I’ve been using it exclusively as my desktop for over 20 years. Does it have flaws and shortcomings? Sure. So have Windows and Mac. What system does not have issues?

Does it fit your use case? Who knows? Just try it and be the judge. If it doesn’t work, just keep using whatever you’re using, no harm done.

All you need is a USB stick, some curiosity and some time. It’s not like it’s a lifetime commitment or something. Unless, of course, you enjoy it… then you are doomed.

One thing that happened recently that really showcases the difference between Linux and Windows is the glibc update that broke several popular video games. These games were specifically built to run on Linux. Ironically, games built to run only on Windows could still be ran on Linux just fine. That’s because those games are run through a compatibility layer that translates the Windows instructions into their corresponding Linux instructions. The games built for Linux use Linux instructions directly, so they don’t need a compatibility layer.

The update to glibc changed how some Linux instructions worked and so any program using the old instructions needed to update to the new ones. Lots of Linux programs are actively maintained or at least open source, so making the change isn’t a big deal. Video games tend not to be open source or actively maintained after they’re released, so some of these broken games will be broken forever. When that was reported to the maintainers of glibc, they responded that they don’t care if they break unmaintained, closed source software. It is the user’s fault for choosing to use such software.

To me, that is the biggest difference between Windows and Linux. If someone creates a program for Windows, that program will likely still work 10 years from now. If someone creates a program for Linux, it could break next week, and the people who broke it won’t care. It’s a bit embarrassing that programs created for Windows work on Linux more reliably than programs created specifically for Linux.