Seems like Linux is kinda popular on GOG and I've been thinking about moving to Linux at some point in the future, so I'm just wondering what you guys think of Linux. Is it just as good as Windows? If yes, why is Linux adoption so low despite Linux being free?

Can you guys still play most of your games made-for-windows on Linux without issue?

I mean one could argue better than Windows. Being Libre, customizable, powerful, and in control.

As for the matter of the adoption rate being low, it's a complicated story; one which is perhaps too unsuccinct for these forums. But think of it like this: Windows is the Catholic Church during the 1200s. And that the various flavors of Linux are the vast variety of Non-Catholic religions; including other sects similar. (IE; the ill fate of OS/2.)

And yeah, I can play most of the games in my library on Linux without issue*.

*Per loose definitions of issues. Nobody is going to have to hack the kernel, but you may have to do some lateral thinking. Heck, some games work better in Wine than they do natively. Especially everything Win16.

Your major issue with adopting Linux full time would be certain proprietary software (such as Adobe Photoshop) which just wont run / wont run properly on Linux (even under things like wine). Gaming can be hit and miss, but theres been a lot of progress.

Yes, there are alternatives, but they may not fit your needs (example: I do graphic design and digital art - nothing quite compares to photoshop as an all in one, but also having an extensive library of self made custom brushes, tools etc, GIMP cannot cut it work wise at all on the level I work).

On the other hand, some multiplatform software (especially open sourced stuff) can run far better on Linux than Windows etc.

In my case Inkscape is a good example right now (a lot of the fiddly filters etc are kinda broken on Windows right now).

I do dual boot and try to use Linux for downtime (I do prefer it for general surfing and movies etc). When I get my pc parts I'll be having my main as Linux (not decided what distro yet) and switching to windows more for work, while keeping the failing laptop windows only for now.

Thats my only input.

If I may inquire, why not Krita?

because it only does about 5% of the job.
I do use it, but only for certain purposes.

Also its tablet support is absolute crap unless its the only thing you use.

Paintstorm is a better choice for any non dabbler / hobbyist, but its GPU bound.

Edit: additionally (regarding perfomance and in general) im not talking about subscription photoshop. that shit can go bum a duck!

Linux is at least as good as Windows; in fact, the only real advantage I see with Windows these days is porprietary software that doesn't have Linux versions, and even then WINE allows many of those programs to actually run.

Worth noting that the majority of games that fain in WINE, at least if you look at popular games, fail due to things like DRM or anti-cheat measures.

The last question I can't answer because I'm not a guy.

Edit: Also, for why Windows is more popular than Linux:
* Windows comes pre-installed on most prebuilts and laptops.
* People are more likely to stick with the default than to change it. (I remember one figure that gamers will leave subtitles on 95% of the time, but will only turn them on (if they're off by default) 60% of the time. The numbers are different (in particular, the chance of a user changing the OS is much lower), but the relationship still stands.)

might want to rewatch happy days for a different view on that (theres a quote from the fonz).

Edit: I cannot find the clip. point being "Guys" has no real gender / sex association - much the same as "mate". those that apply it, fry it.

If you don't need / require a specific software that only works on Windows, YES.

Well I think video games are the elephant in the room there. There's so many games that support Windows only.

It's better, because it's free, as in freedom, being open-source and giving the user all rights. Because it's free as in not costing money. So there's no big, greedy company pushing it onto new PCs and onto kids in school. Most, but not all.

In some ways it is better, in some ways (like compatibility and performance for your Windows applications, and availability of equivalents for certain specific Windows programs you might be using) it is worse.

I propose you don't "move" to Linux, but install it beside your Windows. Then you can use both side by side, and decide if at some point you want to move completely to Linux, or go back to Windows only.

The easiest way is if you can add another hard drive (or partition) to your existing system, then just boot up with a Linux live-CD and let it install itself beside your Windows installation, on that free hard drive or partition.

Or alternatively, if you just want to see what it is like to run and use Linux generally, you can install e.g. the free Virtual Box on your Windows machine, and install Linux within it, as a virtual machine. Then you can easily also get rid of that Linux installation if you want to, without affecting your Windows system at all. However, this is not a good way to e.g. test how gaming is on Linux, but just generally to feel how it is like to use Linux desktop. If you like it, then you can go to installing Linux properly beside your Windows installation, as instructed above.

The reason the adoption rate of Linux is so low among desktop users and especially gamers is that most PC users simply don't have any reason to "switch" to Linux. The Windows 10 that was preloaded on their laptop or desktop PC on the computer store already does everything they want to do.

So you have to ask yourself: why do you want to "move" to Linux? If you are just curious, sure go ahead, either with a virtual machine or installing it beside Windows. It doesn't really cost you anything to try (beside your oh so precious time, and the hard drive space that the Linux installation needs), and you can get rid of it too if you feel it is not your thing.

I originally started increasingly using Linux at home because of two things:

- I used both Linux and some UNIX variants (like HP-UX) at work, and that way kinda got used to them (and nowadays I even work as a Linux administrator (among other duties that I have, like DNS, load balancers, firewalls etc.), maintaining etc. lots of different Linux servers, learning as I go...).

- I have several older PCs (mainly laptops) at home which I felt could still be usable for various (also generic) purposes, but they can't really run e.g. Windows 10 anymore due to too old hardware (= no Windows 10 drivers) or low RAM; and even if they could, I just didn't feel like buying several Windows 10 licenses just to revive some old PCs to be usable again.

I've given them a new life by installing Linux on them. Many of them also run some older Windows (Windows XP, 7, even Windows 98SE) for running older Windows games that may have issues on modern PCs/Windows, but at least the XP and older are disconnected from internet for security reasons.

I tried to switch to Linux some time ago, but then I realized half my time was spend on getting stuff I need/want to run on Linux... I truly sympathize with Linux but compatibility trumps just about anything else in software.

Yes, and that is why I personally suggest "install it beside Windows" instead of "move to Linux completely", unless you have so limited hard drive space that you don't want to waste any of it by running two operating systems side by side. (At that point it is probably just easier to stick to Windows, especially if you are a gamer.)

Earlier for me it was a very clear distinction that in Linux I only did some non-gaming stuff and all my gaming (and some other things) on Windows... however gradually I've seen myself gaming more and more also on Linux, simply by "hey this Team Fortress 2 on Steam actually runs fine on Linux, no benefit running it on Windows as far as I can tell" or "now I finally got WINE installed properly, and hey this and this Windows game seems to run just fine with it, so I guess I can just as well play it there...".

Also I realize different people have so different situations. I gather many here have only one (desktop) PC at a time, doing all their stuff on it. If they want to upgrade or buy a new PC, they will not keep the old PC around. Only one PC at a time, which is probably at least somewhat modern, needing only one Windows license and having recent-enough hardware and enough RAM to run e.g. Windows 10 fine.

Then there are people like me, especially laptop users, who don't sell or throw their older PCs to trash even if they buy a new PC (e.g. a laptop). At some point we start wondering "Gee I wonder if that old laptop which was running Windows XP or 7 in the past could still be usable for something, my kids to watch Youtube videos on it and my wife doing her online banking, email etc. on it?"), then it kinda makes sense to wipe that PC and install Linux on it, instead of buying a new Windows 10 license for it and hoping it runs fine on its old hardware (driver support etc.).

When it comes to Linux not costing any money, frankly I see Windows becoming (almost) that as well.

Like how everyone and their mother could upgrade from earlier Windows versions to 10 for free, and considering that e.g. laptops at least here almost always come pre-loaded with Windows 10 and you normally don't get any discount by not having it preloaded on the laptop even if that was possible, from the buyer's point of view Windows appears "free" as well.

Out of my ass I estimate that the portion of Windows users who actually go buy a new Windows 10 license separately for their PC is quite low. Sure I do sometimes see those options with new PCs, e.g. the gaming laptop I am supposed to buy from XMG online at some point, the Windows license is optional on it, and yes it costs some extra money if you select it.

Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised at all and even feel it is probable that at some point Microsoft will just start offering Windows 10 for free to all home PC users, and expects to make their money from these users with MS Store, Azure, data gathering, advertisements etc.

The same way Google and Facebook make their money from their users. It is not like I buy a license for Android OS on the new tablet or phone I buy, it is there already and appears seemingly free to me. (I've been under the impression that Google doesn't charge for Android from the tablet/phone makers either.)

One clear sign of this is that MS seems less and less interested in forcing people to activate their copy of Windows, at least for home desktop users (corporates are a different thing, especially for those running Windows servers; e.g. we just had an audit where MS was inspecting how many copies of Windows Server we are running). In the Windows XP, Vista and 7 times the consequences for not activating your copy of Windows were much more dire (even up to disabling Windows altogether after awhile; IIRC XP was like that), but now on Windows 10 it just means there is a watermark telling that you haven't activated your copy of Windows, and apparently some cosmetic changes to the desktop (like the desktop wallpaper?) can't be changed until you activate Windows. Otherwise it is still fully usable, getting new security and feature updates etc...

I still prefer the old model tho.. to pay with money, instead of with constant telemetry and lack of control on my main OS. -_-'