thing.
Microsoft has a long standing reputation for bundling crap and bloat its OS, while doing whatever-telemetry and harder to catch as the author of the OS itself.
Valve and Steam has a much better reputation for now, and is respected by many players. I'm not saying it's perfect but at least it's loved by players whereas Microsoft/Windows is more into the hated category, for good well-deserved reasons.
