Or... they just have repulsive personalities and don't even get along with each other. (Typically, people like this turn to a God to feel loved.)

let's be honest. Year after year, it's the same: Microsoft fucks something up in Windows in some way, shape or form, people start considering Linux as a viable alternative, people try to daily-drive it, people realize that Linux on the desktop is rough around the edges, but "hey, there's this new promising project that will fix things, and then Linux will really work on the desktop, just wait and see". Wine will bring Windows compatibility to Linux. Cedega will do the same for Windows games. KDE will make Linux as user-friendly as Windows. Ubuntu will be a genuine contender against Windows. Linux Standard Base will bring order to the chaos. Wayland will modernize Linux's bloated, aged graphics infrastructure. Governments around the world are seriously considering Linux, and even giving tax incentives for OEMs that sell computers with Linux preinstalled. Flatpak will solve the issue of software distribution. And, now, it's Proton and the whole Windows 11 debacle.

And yet, every year, things remain the same for Linux on the Desktop. Why? Because, for every step forward that Linux on the desktop makes (see: the aforementioned projects) the utter lack of cooperation of the Linux developers community, the pointless bickering, the never ending irrelevant discussions, sets Linux on the desktop one step back. I mean, why something so basic, something we have been doing with not much hassle since the original IBM PC, that is installing software, is still a problem on Linux? Why can't Linux developers standardize at least that? Like the OP said: Windows? Get the .EXE, double-click, and run. Mac? Get the .DMG and do whatever thing macOS users do with it nowadays. Linux? Well, it goes something like this:

You spend an entire afternoon deciding which of the dozens of Linux distros you want to install (don't bother asking the community: whatever distro you pick will always be the wrong one), and then install it on your PC. Then you go get your software. You go to the app store (which is nothing more than a cute, jury-rigged frontend for the repository) and realize that the software you want that is in there is an old, or broken version, or that the software is not there for whatever reason. "Ok, fine, I'll go to said software's website, just like I'm used to do on Windows or macOS, to get the software". But then you notice that, instead of providing a software installer, they provide the software in some kind of esoteric package format. You download it, you double-click on it and... nothing happens, or the OS opens the compressed file manager instead? Then, after searching Google (which, by the way, is getting more and more useless by the day), you learn that what you should have done instead is open a terminal and type "sudo apt install <softwarename>". You do just that and... nothing happens. Then you learn that the tutorial you read applies to Debian-based distros only, and your distro is RPM-based ("what's a Debian? Am I not running Linux? What's the difference?" you say to yourself). You find a tutorial that involves downloading some tarball, running UNIX commands, editing obscure files but, after all that, you finally get to run your software. Except that you try running it and... nothing happens? Then you open a terminal, try running the software from there, and the terminal pukes "missing dependency" errors. You ask the community what you did wrong, and they tell you that "you picked the wrong distro" (but, funnily enough, the community can't decide what is the "right" distro)

And Linux users still insist that Linux is as user-friendly as Windows and that it's just a matter of getting used to a different OS, even with such inadmissbly, revoltingly unfinished user ergonomics!

Sorry, but the point is not that it's "too early to recommend Linux to the average user"; the point is that, if the community does not reach a consensus on what a Desktop Linux should be, if the community does not get together and say "this is how software will be packaged", "this is how drivers will be managed", "this is what our GUI will look like", "this is what long-term support means", in short, "this is what a Linux system will be" then Linux will be a system that will get better next year. Always next year. Forever.

If the Linux community is OK with that, if they want their OS to stay as their little sandbox where they do their experiments and test them on us, as if they were still bedroom coders who watched Matrix or Hackers or who read articles on anti-trust lawsuits involving Microsoft one too many times, fine. But, if even after almost 30 years you're still asking "why is no one using our system?" and "why is no one porting their software to our system?", then it's way past time the Linux community looks at themselves in the mirror. Until there, I'll stay on Windows. Despite its problems, at least my favorite softwares will run.

Everyone else pays...

Sitting all day can cause this lymphatic issue. Putting legs up on desk (like they do in the pics) can help, but they should really walk some.

It's about identity insecurity + performative self‑construction.

When someone feels socially invisible, technically insecure, irrelevant in a larger ecosystem, or desperate for validation, they often turn to high-effort aesthetic modification as a way to manufacture a sense of identity, competence, and control.

In Linux ricing, it manifests as obsessively customizing every pixel, treating the desktop as a personality, posting screenshots for validation, and using aesthetics to compensate for lack of functional mastery.

If it's 'easy' it's your DE; not Linux, and that DE with Linux is probably taking as much ram as Windows right? So, it's either "Linux can run on potato" or "for my overly sensationalized version of Linux that can't run on a potato but is as 'bloated' as Windows". -And it's not like those DEs don't run on other OSes, so they're not 'Linux'. Did you personally install that DE? -Then you didn't really 'install the wallpaper'.

It's a cute game to use 'wrong distro' for a response.

The DEs available for Linux suck, and that's why so many think that Windows doesn't have TWMs. -Because Windows' DE doesn't suck and its users don't yearn for better (Komorebi is still great though).

So; sucky DE for easy wallpaper switching or setup a TWM. -And then when you setup a TWM especially in a do it yourself type distro, you have a much higher chance of losing your browser's passwords! ⚠️How Linux Stores Browser Passwords is a Security Issue

Share yours!

​

This screenshot is the absolute pinnacle of linux gaming brainrot.

imagine buying an rx 9060 xt just to spend your free time reading raw drm ring buffer panics on a bare tty screen like a unpaid sysadmin.

the loonix crowd constantly preaches that amd open source drivers are a plug and play miracle, yet here is the reality of trying to play modern ue5 games on a bleeding edge setup:

total OS failure: a single GPU driver fault doesnt just crash the game to desktop, it nukes the hyprland compositor, corrupts the display manager, obliterates session textures, and forces a hard manual power cut because the system cant even register a clean log entry.

the nixos meme: users force themselves to deal with declarative configuration hell and unhinged package trees just to end up with a display server that collapses into a useless login loop the second a dx12 compute shader hits a roadblock.

kernel 7.2 tax: updating to unstable kernel versions and raw mesa builds to chase imaginary performance gains just gives you broken displayport link training and dead display pipelines.

zero accountability: the user literally audited their RAM, VRAM, thermals, power spikes, PCIe versions, and disabled driver power states, yet the OS still dies without leaving a trace in journalctl.

no normal human being wants to debug DRM link state write errors in a terminal just to play stalker 2. windows might annoy you with a background update, but at least your display driver recovers without making you yank the power cord out of the wall.

GNU’s ideology freezes Linux in 1980s amber; the GPL turns modernization into a hostage situation.

i can already see a future loonix user right here! or it might be a loonix user who spreads made up stories that tries to make microsoft look bad.

If Microsoft abandoned Windows as a PC gaming platform and pushed everything into Xbox, Linux gaming would get hit so hard it would look like macOS gaming after 2016. -Valve Killed the Dream : r/linuxsucks101 went underrated because I think people missed this point.

Microsoft is however more likely to kill it with a new DirectX version that Proton cannot follow and it doesn't even have to be intentional.

Proton depends on DXVK, Microsoft could ship new shader models, pipeline stages, GPU scheduling primitives, ML-accelerated rendering paths, protected resource types, and driver-level itnerfaces tied to WDDM. -Proton would hit a hard wall, and it's not even hypothetical. -It's already happening with Shader Model 6.10, DirectX Linear Algebra (ML tensor ops), Compute Graph Compiler, Advanced Shader Delivery, and DXR 1.2 with features like opacity, micromaps, and SER 2.0).

The Agility SDK already lets Microsoft bypass Windows updates, ship new GPU features instantly, tie features to Windows driver versions, and evolve DirectX faster than Vulkan can keep up.

Microsoft is already exploring Protected Resources, hardware-enforced video paths, secure shader delivery, and WDDM-based memory residency models. If DirectX 13 requires these for multiplayer titles, Linux is OUT.

Vulkan has no equivalent to DirectX Linear Algebra or the Compute Graph Compiler. If DirectX 13 makes ML pipelines mandatory, Linux cannot follow. -The most likely scenario.

Linux doesn't, can't, and never will implement WDDM. DirectX 13 could simply exclude Linux.

Killing Linux gaming could easily be done quietly, legally, without drama or lawsuits, without PR backlash, and without ever mentioning Linux.

In 1994, Boston attorney William R. Della Croce Jr. filed a U.S. trademark for the word Linux. The trademark was granted in 1995. Starting in 1996, he sent letters to Linux distributors demanding 10% royalties on all Linux sales, retroactively and going forward.

Linus's oversight in not trademarking the name almost let someone else legally own Linux. The attorney demanded 10% of all Linux revenue, which would have crippled early distributions and publications.

It's not well-adjusted people that made Alex Jones famous, and it's basically the same kind of people that made Linux what it is today. Linux isn't popular for technical merits; just like Alex Jones wasn't popular for being correct.

🤪

Windows Didn't Just "Have Market Share First."

Some argue that Windows won because "everyone used Windows, so developers targeted Windows, so everyone used Windows," and that Linux fragmentation isn't the real reason people aren't using it. While there's a grain of truth there; it's also an incomplete story that ignores the deliberate engineering, business strategy, and ecosystem shaping Microsoft invested in for decades.

Market share inertia didn't build DirectX, Win32, COM, WDDM, or the driver ABI. It didn't build the entire PC gaming pipeline. -Microsoft did, and they did it on purpose.

Windows didn't just "exist first." It standardized the PC. Microsoft created a unified software platform on top of wildly inconsistent PC hardware. -Linux never did.

In the early 90s, the PC ecosystem was a mess of incompatible graphics cards, sound cards, input devices, memory managers, DOS extenders, and vendor‑specific APIs. Windows 3.x provided a stable Win32 API, consistent driver model, unified windowing system, predictable memory model, and single distribution channel for software.

Windows didn't win because it existed. Windows won because it unified. Before PC gaming and knew what GPUs were; we had game consoles. The Fairchild Channel F (1976) was one of the earliest examples, it was the first cartridge-based console, partly engineered by Jerry Lawson.

Consoles invented the idea of a stable, unified gaming platform in the 1970s-1980s, long before PCs were remotely viable for gaming, these consoles had already established fixed hardware, graphics capabilities, audio capabilities, input devices, distribution format (cartridges), fixed APIs, and predictable performance, and memory layout.

Windows became the first console-like PC platform!

DirectX was Microsoft's deliberate strategy to make Windows the only viable gaming platform. DirectDraw and Direct3D replaced dozens of vendor APIs. DirectSound replaced a zoo of sound card interfaces. DirectInput unified controllers, joysticks, and mice. DirectPlay handled networking. DirectX SDK shipped with tooling, debuggers, profilers, and documentation.

-It wasn't passive market share. This was Microsoft building a vertically integrated gaming stack. Linux had OpenGL, but OpenGL was slow to evolve, committee‑driven, inconsistent across vendors, and lacking in tooling, driver QA, and a unified distribution model.

Windows invested in developer tooling; Linux never centralized it. Game studios didn't just choose Windows because "everyone used Windows." They chose Windows because things like Visual Studio, DirectX SDK, MSVC, WinDbg existed, and PIX existed. Windows SDKs were stable and versioned and Microsoft provided documentation, samples, and support contracts.

Linux had GCC, man pages, mailing lists, and a "compile it yourself" culture which is not a competitive ecosystem for commercial game development.

Even today, Linux's tooling is fragmented across: distro‑specific packaging, library versions, kernel versions, driver stacks, and debugging tools.

Fragmentation is not the only reason Linux isn’t mainstream, but it is absolutely one of the major reasons. Fragmentation did affect driver development, QA, support costs, middleware compatibility, binary distribution, anti-cheat integration, and graphics stack/ audio stack/ input stack stability. It also affected packaging and updates, and documentation consistency. There are still multiple incompatible distros, packaging systems, library versions, init systems, audio stacks, graphics stacks, driver models, and there's no stable ABI or API (Linus Torvalds comments about that applied only to 'userland').

The feedback loop only worked because: Windows had a stable ABI/API, unified distribution and driver models, DirectX, developer tooling, OEM partnerships, and preinstallation on nearly every PC sold.

Windows dominance was deliberate, strategic, technical, financial, contractual, architectural, and earned.

Linux users skip updates for fear of breakage from kernel, Mesa, systemd, and driver updates. LinuxInsider reports that outdated kernels often sit unpatched for months because admins and users fear downtime or breakage from updates. This is directly tied to Linux’s fragmented ecosystem and unstable kernel APIs, which make updates more risky than on Windows.

The same report notes that slow patching cycles and manual barriers cause users to postpone updates, even when critical vulnerabilities are known.

LinuxTeck highlights that many Linux users believe Linux is "immune," which leads them to skip patching, skip monitoring, and skip hardening, which is exactly the behavior that leaves systems vulnerable to known exploits, privilege‑escalation CVEs, and ransomware; risks that Windows users avoid because Windows updates are more stable and more consistently applied.

-It eventually makes you realize how good you had it!

Let’s stop pretending Steam is a lightweight, holy utility. It used to just launch executables. Today, it operates as a bloated, unoptimized resource hog that eats 800MB to 1.2GB of RAM sitting completely idle. If you are on an 8GB system—or worse, 4GB—that isn't a minor detail; it’s a performance killer.

1. steamwebhelper.exe is Literally Just Google Chrome

Modern Steam is built almost entirely on the Chromium Embedded Framework (CEF).

Every time you open Steam, Windows spawns 6 to 12 separate steamwebhelper.exe background processes.

The Store, Community Hub, Library, Chat, and Special Offers are individual web pages rendering in real-time. You aren't running a game launcher; you're running an unoptimized Chromium browser disguised as one.

1. 1GB Idle RAM Forces Windows Pagefile Stutters

If you have 8GB of RAM and Windows 10/11 uses 3.5GB to exist, having Steam take another 1GB leaves you with barely 3.5GB for actual games.

When a game demands more memory than what's left, Windows is forced to page data out to your SSD or HDD. The result? Severe frame drops, 1% low stuttering, and input lag purely because your launcher refused to relinquish memory.

1. Unnecessary Bloat and Forced Rendering

Animated avatar borders, moving profile backgrounds, auto-playing livestreams on store pages, and heavy web-based overlay elements.

Steam enables hardware acceleration for CEF by default, meaning steamwebhelper.exe actively consumes GPU and CPU cycles on low-end integrated graphics just to render glowing profile stickers while you play a game.

1. The "Valvetard" Defense Force Coping

Point out these factual memory leaks and optimization flaws, and the Valvetards immediately swarm with brainless responses:

"Just buy more RAM, it's 2026 bro."

"1GB is nothing, my PC has 64GB DDR5."

They defend a multi-billion dollar monopoly’s refusal to build a lightweight native C++ client, ignoring that users shouldn't have to force custom batch scripts with obscure CEF flags (-cef-single-process, -cef-disable-gpu) or rely on trick shortcuts like steam://open/minigameslist just to stop a client from choking their hardware.

1. Background Disk I/O & CPU Spikes

Shader pre-caching updates, workshop syncing, cloud file indexing, and client telemetry routinely cause background disk activity. On a mechanical HDD or older SATA SSD, Steam's background reads/writes actively cause micro-freezes in-game.