Sure. My current laptop is an AMD Ryzen / Vega based convertible laptop. The touchscreen is connected using GPIO, but the AMD microcode (ie. the closed source software) has a bug in it (well, actually two bugs, but both related to GPIO). Now, because it's the closed source microcode, there's nothing to be done to directly fix the bugs except alert AMD that they exist, and wait for patched microcode to be released. The problem with that solution is that the touchscreen doesn't work until the patched microcode is released.

Enter the beauty of open-source. Someone figured out that we could make a small modification to the Linux kernel, and the GPIO would work, albeit, in a slightly downgraded state. So on Windows, where you can't roll your own kernel, you'd be stuck waiting for the oh-so-amazing closed source bit. On Linux, I can use my customized kernel until AMD get's their shit together.

I did
I don’t work for GOG why would I know. It’s nothing to do with copy right or closed source nonsense I can promise you that, since other games include the updates. It uses web installer and Unreal for GOG also has a bug where if you uninstall it, it deletes your save file, even when you chose it otherwise. The reason I was given is that they have higher priorities. But by all means feel free to test them yourself.
Maybe this is because I’ve been using Windows for years, but I haven’t picked up a virus in over 10 year. Not really sold on the extra security of Linux
I’m talking about the Linux and FOSS community mostly.
No one is using Ubuntu on their phones and there is no “we” Google did it all. They might have used some assets from Linux, but if you think for one second that they “need you” you are surely mistaken. I do not consider Android to be a “distribution” of Linux in the same vain as Ubuntu or Manjaro. It’s privately own and controlled and doesn’t belong to any community.
Since you’ve been critical of my arguments I think I should return the favour. Arguing from authority is when I expected to just take your word for it like when you tell me that you have dabbled in making OS’s yourself like it’s meant to give you some kind of authority on the matter.

A Strawman is when you misrepresent someone else's argument in hopes to have an easier time at making a point that sidelines their original argument.

My whole point with Macrium reflect and Clonezilla as well as virtual machines was to emphasise how people would often chose the free and open version despite it being woefully inferior. This was based on feature sets and functions of the software that I not only described but also provided links to. So to answer your question as to why you should download and use a piece of software that I support. So you can verify my story and understand it for yourself. The programs are free and won’t cost you anything, so why not.

However, to take that point and spin it into “you hate everything that is open source” That, my friend is strawmaning. You stawmaned me and then accused me of doing it to you; nice.

I'm going to end this by point out one major detail you've over looked. With all the mountains of text that you've been submitting to argue how good Linux is. The truth is, the more you need to explain how good something is, the worse it often is. Great products speak for themselves and don't need defending or even advertising. They sell themselves. There's a reason that Linux YouTuber just talk and never show anything.

I want to.

Excuse me, do we have Steve Ballmer in the thread?

That's the kicker of the types of holes i describe: you'd never know it if you had the spyware, because you'd never see a report from any security layers, because no one questions connections from microsoft programs, especially things that come with the OS itself. Fortunately, they eventually fixed the one in particular i'm focused on, but it took them years to do so, even though it was well published, including by them. Therefore, it's a bit bold to say you haven't picked up a virus, because, due to the nature of certain types of virus (the most common), you'd never know you were hit.

There are viruses even still that you are not likely to trace, and back doors into systems that are completely out of your control. Right, but it is projection. The things you say are not true of the community, but do seem to be true of you, just the other way around. I'm clearly in the Linux and FOSS community, but i'm not any of those things you describe, but you're here focused on telling us why FOSS is incompetent and doesn't make money. It only seems logical that you see in others what you refuse to see in yourself. So now we're going to deny something is what it is. Sure, ubuntu isn't on phones, but why would it be? Google has provided alot of drivers, and promises of keeping users in line by attempting to prevent rooting (which enables getting rid of the OEM spyware and adware), so why use ubuntu? There is, however, openmoko, but when i talked to one of the devs, they said they're not really as interested in competing with the bigger names (contrary to what their website says). But, hey, check this out. I'm not making an argument in that case. I'm just asking you to get a perspective. I want to know on what technological level i'm dealing with, here, as well as identify whether or not you're trolling. Then, I can make an argument from my more experienced perspective, and include information that you may be missing. You are free, then, to attack the substance of my argument, if you feel I am in error. You're saying that OS dev is hard, but you have no experience, nor do you really have much experience with games, either. Saying that i have experience with both and therefore i'm right and you're wrong, would be an argument from authority. Due to your lack of experience, it suffices to directly deny your argument, since the only thing I could do is suggest you get some experience, which is argument from authority. Difficulty of a project cannot really be quantified or qualified in any objective way. The biggest hurdle is reading some ugly documentation. OS Dev is mostly doing a bunch of fun work in the same vein as you did as a beginner programmer: you basically just make the libraries. It's actually really fun when you don't have to fight some really obscure bug that deals with backwards compatibility (A20 gate, i'm looking at you). To make it even easier, alot of the literature out there is already done for you. The challenge comes in trying to invent something different that works better than what's out in the literature.

Now, if you want a hard project, try doing an assembler with recursive macro support and conditional assembly (from scratch using only STL and in C++). I thought it was easy, so i tried to do it without an abstract syntax tree, and was almost ready for "release," then i realized that i was having an issue with chicken and eggs. I thought i could bypass that with using 2 different types of labels, but then i realized when trying to use it to make a bitmap file (since you can use assemblers to make files other than just executables) i realized that I needed to know the padding earlier on in the file for some conditional assembly, where the stage that gets the size of the file is after all the conditional assembly must be done. In the end, i realized i needed and AST, since the code i threw at my assembler was logical and could be handled by other assemblers, just not the one i made. Needless to say, since any platform i want to make my assembler run on, LLVM already runs on it, anyway. I was hoping to cut down on the memory overhead with my method, for maybe making a "hardware compiler using arduino" or something like that. Yeah, without the AST, that wasn't going to happen. The only thing i want LLVM to do is make an "empty target," which would be one where there is no target machine for the assembly instructions, that way i can overwrite the existing ones if i'm going to do a theoretical machine. I could compile from source to make my goal, but i'd rather be able to just download a binary package instead, especially if i don't want to re-compile every time i move to a new platform. Right now, a good temporary solution would be, if i wanted to make my own VM, to have a program that translates all supported instructions into "kohlrak_X" where X is the instruction, then, at the top, stick an include line to a file that translates the pseudo-instructions to real ones. Thanks to open source, i have the chance to fork that, but i really don't want to. Also thanks to open source, this tool is everywhere i want it to be, unlike a closed-source compiler toolchain.

tl;dr: Your argument is essentially pointless since it's entirely subjective what is and isn't complex and difficult, and since opinions need authorty to carry weight, you have none, not that it matters, since opinions are not strong arguments. I invite you, however, to actually try approaching different tasks to see how difficult they really are for you. People do this all the time, even with closed-source software. There are better tools that are open source and still clonezilla is chosen over them. And you tell me you never get viruses on windows. With that kind of advice, of trusting a closed-source program to be free of charge and viruses, i find that very, very hard to believe. No, i'm not going to download and install arbitrary software that is easily suspect. No, you directly said you don't believe open-source is capable of performing certain tasks, then went to paint the FOSS community in a certain light. It's quite reasonable to assume projection, otherwise you have malicious intent, which i'd rather believe the former rather than latter. We've demonstrated that the FOSS community does not hold the opinions that you claim they hold, and there's no evidence of this. Sure, there's evidence of some, but there's no evidence that it represents the whole of the FOSS community, and especially the linux community which had the power to deny closed-source usage of the linux kernel, but chose not to. And knowing this, you insist on making this argument, so you can't claim ignorance, so you must either be malicious or projecting. That's hardly a strawman argument, seeing as i'm calling you out for saying something that is blatantly untrue. That's funny, i see showing all the time, but never talking. You must be looking in the wrong place. But, hey, android uses linux, so obviously google thought it was a good idea, or are we going to question google's judgement, samsung's judgement, and a whole host of others? But, hey, if good products don't need advertising, why did Microsoft and Apple have battling commercials, or do you have a product out there that's closed-source and better than OSX and Windows? I'm sorry, but with all the people who actually like certain products, these products are still advertising. Obviously their sales reflect that they're good products, yet they still feel the need to advertise. Meanwhile, linux doesn't seem to get advertised, outside of word of mouth, which is the only reasonable way products spread outside of advertising the traditional ways.

I'm not a Windows fanboy I just like exe files.

So you think poorly of Microsoft's recent attempts to get rid of EXE, then?

Yeah, I don't it will go well.
Why could this not be done in Windows? Sure the drivers are closed and so is the Windows Kernel but you could still back engineer an open source salutation for the NT kernel.

Enter ReactOS - a fully open-source implementation of the NT operating system, including a kernel (I think it's still improving on compatibility with NT 5.2/Windows 2003, so applications requiring anything more recent are likely to not work). And Wine, which is most of the operating system, excluding the kernel and some other bits.

Of course, trying to "copy" something well enough to be fully compatible is a lot more difficult than building something that doesn't require binary compatibility. And if you're replacing the kernel and/or userland applications, it's no longer Windows - it's a system that's compatible with Windows.

What's great about PEs? What do you have against ELF?

The argument "you just hate everything that is open source" is an ad hominem (because it is an attack against the arguer, not the arguments), not a straw-man. However, claiming that is what they are saying, when they aren't, is a strawman (because their arguments are being mis-respresented), not attacking the arguer (as you said yourself).

Wow, i can't believe i missed that. Seems i'm not as logical as i used to be.

Oh one more thing I like in Linux in general popped into my mind.

I very much dislike how consumer-level systems seem to have taken the approach "the less the user knows and sees, the better". This is both in Windows, but also lots of other consumer level services and apparatus.

This seems to have gotten worse and worse e.g. with each new Windows version. Nowadays, whatever you do that takes time, it seems you just get some kind of rotating circle or a "progress bar" that doesn't really show the progress, but just an animation of the bar going continuously from left to right, over and over again. On Windows Store this is some kind of "five tiny dots going from left to right, regrouping at each end, wheeee...!", if I recall correctly. And then some generic "Doing something, don't bother your tiny head with it, just wait please..." message.

It doesn't even give me any indication how far (progress) it is, possibly with a rough estimation how much there is still to be done or how much time to wait, or whether it is progressing at all. If there is some percentage number of the progress, quite often it is useless, like staying at 0% for ten minutes, then jumping suddenly to 65%, and then straight to 100% all of a sudden.

If it takes time, after 10 minutes you start wondering is it still really doing something, or is it stuck, or what the fuck. I very much dislike this approach where information is hidden from me. I don't even think it has anything to do with a better user experience, but instead the company behind the service wants to cut down their own work so that people would not report them about some obscure text they see on the screen without understanding what it really means (e.g. is it really an error or a concern at all, e.g. if it is some generic warning that is just to be expected and doesn't affect the update or installation or whatever).

Linux distributions still seeem to offer this extra information to the user, without treating us as dummies who wouldn't understand anyway what the installation or update log says. Sometimes it doesn't even matter whether I fully understand what I see on the screen, but just some kind of confirmation that the system or process is doing SOMETHING and progressing, so that I am not waiting in vain staring at a rotating animation. Or. if I see it is continuously retrying something without succeeding, that is a hint to me something is wrong, even if I don't know exactly what it is trying to do there. Could be that my internet is down when it tries to connect to somewhere, or whatever.

Nowadays most Linux distros do seem to hide e.g. the boot-up texts from the user, or if you update stuff through the graphical package manager, by default it maybe shows less to you, but there is pretty much always some way to see the logs etc. with one click or a push of a key, or to set it to show it all by default. Plus, if you do the stuff on a shell instead (e.g. using "sudo apg-get update" instead of some graphical package manafer), then by default you get to see everything right there. This is also one reason I like to do things in the terminal shell in Linux and not look for the graphical utility to do the same.

Thank Mac. Too many people are afraid of options, and like to be told what to do. I, however, am absolutely sick of something I buy telling me what i want to do. I think i can make my own decisions, and i prefer my agency.

This was more about keeping me informed and giving me at least some kind of feedback (of what the system is doing), rather than about options. But yeah options are nice too.

Like, I can decide when to check and install system and application updates in Linux, while Microsoft has apparently felt that control should be taken away from me for the most part.

I like the ability to do things that i want to do, too. I don't think that button should be there? Awesome! I want these programs to run in a window, but i don't want the window in the task bar? Awesome, shove it over there! I want to turn that annoying feature off? Awesome, it's right there under "settings," not hidden in an advanced menu which is hidden behind another advanced menu in some control panel option that's not even related to what the thing's bugging me about, when i was already looking in the 3 or 4 other menus that seemingly were related, not only to each other, but the issue at hand.