Well their shell also sucks, but on Windows Terminal Preview I just select to run a WSL with zsh if it’s not buggy.

WTF, you look like having a bad day, because of my lack of English knowledge doesn’t give you freedom to insult me.

EDIT: I think you are just insulting me, but if Linux is the most used OS means the support should be awesome… worldwide support… while this malware could happen on Linux but also on Apple and of course on Windows, there will be always malware… so at least let’s make one really good as it is right now Linux (with support for old computers, means it’s not forcing users to keep upgrading their hardware), and that’s the reason it is the most used, fits everywhere. Windows only have the monopoly and Apple the “think different” thing (and they give special focus for designers and is Unix, sadly docker is still virtualized).

It has good plugins, like containers, to keep cookies separated to normal browsing or others sessions.

That’s cool and can be installed with winget as winget install gerardog.gsudo, maybe they still need to fix the terminal’s look then, the Windows terminal preview were pretty cool when I tested it compared to the cmd and PowerShell

I see, this was released 3 years ago (Chocolatey is 12 years old)… I’m not sure if this replaces Chocolatey.

EDIT: I tested it, I was thinking “this is so cool, no more Chocolatey and I will start using this official tool!” Until I got an error 17003 installing a package… isn’t this a bit of a lack of transparency on what exactly failed? What is error 17003? xD Also, does Windows terminal have sudo? Or I will need to right-click every time I need to run a sudo-like command? This Windows system isn’t for me…

EDIT2: 17003 fixed after updates install and rebooted… xD

For you a company should just throw away it’s employees to hire inexistent Linux experts or people using Linux software or whatever?

There are Linux experts.

There is the server side. There I agree that using Linux is great.

Not only great… xD

The company already exists, providing work to the employees, trained on windows. So switching on Linux may change the software if it cannot be used on Linux (not everything is a saas). And that can be a time consuming process for the employees too because they don’t know how to use it efficiently.

I never said all them needs to switch, I just said to provide support for people that never uses Windows or Mac, so we can keep working properly with our Linux tool and all our environment.

If they want to switch all from Windows to Linux, then it’s a huge decision… because of Microsoft monopoly, everyone buys PC with Windows licenses and that’s the only reason I see why companies uses Windows, the monopoly.

Maybe he refers to apt, pamac or dnf/yum which on Windows would be https://chocolatey.org/ which is like Brew from Apple, not a standard from OS but a third party that helps you to update/install apps. That’s the big issues with Microsoft/Apple, the lack of a repo to install updates/apps safely and officially.

https://www.computerworld.com/article/3245645/the-5-best-linux-distros-for-work-red-hat-suse-ubuntu-linux-mint-and-tens.html

Not that hard, not that expensive.

They can’t really do that, mostly because it’s not “just 1 person”.

I said you can, but for companies that really wants to do it, 3 - 4 persons could be better to make sure everything works 7/24. For smaller companies they probably neither have IT, if they have, then they can manage Linux. If they hire people that don’t know how to use Linux, then they are hiring people not prepared to provide to their workers the tools they need, and they will need to “stick with what they know” which is Windows.

There are a lot of costs going into maintaining the os, apps, custom software, and training for the employees.

Yup, right now I am having issues with Mac and Windows, issues like arch dependent tools (M2 is ARM) or Windows that can’t deal with docker properly. All systems have their own costs.

Google is giant, and has a huge amount of money. They can afford to spend the costs of training, modifying software, or developing other software for their needs if it reduces their future costs.

If they had any issues they would undo it and go back with Windows, they didn’t probably because the cost to “into maintaining the OS, apps, custom software, and training for the employees” isn’t that expensive as running all desktops with Windows.

A smaller company don’t have all those funds, they wouldn’t be able to invest as much into switching to Linux and maintaining the custom software or finding new software and training.

The tools exist, they just need to hire people that actually knows how Linux works, still will be cheaper than paying Windows licenses and support stuff.

When people switch to another software, there is also a period of low productivity, when these same people are still discovering the software, and cannot do everything as fast as before. That is also creating additional costs.

Is that an argument for not giving support to Linux users? Every Linux user needs to lean how Windows or Apple works right now, and Windows and Apple is already an option to choice (normally), I don’t know who would request to work with Linux if they don’t know how it works…

But other companies can do the same as Google did, I saw distributions maintained by 1 single person, what stops companies to do the same? I think that is the lack of knowledge of how Linux works. Google is a good example and could work for many big companies, small companies normally allows already to work with Linux or I have been lucky to find dev job positions on small companies that work with Linux already.

Same as Windows and Apple their closed source makes it impossible to know how long they have been hacked, you depend on the company transparency.

So because it’s Google means they waste their money? Nope, they just know why they are using Linux, and I’m sure they are spending less money than what they should if they used Microsoft/Apple technologies.

If you want, I can delete the photo, so we can talk about the topics, it’s just a screenshot from Quora responses.

Everyone can have mistakes, I just think it’s much harder to get infected with Linux.

Linux is very targeted by hackes, Linux is the OS (most used by servers/infrastructures) that keeps most personal data while Windows is just to hack users that miss click or gets hack by Windows vulnerabilities. Hackers do targets to Linux systems as all servers and infrastructures runs Linux. They do target, but it’s just different intention or methods.

My previous post? Was not mine, I don’t do that to my work company laptop, I stick with what I have, Mac.

Wrong, Linux totals 3% of the desktop market which is what’s being discussed in the original post.

There are more servers than users in this world, even your car runs Linux.

I do have, let’s not assume things. My Mac device isn’t connected to that IT infrastructure, we have no support to connect to the company network neither, and I work for a pretty big company. So my question is, for the lack of support I get for the Mac, why can’t I just use Linux as many devs on my work are requesting the same if there isn’t any support for Mac, Windows Defender also runs on Linux and all can work perfectly.

Windows 95 software also runs on Linux, with Wine. And it works for me.

“no virus” is because it’s literal extracted from the text, not my words. I explain then what I understand with saying “no virus”, as any device can have virus, JavaScript runs on Linux, Windows and Apple. It’s common sense. No need explanation.

Well, I think they are expensive because they are actually experts, not like random IT hired personal that (in my case) couldn’t even understand how OAuth works.