Sorry, just a newbie here. But I would like to ask why do a lot of people hate Microsoft?

Because it is micro and soft at the same time 🤣

@Alice For me they're quite nice to developers. Offered a free version of Visual Studio and SQL Server. But hey I love C# which is created by MS and maybe that is why. I love to hear your opinion

I wouldn't really consider myself a Microsoft hater, as I'm quite often using Windows for school (OneNote) and games, but if you are really familiar with the terminal, Linux is just way more comfortable.

Take an example, you want to install Firefox on a new PC.

The Windows approach:

Open Internet Explorer, navigate to firefox.com, download the installer, click through the installer

The Debian approach:

apt install firefox

Many reasons but it varies too much to pin it down.

I don't like Microsoft because there eco system is destructive and hell bent in becoming the only eco system, trying to swindle into the Linux market is simply trying to attract developers to windows so Linux fizzles out and dies.

Have you ever used windows?!😐

Thanks for the answers! Still a student and I would love to try Linux if only Visual Studio is able to run there

@reiniellematt Same here until I moved on to dotnet core, I just use VS Code on Linux

Though I still have VS for WPF and Windows store apps.

Because some linux fanboys feel the need to defend their os and call everything else bad. I dont have anything against linux - use what works for YOU. Just this fanboyism is dumb as hell.

@musician except when it really is bad... then it's not fanboyism :p

@ScribeOfGoD define bad. I couldnt do my main work (music) stuff on linux. I gave it a shot a week ago but the software and driver is just not there. Does that make it bad as well?

I simply don't like many of their products. I really hate Windows, I don't like C# or any of .NET, and Visual Studio is a pain for me. But I have to say that VSCode is not bad (although I don't use it) and typescript can be quite nice too

@host127001 Are you a web developer?

@musician you can find a Good DAW, all hardware is now plug and play, you have the alsa mixer, you can do music in linux but it will take a while to get used to new software and new ways to route audio.

About drivers, what are you using that needs drivers? Is it something cool and old?

I agree Windows is best for easynes and compatibility, however if you do want to do music on linux it can be done and done good.
Have a look at ubuntu studio, it has everything you need to start out of the box.

@mundo03 thanks for the advice. But we use pretty specialised hard and software here. (For example a huge DAW controller in conjunction with nuendo/melodyne/izotope plugins and more). Im sure its fine for homerecording and electronic music but for big productions and restoring/mastering I didnt find the tool I need.

@musician yep, that id what I am saying, it can be done if you are willing to strat from scratch :p aaand to stop being compatible with other studios.

How about mac? What daw do you use? (I do have a small home studio, and use windows ok it)

@reiniellematt i hate ms because of they used to be excluyent, they pro-developer approach is quite new, besides, with .net core + visual studio code or rider (you got free license for being a student) you can use c# in linux.

@mundo03 mac would work too. We are using nuendo as our main daw. Yeah compatibility with other studios is kinda important in this business

@musician Keep in mind that some people actually provide arguments as to why they 'hate' it.

In my case:

- they created windows, a proprietary and closed source operating system. That proprietary and closed source part is why I distrust the software and thus the company behind it for creating it.

- They partly make money by using user data for advertisements.

- they're integrated within the biggest mass surveillance engine/system/network ever created.

I don't particularly like companies which employ practices like mentioned above.

Mostly because Microsoft was the bad wolf in the old days, they wanted the monopoly and hated free software, also got into some shady deals in the past and they took 20 years to build a good sistem and they aren't done yet...
Linux is a lot more reliable, secure and less intrusive.
Btw I'm a windows user.

// Part 1
As a dude that started his career working with Microsoft for a solid 3-4 years before ever touching Linux in the enterprise here is my 2 cents...

Windows is extremely easy for non-technical people to grasp because everything is/was handled by a GUI. (Windows Server 2000 comes to mind)

However, due to this design a lot of people that had no business futzing around with administration developed this internal sense of, “I got this/I know what I’m doing” when setting things up thanks to install wizards that handled the configuration behind the scenes with your input from the wizards.

This often led to piss poor implementations and fuck-all for best practices, which then becomes a management headache later.

Windows was built to be “easy to use” for non-technical people who were either afraid to use the cmd line or powershell or were not mentally capable of it. (Not calling people stupid, just not strong at thinking abstractly. I’m definitely in this boat!)

//part 2
Having a GUI allows people visually see things like the file structure, in an easily understandable format.

Linux has tools to expand folders and list items but for a lot of people (technical muggles) the output format isn’t intuitive.

Going back to Windows for a second, the use of GUI’s to handle configuration and management led to the need and use of complex API’s to make those changes. Windows is also a fucking beast when it comes to development, you have the registry, previously mentioned complex API’s, graphical elements that need to be handled by any program that runs in a window, and the list goes on...

Linux on the other hand is, at it’s core, a very simple to understand OS. It’s easy to configure and manage a Linux system as almost anything can be managed with editable configuration files and service/daemon restarts.

Everything can be controlled from a single place, the terminal.

//part 3

Need to update an apache configuration after adding a new vhost website. Just open up the configuration file and define the new vhost settings and root dir. Save the file and restart apache. Done and done.

Making the same change to an IIS webserver requires either using the GUI and tons of point and clicks, or some intermediate level (or higher) skill with powershell.

Microsoft has a certainly come a really fucking long way from the ‘early days’. PowerShell has gotten better and better with every revision. However, in order to perform common tasks in either terminal or PowerShell, the terminal wins hands down from ease of use. Commands are short, generally intuitive, and performance is amazing.

PowerShell’s format is very verbose which has pro’s and con’s. Pro: is that someone with some basic IT or developer skills/knowledge could look at scripts and determine what the script is trying to do. Con: writing said scripts is a bitch!

//part 4
When you start getting into things like configuration management and DevOps those blasted Windows API’s slow down development.

Again, linux is basically an OS comprised of configuration files. DevOps tools can easily tell a system to modify config files to “X” settings or specifications and restart the service that uses these configs. And you’re done!

DevOps tools need to rely on multiple methods of updating Windows configurations. Because a setting may only exist in the registry or in a local group policy object that may not have an existing management API. So the devs of the DevOps tools either need to find an existing alternative way to interface with the setting, create a custom way to interface with the setting, or just choose to drop or never support that specific setting.

Another things that comes to mind is the different management ports used by Windows Vs Linux. Every linux OS can use SSH. And there is a pretty solid set of defined ‘best practices’

//part 5

For using SSH. Windows has WinRM but it’s not enabled out of the box for desktop OSes. So trying to remotely manage and configure lots of user machines via powershell remoting needs an additional bit of setup on every single PC to enable WinRM, or you need to use Active Directory to push GPOs to the Pc’s to enable WinRM. The management overhead quickly becomes daunting.

Microsoft products also have a really bad reputation as there is a lot of “left-hand doesn’t talk to the right-hand” kind of stuff going on internally. One product, developed by Team A might be really good, and then Team B, and C, and D make some shit products and never talked/tested thoroughly to determine if there would be compatibility or security issues when running the products together.

Example: updating the WMF to 5.0/5.1 (Windows management framework) on certain Server OSes (2012r2 - IIRC) broke the SysPrep tool. SysPrep is for imaging a server for new deployments!

As far as I am concerned, I don't hate MS per say. Their products are solid, not perfect, but they do the job.

What I hate is almost all the public infrastructure, from schools to governments, are depended on MS software licenses. Licenses that the tax payers have to pay for, when we could be using a free alternative, given the time to adapt.

Most of my non-it friends are like: I cannot use Linux, I don't know how!

When just the use frontend experience is very similar if not better.

//part 6
(This is the last one, promise)
Can you imagine updating your base imaging server to include the new features of WMF5/5.1 on your server images only to have it break the SysPrep tool or cause the Image to not boot after a SysPrep?!

That kind of stuff has happened far too many times historically for most technical people to consider it a good and/or stable OS, the ease of use is not there for power users/admins when compared to Linux, management overhead creeps along like it’s in a full fucking sprint running for it’s life trying to get away from Freddy-Fucking-Krueger, and development is generally easier using Linux tools. Visual Studio is A+ software, but it’s bulky and cumbersome compared to Linux text editors and IDE’s.

I’m definitely more of an admin than a dev (as I’m sure you can all tell), but in my experiences Microsoft still has a long way to go to reach a position of ‘easiness’ for power users. This is where the Linux love comes from.

I like Windows because of C# and how well it works, but I dislike (not hate) Microsoft because of they're morals and the fact Windows has a lot of rough edges that they are all too lazy and/or shortsighted to fix

Thanks for the answers! I'll install a Linux distro next time I have a chance. (There's some Linux distros on the Microsoft Store too bad my PC is 32 bit)

@Lahsen2016 most pro people say that stock plugins are enough.
Also, if you are really pro you may have ehatever the plugon does in hardware.

And of course, I am not talking about electronic or any variant, I am talking about real instruments.
And even on electronic, you should have synths and stuff to get mote organic sound.

So yes, you can do pro music production on any platform.

@Lahsen2016 synthed shit will allways sound like synthed shit.

But I agree with you, you can have millions worth of equipments in a plugin.

Also, it is nice to see you agree with me, you can make pro music in linux if you have the right stuff.

@Lahsen2016 i say it sounds fake, it feels fake, there are people that won't record a grand piano without a grand piano.
But I agree this is mainly psychological, if no one tells me something is synthed I definetively will not notice it.

About the money, I record rock stuff, guitar, vocals, bass, drumkits (this one is midi actually), so ehat I am saying is that I can record on linux the same shit I record on windows.

I agree not all people can actually pull this off, so we both win? :D