Lol not being able to plug your USB into Windows based system is quite the handicap. Windows isn't going away no matter how much you want it to

That's only relevant if you actually use Windows.

Also, it's possible to partition a flash drive, putting different file systems on each partition, and both Linux and modern versions of Windows can handle that fine. (Note that you should not let Windows format the ext4 partition if it asks.) I also note that FAT32 works reasonable well on both OSes.

Perspective is everything. From my point of view, catering to windows by using NTFS or Fat32 is more of a handicap.

I don't know what problems there are, but I haven't had issues with Mint 19 Xfce on this gaming laptop where I installed it beside Windows 7.
That is irrelevant for the scenario you presented earlier: moving your home directory (with folders) to a new Linux PC. Why would you need to move it to Windows?

If you want to use that same USB flash stick for Windows, then you can reformat it later to FAT or NTFS. Or use some extFS driver for Windows.

It depends on your environment ;)
In my personal, familial, hobbyist and work environments, Windows disappeared years ago…

I see... So you got really interested in Linux because of that Youtuber, but you saw through his BS and lost your interest immediately? Or it took you some time?

Windows has niche things that it does very well.

I think for a end-user experience, it's extremely polished and if you just want simple things to work out of the box and you're not doing anything too fancy (from a technical standpoint), it can be a fine OS. There are reasons why it has been very successful as a desktop OS.

It's just important to realize its limitations and where alternatives shine.

I use(d) Linux because it's free. For one whole month, late last year. Thought it may work as a substitute for going to Win 10. But then I found that half the things I wanted to run didn't. Half the other half ran with issues, and the remainder ran slower. And the tin foil hat was causing a rash where it rested on my forehead. Over the years I've tried Linux 4 other times with the same result.

So I swapped to Win 10. Six months later, my old PC now boots faster and looks better than it ever has, and has been 100% hassle free and it has ran everything I've used on it. And the Edge browser is the best PDF reader I've ever come across- and I use PDF's a lot.

Yes, I'm pretty good with technical things and PC's- it's my life and my work. So I could work through the issues I had with Linux and solve them all, no problem. I could probably manage to work the rough end of a Pineapple up my rectum as well. Just because I can, does not mean I want to.

Your mileage may vary of course.

I didn't get buthurt he was just full of shit. Like all fanboys

I don't use Edge myself (LTSB user) but everything you've said here is right on point. Windows is made to run programs while Linux is made to do it's own thing. If you were to post something like this on the Ubuntu forums I have no doubt the community would get downright abusive and would probably lock down the thread. You won't have to worry about that here though.

Depends what you want to run.

The graphical user interface in Windows is extremely polished and stable, beyond anything I've yet to encounter in Linux (yes, you'll encounter the occasional quirk in Linux, at least for the GUIs I've tried... can't say I've tried them all, I'm not that fussy about my graphical end-user interface needs). If a flawless experience with the graphical end-user interface is what you are looking for above all other concerns, for sure, go with Windows (or Mac).

For a lot of professions, the ecosystem for professional-grade tools may be strongly predisposed toward one OS as well (for example, I heard musicians tend to go for Macs) and Linux is still poor in terms of high quality tools for graphics design (a few vendors got that market cornered and they don't support Linux).

But... if you're trying to design an embedded system (ex: something to pilot a robot or open your door for you based on sensor readings) or a fault-tolerant distributed backend, you'll find your options with Windows to be severely limited compared to Linux.

A lot of regular consumer-grade desktop computers are made for Windows (because that is what most people use when they want a personal desktop). They come with all kinds of silly features in the BIOS that needs to be disabled to get the best experience with Linux.

So far, Lenovo has been the worst for this among the vendors I bought from (seriously, I'm going with a System76 for my next laptop, I'm not going for a Thinkpad again).

Similarly, graphics cards (which tend to be used predominantly by gamers running Windows rigs) are better supported in Windows (though with emerging uses for GPUs in AI and scientific computing, Linux support is ramping up... for example, Linux kernel virtual machines, aka kvm, now support GPU passthrough which allows a virtual machine to directly use the hosts' GPU, in great parts because needs from the AI and scientific communities).

I think this might not be true for Intel graphics; I have read some reports of the open source driver in the Linux kernel being *better* than the Windows driver.

With that said, if you are buying or building a computer specifically for Linux, I would avoid Nvidia graphics cards, as Nvidia does not support open source drivers (unlike AMD or Intel), so you end up having to use a proprietary blob if you want to take full advantage of the card, and that can be a pain when it comes time to upgrade the kernel.

Yeah, you did and yeah he is full of shit, but he is at least useful for the tips.

You are not supposed to use LTSB, LTSB is designed for companies. You are supposed to use Spyware-and-Metro-and-Ads-and-Garbage Ultimate Edition. You are not behaving like you are expected to behave. Its the same spirit that kicked Stallman into GNU project and Linus into making Linux kernel: the "I want that it works my way - not dictated way". So you are yourself incompatible with Windows mentality on a core level.

RE: "Windows is made to run programs" - Windows is not made to run programs, programs are made to be run on Windows. It was made to be there, because its historically designed to be purchased (or pre-installed) and exists as a dependency. All its design choices were made by MS and forced onto consumer, the frameworks are designed non-compatible with external ecosystems often ahead of the time to occupy the niche harder accurate to marketing department.

Nobody with slightest level of IQ would use Windows if he/she had a choice, except very rare time when MS actually did something inventive (proper swapping in Win 3.0, proper multitasking in Win2k). However MS historically has done everything to remove the choice by exploiting market position and planting unexpected behavior in API, en-masse offering the discount to dealers who preinstall MS only and limiting customer to solutions that THEY think you should use.

Linux is made to run programs, its foremost a tool which is purposely designed to have no limits whatever hence GPL2. It stayed with GPL2 again because Linus got impression that GPL3 adds a limit to prohibit "technical limits" (Tivio). When some projects uses Linux and you don't like the project - this does not apply to Linux, because its just a single gear in the mechanism that you didn't like. Pick a different project or make one yourself.

RE: "You won't have to worry about that here though" - you have just confessed that you are here to troll and derail. However, these forums are moderated. Its just Ubuntu (or Arch) mods don't want to clean too much, so they are not very well with trolling.

It's been pretty hard to not develop a tin foil hat approach to using MS this last couple of OS iterations. They have changed their business approach quite a bit since Bill Gates left. They really want to be the new Apple imho.

This is the most important part.

For example i was having to spend so much time trouble shooting my Windows systems (i keep two on Windows 7 currently) as i did NOT WANT Windows 10. In the end all that forced me to try Linux Mint out (i wanted a windows-friendly version of Linux as my first choice).

Three years later and that test laptop (was Vista originally) has been Linux Mint 17 the whole time and it looks like i won't be going back. It has just been much EASIER to run it under Linux Mint than under MS.

So it seems to really depend on the hardware and if you have a system that runs Linux well or not. Luckily nearly all versions of linux can be run off a DVD (or USB) in a 'live mode' to test if you have a Linux friendly system or not.

IF you have one, the reasons to stay with Windows really starts to shrink.

In the future i can see me keeping just one family PC on Windows (7) for games and moving the others to some version of Linux.

Actually, Linus couldn't change the kernel license even if he wanted to; there are too many contributors, each with copyright on their contributions, and it wouldn't be feasible to track every one down to agree to a license change.

(The trick used to relicense Wikipedia won't work here because, unlike many programs, the Linux kernel license is GPL2 only, not GPL2+.)