I bet very few people know that there’s an openssh client already installed in Windows.
Same with Powershell, I have heard it is quite capable but in practice Windows users tend to not know powershelI. I haven’t found anybody IRL who knows Powershell.
My goal wasn’t to criticize Windows, I wanted to show how much our experience is different from Windows users. It is not about windows vs Linux, but about how windows users usually do things vs how Linux users usually do things. Relatability is a powerful social force that I hadn’t accounted for, and now it just bites me.
Im sure there are linux users that don’t ever use ssh and would look at you quizzically if you asked them about bash. The fact that linux has built more of an enthusiast community doesn’t change the operating system. I would be entirely wrong if I said you had to install a tightVNC viewer/server to connect to a remote linux system, or install golang to write a simple linux script.
You should criticize Windows, as it’s woefully user hostile, but do so in a reasonable way. Pretending that it doesn’t have excellent built in tooling doesn’t help your case.
I am sure there are Linux users that don’t ever use ssh and would look at you quizzically if you asked them about bash.
Pretty sure these users are few and far between. I haven’t found any of them.
Now it is possible that where you live, there is an abundance of Windows/Powershell experts and novice Linux users who only use Facebook. I’ll accept if that is your reality. All I can observe is that curious/enthusiast types tend to use Linux whereas others use Windows. People who want to better their situations tend to switch to Linux.
You should criticize Windows,
That never went well for me. Criticizing Windows is like talking them down for buying a car or calling their baby ugly. If you criticize Windows, Windows users will defend it.
What does work is to just stay silent and let Linux be better at getting my job done. Curious ones will observe and switch to Linux on their own. Others will continue using Windows.
Pretending that it doesn’t have excellent built in tooling doesn’t help your case.
Tooling can be installed. It is not a big enough factor in choosing an operating system.
And pretending that Windows doesn’t have built in tooling totally helps my case. Windows users have different expectations from their operating system. Windows is expected to be GUI based, so why will it have an SSH client? (except that it does) And why will it have a decent scripting language? (except that it does) And all software is installed by double-clicking on an .exe (except that Windows has a package manager)
My case is about people, not operating systems.
For me, Windows hasn’t fixed its myriad of reliability, performance and trust issues in over a decade, no amount of built-in tooling will make me return to Windows. Windows users on the other hand will tolerate the issues, or at most make it only as severe as previous Windows version. You see how difference between the users is playing out, right? The enthusiast types observe that a better experience is possible with Linux and become Linux users, and remaining users stay with Windows, mostly tolerating whatever Microsoft adds to Windows updates. Over time, Linux users and Windows users drift apart and become very different.
That’s a lot of words to say “I was wrong about windows not having built in tooling” but you did include it, so good on you.
Linux being mainly enthusiasts is a detriment, not a positive. Windows appealing to everyone is something Linux needs to work more towards, and thankfully it slowly is. Bifurcating the different use cases into “no, only enthusiasts over here in linux land and you casuals over on windows” is a problem, not the solution.
Both OSs can be used for serious or casual purposes. That should be applauded, and the better elements of both should be considered honestly. Making easily rebuffed strawmen about what Windows can or cant do isn’t helpful to anyone.
I bet very few people know that there’s an openssh client already installed in Windows.
Same with Powershell, I have heard it is quite capable but in practice Windows users tend to not know powershelI. I haven’t found anybody IRL who knows Powershell.
My goal wasn’t to criticize Windows, I wanted to show how much our experience is different from Windows users. It is not about windows vs Linux, but about how windows users usually do things vs how Linux users usually do things. Relatability is a powerful social force that I hadn’t accounted for, and now it just bites me.
Im sure there are linux users that don’t ever use ssh and would look at you quizzically if you asked them about bash. The fact that linux has built more of an enthusiast community doesn’t change the operating system. I would be entirely wrong if I said you had to install a tightVNC viewer/server to connect to a remote linux system, or install golang to write a simple linux script.
You should criticize Windows, as it’s woefully user hostile, but do so in a reasonable way. Pretending that it doesn’t have excellent built in tooling doesn’t help your case.
Pretty sure these users are few and far between. I haven’t found any of them.
Now it is possible that where you live, there is an abundance of Windows/Powershell experts and novice Linux users who only use Facebook. I’ll accept if that is your reality. All I can observe is that curious/enthusiast types tend to use Linux whereas others use Windows. People who want to better their situations tend to switch to Linux.
That never went well for me. Criticizing Windows is like talking them down for buying a car or calling their baby ugly. If you criticize Windows, Windows users will defend it.
What does work is to just stay silent and let Linux be better at getting my job done. Curious ones will observe and switch to Linux on their own. Others will continue using Windows.
Tooling can be installed. It is not a big enough factor in choosing an operating system.
And pretending that Windows doesn’t have built in tooling totally helps my case. Windows users have different expectations from their operating system. Windows is expected to be GUI based, so why will it have an SSH client? (except that it does) And why will it have a decent scripting language? (except that it does) And all software is installed by double-clicking on an .exe (except that Windows has a package manager)
My case is about people, not operating systems.
For me, Windows hasn’t fixed its myriad of reliability, performance and trust issues in over a decade, no amount of built-in tooling will make me return to Windows. Windows users on the other hand will tolerate the issues, or at most make it only as severe as previous Windows version. You see how difference between the users is playing out, right? The enthusiast types observe that a better experience is possible with Linux and become Linux users, and remaining users stay with Windows, mostly tolerating whatever Microsoft adds to Windows updates. Over time, Linux users and Windows users drift apart and become very different.
That’s a lot of words to say “I was wrong about windows not having built in tooling” but you did include it, so good on you.
Linux being mainly enthusiasts is a detriment, not a positive. Windows appealing to everyone is something Linux needs to work more towards, and thankfully it slowly is. Bifurcating the different use cases into “no, only enthusiasts over here in linux land and you casuals over on windows” is a problem, not the solution.
Both OSs can be used for serious or casual purposes. That should be applauded, and the better elements of both should be considered honestly. Making easily rebuffed strawmen about what Windows can or cant do isn’t helpful to anyone.