This post is absurd but I'm going to make it anyway.
I work for a relatively large company doing embedded systems development and I love so much about my job. The one thing I can't stand is the fact that I'm forced to use Windows and that the majority of my coworkers actually seem to actually prefer Windows. I don't understand it. I got into embedded programming as a result of my love for operating systems, which followed my love for Linux. I love Linux because it works. Every single distro I've ever used has always worked orders of magnitude better than any other operating system I've ever encountered, even if a bit of tinkering was required up front.
I can understand the choice of simplicity over functionality for a non-developer, but how anyone who actually works with embedded hardware could deride Linux and praise Windows is beyond me. It wouldn't even bother me so much if I were allowed to at least run Linux on my work computer, but I am not. In fact, since many of our tools are so heavily dependent on Windows (in what can only be described as a portability comedy of errors), it would actually require a considerable amount of effort to even get to a point where it would be possible to use Linux for my work. But I would happily put in all of that effort, on my own time, and make it available to anyone else who wanted to use it, if it just meant being free from the trash fire that is Microsoft.
I feel ridiculous for being so dissatisfied over something like this, but, at the same time, fuck it.
> the majority of my coworkers actually seem to actually prefer Windows Having worked in embedded systems companies, that is definitely an anomaly. I think your co-workers may be retarded, user. Linux is just better in every way for low-level development. The only reason I could see for using Windows in that environment is if you have some special software tool that only runs on proprietary OS. No one in embedded systems _prefers_ Windows- at best they view it as a necessary evil. Your co-workers sound like a bunch of stubborn septuagenarians.
Jason Gomez
It’s your job. You are forced to do whatever they want, the way they want. You get paid for it. If you can’t accept it, then quit.
Logan Hill
>many of our tools are so heavily dependent on Windows That's why you're forced to use Windows. Some dumbass manager or executive in the past made that decision and it's stuck ever since. Once you're in the Microsoft userland, you're there. Good luck porting out.
Angel King
It depends on what kind of embedded work you do. For things like routers or whatever that uses a stripped down Linux kernel it's probably easier to use desktop Linux. You gotta realize you are a fanatic and been indoctrinated into a cult that you need to to break out from. Linux is not really inherently better than windows, they both have their pros and cons.
Luis Williams
Most kinds of microcontrollers, FPGAs and PLCs have tools that are exclusive to or work better on Windows. It really depends on what you're doing.
Eli Fisher
embedded systems development is inherently immersed in closed source outdated bloatware, if you want to understand linux go learn the kernel itself or at least do some embedded linux or go for device drivers, otherwise it's closed source bullshit
FWIW user, the "Windows Subsystem for Linux" is functional, allows for use of both Windows and Linux binaries in the terminal/powershell, supports several distributions, and isn't hot garbage. It's still not "true" linux, but it can get you 90% of the way there, and likely around the major hassles you are feeling while still letting you use your in-house company tools.
In school now, this very sadly is the case for some people
Colton Jenkins
Eeeeeeeh, I really disagree
The only reason windows still exists is exclusive software and company support. Everything from the base system to the group management is pretty garbage
Tyler Mitchell
Addition to my previous comment:
Sure, they both have their pros and cons, if the pro of linux is "not terrible" and the pro of windows is "more proprietary software available"
Brody Sullivan
>All I want is to use Linux at work Just quit your job and start working in the physics field.
Blake Foster
Run linux in a VM, jesus
Hunter Fisher
This, or just boot from USB and run windows in vm. Then again, if you had to ask Jow Forums to figure that out, I'd suggest just sticking with windows
Gavin Hughes
my friend does embedded systems also and all they use is osx and linux, sounds like you can just change your job doing basically the same thing if you care about that so much.
Henry Harris
I hate my job! Not OP, but can I quit mine? What are benefits? Redpill me on quiting job you hate.
Tyler Flores
Just do it
Nolan Wood
Stop being a pussy and do it
Sebastian Taylor
>In fact, since many of our tools are so heavily dependent on Windows (in what can only be described as a portability comedy of errors), it would actually require a considerable amount of effort to even get to a point where it would be possible to use Linux for my work
there is your answer OP. it would cost them too much to switch over, so they don't. even if they might save money in the long run.
Isaiah Gutierrez
Why not just install VMWARE on your distro and install there windows, so you could work with windows tools, when they're needed. The only problem you may encounter is with microsoft vpn if your company use that for sharefolders.
Isaiah Long
Intel cucks on suicide watch
Samuel Smith
So what about AMD?
Juan Lewis
>Linux is not really inherently better than windows If you actually used Windows regularly and compared it to a typical Linux distro, you would know there are lots of arcane bugs and performance issues. Just look how long this shit has been open: developer.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-edge/platform/issues/16417692/
Jackson Hill
Not really. Linux's GUIs tend to be either buggier (KDE) or have less features (GNOME etc.) than the windows GUIs in my experience. Drivers tend to be shittier. And yes, software support tends to be better on Windows for most things except UNIX or scientific development (or web dev but even that's debatable). Other than that they're pretty similar. But it doesn't matter who's fault is, advantages are advantages regardless.
Julian Brown
The WSL is actually Microsoft's implementation of the Linux kernel binary APIs. The userland (GNU or whatever you decide to use) is not technically part of WSL.
Justin Lopez
It's called that because you can run binaries intended to be loaded by the linux kernel. load_elf_binary() is a linux kernel function. FreeBSD also builds in linux binary compatibility. This of course doesn't refer to the ability to run a linux kernel, but the ability to run an executable intended to be loaded by the linux kernel.
Jonathan Peterson
Install msys2 /thread
Brayden Price
I've had far more GUI bugs on Windows 10 than I've ever had on KDE. See for one (possibly resolved for me with a workaround for yet another GUI issue but not enough time to be certain). Another issue is that every so often the preview of an app shown by peeking (i.e. hovering over the app on the taskbar) stays up when I move the mouse away and needs to be escaped manually. The only resolution I've found is restarting explorer.exe
Nice, but has some performance issues.
Kayden Watson
I've used both on a regular basis for almost a decade. I prefer Windows for most things. Its just a smoother experience, if I can get shit to work in 10 minutes instead of 30, that's worth it to me even if just because of the reduced stress. I use whatever seems to work better for the task at hand, it's just that Windows has the best tools for most of the stuff I (and 90% of people) do.
Liam Collins
That's fair enough, but if what you desire is a smooth GUI experience then Mac OS. It has performance issues compared to Linux (just try using ntfs-3g through fuse, no goddamn caching) but they don't hold a candle to Windows' issues. I've never had a simple file explorer crash as often as Windows' does. I've never had kernel panics with no underlying hardware failure as often as Windows BSODs.
meant to say "modern KDE"
Joseph Carter
>if I can get shit to work in 10 minutes instead of 30, that's worth it to me even if just because of the reduced stress. Have you ever updated a rarely used machine that's been off for a long time (like say a year)? It's an absolute nightmare in Windows. Hours and hours, maybe days, of not being able to use the computer, repeated reboots, etc. While in a modern linux distribution it's just a couple of commands (which leave the system up) and a single reboot. Updating Windows is just a total mess. The package management systems used by most linux distributions are much faster (essentially ZERO time spent with your computer in a noninteractive state) and break much less.
Aiden Jones
AMD users don't need AMD "Xeon" to be able to virtualize with GPU passthrough. They just let it rip.
(Friendly reminder that all that's needed for GPUpt is a single GPU for few shekels, as all modern boards have integrated graphics for booting the host, so it's not a big deal. Brace yourself, the intel apologists will be posting the opposite narrative after I've clicked "Post")
have fun!
Liam Moore
>I don't understand. IT staffs in large companies don't like to support multiple OSs, it's more work for them. The IT guys at my company told me Linux was a "security risk." When I pointed out that the $2 million cluster I work on was Linux, he said "that's different." TL;Dr IT staff are pajeet cucks.
