![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
Windows isn't the best operating system anymore
- Thread starter philb2
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2004
- Messages
- 3,653
Apps were written for the OS that came (by monopoly) on your purchased computer. Programs are written for it because of "the monopoly". Even if the apps weren't there, it wouldn't matter. Sure, one might make the argument that a market like Linux, which would still require you to install and replace the OS that came with your computer,... sure one could argue that the marketshare would be bigger, but "the monopoly OS" would still have the biggest share. There might be more System 76 style companies out there.. maybe in that dream world. Just remember, there were a lot more of those types of companies at one time and they all failed... because of "the monopoly". It's easy to say it's "the apps", but on a level playing field "the app" would have been forced to be ported to more than just Windows and Apple. App makers aren't going to let their competitors have exclusive access to "insert name of alternative OS" marketshare if that's an extra 25% of the market. It's possible that it doesn't have to rise to 25%, because arguably in many markets, with just the two players, that extra <15% is indeed just Apple.
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2005
- Messages
- 21,017
Linux Mint?
Related to annoyances, last time I installed Windows 11 I was using like 5 gigs of RAM on a fresh install with nothing running except the basics like the OS plus updates, plus drivers and the steam client (no browser open). The same setup on Mint was around 2 gigs. Windows is is contributing to the RAM problem, actually the hardware problem in general. It requires so much more horsepower to do the same basic things plus extra nothing useful.
Now to Windows credit, they have stated they intend to make real apps instead of slow s***** web apps that consume way more resources than they ought to. Granted it's too late for me to be saved and brought back into the windows ecosystem personally, although I'm technically stuck with Windows at work because we are a Microsoft shop through and through.
I still think it's funny that they converted everything over to web and people realized "hey, I can just use any computer to access these services."
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2018
- Messages
- 4,623
Office apps have been cross platform for decades.
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2005
- Messages
- 21,017
Astute observation.
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2018
- Messages
- 4,623
I think I possibly missed what you meant with your post.
![Zarathustra[H]](/data/avatars/m/9/9298.jpg?1723407683){kind=avatar}
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 42,210
"Best" isn't really a thing in isolation.
You have to define best at what.
Take cars for instance.
Claiming that one car is "the best" is a completely meaningless claim without defining what you mean.
Is it the most reliable? The greatest cargo capacity? The greatest seating capacity? The fastest on the drag strip? The fastest around a road course like the Nurburgring? Or maybe it has the best fuel economy?
These are all things that could make a vehicle "best" depending on someone's needs, and they typically are not all present in the same vehicle.
So when someone says Windows is or isn't the "best Operating system" it means very little.
What are things operating systems can be "the best" at?
- Security? Windows is better than in the past in this regard, but has never been "the best" at it.
- Stability? Same. Windows is certainly more stable than in the bad old frequent bluescreen days, but still is not the best, and never has been
- System resource usage? Windows is rather bloated compared to other alternatives, so it isn't "the best" here, and likely has never been
- Software compatibility? This is one area where Windows has been at or near the top for its entire existence, and that still holds today. If you just want to go out and buy a commercial piece of software, chances are it natively supports Windows.
- Brute force compute/scientific performance? Windows has often done well here, but so do others.
- Hardware compatibility? This used to be a Windows strong suite. If there was hardware designed for x86 machines out there, it was almost guaranteed to have Windows support. These days what with Microsoft unceremoniously cutting support for older hardware and requiring TPM that is no longer the case.
- 3D/Gaming performance? This one depends. You certainly have the most consistent performance with Windows in most cases, but with many titles and hardware configurations (usually AMD GPU's and older titles) Linux both trades blows with and sometimes even beats Windows these days, especially in CPU heavy titles where the Linux scheduler shines.
So, when someone says the "best" operating system, which of the above are they referring to? Most likely it is some sort of weighted balance of all of the above depending on their own priorities and needs.
For me Windows has not been "the best" operating system since the late 90's or early 2000's some time. I've been on a Linux Desktop since ~2001, but have still dual booted Windows all of that time as it still provides the best gaming experience with my combination of titles and hardware, but outside of work, games are pretty much everything I use Windows for. For everything else, Linux has been superior for my needs for decades.
You have to define best at what.
Take cars for instance.
Claiming that one car is "the best" is a completely meaningless claim without defining what you mean.
Is it the most reliable? The greatest cargo capacity? The greatest seating capacity? The fastest on the drag strip? The fastest around a road course like the Nurburgring? Or maybe it has the best fuel economy?
These are all things that could make a vehicle "best" depending on someone's needs, and they typically are not all present in the same vehicle.
So when someone says Windows is or isn't the "best Operating system" it means very little.
What are things operating systems can be "the best" at?
- Security? Windows is better than in the past in this regard, but has never been "the best" at it.
- Stability? Same. Windows is certainly more stable than in the bad old frequent bluescreen days, but still is not the best, and never has been
- System resource usage? Windows is rather bloated compared to other alternatives, so it isn't "the best" here, and likely has never been
- Software compatibility? This is one area where Windows has been at or near the top for its entire existence, and that still holds today. If you just want to go out and buy a commercial piece of software, chances are it natively supports Windows.
- Brute force compute/scientific performance? Windows has often done well here, but so do others.
- Hardware compatibility? This used to be a Windows strong suite. If there was hardware designed for x86 machines out there, it was almost guaranteed to have Windows support. These days what with Microsoft unceremoniously cutting support for older hardware and requiring TPM that is no longer the case.
- 3D/Gaming performance? This one depends. You certainly have the most consistent performance with Windows in most cases, but with many titles and hardware configurations (usually AMD GPU's and older titles) Linux both trades blows with and sometimes even beats Windows these days, especially in CPU heavy titles where the Linux scheduler shines.
So, when someone says the "best" operating system, which of the above are they referring to? Most likely it is some sort of weighted balance of all of the above depending on their own priorities and needs.
For me Windows has not been "the best" operating system since the late 90's or early 2000's some time. I've been on a Linux Desktop since ~2001, but have still dual booted Windows all of that time as it still provides the best gaming experience with my combination of titles and hardware, but outside of work, games are pretty much everything I use Windows for. For everything else, Linux has been superior for my needs for decades.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2006
- Messages
- 11,469
We still play Treasure Cove. That shit never gets old.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2006
- Messages
- 11,469
I think Windows 7 is probably my personal best. Stable, fast, ran everything I could throw at it. None of Microsoft's "modern" bs practices. I do like Mac OS for work but gaming is ass. I'm still a little bitter at Apple for their treatment of their last gen Intel devices. My MacBook Pro 2019 runs faster on Windows than it does on Sequoia. Like night and day speed difference.
So yeah, Windows 7 gets my top OS at least in my lifetime.
Linux is only free if you don’t value your time.
Another misconception from ~10 years ago. Turn Linux PC on, PC goes burrr. Turn Windows PC on, it tells me not to turn off my machine as it's performing an update I didn't schedule, while the process takes a ridiculous amount of time in the case of a major update.
Out of all of the computers in my home there's only one (and it's the only one) computer that gives me a headache and it's the Windows one.
DukenukemX
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2005
- Messages
- 11,194
Most distros don't have much variance. When I had Linux Mint installed, I did wonder why I don't just use Ubuntu and install Cinnamon? Even as a CachyOS user, I do wonder why I don't just install Arch or even EndeavourOS? The answer has always been time, as in which distro gets me what I want with less time? What also sets apart distros is what version of what software gets installed. Debian likes to stick with stable but older packages of software while Ubuntu is a bit more up to date with it's packages, but Arch Linux is extremely up to date with packages. I swear one day Linux distros are going to differentiate from each other with default wall papers.
I have two brother printers and they both work just fine. One is a laser printer and the other is an ink jet with scanner.
So don't and be happy with Windows 11. I'd be more upset that Nvidia can't make Linux drivers as good as Valve does with AMD's drivers. Without Valve helping AMD, they wouldn't have good Linux drivers. Valve is working on NVK drivers for Nvidia, but they're a long ways off before becoming a choice for Nvidia users on Linux.
Not the way I see each OS.
- MacOS - is super stable because it's based on BSD. We've seen Asahi Linux perform better than MacOS in benchmarks, so it isn't super optimized. I wouldn't even call it locked down, but you are limited on what hardware it runs on.
- Windows - has graphics performance supremacy. No matter what, Windows is always ahead when it comes to graphics performance. It's collecting telemetry data on you while pushing ads with AI, when nobody wants it.
- Linux - is very optimized for CPU tasks but is a hit or miss for graphics. Linux has limited commercial software since it isn't take as serious as MacOS and Windows.
Anyone who switches to another OS will have the same problem. A MacOS user going to Windows and vice versa will have to learn. Besides, nobody values their time. If they did then they wouldn't be posting on forums and arguing with people on technology.
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2007
- Messages
- 955
I was going to say pretty much the same thing.
Yupz. That's how I live my life now.
Definitely my favorite of the Microsoft ones. That was also the last time my main OS was a Windows one. After that I switched to Linux, though I keep Win10 around for some stuff.
Windows 2000 was peak Windows IMO. Although Windows 7 was a modern contender. 
OSS Nvidia drivers literally suck [H]ard. Nvidia have been improving in leaps and bounds, once the descriptor heap issue is sorted as a result of an API based on Mantle (which was optimized for AMD cards), things should improve for both Intel and Nvidia. As it is, I run Nvidia under Linux and my performance is great, no complaints whatsoever.
OSS Nvidia drivers literally suck [H]ard. Nvidia have been improving in leaps and bounds, once the descriptor heap issue is sorted as a result of an API based on Mantle (which was optimized for AMD cards), things should improve for both Intel and Nvidia. As it is, I run Nvidia under Linux and my performance is great, no complaints whatsoever.
Last edited:
I agree with some of the other points, but that isn’t true.
Linux’s scheduler is slightly better than Windows’s, but the "CPU" performance you’re talking about is due to Zram, not the scheduler. When you enable RAM caching in Windows, the performance you’re talking about “magically disappears”
The problem with this (mis)information about the scheduling mechanism comes from random YouTubers who have never heard of things like RAM caching.
Linux’s scheduler is slightly better than Windows’s, but the "CPU" performance you’re talking about is due to Zram, not the scheduler. When you enable RAM caching in Windows, the performance you’re talking about “magically disappears”
Zram is compressed swap space, it's not some high speed storage area like a ram drive. I run two Linux based systems here, both running differing distro's, and if I'm brutally honest, enabling zram provided 'very' modest improvements almost within the realm of statistical error.
Basically, zram doesn't provide a night and day difference as you're implying by acting as a ram drive, it simply makes swap space more efficient.
There's little doubt that schedulers under Linux are far better than any scheduler under Windows. However, even with zram disabled, Linux cache's data far better than Windows.
The latency and limitations in accessing RAM and any type of storage can be significant, simply because storage controllers cannot process all requests—they are constrained by the "price-performance" ratio—whereas this is not an issue for RAM—and that is precisely the difference. In one case, the processor has to wait, while in the other, it just keeps working.
Understood, however zram isn't cache. Zram is swap space compressed into system memory. The kernel has effective cache management by default without the use of zram. Tpmfs is more along the lines of what you're describing.
You need to understand, you're not using it as a ram disk. As implemented by default, it's a block device (ram disk) for use with compressed swap data. When it comes to gaming specifically, zram is basically doing bugger all unless you're limited to 8GB of system memory or less.
Basically, zram is not the foundation for certain advantages Linux has over Windows in relation to performance unless you're running a minuscule amount of system memory and slow storage. I know, I've actually tested with it enabled and with it disabled - The difference with 32GB of system memory and a fast SSD was negligible to the point of statistical error.
Last edited:
Ah, ok, you are right!
Well....It's not specifically about being wrong or right, it's about clearing up certain misconceptions when it comes to Linux in comparison to Windows...
If you want to experiment with ram disks under Linux, look up tmpfs.
Probably I need to store some of data from tmpfs to disk on reboot.Well....It's not specifically about being wrong or right, it's about clearing up certain misconceptions when it comes to Linux in comparison to Windows...
If you want to experiment with ram disks under Linux, look up tmpfs.
And to softlink some game-cache data to tmpfs.
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2005
- Messages
- 21,017
This is rage bait for sure.
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 15,177
This has always been the problem with Linux and the only thing that changed in the past 20 years is where the line is when it stops being easy and straightforward. But eventually you'll still hit a problem and it's either you find a solution online, or find a solution that can be adopted to your situation if you are expert enough. But in case both of those options fail you just have to deal with it and work around the issue if possible. These kinds of issues used to be completely alien to windows, emphasis on used to be. As more recently i.e. since windows 11 all kinds of inexplicable problems started to plague windows as well, with no solutions in sight, and no help from anywhere, it's like a lottery, you get a different one with each computer.
Windows explorer is a joke, it takes minutes to even do basic stuff like changing the sorting order of files in a directory by date. It defaults to the useless user folders having to scroll through all of those before you can access the actual drives, which is especially annoying when browsing for files from a software.
It had one useful feature, the preview pane, which has been recently disabled "for security reasons" on most document types. Forcing you to open the file to see what's in it anyway. How is this security? If you don't trust a file run a virusscan on it, don't tell me you can't preview it, forcing me to open it anyway.
I have Mint on my old gaming computer that I moved into the back office when I got a new gaming machine. I have dual boot with Windows so I can do my taxes on the software that I normally used. I just completed them so now I can stay in Mint for the next 12 months until I have to do them again. In that time I'll figure out how to do the whole VM thing so I don't have to dual boot anymore. The computer is, right now, largely a machine that I use to run the software for my 3D printer and they make a Linux version so works fine. I don't do much else at home on a computer that isn't gaming anyway. I haven't switched my gaming machine to Linux yet but that may occur at some point in the future. I just dread the whole reformat and reinstalling games and all that jazz. Right now Win11 works on that machine so I need heavy motivation to take the time to switch.
Explorer has a few settings; by default, it opens to the Home tab, where it shows everything that was last opened—a bit annoying, but useful for some people.
If you set it to "This PC" and clear the history often, it will open and run super fast. The worst thing about Windows is that I have to clean it up often if I want it to run fast.
Linux is far better in that regard; yes, BleachBit is a tool for Linux, but I still haven’t installed it in nearly two months, whereas that’s the first thing I do in Windows
Which operating system is best? Totally matter of opinion. Here is a light-hearted car analogy, I'm sure others can come up with more clever illustrations:
Windows is like a Chevy truck. Kind of boring, rather reliable, but seemingly plagued with weird issues that don't effect everybody. It's the perfect vehicle when you need to do "truck stuff."
MacOS is like a Tesla. Cool, hip, and plenty of differences from everything else for the owners to point out how superior it is. Only Tesla stuff works with it, and Tesla controls every aspect of it. When it breaks, it breaks spectacularly in a unique way that no one has ever seen before.
Linux is like a Ford F450. Designed for heavy work, but from the factory is just a basic cab and chassis. Gets customized by 3rd parties to do a variety of work, though is overkill for most applications. Driving one gives you a feeling of superiority over those driving "lesser" vehicles.
BSD is like a Freightliner. Reliably moves stuff. Can be customized with a luxurious living compartment, but at the end of the day is best used only for serious work that requires that specific tool.
Windows is like a Chevy truck. Kind of boring, rather reliable, but seemingly plagued with weird issues that don't effect everybody. It's the perfect vehicle when you need to do "truck stuff."
MacOS is like a Tesla. Cool, hip, and plenty of differences from everything else for the owners to point out how superior it is. Only Tesla stuff works with it, and Tesla controls every aspect of it. When it breaks, it breaks spectacularly in a unique way that no one has ever seen before.
Linux is like a Ford F450. Designed for heavy work, but from the factory is just a basic cab and chassis. Gets customized by 3rd parties to do a variety of work, though is overkill for most applications. Driving one gives you a feeling of superiority over those driving "lesser" vehicles.
BSD is like a Freightliner. Reliably moves stuff. Can be customized with a luxurious living compartment, but at the end of the day is best used only for serious work that requires that specific tool.
Naw. The worst thing about Explorer, and the entire file system for saving on Windows right now is OneDrive. Everything wants to default to OneDrive so you end up with two sets of documents folders, two desktops, two of everything. Sometimes you make a mistake and save it in OneDrive instead of local and then can't find it anymore. At home not a big deal because I killed that hard. At work ... I want to burn it to the ground. One of the most frustrating things they ever did.Explorer has a few settings; by default, it opens to the Home tab, where it shows everything that was last opened—a bit annoying, but useful for some people.
If you set it to "This PC" and clear the history often, it will open and run super fast. The worst thing about Windows is that I have to clean it up often if I want it to run fast.
Linux is far better in that regard; yes, BleachBit is a tool for Linux, but I still haven’t installed it in nearly two months, whereas that’s the first thing I do in Windows
I used OneDrive for years, but ever since I switched to Linux, I’ve been moving my files to Filen. Sure, OneDrive is manageable to a certain extent, but all that AI stuff… And what you’re talking about is:
OneDrive Files On-Demand helps you access all the files in your cloud storage in OneDrive without having to download them and use storage space on your computer.
You can turn it off if you want—it’s enabled by default, but only if you have enough storage space.
About the duplication of some folders you mentioned—yes, that can happen, but... Reinstalling Windows solves the problem
Domingo
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2004
- Messages
- 24,066
One of the worst things about Onedrive is a hallmark of Microsoft's recent strategies: there are multiple versions that call themselves the same thing. Kinda like Outlook and Copilot, you can get rid of one type and then you realize there are 2-3 other versions hiding and trying to force you to use them.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2005
- Messages
- 2,066
This couldn't be further from the truth. I install Linux, update and we're done. In Windows, to set up as I do, it's a process of fiddling with maybe 50 settings to shut crap down, uninstall the garbage apps, then run updates and hope they complete. I open Dolphin, start a copy, and guess what, it doesn't sit there waiting to start. It just goes. With file explorer, you're hanging out while it's trying to figure out how long it'll take. Once it decides to start it works, but I don't have any of those issues with Linux. People forget how much time is lost waiting on Windows to just do Windows. But of all the benefits Linux provides, the biggest in my opinion is it respects MY choices. The OS never dictates to me what it wants to do.
Twisted Kidney
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2013
- Messages
- 4,721
Nah he's kind of right at least to a point, and definitely not trolling either. There's an initial phase of friction to using Linux, especially for switchers. There are things you have to do and learn to get comfortable in Linux, now I personally think it would be the same for anyone changing from one OS to another. Even then there are some points in using Linux that just take more effort than using Windows simply because of application support, it's not necessarily Linux' fault, but the problem exists no matter the culprit.
I will say that from a gaming standpoint a huge amount of that friction has been deleted by Valve, the major hold-outs are the huge software as a service pecker-heads... Honestly I think purging them from your life is probably worth the friction if you can do it, like professionally. The upside is that the day-to-day friction of using Windows grows with every patch, with every new enshitification policy, and with every new slop infusion Micro$lop tries to ram down our throats.
I think Linux has become the better system for you PC, both through Linux improving and Windows actively getting worse.
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2005
- Messages
- 21,017
Okay, now that I've had time to simmer down, Windows 11 is technically free...
Last time I installed Windows 11 (a few months back), it was like 45+ minutes to make it useful, whereas 15 minutes loading Mint I was ready to rock and roll, online and in Steam.
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2004
- Messages
- 2,776
I have 11 installed on another drive but usually only boot it up to compare how new games run in Linux. I booted into Windows for the first time in months to test Crimson Desert and for whatever reason it randomly decided to install a 'new' GPU driver that borked my displays; ended up having to download DDU and then boot into Safe Mode to uninstall the MS driver and then reboot again to install the AMD driver and then reboot again. Crimson Desert runs the same for me on both Windows and Linux (all AMD hardware); actually seems to load a little faster on Linux. It's probably time for me just delete Win11 and use that drive as my $Home + Steam drive.
Yeah, except I can't do anything with my work machine. They lock that down so bad and won't let you make any changes that benefit your workflow.I used OneDrive for years, but ever since I switched to Linux, I’ve been moving my files to Filen. Sure, OneDrive is manageable to a certain extent, but all that AI stuff… And what you’re talking about is:
OneDrive Files On-Demand helps you access all the files in your cloud storage in OneDrive without having to download them and use storage space on your computer.
You can turn it off if you want—it’s enabled by default, but only if you have enough storage space.
About the duplication of some folders you mentioned—yes, that can happen, but... Reinstalling Windows solves the problem
Twisted Kidney
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2013
- Messages
- 4,721
"Free" if you enjoy inserting a drain snake up your urethra.
You're so right though, the pain points with Windows are things Micro$lop has been creating where as Linux developers spend their time eliminating them.
Yes and no. It all depends. For most people they don't have to do anything with Windows to make it, as you say, useful. For them it is useful out of the box because they don't much care about what you or I do. For me, starting up a new Windows machine is far faster than starting up a Linux machine only because I'm far more familiar with Windows. As an example, I still haven't mapped my NAS to Linux after months of using it. I tried multiple times but I'm obviously screwing something up along the way. With Windows I can do it in the blink of an eye and its always there. That's not the fault of the OS it is simply my experience with both systems over decades.
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2007
- Messages
- 955
I created checklists for OS post-install setup and configuration. My Linux one is much shorter than my Win10 and Win11 ones! It takes less time for me to get Linux set up and configured for normal daily use after I install it than it does for Windows.
- Status