This is an interesting question, since it's actually the underlying strategy of Microsoft (I don't imply it's a wrong thing).

My personal motivation is that Linux power users will miss the control, or at least, customizability, of the operating system, which is something Linux does, and Windows doesn't (as they have different targets).

Also, not to be underestimated, security (although for me it's only a very small factor).

WSL2 doesn't support hardware perf counters, which means `perf` and `rr` won't work.

Tried WSL, was buggy and had some issues with filesystem performance i think. I prefer having a 100% real linux & windows OSes that just work over slightly buggy workarounds. Plus i also host a lot of homeserver services (media server, SMB server, postgres db etc) on the linux host and its cleaner having those run on the host. If i want to do something very demanding on the host for example I can shutdown the VM.

WSL2 is using a real Linux kernel with almost no limitations. But it doesn't pass through the GPU. Therefore graphical applications are relatively slow.

Wouldn't it be easier to have 2 devices, one specifically designed for gaming and one running 24/7 for home server services. A cheap used Thinkpad could be used as linux device so it doesn't have to be expensive. Plus if you value your own time and effort you have to put in for your current setup, then it might actually be cheaper.

It depends on what do you mean with "easier".

Technically speaking, for machines where VFIO works, there is no maintenance, and the setup can be easy (excluding one significant issue due to a specific linux kernel upgrade, my VFIO setup procedure has been essentially the same for years, on multiple machines).

So, assuming that VFIO setup setup/maintenance is very easy, having a second machine is just redundant.

One convenience not to forget is safety. If a Windows VM gets infected for whatever reasons, rolling back the system is performed by literally deleting one file.

You basically just need an extra gfx card (or even headless host). And why would you not want a fast Linux OS? Many SSD's and lots of RAM to make the IDE fast. Powerful CPU for compiling. Good GFX for better latency/hz.

It might, but I am cheap :) and i like to run heavy workloads on the home server/devbox as well which would take a well specced $700-800 PC.