this post was submitted on 05 Jun 2025
1196 points (98.1% liked)
memes
15291 readers
4572 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It is super easy, if you stick within the boundaries of the absolute most basic use cases. If you're a normal user, which is what Linux evangelists insist Linux is ready for despite persistent edge cases with hardware support.
If you think ripping out the default web browser (which is used behind the scenes as a system component for a ton of OS level shit) is a "normal user" action, then you're already operating outside of their target demographic and well into the "you can figure it out yourself bucko" realm.
Even installing a different browser beside Edge is farther than 90% of users will ever consider going.
It's very easy from a position of tech knowledge to assume that the average user is a hell of a lot more saavy than they are. Go spend some time working IT support and you'll be violently stripped of that notion. Fucking professional coders, good coders, that can't navigate basic settings menus. Who don't use adblocking plugins. It's crazy.
But anyway, replacing the browser (and still leaving Edge installed) is as simple as installing your browser of choice, then going to Default Apps and switching it off Edge to what you want to use. Yes, it gives you a completely un-needed "are you sure" prompt. No, I've never had it reset that setting on me after an update.
The only default app setting I've had issues with is Edge taking over as default PDF reader after some updates, and that stopped happening well over a year ago.
This is the type of shit I'm talking about. Yes, it's some dumb as shit OS design to so tightly couple the web browser into the rest of the OS.
But the "gotcha" from Linux users is "Well if Windows is meant to be so easy to use for normal people, why can't I rip out a critical OS component easily?"
Because it's a critical OS compenent you dolt.
You aren't asking about using Firefox here, you're asking about something akin to changing the BT stack handler, the TCP/IP stack, or the CPU scheduler. All things you can do on Linux, but not normal end user shit.
Well, anything is easy if you stay within the boundaries of the OS as it is shipped. For arch, that means no desktop environment at all, just the TTY – which is super easy to use if that happens to be exactly your use case. IMO a reasonable test is not whether is it easy to use if you stay within the boundaries (as that is true for everything), but whether those boundaries are reasonable.
I completely agree that ripping out system components does not have to be easy. But not wanting Cortana, OneDrive, Edge or other microsoft programs to be preinstalled, hard to remove, and constantly nagging you to use them over other programs is not an unreasonable request. Last time I installed Windows for a friend, you needed a workaround to be able to use the computer without a user account tied to some microsoft account. And that triggered the same response in me as in the meme – this is not some cloud service where I make an account and they provide the hardware. I want to use the computer that is sitting in front of me, in my house. Why should I need a microsoft account for that?
Ok, but now we're changing the context, and we're back to my original point: Making Windows work for you is possible, and roughly as hard as making the switch to Linux.
But complaining that power-user functioanlity isn't easy is just... asinine. If you understand the underlying design, it becomes awfully obvious that Microsoft is far more lazy than malicious. Same end result, but it helps make the entire process of using and configuring Windows make a lot more sense.
Yeah, Linux is obviously the better choice long term. But "fixing" Windows isn't impossible, and switiching to Linux isn't a "it just works" experience. Simple shit like HDR support still isn't as plug and play as it "should" be.
So seeing people wrongly claim that doing certain things with Windows is literally impossible while they talk about dealing with similarly complex shit in Linux is frustrating. If you can do X in Linux, you are more than capable of doing Y in Windows.
You're not wrong. It shouldn't be necessary to tell Microsoft to fuck off at all. It's not an unreasonable desire to want Microsoft to fuck off with their anti-consumer bullshit.
All I'm saying is that the skills needed to make Windows work for you are roughly equivalent in difficulty to getting Linux to work for you.
Both take work, and knowledge about the underlying design to do properly. The asinine "hot takes" from both sides are largely fuelled by people spouting off without the background knowledge to understand why things are designed how they are.