I Don’t Defend Operating Systems — I Test Them
Viewpoint Thirty years of Windows, fresh Linux experience, and no emotional attachment to either side.
1. Thirty years of Windows, then a hard pivot
Before I touched Linux as a daily driver, I lived through the full Windows arc: MS‑DOS, classic Windows, NT, XP, 7, 10, and beyond. I know what it feels like when a platform is familiar enough that nothing surprises you anymore — you know the registry, the driver stack, the GPU pipeline, the codec situation, the networking quirks, the virtualization options, and all the little tricks.
When I moved to Linux (from October 2025 onward), it wasn’t because I “hate Windows” or needed a new tribe. It was because:
- I wanted a fresh learning curve after decades in one ecosystem.
- I wanted more sovereignty over my infrastructure and workflows.
- I wanted to test what Linux can really do when pushed hard, not just read about it.
That means I arrive in the Linux world with a deep baseline: I know what a high‑performing Windows stack looks like, so I can recognize when Linux actually wins — and when it absolutely doesn’t.
2. Why I don’t “defend” Linux or Windows
A lot of people talk about operating systems like sports teams. They “defend” Linux because they use it, or “defend” Windows because it’s what they grew up with. I don’t work that way.
I care about:
- Stability – does it survive stress and weird edge cases?
- Performance – can it actually use the hardware to its limits?
- Predictability – can I reason about it, automate it, and reproduce results?
- Sovereignty – do I control it, or does it control me?
If an OS ticks those boxes for a given job, I’ll use it. If it doesn’t, I won’t. There’s nothing to “defend.” There’s only: does this tool earn its place for this workload?
3. Examples: when hype meets reality
Immich: brilliant idea, real limits
Immich looks amazing on paper: local AI, facial recognition, smart search, private Google Photos replacement. On high‑tier hardware, I stress‑tested it until it cracked. The result:
- GPU memory fragmentation under repeated jobs.
- CUDA/TensorRT instability with medium‑sized real‑world batches.
- Unkillable containers and OOMs that require full reboots.
- No desktop sync clients, and mobile uploads that are fragile for non‑technical users.
My verdict isn’t “Immich is bad.” It’s: Immich is powerful as a LAN‑only, controlled setup for technical users and families — not a cloud‑grade, consumer‑ready sync solution.
WinApps: clever RDP, not magic
WinApps gets hyped as “run Windows apps natively on Linux.” Once you build it and use it, the truth is simple:
- It’s RDP window forwarding with nice desktop integration.
- Latency, input feel, and GPU acceleration are limited by RDP.
- File I/O and UX are nowhere near a real VM.
On paper, it sounds like native magic. In reality, a properly tuned VMware or KVM VM with GPU support is often faster, smoother, and more reliable.
DaVinci Resolve: not the same on Linux
There’s a popular narrative: “Resolve runs great on Linux.” Technically, it runs. But:
- Codec support is limited and fragmented compared to Windows.
- GPU acceleration depends heavily on kernel, drivers, and distro.
- Full support is limited to very specific base systems.
You simply cannot claim Resolve on Linux is equivalent to Resolve on Windows for all workloads. That’s not hate. That’s observation.
Linux itself: powerful, but not magic
Linux gives me:
- Strong server workflows and automation.
- Better sovereignty for self‑hosted stacks.
- Fine‑grained control over services, containers, and networking.
It also gives me:
- Kernel fragmentation that complicates vendor support.
- Driver friction with GPUs and codecs.
- Extra work for things that are plug‑and‑play on Windows.
I don’t pretend those downsides don’t exist just because I’m currently using Linux.
4. How I actually evaluate an operating system
My process is simple, but ruthless:
- Benchmark it – see how it behaves under realistic and extreme loads.
- Break it – find the edge cases, the cracks, and the failure modes.
- Map it – understand where it shines and where it falls apart.
- Deploy it – but only inside the envelope where it has proven itself.
- Document it – so others see the real trade‑offs, not the marketing.
If Linux wins for a given role, I say so. If Windows wins for a given role, I say so. I don’t feel the need to protect either system from criticism.
5. Why this viewpoint matters for the public
Most people online are exposed to:
- Hype videos that only show the best‑case paths.
- Tribal debates where people defend their OS like a belief system.
- Half‑truths about “you can just self‑host X” or “Y works fine on Linux.”
What’s missing is:
- Honest, tested conclusions from someone who has actually run both worlds hard.
- Clear boundaries – where a tool is good, and where it is not.
- Respect for users’ time and expectations, not just excitement about features.
My goal isn’t to convert anyone to a platform. My goal is to give people a clear, reality‑based picture so they don’t waste months chasing someone else’s hype.
לא נמצאו הערות