What benefit would I have, if I go back to Windows from Ubuntu?`Thanks

What benefit would I have, if I go back to Windows from Ubuntu?`Thanks.

I downloaded the iso yesterday, but I am not sure if I should install it.

the benefit of finishing the last bits of my load youve been swallowing

get rekt faget

LOL!

What Windows version though?

You will get a fuckton of malware and spyware on any version no matter what.

>What Windows version though?
10 obviouly.
I wouldn't install an obsolete OS which is out of mainline support

Well you will just have some more gaymen and nice camera watching you masturbate but i guess nothing changes that much.

An OS is an OS no matter how you look it unless you're some kind of IT dude that uses Linux properly.

There was a thread yesterday were they showed that Wini10 gets better benchmarks than ubuntu. I want nice benchmarks, too!

bait thread*
Ftfy

How can benchmarks be bait? The are facts

No screen tearing
Ability to play games
Some native Windows apps like Groove are fun
Store and Windows 10 exclusive games on Xbox
Comfy .exe files and installers so you can be lazy
Graphical UI that actually looks good and sane

Just a few I could think of

It was a random benchmark on a third-party, javascript-driven site with Ubuntu GNOME, a resources-consuming DE whose purpose is clearly not first world-script kiddies' benchmarks, stating that Linux takes more resources than Windows.

The single fact this website looked so cluttered and was javascript-driven makes the accuracy of the test questionable; and Ubuntu GNOME is not Linux. There is no controversy on the fact that you'd get much better performances with a WM (Windows Manager) or a minimal OS (such as Gentoo, because of constant optimizations made by the user based on solid computer knowledge).

If you'd like performances, you could use Solus; unfortunately their packages manager (which is great) doesn't include numerous packages such as Ubuntu. For the record, I couldn't install the LaTeX compiler near july-september 2017.

If benchmarks are important to you, you could install Xfce as a desktop environment as well (instead of a minimalist WM), which is lightweight (it's recommended for old computers), stable, and full-featured.

So I'm using Archlinux for other reasons than the Ubuntu OOTB functionalities, but pic related made me change my point of view on Ubuntu.

* numerous packages as does Ubuntu.

I'm sick and tired, sorry.

>obsolete
What needed features are missing?

multiple workspaces
tiling windows with keyboard
desu

Because it was during a dual boot. Read the thread:
>2nd OS on a dual boot setup on the same drive will suffer performance loss because of how hard drives work. Ubuntu was doomed from the start.
If you were to dual boot windows with windows, the second windows would perform much worse.

Dexpot
How does perform differently from 7 or 8 in that regard?
Fuck off

For the love of god, if you're gonna use Ubuntu at least use xubuntu

>AN OLDER OS IS BETTER BECAUSE IT WORKS JUST AS THE NEWER ONE IF YOU INSTALL ADDITIONAL SOFTWARE
TOP KEK.

Why though? Unity is really good. The search on the launcher is super fast and launching applications is as fast and responsive as on windows

Reverse that sentence and see what happens

So are you implying that the Windows DE is more optimized and less resource hungry than GNOME?

It actually is

>I wouldn't install an obsolete OS
so why are you installing 10 then?

He's shilling his personal preferences by attacking yours with no proper arguments, kind of what winfags do. Where do you think you are? This is Sup Forums after all.

Anyway, unity is much heavier than xfce. I use unity myself, but I see why some people wouldn't. Especially on weaker machines. It's the most resource heavy DE out there. And it also includes amazon services by default (though disabled by default since Ubuntu 16, it still exists as bloat).

wat

>Anyway, unity is much heavier than xfce.
Yes. This is really no secrect, but I rather go spend money on a better machine than having an awful (imo) workflow.
Anyone has a different taste though. I am really not sure if most faggots are trolling here or if they are serious about those literally nonesense rants about unity

Yeah, the plug and play setup on Ubuntu is fucking leagues ahead of Windows.

I have only used Arch as a headless machine, so I can't comment on how it works there.

Still, the most idiotic thing about that whole mess is that speed in itself is not the whole story. If it's fast enough, then there might be other much better places to spend your manpower.

> Shit can be easier to use.
> Shit can look better.
> We can make more things work
> We can use less battery power

And so on. It's an interesting test, and it's nice that Windows 10 finally has one thing going for it, but unless you're running a node.js server, is javascript execution speed that important?
(And why would you do that on Windows?)

It better be, considering how it's running on the kernel, and implemented in assembly.

Why switch if you can't even come up with a reason to do so?

Thank you for your answer, your post is really good.

>What benefit would I have, if I go back to Windows from Ubuntu?

You'd have someone to watch over you.

it's a frogposting thread, do you need another reason to believe it's a shitpost?

sage