Windows sucks dick

>Windows sucks dick
>Linux is a server/embedded only OS
>macOS is locked down to Crapple hardware

Why don't we have a good desktop OS?

>this thread

Explain what a good desktop os would look like

Blame muh gaymes faggots

>botnet os
>by the literal botnet company
>literally calling themselves "alphabet", one of the most generic megacorp names

Windows is ok if you are not a pedophile.
And Linux is great for developers too.

Pretty much macos with games support.

games are a part of it, but the dominance of Windows has far more to do with legacy support being important to many users to varying degrees. Businesses, especially all those millions of boring not especially large, not exactly high tech ones nobody really thinks about much on Sup Forums, they won't move to another platform because they still use all kinds of ancient shit of various sorts and in almost all cases that old shit "just works" for many, many years on subsequent versions of windows. This goes back to the DOS days and will likely continue to keep windows relevant for a long time to come.

ChromeOS is solid although 100000x more locked down than OSX.

windows is actually pretty okay.
>or at least windows 7

...

>>Linux is a server/embedded only OS
No it's not, it's for anything and everything. I use it for desktop use as well. It wasn't even originally developed to be a server system, it just happens to be great with it.
>I fell for the bait

>server/embedded only OS
cute meme, may i save it?

so linux then, yeah?

>again

Linux. All it requires is more users and more development towards desktops. Linux is not coming to you like Microsoft and Apple, because it doesn't work that way. People have to adapt and develop it for their use cases. It reached enterprises in the late 90s because they found the ability to modify the software and be self-reliant to offer them an edge in the competition.

If you think we are ever going to get a decent, commercial desktop OS, you are delusional. We are being used on all fronts in our lives by large corporations and they want to get the most out of you as an user. Not even $1000 licensing fee would make up for the advertisement, locking you in their walled garden (ecosystem) and data collecting they will do.

that's weird I didn't know you could run linux inside of macos

>linux
>desktop

Mac OS has more games than Linux. Not that it matters, I still use Linux.

The frog made it obvious.

You can run linux in windows running in mac os. It is called virtual machines

can they run in parallel with current OS while using the same kernel?

...

Anime website

>goy, use Goolag (((( fuchsia OS ))))

it has 30% less white males programming it lol

Which is kind of a good thing. Since your average white ""male"" is a homosexual atheist savage

Where exactly does this linux for server meme come from? I understand most servers run some sort of unix but what about the linux kernel makes it more suited for servers than personal computers?

no, homosexual white males we dont fire. We only hate CIS gendered heterosexual white males, because of their inherent racism due to institutional power.

>tfw kvm so get my drugs anyway

It's not that Linux is not suited for desktops, it's not suited for brainlets.

>an operating systems main purpose is to luck you into their ecosystem
>succeeds, you are now reliant on their software
LOOK AT THESE PEOPLE THEY ARE SERIOUSLY USING LINUX (A SERVER OS) AS THEIR DAILY OPERATING SYSTEM, SO PATHETIC

Organizations did not want to get locked into other organizations' software/hardware ecosystems and thus adapted open source software and Linux.

Users like OP are idiots who long for the maximum convenience. Pawns for the larger corporations to make money from. If you believe a closed-source operating system ran by a single company will ever be "good", you are either delusional or a complete retard. No amount of money will make up for the advertisement/data/locked ecosystem value you provide to a company.

Microsoft, Apple and Google will push their users to limits, while maximizing profits. Maybe some "better" choice comes along, but it will be only a little better than the awful alternatives. Everyone will switch and the new alternative will keep pushing until the same happens. Cycle repeats.

Consumerist board.

I am a Linux user, but it still lacks in usability. MacOS is 100x more smooth and stable.
The only shitty thing is that it lacks hardware support, so that's what's keeping me on Linux for now (I need nvidia GPUs for work)

MacOS lacks hardware support too. Which is not seen as an issue because users are locked to Apple hardware.

Besides, why do you consider MacOS 100x more smooth and stable? Which distributions have you tried? As a Mac user I find Linux to be extremely smooth and stable. Only gripe I have with Linux is software availability (Mostly Photoshop, MS Office and Video/Audio Editors).

You can do this with linux virtual machines (which includes Android) inside a linux host machine. Can't do with Windows, though.

>server OS desktop OS dichotomy

retarded shit mostly parroted by gamers.

>build desktop for - guess what - games
>linux can't run them
>therefore, linux is not a desktop OS, because desktops are for gaymes right?
>t. gaymer manchildren

meanwhole in the world of the employed
>mfw linux is a desktop OS because it runs on my desktop
>OS X is a laptop OS because it runs on my laptop
>windows is an autocad and excel OS because I only open a stripped VM of it for those two programs

>Why don't we have a good desktop OS?
Linux is that, at least for the people that aren't best off with Android anyhow.

All of them OS you pointed out are good, some better than others,

> >Linux is a server/embedded only OS
what is Mint
what is Manjaro

> MacOS is 100x more smooth and stable.
What *isn't* smooth on Linux?

And while the plebs in the family already had to completely reinstall multiple times (at least one instance of a borked OS update included, IDK what happened the other times), my Gentoo still runs >13 years now.

> it lacks hardware support
Almost not the case. Current Linux has the best hardware support of all OS' (oh sure, if you could run the hardware support of all Windows versions in parallel, that might be better - but you can't).

>OS X is smooth and stable

Sorry, I can't hear you over keyboard input randomly becoming inaccessab

I might have expressed myself badly: MacOS lacks support, hence I'm on Linux.
Which has problems like screen tearing, HDMI audio not working, GPU switch breaking randomly after updates.
That's just my experience in the last 6 months, with Ubuntu.
>Inb4 Gentoo/Arch
No, I have shit to do with my computer, I don't want it to get in the way

>windows sucks dick
>can do everything
>takes less space than fagos or linux
>customizable enough to look pleasant but not go full retard
You're a brainlet and you should feel bad

>only the first line of the greentext is true and that was a quote from OP

...

macOS on x86 is completely different and way more comfy than babby iOS on mobile

look how pretty xd

office is pretty fucking comfy tho.libreoffice is a useless buggy piece of shit.also why the fuck is there no name localization for libreoffice functions and why are they so few and so shitty?

no,im not going to use wine at that point im better off with win7/8.1

I use MacOS for MS Office.

the fuchsia is now

dominik mi a faszt csinálsz te windowson?

dávid vagyok de amugy szia.

ja akkor bocs

Wtf what *is* smooth in linux

Jesus Christ! I think that table is having a stroke!

Wtf is smooth in homOSeX?

>macos is locked down
????????

Microsoft Office is the only real, valid answer.

because there is no market for it
/thread
>inb4 threading his own post
newfag

freebsd + drivers + games

>macOS is licked down to Crapple hardware
Wrong.

True. Hopefully they pull their heads out of their asses and really make a more modular Mac Pro this year.
Luckily Hackintosh is quite usable nowadays.

>Why don't we have a good desktop OS?
Because Redox-OS isn't yet self hosting. Soon...

Who perpetuates these retarded fucking memes? The reason that linux isn't a desktop OS is because it fails to incorporate industry grade software, it fails to be as accessible as modern OS, and it fails to provide support in business solutions. Everyone uses their own OS according to their needs. I run a dual boot of Funtoo and Windows 10. I need to run enterprise engineering software on my computer that is simply not available on linux. The employed world does not exclusively use word and excel; holy fuck are all programmers this fucking retarded? Accountants, Bookkeepers, Doctors, Engineers, Lawyers, all of these professions run OS specified enterprise software. And how about when I run into an issue with a windows computer at my work place? I contact microsoft and a specialist connects to my PC and troubleshoots it. How about with linux? Go fuck yourself. Post on forums and pray someone had once upon a time had your issue. Then there's the whole fucking problem of these free alternatives looking like shit and being a fucking anal ravaging to learn. No one wants to relearn how their software operates in order to use a watered down alternative with no support and a million needed extensions to make their "same-functioning" LibreOffice work like Word. Some people enjoy using linux, some people NEED to use Windows. Quit preaching one is BETTER than the other.

The core OS does not need to be built for the desktop. If you've used GNU/Linux and other unix-like systems (but not necessarily mac os) you should get what I mean. Basically, a 'desktop environment' can be placed on top of whatever OS you want. We're dealing with a modular system. So to me, a good OS for the desktop, or anything else really, is one that is free software, unix-like, and modular. It doesn't matter much if it's Gentoo, Ubuntu, or OpenBSD. What we need is a bigger push for good desktop environments. Personally, I'm extremely content with i3wm. I can't imagine using a traditional DE. Since I'm satisfied, though, I'm obviously not the problem here. You are the problem. What do these desktop environments lack that you'd like to see? Can you put it into words? People who are dissatisfied such as yourself should aid in development, even if it's just by giving feedback. The sort of people who actually make the desktop environments are often more like me than they are like you. Content with something that many people would not consider user-friendly at all.

Mac OS with a windows-like taskbar. Dock sucks.
t. Mac/win/linux fag

install gentoo

>and again

why does such a horrible thread get so many replies

Competition, we really don't have much of it and we just got so damn used to there just being what there is. I mean I'm guilty too I still use windows 7 and don't know too much in the way of linux but I might have to go that route in the future or have to suck it up and go to 10 I don't really know. "What about mac?" I build my desktops and having to limit my hardware to whatever would support a hackintosh just to run osx isn't really an appealing thing.

The problem isn't just lack of competition on the desktop, but a homogenisation of the paradigm, so a "Laptop OS" (for lack of a better word) is the same as a "Desktop OS", which is the same as a "Workstation OS", both literally since they're Windows, and figuratively in that Linux DEs still operate within the Windows paradigm (besides tiling WMs).

What this means is that the benefit that the hardware and the software for a particular type of computer doesn't play well with it, but rather simply "just works". Look at Laptops, and how much power they require. In an ideal world they'd be set up to use as little power as possible not by throttling the CPU, but by having a weak and low-draw CPU in the first place. Even Atom doesn't go quite far enough. Of course this weaker hardware would then need a totally different style of OS in order to function comfortably (totally possible, RISC-OS works well on the Pi and great OSs have used less than even an early SBC).

I guess what it all comes down to is this one-solution model that is thrown onto everything.