DOS/Windows user since 1980, Linux user since 2016.

With Linux, between Slackware and Xubuntu, I do much more as a home user and hobbyist than just internet browsing and Open Office.

On the other hand:

Canadian desktop tax software doesn't exist on Linux. So once a year, I fire up Win10 to actually do something on it. The other 3-4x a year is to update itself - I don't like to let it get too far behind updates, worried that this could cause a problem.

My brother-in-law was a power CAD user a couple or few decades ago. He is moving to Linux and away from Windows as much as possible (but I haven't convinced him to try Slackware, yet), but he keeps his very old paid-for-once AutoCAD on(DOS? Windows?) on an off-line machine for occasional serious hobby use. His opinion is that free modern CADs in Linux don't match it in function, and while VeryExpensiveCAD is capable, he can't justify the cost for his use.

Unfortunately there are definitely use cases that don't let you get around Windows.

I can. I use both. There are still oddities and glitches in Win10 (and Office) that confuse people and waste their time and mine.

Windows easier to use than one of the "easy" Linuxes like Ubuntu, Mint, Zorin... or even Slackware? Disagree.

I agree Windows has gotten less unreliable (in my case, at work and at home, regular but minor operating glitches - it's the updates that make me nervous) but many would disagree that is no longer relevant. Sources: do an internet search and you will find abundant reliable reports. For a sample, look at the links in my last post.

A disastrous, unrecoverable October 2016 update glitch (xIxforgetxifxWin8xorxWin10x [ Edit: definitely Win10], many were hit by it, would have required reinstallation) was only the worst problem I experienced, but was the final straw that finally drove me to try and then eventually replace Windows with Linux for home and serious hobby use.

Xubuntu occasionally gives me weird operating glitches, although less often than Win10.

Slackware 14.2 + KDE4 doesn't glitch on me. I have had one-self inflicted kernel panic after making an optional kernel change, easily fixed with the same level of knowledge I had to shoot myself in the foot. A GUI-only user of Slackware (or other Linux) would avoid that problem by not messing around in their in the first place.

+1. You can save yourself loads of hassle with Win10 following dalacor's approach. It takes some attention around each monthly patch Tuesday and major version update if you're on Home Edition, but that's preferable to Win10 updates hijacking productive time or crashing your computer.



For me Slackware 14.2 is a pleasure to use, lets me control the update schedule, and I can dig deeper and learn about Slackware and Linux when I want to (and just use it when I don't want to.) Win10 is usable but with regular operating glitches, updates make me nervous and controlling the update schedule requires keeping attention on MS's schedule, and I gain little to no non-perishable knowledge when I have to resolve a Win/MS problem.

Slackware for the win for me, aside from desktop tax software.

TKS

1 members found this post helpful.

Your initial post, and the part I quoted, stated that you had irreplaceable programs in Windows. Windows does work and many people are happy with it. I'm not arguing that your choices are wrong. There are equivalent programs available in Linux, although, they might not suit your specific needs. But to say Linux users are just "Internet and Open Office" users is extremely ignorant, if not outright lying. Many try and say the same for Windows. Both OSes are extremely capable and different users have different needs. For some, Linux is NOT the best option and I'll be the first one to state that. But I'm also not saying that Windows is only for office productivity and browsing the web. Those things are able to be done on any OS. Certain things are much easier to do on Windows and some things are much easier to do on Linux. Pretty much all of what I need to do is on Linux, so I really don't have a need for Windows (I keep my laptop on Windows and go into more detail below on why).

Do you want to know what required me to run Windows? It was my university. For certain tests, they were required to use test monitoring software (to maintain accreditation). It would ensure students were unable to use other programs or websites, and some even required the webcam to be enabled to ensure students weren't referencing material, phones, or a second computer. This program only worked on Windows and Mac. I kept my laptop running Windows in case I decide to go back to that school to finish my degree (my current job takes up too much of my time and if I pursued more schooling, I'd have no free time at all). Most of the time, my laptop is just used for browsing the web, monitoring my torrents on my Linux server, and using Windows Subsystem for Linux to have a bash prompt open to ssh into my main computer upstairs or my htpc that's hooked up to the TV.

I don't use any software right now that requires Windows.

And there's nothing wrong with being happy with Windows and not feeling a need to look for alternatives. I could throw some websites in here that discuss accounting software and fleet management software that is available on Linux (and maybe some would even fit your requirements) or discuss Wine and/or Proton for Linux gaming, but if you're not interested in switching to Linux full time, there's no point in doing the research and typing up the post.

Simply put, any OS: Windows, OSX, iOS, Android, Linux distros, *BSDs, etc, can be used for office productivity and internet browsing. Saying that someone only does that because of what OS they use is a foul and is disparaging on people who use that particular OS for far more than what was given credit for.

Windows has artificial limits too.

Admin: "We need to add more users."

Microsoft: "You're at the limit... Fetch your wallet!"
... Neither of which are available to small business.

We have to set a Group Policy to disable Metro apps... but that doesn't remove them.
No, it's a Windows Update problem. Every update brings a reset of the defaults to Edge for everything. Perhaps you don't get this because you're using the Education version?

This is the same behaviour Microsoft have exhibited for more than 25 years. Do you remember when you had to reinstall Netscape after every single Windows Update? I do.
Maybe so... But in this industry, it is quite common to leverage the "global community" and employ offshore contractors to work for us overnight. How are they supposed to log in when their attempts keep timing out because Windows Update is using 100% CPU on the server?
Just to shed some light on this, because you're right... There is a lot of hate towards Windows, and much of it is irrational.

In the late 90's, we had an original Pentium (running at 166MHz), and had just "upgraded" the OS to Windows 98 about a week before the "big crash." I was studying at university at the time and had an essay due and had stayed up all night working on it, only to have the computer crash an hour & a half before it was due. I was saving along the way, but the crash had caused my file to be corrupted.

You can say that I should have planned it better. I acknowledge that... As did my lecturer who had no sympathy for me. Although I passed the subject, this event caused me to receive a much lower grade than I would have otherwise.

After an event such as this, one cannot help but to feel some resentment towards the software which is supposed to be working for you, not against you.

Regardless, I came out of it a winner because it was this event that pushed me to Linux. It felt like I had found the holy grail: A full-featured operating system which didn't crash, could truly multi-task and was actually multi-user... All for free! I grew comfortable with it and went through the rest of my course without losing any further documents.

Yes, I know modern Windows is much more stable, but, like you, I'm used to doing things a certain way and see no benefit in switching now.

3 members found this post helpful.

Many Windows applications are better. Windows itself? Hardly. I ran Linux and BSD servers/firewalls for several businesses and schools in the 00s, before moving my own home computers to Slackware in 2009. I still miss some excellent Windows software, especially Becky Mail and Total Commander, which have no equal in Linux. But I don't miss installing a brand new operating system on someone's PC and then finding out I need to download 3 or 4 gigabytes of updates that same evening.

That was when the best we had here in rural Ireland was metered 3G, by the way.

That smacks of complete insolence and arrogance on the part of a corporation. What does it say? It says we're not bothered about getting our operating system working properly at release-to-market; we'll just exploit our guinea pig customers and their data allowance. Within two or three years the bugs should be ironed out. At no cost to us.

Yes that happens to Linux as well, but we don't have to pay a one or two hundred euro licence fee for Linux. For just one machine. Nor are we threatened with lawsuits. Stick a Microsoft Windows trial on a laptop and within a day they're telling you you could be using pirated software. That's before you've even managed to download all 4 gigabytes of fixes for the cobbled-together operating system they just released.

I even saw those big warnings about pirated software on machines that had perfectly legal licences. Perhaps they had exceeded their activation quota or something. I don't know, and no longer care.

Got sick of all that over ten years ago and never going back.

2 members found this post helpful.

My /etc/rc.d/rc.local_shutdown:


EDIT <When I have the time I move them to a better place and keep for re-install if needed>

1 members found this post helpful.

a) Simply: you are free(in the limit of possibility) to personalize the system.

b) The installer: the text installer, works on serial, ssh is really easy to setup, is possible to create raid0+lvm or raid10+lvm configuration without the annoying and old /boot partition(the latest releases of grub permit to boot from raid).

c) No boring package manager, you can update what you want(of course there is a risk to broke something, but after a recompiling all works fine)

d) No patched kernel, a rarity.

e) No systemd, I have nothing against systemd but I prefer the old systemV way or the "BSD" way of Slackware

For the future it will better: add Selinux or Apparmor, nothing else.

1 members found this post helpful.

>I can't see how Slackware or any Linux distro could be considered easier to use than Windows.
Have you ever looked at stenotyping? You know, what court reporters and live speech transcribers use?

It's so different to regular computer touch typing that you even have completely different hardware and a completely new way of using it (aside from both working from "press down keys").

Guess which one is superior at similar user proficiency?
Spoiler: It's stenotype without even a shred of a contest (a reason why I'm lowkey saving for a fancy (aka well built and sensitive (to reduce the force needed to depress keys) stenotype keyboard)

Granted, it's easier to see that because I could now link something like a video where a stenotypist types at about 200+ wpm with a fraction of the ergonomic stress (which I find most important, way above typing speed) of regular typing, but the point still stands.
( like zo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xr63x1Wdy4M, one for "leisure" ('only' 170ish wpm) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Il8DT_alCLk )

I'm not a crack guru superl33t Linux haxx0r and I can't go back to Windows under heavy protest by my brain.
I've settling in over time and now Windows simply cannot compare anymore, at all, some software for Windows can, of course, but that's not the OS.
After all, not much else except cost of time/money/resources/license choices bars a developer and/or hardware vendor from making something for Linux.
Linux offers all the tools required to make things for it, in the same programming languages available for pretty much all platforms (albeit with different APIs)

I might add only that what the BSOD was for the 32 bit era is replaced with the MS updates now days.

One way or the other, your rightfully owned hardware is serving another master...

3 members found this post helpful.

Systemd-free, non-rolling, vanilla distribution.
Speed/responsivity, stability...

1 members found this post helpful.

I will start a new post asking people how they find linux easier to use than Windows and ask them what their distro can do that Windows can't. It would be very interesting to see what people like about Linux over Windows. I suspect for me, the case is that I don't miss what I don't know about.

I will let this topic carry on with Why we use Slackware. My apologies to the OP for derailing the thread.

2 members found this post helpful.

From my POV you didn't derail this thread at all but only highlighted why Slackware is not only better than Windows for many operations and functions but also better than other distros. The problem with Windows for me is that it does what IT wants to do multiple times each day (part of which is spy on the "owner" errr.. lesee) while Linux, and especially Slackware, does what I initiate, no more... no less. This makes everything easier as well as more to my liking. It suits me, not some corporation. This is not trivial but is at THE most fundamental level. If it's rotten there, it's rotten everywhere.

Frankly far too many distros tend to use Windows as a template which values convenience over power. I prefer power. There is nothing I can't do to my Slackware system, but Windows will disallow many actions even when logged in as Administrator. That is unacceptable. Who owns "your PC" anyway? Would you accept a feature-full, high quality, self-driving car that while on the way to work would suddenly veer off instead to the shop for maintenance?

2 members found this post helpful.

I accept your apology, but I, like my fellow poster enorbet, feel like you have put a new perspective on why we use Slackware, as opposed to why we don't use Windows.. There's nothing wrong with your use case; it works for you. My main point was to illustrate the strengths of Slackware, being the oldest and most traditional distro, contrasted with more modern distros, and why they don't work for us (For me, that would have been Manjaro; I installed it and found things distasteful about it; too automated for me. I like the stick feel as opposed to automatic). As for Windows, there's nothing about it that I find compelling, except for that rare corner case where I might find a need to use a program that is Windows-only, but that is rare.

MS Windows vs Slackware (GNU/Linux) - Why rent? When you can own.

4 members found this post helpful.

i use Slackware because it's robust, stable and works for my work

2 members found this post helpful.

ROFL! So very true. With the addendum that because your computer can't function without an OS (essentially), if you can only rent your OS, then by extension, you're logically renting your computer from them as well (at least, that's how I look at it)!