I think that's why a lot of people wind up on OSX. You get the CLI environment you're used to with Linux, but rarely lose half a day because a driver upgrade broke your desktop.

Funny, because I've been using Arch Linux now almost 5 years on my work computer without any problems. Same desktop (xmonad), same editor (emacs) and same terminal (xterm) with the most awesome configuration stored in Github. The only problems I've heard here are coming from the OSX users, who face difficulties when upgrading the OS into a new version, which breaks homebrew or something...

Perhaps Servercobra was talking about the barrier for entry. I haven't yet set up an Arch distro, but I can say that getting started with OSX is beyond simple. Based on what I have heard, setting up Arch can be rather difficult.

I really like the idea of Arch but I am intimidated to jump in. What was your experience like when you first booted up Arch?

Installing Arch Linux requires seems to require both knowledge and time. I haven't installed myself, but I've seen friends and people in the Internet describing it that way.

If you want to quickly try something similar, I'd suggest Manjaro Linux, which is based on Arch. It really feels like Arch but with non-minimal defaults for those who don't want to set up everything themselves.

Well, I have experience with Linux for the last 20 years, since I was 12 years old, so it was not that strange to setup Arch for the first time, way easier than the early Red Hats back in the days. I also have long history with OSX, including the early 10.0 builds until 10.6. I honestly think that having a nicely configured computer build with a simple distribution, like Arch, is much easier for day-to-day work than an OSX installation, that can break lots of things when there's a new version out.

So, so, so much this. I did a full-stop switch to Mint for ~2 months and, for the most part, quite enjoyed it. What finally killed it for me was when I was back in an "office" setting where I wanted to use a monitor and bluetooth peripherals. After a few days of struggling through various bluetooth drivers and CLI management tools, I gave up.

To make things worse, the general response I've heard from other folks that use Linux full time was, "oh yeah, why weren't you just using USB peripherals?" The general feeling I got was that I was a n00b for even trying to use a BT mouse and keyboard in the first place.

I genuinely wanted to make the switch work, and it's a shame that it just didn't (for me). Honestly, the last thing I need sprinkled into every few working days is 45 minutes trying to get some driver re-installed.

I also faced various issues ... as it is anyway inevitable with Linux apparently (yes, the closed source drivers ...).

But I managed to solve almost all of them thanks to lots of very kind, to the point and fast responding pros on forum.linuxmint.com.

I've found Linux is better at Bluetooth than Windows.

> In the "Linux Community" there only seems to exist the hacker (who loves to spend ages tinkering with config files and debugging hardware issues) and the technically incompetent user (who most likely uses Windows anyway).

wow, that's a pretty elitist comment, even for HN. essentially what you're saying is that people who don't like spending time trying to make their computer work are technically incompetent?

I beg to differ ... maybe you should reread my comment