Use Linux It is, broadly speaking, a personal decision, especially if we take into account that there are still few computers that pre-install it despite the push of companies such as the Spanish Slimbook and the consolidation of Ubuntu in part of the Dell catalog.
When asked why one uses Linux, it is normal to find answers such as “because it is more secure than Windows”, “because it is lighter than Windows” or “because it is free software”. On the other hand, we have the topic of the person who has been brainwashed or lobotomized at a conference dedicated to Linux and free software, a situation that is made worse if there has been a talk by Richard Stallman or Linus Torvalds in the middle.
With its virtues and its defects, here is a server that uses Linux 24/7 and that does not touch Windows on a physical machine or with a stick. However, the Microsoft system continues to rule the world, so there is no other option but to have it in a virtual machine to carry out some tutorials, especially if the intention is to reach the majority. Since 2017 and with one exception, I don’t know what it is to install Windows on a physical machine, and my oxidation has reached such a point that I am unable to do the process easily. Who said Windows was easier than Linux?
The reasons that led me to get started with Linux fifteen years ago are based on clichés, but they were not the trigger or the main reason. The reality is that, years before knowing what Linux, free software and open source were, Windows had already burned me because it was always a product that left me dissatisfied with the exception of version 7, the only one that seems to me to be a round system counting those aimed at the desktop from 98 and adding version 2000, which was more aimed at companies than at home users.
I was holding on until my relationship with Windows blew up in 2007. At that time I bought a Toshiba Satellite Pro P200 laptop with an Intel Core 2 Duo T7300 as a processor, 2GB of RAM, a Radeon Mobility HD2600 graphics card with 256MB of shared memory and two 200GB hard drives (the latter was a rarity on computers at the time).
Windows 10 running in a GNOME Boxes virtual machine, a simple interface to KVM/QEMU.
The Toshiba laptop was a piece of equipment whose quality was evident with 13 years of good service (then the problems began), but there was one detail that ended my patience: the presence of Windows Vista pre-installed. That system is the most infamous thing I’ve ever used. It took a literal five minutes to turn on and a literal five minutes to turn off. With the help of my then roommate, we removed all the Toshiba bloatware, disabled unnecessary services, put a classic Windows theme… but nothing, that kept going wrong, and not only because of the time it took to start up and shut down ( which was criminal on updates that required multiple reboots), but also for lousy responsiveness and performance.
The exasperation of Windows Vista made my roommate will introduce me to Ubuntu 7.10 and install it on my computer. Although that Linux only recognized half of the laptop (the Wi-Fi did because it was Intel), I saw that it turned on quickly, that it turned off quickly, the updates required at most a restart, it did not need antivirus, it did not need defragmentation, there was no record to clean and if there was something I didn’t like, I could easily change it.
Everything that made me spit bile at Windows disappeared in one fell swoop, but instead I was forced to use the computer at 1024×768 resolution instead of the native 1400×900 due to poor quality graphics drivers. On the other hand, I didn’t have the skills to port it all, so my production straddled Windows and Linux for my first five years as a Linux user.
After exposing the important part of the story that has led me to Linux, I am going to mention five reasons why I use it in my day to day to the detriment of Windows, which I always look at with a certain contempt.
Less maintenance
If you read carefully the story of how I got to Linux, you will see that one of the main reasons is the expensive maintenance of Windows, more in those days. What if the antivirus, what if defragmenting the hard drive, what if the registry… That amounted to many hours lost a week.
In Linux there is no reason to follow these routines as there is no registry to clean and defragmentation of the hard disk is not particularly necessary, a process that is highly inadvisable to carry out on an SSD. And yes, most major distributions enable trim by default, in case anyone asks.
Regarding the antivirus (or rather antimalware), things are not so simple, because although the amount of malware against Linux is much lower than that of Windows and Android, it is still highly recommended not to download software from unknown sources or visit websites potentially malicious. Secondly, in case of being in an unsafe environment in terms of cybersecurity or if it is a BYOD computer, the use of anti-malware could be highly advisable, not only to remove threats specific to Linux, but also those affecting Windows. In my home I am the only person with computers connected to the local network and none of them are BYOD, so the use of anti-malware on my part is not justified.
Getting rid of the heavy Windows maintenance routine has been a great relief for me, and this is something that I try to promote from Linux by looking for the system that requires the least effort for its maintenance. I currently use Fedora Silverblue and I’m looking forward to what openSUSE MicroOS may offer in the future. This tendency to use the system that requires the least effort has made me opt for the immutable ones because they are more resilient and offer more springs in the event of failures.
Since 2016 I use Linux under a maxim: the law of least effort. Fortunately, the quality of the drivers has improved enormously over the years, to the point of being able to use the latest generation hardware without problems (my current computer is an Alder Lake that has been with me for about half a year) and to play titles Windows AAA through Proton with more than satisfactory results in terms of performance.
Another point that Linux has in its favor is its monolithic kernel (come on, actually the system is GNU/Linux, Linux is just the kernel), which means that all the drivers are included in the kernel. Although this model makes the inclusion of new drivers cumbersome, it also provides some facilities. For example, Intel and AMD graphics are supported by the standard system stack (not NVIDIA if we count official support), so, the day i decide to buy an intel dedicated graphics card to replace my current rx 580, i just need to turn off the computer, remove the radeon, put in the intel, and turn on the computer again to have everything in place. The driver? What is a driver?
Easier and faster installation
Windows has always had steps in its installation processes that don’t make much sense, but all this has worsened enormously since version 10 and Microsoft’s stubbornness for including advertising and tracking mechanisms that in the background bloat the system without providing anything of value to the user. These mechanisms have their corresponding steps in the installation process, to which is added the invitation to link the first user account of the system to an Outlook one.
Fortunately, in Linux one does not find such aberrations in the installation process, which for years has been much simpler than in Windows in virtually every desktop-oriented distribution. This means that the steps to perform in Linux installers are usually the necessary ones or little more than that, and if there are additional possibilities, these are usually related to the possibility of changing the system layout (install it as desktop, server, etc.)
no spyware
This reason is directly linked to the previous one and refers to the large number of questionable things that Windows incorporates, especially since version 10 or possibly version 8. Microsoft justifies the inclusion of these mechanisms in the intention of offering a more targeted experience, but In the end, it is still a way to track user activity for the purpose of collecting data.
Linux is not free of tracking mechanisms, but these are primarily geared towards obtaining performance data that is collected in a clear, honest, and transparent manner. The issue of transparency is greatly reinforced if one takes into account that these mechanisms are free software, so their source code is available and can be audited by anyone independently and without commitment.
Transparency through free software and open source
Does the software really do what it is supposed to do or is it stealthily doing other things? Windows and macOS are proprietary operating systems. This means that the source code is not publicly available (at least officially) and cannot be audited in a free, independent and uncompromising manner..
Obviously, both Microsoft and Apple hire experts and companies to automate the security of their products, but those who engage with these giants are forced to sign draconian contracts that prevent them from disclosing any data to the public, so in the end, transparency it shines by its absence.
It is important to keep in mind that free software and open source are not a panacea, but it is always better to have that factor in favor than not to have it.
Commitment to diversity and freedom of choice
Thanks to the fact that it is free software, Linux can be forked, modified and redistributed by anyone. This has allowed the existence of a large number of distributions with very different proposals and capable of adapting to different user profiles.
Many see the existence of distributions as an inconvenience, but we must also see that it encourages competition between different proposals, while Windows and macOS are monolithic products that one has to swallow as they are and without having the same margin to modify them. .
In short, Linux opens the door so that the user can use his computer from the perspective he wants and under his own conditions. For example, I’m all about automation, which is one of the main reasons I use Fedora Silverblue. However, another user may prefer to have more granular control of the system, and here distributions like Arch Linux offer a more ideal solution for that purpose.
That the user has options to choose from is good in market terms, since in general, in this context, innovation and improvement of products are usually encouraged, while monopolies and abuses of a dominant position are tending to offer more mediocre products.
conclusion
As we can see, reasons to use Linux are not lacking, and it is not necessary to constantly appeal to the romanticism of free software and open source, but it is possible to motivate its use in favor of having a market with more options and more innovative.
It is true that today Linux is not perfect, especially if we take into account that its hardware support is still much lower than that of Windows, despite the fact that it has improved enormously in that regard. However, and if you have the right hardware (Intel is the main reference brand), it is always good to consider using it for the reasons already stated.
Bringing back the native resolution of the old Toshiba laptop, which I no longer have, the old Linux driver for Radeon (whose name is Radeon, while the new one, the one that allows gaming, is called AMDGPU) began to support it during the course of 2008. The first distributions to do so were Mandrake and Fedora, which piqued my curiosity around the RPM spectrum.
