• marxismtomorrow@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Most likely your software will work via bottles or wine. If you have a desktop PC from the last decade and it cost more than $1k, you can also run a VM (or Winboat) specifically for your software with nearly 1:1 performance to bare metal (if you get the passthrough right.)

    Which isn’t a permanent solution, mind you, but if it’s just one piece of software holding you back and you don’t care to play with alternatives, then the solution isn’t to keep Windows despite its terrible performance in 99% of things, it’s to switch to windows and emulate or compatibility layer the 1% of software you might use that requires windows.

    • tux0r@snac.rosaelefanten.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      If you need an emulator (yeah, “Wine Is Not an Emulator” yadda yadda, it still makes your software think you run a different OS) to run much of your most important software, you chose the wrong operating system.

      • bearboiblake [he/him]@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        If it works completely fine with Wine - in many cases, better than under Windows - why do you care if there’s a translation layer? Seems like a weird hill to die on. Do you also feel like running 32-bit applications on a 64-bit architecture means you chose the wrong architecture?

        • tux0r@snac.rosaelefanten.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          If you use a Windows “translation layer” for your software anyway, why would you choose Linux as the host platform in the first place?

          • bearboiblake [he/him]@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            3 hours ago

            There are so many reasons. Here’s just a few off the top of my head:

            • Windows isn’t free, Linux is.
            • Windows isn’t an open platform, Linux is.
            • Linux doesn’t track your activity. Windows does.
            • Linux doesn’t come bundled with a bunch of shovelware crap. Windows does.
            • Linux doesn’t push cloud products onto you. Windows does.
            • Linux doesn’t use your hardware to force-feed ads to you. Windows does.
            • Linux is infinitely more customizable than Windows.
            • Linux lets you choose when, how, and if you download/install updates. Windows does not.
            • Windows constantly pushes/forces AI slop products onto users. Linux does not.
            • tux0r@snac.rosaelefanten.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 hours ago

              All of that is true for most other operating systems, some of which are even more customizable than some of today’s Linux distributions. My question was “why Linux?”, not “why not Windows?”.

              • ayush@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                52 minutes ago

                Question is a not relevant to the discussion, and might be an (possibly unintentional?) attempt at derailing the conversation. @bearboiblake@pawb.social answered the question more than adequately. Their point still holds: If needed, there are many ways to run Windows apps under other operating systems (including Linux). Choosing an OS between Linux - and it’s various flavors, FreeBSD etc is outside the scope of the original discussion.

              • bearboiblake [he/him]@pawb.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 hours ago

                Oh – in that case, because Linux is vastly more popular than any other alternative free operating system or system distribution, has infinitely more support options and software available than alternatives, and a much larger community/install base, meaning that if you have a problem or want some tool, it’s far more likely to be available for Linux than any other free alternative.

                • tux0r@snac.rosaelefanten.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  3 hours ago

                  vastly more popular

                  Windows is more popular than Linux, so is macOS. Now is that a reason or not?

                  has infinitely more support options and software available than alternatives

                  False.

                  if you … want some tool, it’s far more likely to be available for Linux than any other free alternative.

                  Which tool does (e.g.) FreeBSD lack for you?

                  • bearboiblake [he/him]@pawb.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    3 hours ago

                    Windows is more popular than Linux, so is macOS. Now is that a reason or not?

                    notice the word free

                    False.

                    ok lol

                    Which tool does (e.g.) FreeBSD lack for you?

                    Well, Docker is the archetypal example, though I’m sure there are plenty of others. I’ve never particularly cared to get into BSD, because I have no incentive to do so.