• 0 Posts
  • 6 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 8th, 2023

help-circle


    • Closed source (has always been bad for an OS, a 1-US-company controlled blackbox at the heart of your “personal” computer)
    • Privacy nightmares (and getting worse)
    • Forced cloud integrations (and getting worse)
    • Forced AI integrations (and getting worse)
    • More bloat and ads (and getting worse)
    • More restrictions (e.g. local user accounts) (and getting worse)
    • More dark patterns to try to annoy the user and get him/her to accept something that MS wants (and getting worse)
    • More opt-out, on-by-default bad stuff being added (and getting worse)
    • There’s probably more…

    The question is wrong: it’s not why do you “still” hate Windows. I did like Windows 7. It was the last Windows I liked. After that, it’s just a downhill enshittification spiral. The only real question is: at which point will it be too oppressive for the common user that even the most common user will try to avoid it entirely. And I fear that there’s still more than enough room for MS to make Windows worse before enough people migrate away from it.



  • Arch is not at all problematic, however if you’re still inexperienced with Linux in general, there might be smaller issues with some packages which might be unsolvable or hard to solve in that particular case (but any experienced user can easily solve those by e.g. downgrading the problematic package until a fix is available, or by restoring a filesystem snapshot). My current Arch installation is almost 5 years old and I only had a couple of very minor individual package update issues, and one time where the system couldn’t boot anymore after an update, which could be desastrous for a newbie, but only for a newbie. So, any talk about Arch being unstable is most likely exaggerated. Windows 11 these days has more update failures than Arch, and Arch updates almost daily. Yes, Arch is not “perfectly stable” due to it being rolling release and receiving updates almost daily, but on the desktop or notebook that “less-than-perfect-stability” really doesn’t matter much unless you have some kind of allergy against breaking changes or spending 15-30min to fix something or get annoyed if you have to reboot. The fast updates and generally very up to date packages generally more than make up for the disadvantages. At least on the desktop and notebook. I’m not sure if I could recommend Arch on servers. Also, you should at least update Arch once a week (or more often). If you don’t update for multiple weeks, then updates might fail because Arch assumes that everyone is on or close to the most current updates. Or you might have to first update the pacman-keyring before updates work again. In any case, updating often is also a way to keep Arch more stable. If you don’t like updating often, don’t use Arch.


  • Not generally, however you might want to avoid any early dot-zero releases (e.g. 6.0.x). These tend to be a bit buggy with KDE Plasma, but the bugs get fixed soon. NVidia drivers should be better with the very latest updates, they are supposed to work well on Wayland now. But I don’t buy Nvidia, just AMD, so I’m not following this stuff closely.


  • Both are good. Librewolf is more like vanilla Firefox, just configured way better by default. Mullvad Browser is like a port of the Tor Browser (also based on Firefox) for the clear web (or for use with Mullvad’s VPN, or whatever). Also configured very well by default. Mullvad Browser has better anti fingerprinting stuff built-in but as a result of its unusual configuration some sites might be broken. Librewolf is kind of the opposite in that regard - sites won’t be broken but you’ll be easier to fingerprint. In any case, they both are at the top of the best Firefox variants I’d say.