> someone else comes and says it's always worked fine for him. I'm not saying you are lying, but you are probably in a minority.

Here's my "secret," if it helps. I buy laptops with Linux pre-installed from a supported vendor, I run Ubuntu LTS in the default configuration, and I only customize a tiny number of things. This has worked pretty well for me for over a decade. (Before that, I had more issues.)

I don't feel like installing Linux onto random Windows laptops is a good use of my time. Similarly, if I were to choose some unusual distro or desktop environment, that would usually mean more hassle. So I don't.

> Also, having two screens with different scaling was completely unsupported, unlike on Windows.

Yup, that's the biggest limitation I've seen. That's one reason I ended up giving away my ancient external monitor and getting a new 4k. That way I can use the same scaling on the internal and external monitor.

And if I'm going to make a major hardware purchase, I usually Google to see if it works with Linux. This matters mostly for things like drawing tablets.

The most probable difference between these two people is that the first one installs Linux on a supported hardware (or buys preinstalled Linux), while the second one takes their random hardware and expects that Linux will work on it flawlessly.

Why do you assume they’re a minority? If every time someone mentions something didn’t work, 10 other people explain that it can actually work, maybe that should be telling you something different.

Because a lot of people don't report that it doesn't work, they just stop using things that don't work. Those that do report it get "Works for me (TM)!" --or perhaps "Try a different distro (TM)!"-- in response instead of anything helpful, so why bother?

Even someone like me has long since stopped reporting bugs to Linux Desktop projects because of the above, and the fact that a lot of times the bug is already in the issue tracker and has been for years so clearly no one gives a damn anyway.

People respond like that because they genuinely have been using Linux desktops for decades, and have been perfectly productive using them for work and play. And then someone posts something like 'I tried installing Ubuntu but thing X didn't work, how can anyone do real work on this joke operating system? I stopped using it immediately' and they just want to provide a different perspective.

Personally I bought a highly-recommended Windows laptop a few years ago and had to stop using the OS because both sleep and the Intel wifi drivers simply didn't work. Yet if I tried to use that experience to proclaim that that Windows was a non-functional, useless operating system developed by people who don't give a damn, I would not be taken seriously.

By the way have you considered what reporting bugs like this for Windows is like? You end up on one of those Microsoft support sites staffed by non-technical non-employee Community Experts who have absolutely nothing useful to add. Talking to real driver and OS developers directly on Linux bug reports is magical in comparison.

> People respond like that because they genuinely have been using Linux desktops for decades, and have been perfectly productive using them for work and play. And then someone posts something like 'I tried installing Ubuntu but thing X didn't work, how can anyone do real work on this joke operating system? I stopped using it immediately' and they just want to provide a different perspective.

...because they have entangled their identity with their OS of choice such that they interpret "I had a problem with this and therefore don't use it" as some kind of personal attack. This is not only unhelpful, but an actively repellent behavior.

> Personally I bought a Windows laptop a few years ago and had to stop using the OS because both sleep and the Intel wifi drivers simply didn't work. Yet if I tried to use that experience to proclaim that that Windows was a non-functional, useless operating system developed by people who don't give a damn, I would not be taken seriously.

Case in point, who is saying Linux is useless? Useless for their particular use case or workflow, sure. Even people who like Windows generally, like myself, say the developers don't give a damn (see some of my other posts on the subject). Fact is, a lot of use would love to be using an OSS system, but the community actively fights us when we have issues with their stuff and their echo chamber of "our way is the best way!" remains unbreached, so our use cases and workflows are never accommodated and we, consequently, can't use it. This has been going on for about 20 years now. It's pretty damned tiring.

> By the way have you considered what reporting bugs like this for Windows is like?

I work supporting Windows systems, so I know how useless Microsoft support is. You know what I don't get when I talk about a Windows issue with other Windows admins though? "Well it works fine here..."

> Talking to real driver and OS developers directly on Linux bug reports is magical in comparison.

Sure, if they listen, which they often don't. Spend some time in Ubuntu's issue tracker if you don't believe me.

I have noticed Ubuntu and Fedora's bug trackers often seem to have ignored and longstanding bug reports. I think part of the problem is there is a layer of indirection - the developers of the packages themselves don't look there.

>they interpret "I had a problem with this and therefore don't use it" as some kind of personal attack. This is not only unhelpful, but an actively repellent behavior.

Your posts so far have implied that people reporting their positive experience or advising how to make the most of Linux (eg being careful about hardware choice) must be doing so because of a kind of identity crisis, or that they are reciting from mockable 'Linux Desktop Evangelism playbook'. Meanwhile you seem to have taken personal offence at the 'community's (as if it's one entity) response to your Ubuntu bug tracker entry.

My point exactly. If you report something like this on the Ubuntu bug tracker, your bug will be gathering dust forever. If you are (un)lucky some bug triager who has absolutely no knowledge of coding or the systems involved will ask you for logs that are useless to the problem at hand, and that will be it.

It doesn't matter who is in the minority. If even 1% of Linux desktop installs have issues, quirks or plain failures, it's a problem for all of Linux as that 1% chance of failure becomes a first impression, or a horror story a product manager can't unhear.

Having said that, I'm also generally in the boat of having an unpleasant experience installing on various laptops. Doesn't stop me from trying every year or so though, ha.

Have you considered buying a laptop with linux at some point?

If you're just asking me personally - absolutely I have! I had to sell my MacBook because of the pandemic and I deeply miss my i3-clone yaourt.

I'm running regolith with i3 using an X server on my WSL 2 install. It even has GPU passthrough now! It's been super pleasant experience having the best of both worlds without having to reboot.

If you're asking to make a point, I'll just say that it takes a level of tech savvy to even know _how_ to find a Linux laptop that runs smoothly. That is the problem I'm referring to.

The best logical answer would be to buy something that comes with linux after reading a review to ensure that it meets your needs.

Right that's gonna be my strategy going forward. I should have mentioned I had to stick with windows on my gaming rig because I don't currently have the money for a new laptop.

I've heard Dell and the Thinkpads work well with Linux. Got any other suggestions?