Now that we have bash on Windows 10...

Now that we have bash on Windows 10... Is there any reason to keep using Linux on the desktop besides lightweight on low-end hardware and 'better privacy'?

Other urls found in this thread:

blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/wsl/2016/04/22/windows-subsystem-for-linux-overview/
channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/Seth-Juarez/Windows-Subsystem-for-Linux-Architectural-Overview
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

There's never been a good reason to use Linux on the desktop

>Can't change the shell colors

Its shit. I can't even read that blue.

Microsoft's EULA grants Microsoft the rights to use any of your content related to the services like Bing, Cortana (a built-in file indexer and search in Windows 10), OneDrive or Skype: "you grant to Microsoft a worldwide and royalty-free intellectual property license to use Your Content". You can read Microsoft's response here which paints everything in a positive light however after Snowden's leaks it's hard if not impossible to take them seriously.

source: altervista , why windows 10 sucks

(fucking Sup Forums system thinks I'm spamming)

Guess I'm fine then since I don't use any of those services.

Linux doesn't spy on you

reported

That's a standard line for pretty much every large online service.
Bing, Cortana, OneDrive and Skype are not Windows.

>inb4 cortana
It's an optional feature and you're given an option to choose whether or not you want it while installing Windows.
I think it's not even a preselected checkbox but two buttons.

You can't even edit Linux files. Useless.

Worst terminal emulator. Fucking piece of shit.

Do you still believe in moderation?

>doesn't force you to update all the latest and greatest bloatware whenever it feels like
>doesn't download hundreds of pajeet-authored hotfixes full of security holes
>doesn't start putting fucking ads in the start menu
>doesn't spy on you and sell your data to amazon to figure out what your favourite colour dildo is (in b4 lol n00buntu amazon, it's been disabled by default and anyone with half a brain turns it off anyway)
>isn't affected by 99% of worms, trojans and botnets because hackers know it's way easier to hook microsoft plebs
>doesn't spin your hard drive up to 100% at random for no fucking reason

why does everyone get such boners over fucking bash? i think its one of the worst shells, fish for example is way better

Windows is proprietary software. It should not be used as it is an attack on your freedoms.

>Linux on the desktop
This doesn't make any sense. Do you mean GNU/Linux, or one of its derivatives such as Ubuntu or Fedora?

>and anyone with half a brain turns it off anyway
Well you just answered all the Windows problems you mentioned.

>bash is Linux

Never post here again, you fucking retard.

>he doesn't know that microsoft literally implemented most relevant features of the linux kernel into windows
This isn't some cygwin bullshit.

10 posts, later, freetards still can't give good technical reasons and start knee-jerk screeching about "muh spying"

pajeet please leave, you dont know what youre saying

>his terminal emulator does not even display images
lmao get a load of this guy

L T S B you dumb cuck

Oh yeah, they totally implemented all of those features you've failed to specify in NT.

You're a retard. bash is a shell, and basically fucking worthless on an operating system that finally pseudo-usable CLI config abilities with Powershell.

I mean, it's much easier to run on low-end hardware, and it's FOSS so you can change it how you want, and there are no ads in it, and there are few viruses made to target linux, and official, community maintained repositories take guesswork out of software installation, but outside of that I guess there's no point, lincux btfo windows rulz

There is no technical reason. "Bash" was able to be run on windows long, long ago with Cygwin. Nothing about "Bash on windows 10" is new or remarkable in any way.

There is also no technical reason the windows subsystem can't be run on top of GNU/Linux. See Wine for proof of this. The only reason it has compatibility issues is because microsoft refuses to release their OS as free software and so people had to clean room reverse engineer it, which is time-consuming. But then again that fits microsoft's strategy of wasting everyone's time perfectly.

Package managers that aren't dogshit, possible to use filesystems other than NTFS, a file hierarchy that is significantly less retarded than Windows (but still pretty bad), *no registry*, significantly fewer restarts required for basic updates, significantly better CLI configuration, process management is significantly simpler than Windows, etc.

Windows has cool features, but don't post if you haven't had to use both Windows and Linux extensively.

blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/wsl/2016/04/22/windows-subsystem-for-linux-overview/
channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/Seth-Juarez/Windows-Subsystem-for-Linux-Architectural-Overview

Linux doesn't have a native as powerful and simple as C#

Learn english first, street shitter subhuman.

So you're effectively reimplementing Linux binary support under Windows? Why would I care about this any more than I do WINE?

C# is rad. It's one of the reasons to use Windows. A single feature doesn't make Windows superior in every way, and it certainly doesn't mean that bash being implemented for Windows means a sudden erasure of all reasons to use Linux.

Wew, I missed the word "language". But I guess that's too much of a gap for a brainlet such as yourself to fill.

Seems like you also missed the rape bus.

>what is mono and .net core

It's nice, my telegram bot runs on mono, on my vps. But it's not as comfy as C# on Windows.

I hugely support Linux, but if you're going to bite on a product like C#, just commit to Windows. Trying to drag C# into Linux is the wrong attitude.

Sudo install when plz microspft

>Why would I care about this any more than I do WINE?
Because, unlike WINE, Windows can actually run Windows applications.

>inb4 libreoffice

>fuse
>netlink sockets
>raw network device access
>better filesystems
>customizability
>better security for some distributions
>pci passthrough
>dropping privileges
no

1.) It's beside the point. What was linked is basically a compatibility layer. If I wanted to run Linux applications, I would run Linux instead of some container fuckery. It's the same reason I avoid WINE and just run Windows when I need Windows programs.

2.) WINE is in the state it's in because the Windows API is fucking absurd by design. They stopped giving a shit about it making any sense decades ago and just keep throwing more employees at it.

Here it is, bots are comfy.

No VAC on Linux

Most of the time I'm using Windows programs and I'm not going to switch to Linux when I want to run mosh or any other utility that isn't available on Windows without cygwin fuckery.

Except, in Windows you may think you turned the Spyware off but the backdoor is still there. The advantage of OSS is that you can inspect source code and see if the software actually did what it promised.

GNU/Linux*

>Is there any reason?

..Being a special snowflake
..Wanting to do everything in hardmode
..Promoting Marxism
..Being cheap/poor

Plenty of reasons.

see, was it that hard?
>Package managers that aren't dogshit
Multiple ones on windows as well.
>possible to use filesystems other than NTFS,
Ill give you that.
>a file hierarchy that is significantly less retarded than Windows (but still pretty bad)
Not really. Besides, you can use a super similar one in windows, people are just more used to C:/blablabla, D:/, *no registry*,
>significantly fewer restarts required for basic updates
Counterpoint:
Upgrading windows to a new version usually works pretty well, while mentioning that to a linux fag makes their face furrow that it's a dangerous heresy on linux.
Also, creator's update solved a lot of that. >significantly better CLI configuration
Linux subsystem solved that.
>process management is significantly simpler than Windows, etc.
How come?
>Windows has cool features, but don't post if you haven't had to use both Windows and Linux extensively.
I did.
I'd also like to add that the OS's modularity is really fascinating and awesome.
I just hate penguinfags screaming about "muh NSA" and "the command line", like that's the end all for anything anyone might ask of their PC's.
>The advantage of OSS is that you can inspect source code and see if the software actually did what it promised.
Until you get blindsided by a 7 year old explot hackers banded together to keep quiet so they can continue fucking you.

>The advantage of OSS is that you can inspect source code and see if the software actually did what it promised.
that's nice in theory but in practice noone's actually downloading and reading millions of lines of code before he installs ubuntu/arch/gentoo whatever. i always feel like that's a phony argument.

Privacy isn't a concern for most business users so I don't bother discussing it. It's a given that an open source program is easier to valdiate *if and only if you have the man hours.*

>Upgrading
True, but my point was about restarts. Before systemd, the only thing you would ever need to shut down for was kernel upgrades. This was great for small business and and learners who can't afford redundancy out the ass and would prefer to just have one server that will run for as long as they live.

>Processes
Having everything wrapped up in svchost just made a fucking mess in my opinion.

>Having everything wrapped up in svchost just made a fucking mess in my opinion.
Fair enough.
Understand why they did it, though, but i get your point as well.

Showing people on Sup Forums how big my e-cock is.

>NTFS

Start Bash on powershell instead?

To be completly honest NTFS is a decent file system, it's the windows implementation of it that sucks balls.