The WSL does indeed look promising. It's one of the top reasons I've lost my deep-seated resentment for Microsoft (which had built up from over a decade of indie computer repair work.)
Still...let me know how you do with the inevitable malware risks, slowdowns, and badly timed updates that Windows is still known for. I'm always helping clients with those things on their Windows 10 machines...and those are precisely the things that drive them to Linux.
In other words, please post an update in six months on just how much time you had to (or didn't have to?) put in on just maintaining Windows, or indeed, in just letting it try to maintain itself. ;)
I swear Windows Update has always had an AI that detects urgency in the user, and chooses those times to cheerfully demand that you leave it plugged in and turned on for 40 minutes while it installs updates. If you ignore it, Windows often just bricks. (Clean reinstall, anyone?)
Yeah man no clue what you're talking about unfortunately or fortunately. I can't see someone who doesn't know how to schedule updates outside of working hours as someone who should even consider Linux.
Come to think of it, I've never experienced a "forced" update. You either accept the notification or reschedule it, and still you can reschedule it as many times as you want.
This is all coming from someone who uses new release builds with fast ring by the way. So I mean idk.. I just really gotta scratch my head anytime someone mentions having issues with something so seemingly trivial.
"and still you can reschedule it as many times as you want"
I don't think that is correct. Only some Windows licences allow deferring, and no Window licence allows indefinite deferral of feature updates.
Microsoft wants to cut costs associated with maintaining Windows as it is now a legacy product, and I imagine it is an incredibly expensive product to support per version. Forced upgrades make it cheaper since eventually, when Windows 7 reaches end of live, Microsoft will have a much reduced number of versions to support. I think this is a good thing for everyone.
I don't know if I can go for permanently deferred updates. I guess, for feature updates. But most of these contain security fixes also. I think it's a bad idea not to update.
What I see more of is third party software doesn't move as fast as Windows, especially on the enterprise side. I work with a lot of Dentists and the biggest issue we face is their practice management software either doesn't work with Win10 or the Dentist themselves refuse to update the PMS and updates break things because they are determined to stay on old code bases... fear of change.
Either way, Windows 10 came out 4 years ago..it's ridiculous some vendors have not caught up yet.
I can't see someone who doesn't know how to schedule updates outside of working hours as someone who should even consider Linux.
I am well familiar with scheduling updates. Unfortunately, in my experience, that has no effect is the computer is on hibernate or powered off at the time you've selected. Desktops that are left on at all times can easily handle such a situation. Laptops for people who have no set schedule are not quite as easy.
I'm certainly glad you've never experienced a forced update, but I assure you, it happens.
Ahhh okay. That clarification helps a lot. I mean yeah, I guess if you turn off the computer when it needs to update, there is no real basis of control for that.
I was under the impression that you were acting as if it would just kick you off out of no where without any prior mention in advance.
Thanks for clearing that up. We can be friends again (:
Ha ha, no, Windows has never done that. It just has a nasty habit of jumping into the midst of a user-triggered startup/shutdown/restart, and it seems to (inexplicably) do it at the most unexpected and worst possible times.
BEng in CS graduated from University of Wrocław; MSc CS student at the same university; mainly interested in compilers, functional programming and gamedev.
When it comes to the malware risk, during the past few years, I have had a malware issue only once, after downloading many not-exactly-legal things from torrents, so I was kind of asking for problems myself. And I only have the Microsoft defender antivirus.
Slowdowns - they actually don't happen with NVME SSD. With older SSDs - afaik also no, but on HDDs - yeah, Windows can be pretty slow (it's because of how it manages the disk space on a low level - if you're interested, let me know, I can tell you more :)).
Updates are also not a problem. You can set them not to run automatically.
I think Windows' bad PR comes from the fact, that its users are less experienced with computers than Linux's, so they can't actually set up Windows the proper way and be productive on this OS.
Yeah, I work in a windows IT shop. To this day I have never had a virus. And I only rely on defender. And with very little reading you can get it running very well.
Although I can say with certainty that it doesn't protect against everything (no anti-virus does), I have been impressed with Windows Defender. The independent lab tests have been ranking it at the top, alongside top performers Kaspersky and Avast!, my go-to AVs for older Windows systems. Windows 10 certainly gets infected far less often than XP, 7, or 8.
I think Windows' bad PR comes from the fact, that its users are less experienced with computers than Linux's, so they can't actually set up Windows the proper way and be productive on this OS.
...except, these problems have always shown up not only on my system (and I fix Windows), but on those of other ITs and computer technicians I've known over the years.
I won't speak to how an NVME SSD factors into it, as I've never used that specifically, but 6-8 months of basic, regular use, with or without the recommended maintenance, results in marked drops in performance. Again, I've observed this across all Windows systems, with no exceptions for hardware, expertise of user, or use case of the machine. Home Edition deteriorates more quickly than the higher-tiered versions, but they all do it.
it's because of how it manages the disk space on a low level - if you're interested, let me know, I can tell you more
Like I said, I've been fixing computers for over a decade (actually, 15 years). I know exactly what you're talking about. And that doesn't explain many of the systems I've seen, where more than half, even more than three-quarters, of the disk were untouched.
When it comes to the malware risk, during the past few years, I have had a malware issue only once, after downloading many not-exactly-legal things from torrents, so I was kind of asking for problems myself.
Drive-by malware, email malware, and spoofed websites are three more common payload delivery vectors. It's extremely easy to get infected.
I think it’s fairly easy to get infected for the casual user. And remember, the more popular Linux becomes the more exploits will target it. It is by no means infallible.
BEng in CS graduated from University of Wrocław; MSc CS student at the same university; mainly interested in compilers, functional programming and gamedev.
I have reinstalled Windows on my computer only once during two years of ownership and it was not because of any performance drop, but I wanted to have Linux alongside Windows and... let's just say they didn't want to work together, so I had to wipe the disk.
The performance actually goes up with time. I remember some time ago my computer booted ~15s and now it's ~14s.
It doesn't matter if even more than 3/4 of disk is untouched. This is exactly how Windows saves files on disk: sequentially, not giving a file space to grow. That's why it needs defragmentation on HDDs, but on SSDs it doesn't have impact, because there's no head (I think it's called head) nor platters that have to move and spin.
People experienced with computers can spot malicious emails and spoofed websites can break also Linux. I was actually quite surprised my neighbour has managed to infect his Ubuntu in such a way that there were p0rn ads all over the desktop.
I have reinstalled Windows on my computer only once during two years of ownership.
So it's perfectly possible that you reinstalled at the right interval to coincidentally miss the worst of the performance drops. There are indeed techniques you can use to delay that performance issue, but it is inevitable you'll need to refresh at some point to actually avoid it.
So, I'll be interested to see how your performance is on that SSD after 2 solid years without a "Windows 10 Refresh" or reinstall.
It doesn't matter if even more than 3/4 of disk is untouched. This is exactly how Windows saves files on disk: sequentially, not giving a file space to grow.
Mm hmm. Like I said, I know that.
People experienced with computers can spot malicious emails...
Usually. Spoofing is getting harder to detect. Also, this doesn't account for drive-by viruses delivered via the web.
...spoofed websites can break also Linux.
Occasionally, although it actually takes a good bit of naïvety to get infected this way. I always train my clients on safety regarding installation sources, scripts, and when to not enter your password.
Or, as I explain it, "It's entirely possible to get malware on Linux, but you really have to work at it." (And then I explain what not to do.)
Like I said, I've been doing this for over a decade.
I don't understand the Windows update annoyance. I set up my working hours once, and it seems to find a time at night to apply updates--I never see it.
The only inconvenience is sometimes needing to reopen apps, but it also helps keep the system stable by rebooting every so often so I won't complain.
"but it also helps keep the system stable by rebooting every so often..."
This is a thought I haven't had once since switching to Linux. My work desktop's average uptime is 2 months and my laptop tends to hover around 2 weeks (with it shutting down when I neglect to charge it every so often).
Windows updates are annoying for three reasons. They are very slow, and very rebooty. This can be hidden to nighttime now. But problem number three is that they break. It's probably a good thing that there is no direct report from Windows to Microsoft's CSuite these days because I imagine there would have been some very awkward moments in the past six months. It's a legacy product causing a lot of horrible headlines. Over the years I've had so many mysterious update breakages with weird error codes that are fixed with strange incantations, hotfixes and various evolutions of fix tools from Microsoft. Doing windows system admin is like a priest searching the holy texts for spells. When Linux breaks, you can fix it (if you are a skilled user). That's a big difference, although it is only meaningful to a small user base.
Of course, nothing is perfect. Windows with WSL is an attempt to stop developers defecting, since basically all IT innovation for the past ten years has been on Linux and runs better on Linux desktops. And windows does some things better, not just gaming. It does mixed DPI screen better ... I'd say it is five years ahead of linux, it's pretty good on Windows now, and two to three years away from that maturity on Linux, which is just starting to move away from early-adopter phase. For many people, that is really a big factor.
And Windows 10 is the best Windows by far, at least, Windows Pro.
But the future of Windows is a nagging concern. How will Microsoft monetise it? Will they keep investing in it? It is commercially a dead-end product in the enterprise. Will the future be a locked-down Windows (they keep trying this, now consumer users have to go through tricks to make locally authenticated accounts). The wise power-user would be careful to keep their options open.
Soon I believe Windows won't matter as much to Microsoft's bottom line. The goal these days is all things lead to Azure. I don't think they necessarily care how you get there. Windows is just the path they maintain. Just as Gmail doesn't make money for google. It just feeds the machine that google does make money on, advertising.
The WSL does indeed look promising. It's one of the top reasons I've lost my deep-seated resentment for Microsoft (which had built up from over a decade of indie computer repair work.)
Still...let me know how you do with the inevitable malware risks, slowdowns, and badly timed updates that Windows is still known for. I'm always helping clients with those things on their Windows 10 machines...and those are precisely the things that drive them to Linux.
In other words, please post an update in six months on just how much time you had to (or didn't have to?) put in on just maintaining Windows, or indeed, in just letting it try to maintain itself. ;)
I swear Windows Update has always had an AI that detects urgency in the user, and chooses those times to cheerfully demand that you leave it plugged in and turned on for 40 minutes while it installs updates. If you ignore it, Windows often just bricks. (Clean reinstall, anyone?)
Will do
Yeah man no clue what you're talking about unfortunately or fortunately. I can't see someone who doesn't know how to schedule updates outside of working hours as someone who should even consider Linux.
Come to think of it, I've never experienced a "forced" update. You either accept the notification or reschedule it, and still you can reschedule it as many times as you want.
This is all coming from someone who uses new release builds with fast ring by the way. So I mean idk.. I just really gotta scratch my head anytime someone mentions having issues with something so seemingly trivial.
"and still you can reschedule it as many times as you want"
I don't think that is correct. Only some Windows licences allow deferring, and no Window licence allows indefinite deferral of feature updates.
Microsoft wants to cut costs associated with maintaining Windows as it is now a legacy product, and I imagine it is an incredibly expensive product to support per version. Forced upgrades make it cheaper since eventually, when Windows 7 reaches end of live, Microsoft will have a much reduced number of versions to support. I think this is a good thing for everyone.
howtogeek.com/223083/what-does-%E2...
I don't know if I can go for permanently deferred updates. I guess, for feature updates. But most of these contain security fixes also. I think it's a bad idea not to update.
What I see more of is third party software doesn't move as fast as Windows, especially on the enterprise side. I work with a lot of Dentists and the biggest issue we face is their practice management software either doesn't work with Win10 or the Dentist themselves refuse to update the PMS and updates break things because they are determined to stay on old code bases... fear of change.
Either way, Windows 10 came out 4 years ago..it's ridiculous some vendors have not caught up yet.
I am well familiar with scheduling updates. Unfortunately, in my experience, that has no effect is the computer is on hibernate or powered off at the time you've selected. Desktops that are left on at all times can easily handle such a situation. Laptops for people who have no set schedule are not quite as easy.
I'm certainly glad you've never experienced a forced update, but I assure you, it happens.
Ahhh okay. That clarification helps a lot. I mean yeah, I guess if you turn off the computer when it needs to update, there is no real basis of control for that.
I was under the impression that you were acting as if it would just kick you off out of no where without any prior mention in advance.
Thanks for clearing that up. We can be friends again (:
Ha ha, no, Windows has never done that. It just has a nasty habit of jumping into the midst of a user-triggered startup/shutdown/restart, and it seems to (inexplicably) do it at the most unexpected and worst possible times.
When it comes to the malware risk, during the past few years, I have had a malware issue only once, after downloading many not-exactly-legal things from torrents, so I was kind of asking for problems myself. And I only have the Microsoft defender antivirus.
Slowdowns - they actually don't happen with NVME SSD. With older SSDs - afaik also no, but on HDDs - yeah, Windows can be pretty slow (it's because of how it manages the disk space on a low level - if you're interested, let me know, I can tell you more :)).
Updates are also not a problem. You can set them not to run automatically.
I think Windows' bad PR comes from the fact, that its users are less experienced with computers than Linux's, so they can't actually set up Windows the proper way and be productive on this OS.
Yeah, I work in a windows IT shop. To this day I have never had a virus. And I only rely on defender. And with very little reading you can get it running very well.
Although I can say with certainty that it doesn't protect against everything (no anti-virus does), I have been impressed with Windows Defender. The independent lab tests have been ranking it at the top, alongside top performers Kaspersky and Avast!, my go-to AVs for older Windows systems. Windows 10 certainly gets infected far less often than XP, 7, or 8.
Yeah, as a product I think AV is a wasted purchase if your running Windows 10. Defender is as good if not better than the rest.
...except, these problems have always shown up not only on my system (and I fix Windows), but on those of other ITs and computer technicians I've known over the years.
I won't speak to how an NVME SSD factors into it, as I've never used that specifically, but 6-8 months of basic, regular use, with or without the recommended maintenance, results in marked drops in performance. Again, I've observed this across all Windows systems, with no exceptions for hardware, expertise of user, or use case of the machine. Home Edition deteriorates more quickly than the higher-tiered versions, but they all do it.
Like I said, I've been fixing computers for over a decade (actually, 15 years). I know exactly what you're talking about. And that doesn't explain many of the systems I've seen, where more than half, even more than three-quarters, of the disk were untouched.
Drive-by malware, email malware, and spoofed websites are three more common payload delivery vectors. It's extremely easy to get infected.
I think it’s fairly easy to get infected for the casual user. And remember, the more popular Linux becomes the more exploits will target it. It is by no means infallible.
Certainly not, although the architecture of Linux does make "drive-by" infection far more difficult.
I have reinstalled Windows on my computer only once during two years of ownership and it was not because of any performance drop, but I wanted to have Linux alongside Windows and... let's just say they didn't want to work together, so I had to wipe the disk.
The performance actually goes up with time. I remember some time ago my computer booted ~15s and now it's ~14s.
It doesn't matter if even more than 3/4 of disk is untouched. This is exactly how Windows saves files on disk: sequentially, not giving a file space to grow. That's why it needs defragmentation on HDDs, but on SSDs it doesn't have impact, because there's no head (I think it's called head) nor platters that have to move and spin.
People experienced with computers can spot malicious emails and spoofed websites can break also Linux. I was actually quite surprised my neighbour has managed to infect his Ubuntu in such a way that there were p0rn ads all over the desktop.
So it's perfectly possible that you reinstalled at the right interval to coincidentally miss the worst of the performance drops. There are indeed techniques you can use to delay that performance issue, but it is inevitable you'll need to refresh at some point to actually avoid it.
So, I'll be interested to see how your performance is on that SSD after 2 solid years without a "Windows 10 Refresh" or reinstall.
Mm hmm. Like I said, I know that.
Usually. Spoofing is getting harder to detect. Also, this doesn't account for drive-by viruses delivered via the web.
Occasionally, although it actually takes a good bit of naïvety to get infected this way. I always train my clients on safety regarding installation sources, scripts, and when to not enter your password.
Or, as I explain it, "It's entirely possible to get malware on Linux, but you really have to work at it." (And then I explain what not to do.)
Like I said, I've been doing this for over a decade.
I don't understand the Windows update annoyance. I set up my working hours once, and it seems to find a time at night to apply updates--I never see it.
The only inconvenience is sometimes needing to reopen apps, but it also helps keep the system stable by rebooting every so often so I won't complain.
I must be odd for actually enjoying updates...
For you:
(Kidding. Different strokes for different folks.)
HAHAHAHAHHAHA I can't even argue with that
"but it also helps keep the system stable by rebooting every so often..."
This is a thought I haven't had once since switching to Linux. My work desktop's average uptime is 2 months and my laptop tends to hover around 2 weeks (with it shutting down when I neglect to charge it every so often).
Windows updates are annoying for three reasons. They are very slow, and very rebooty. This can be hidden to nighttime now. But problem number three is that they break. It's probably a good thing that there is no direct report from Windows to Microsoft's CSuite these days because I imagine there would have been some very awkward moments in the past six months. It's a legacy product causing a lot of horrible headlines. Over the years I've had so many mysterious update breakages with weird error codes that are fixed with strange incantations, hotfixes and various evolutions of fix tools from Microsoft. Doing windows system admin is like a priest searching the holy texts for spells. When Linux breaks, you can fix it (if you are a skilled user). That's a big difference, although it is only meaningful to a small user base.
Of course, nothing is perfect. Windows with WSL is an attempt to stop developers defecting, since basically all IT innovation for the past ten years has been on Linux and runs better on Linux desktops. And windows does some things better, not just gaming. It does mixed DPI screen better ... I'd say it is five years ahead of linux, it's pretty good on Windows now, and two to three years away from that maturity on Linux, which is just starting to move away from early-adopter phase. For many people, that is really a big factor.
And Windows 10 is the best Windows by far, at least, Windows Pro.
But the future of Windows is a nagging concern. How will Microsoft monetise it? Will they keep investing in it? It is commercially a dead-end product in the enterprise. Will the future be a locked-down Windows (they keep trying this, now consumer users have to go through tricks to make locally authenticated accounts). The wise power-user would be careful to keep their options open.
Soon I believe Windows won't matter as much to Microsoft's bottom line. The goal these days is all things lead to Azure. I don't think they necessarily care how you get there. Windows is just the path they maintain. Just as Gmail doesn't make money for google. It just feeds the machine that google does make money on, advertising.
I think it just depends on peoples workflow and patience level with such things on how much they hate it.