Personally love .NET and Visual Studio development, especially when I was forced back into Java recently. I'm not a huge fan of Windows 10 and but I really would love to stay in the development ecosystem for the foreseeable future.

That being said if they ever put out a fully functional VS for linux, I'd switch in a heartbeat.

"These days windows just feels wrong though. It's probably just me but I feel like my windows machines are basically iPads with keyboards that I can't really do anything with the way I want to.

Git sucks on windows, paints replacement sucks, almost anything that isn't .Net development sucks and Visual Studio has to live in a cage or it takes over everything from wanting to debug your steam library to howling at the moon."

You are being far too polite :) It is not you: Windows is fine as a launcher for consumer applications, but for setup of development tools, it is appallingly terrible, and outside .NET the user experience with developer tools can be pretty rough. For many things, it is now a third-class platform (Mac is first, then Linux).

I definitely agree with Git, specifically. This isn't Microsoft's fault: Git is so UNIX-y that you have to wrap it in a kind of miny-UNIX distribution to run it on a non-UNIX platform, but they are the only desktop vendor with a non-UNIX platform.

I am looking forward to having an opportunity to work with WSL, to see how much that helps.

What are your issues with git on Windows?

Not sure why you feel Windows is "appallingly terrible" for set up of development tools either? Care to expand on why this is the case?

Genuinely curious, if only becasue I don't have these problems...

Git isn't the problem, per se. It's a barebones tool that, on Unix systems, gets paired with a very powerful terminal. The command prompt on Windows is useless garbage by comparison. You pretty much need to use a GUI with Git on windows because command prompt is so bad.

Aside from that, window management is awful on Windows (ironic?). Alt tab is kinda stupid, you can't scroll windows behind the active window, the taskbar and start menu are generally a mess, and god help you if you have multiple monitors.

Why would you want to use archaic CLI commands instead of a modern GUI though? In my 8 or so years of using GIT on Windows, there's nothing that I couldn't do through my preferred GUI.

Anyway, window management is great on Windows. It's definitely more robust than the Mac OS and more stable than whatever minority Linux desktop you're using. And alt tab is definitely not stupid and if it were, it would certainly not be because of some lack of scrolling because nobody wants to scroll stuff while they're alt tabbing.

Also, the start screen is better than anything and not messy at all. I can't even organize the equivalent on my Mac the way that I want to. Windows handling of multiple monitors is better than any other OS too and way more stable.

>Why would you want to use archaic CLI commands instead of a modern GUI though?

Because on Unix systems, the CLI commands are not archaic and you can move way faster than a GUI using them.

> window management is great on Windows. It's definitely more robust than the Mac OS and more stable than whatever minority Linux desktop you're using

I'm comparing it to Mac. The gestures a mac laptop provides make window management very smooth. The keyboard shortcuts and mouse movements required to replicate this on Windows aren't the same. MacOS remembers my multi-monitor window placement, yet every time I unplug and re-plug in my windows laptop from my monitors, I have to drag all the windows back to their monitors.

>Also, the start screen is better than anything and not messy at all. I can't even organize the equivalent on my Mac the way that I want to

It's a jumbled mess of colours and rectangles. The old school start menu is just as bad - nesting folders upon folders, hunting pixels so you click the right spot. It's just an old school way to manage computing that many people are used to and therefore think is better.

> Because on Unix systems, the CLI commands are not archaic and you can move way faster than a GUI using them.

I use the keyboard to operate the Windows GUI though and Windows is definitely known for having better accessibility hooks than any other system. I am confident that I can operate my GUIs faster than a CLI user for a broad range of tasks. It's certainly faster than looking up commands.

> I'm comparing it to Mac.

Well I use Macs too. I think the touchpad is extremely overrated since you have to take your hands off the keyboard to use it. I'd rather operate the entire system with my keyboard, something that Macs don't let you do as easily as Windows where knowing a few simple principles let you do everything. I have a Mac Pro besides my Macbook Pro and I'd have to buy a separate trackpad to operate that and where would I put it? That's annoying.

Speaking of multiple monitors, I don't think even Sierra lets you soft-disable monitors yet. Windows has had this since forever. It's so annoying that I have to physically unplug my Mac from the monitor or else I can't use the monitors built-in KVM to share it with other computers because the Mac will still think the monitor is there and open windows on it. I won't buy a third party program for it either (for reasons).

> It's a jumbled mess of colours and rectangles.

No, it's not. Knolling [1,2] is a well known process for arranging objects and that's what the start screen/menu lets you do. (I use the full screen).

It's way better than Apple's launchpad that you can't even organize the way you want. It's launchpad and spotlight all in one.

Anyway, it just sounds like we have different problems - I don't plug either of my laptops into external monitors (unless mirroring on a projector), so I don't have your problem. You don't have my problem because you probably don't have a Mac desktop that you'd like to share monitors with your PCs. I could talk for hours about all of my problems an every OS. None of them are perfect and it really comes down to "what do you need it to do for you easily most of the time and can it do that without a problem?"

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knolling [2] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-CTkbHnpNQ

> Why would you want to use archaic CLI commands instead of a modern GUI though?

Automation

Is your last name Ballmer by chance?

There's no call for that here.

Nothing about my comment says that I'm a shill or that I work for Microsoft. Please look again at my response and compare it to the comment that I was responding to. I answered each claim or opinion in like fashion. Should I have instead asked that person if they were Linus Torvalds?

You're right. I regret my careless barb.

I wish I was able to reply to your comment as well as jbob2000 did.

His point-by-point reply summarizes my understanding of reality perfectly.

And my point-by-point reply to that summarizes reality as it actually is.

> but I never quite got into the tinkering culture

off topic (bikeshedding?) comment: you don't need to tinker with linux: install ubuntu, use it, profit. At work we went from "windows 8 + osx" to "ubuntu + windows 10". Nobody tinkers with anything and everything just works. Its just a bit faster and cheaper now.

I've run ubuntu, had to write a small startup script to turn off one of my two graphics cards to save power.

It was relatively easy and the ubuntu forums were really helpful, but it's things like that that I don't want to have to do.

>configuring to make things work the way I wanted just wasn't me.

You must be one of the lucky few whose workflows jive well with what Windows enforces.

I personally have never been able to get Windows to work the way I want.