[simonh]

WSL is really interesting. I switched to the Mac in 2006 but I’ve never really used the fact it’s built on Unix much because it’s so different and frankly outdated comparede to the Linux systems I work on. When I want to do ‘Unixy’ stuff at home I run a Linux VM in VirtualBox. But WSL seems to offer the best of both worlds – a solid mature desktop environment with plenty of well supported professional level apps and an approaching first class Linux environment baked right in. I’m still very happy on the Mac and would miss a lot of Mac specific features and applications, but this is the first thing to happen in Windows Land that’s made me even think of the possibility of wanting to run Windows at home for over 10 years.

Edit: What would be the nearest thing to WSL on a Mac? VirtualBox is a bit heavy-weight. Maybe something based on Hyperkit and Docker?

https://github.com/moby/hyperkit

https://docs.docker.com/docker-for-mac/

[ghshephard]

Likewise - except for me it's been 15 years. Switched over in 2001, and didn't look back. Running WSL creators edition is really a delight. It's not quite there yet - still has a year or two to bake - but the progress is great. They just added serial support yesterday (which is important for a bunch of the linux binaries I run). For the very first time I'm honestly considering sitting down to a Windows System to do work - I never thought I would have said that - I've got * nix in my finger DNA, so powershell, despite being incredibly powerful, just never managed to get into my workflow.

But now - It's best of both worlds - solid User Environment + Solid Unix CLI. Even better, it's a linux CLI, which means I get all the apt-get goodness that I've been missing on OS X (which admittedly has a pretty good brew install infrastructure).

[chx]

For me at least the big problem is malware. Running Arch Linux means I do not need to worry about malware. Ransomware. Crap like that. Yes, I am a reasonably experienced computer user and it's quite unlikely I would click anything "wrong" but not having to worry about a single bad click causing hours of recovery is a big plus.

Edit: while I understand downvotes I would be much happier if you'd educate me where I am wrong.

[noen]

If you avoid the darknet/warez and use Windows defender and Windows security essentials (MS antivirus), you will largely forget this was ever an issue with Windows.

Even my parents, love them, haven't had a single piece of malware or a virus since I forced Windows 10 upon them (from Windows 7). They were not happy at first, but the number of calls I get for "why is my computer so slow" and "what is this thing that keeps popping up" have dropped to 0.

[microtonal]

Running Arch Linux means I do not need to worry about malware. Ransomware. Crap like that.

I didn't downvote you and understand your concern. However, keep in mind that X11 has no GUI isolation. So, an attacker could snoop all your keyboard and mouse events, make screengrabs, etc. through a compromised web browser.

Wayland provides GUI isolation, but is not widely deployed yet. Most X11 users are only safe because the X11 desktop is not a large target group, but it is probably less secure than Windows, which does GUI isolation between processes of different privilege levels, sandboxing for Store apps, etc.

[beagle3]

That's true, but it only matters once the attacker manages to run code - which is significantly harder to achieve on Linux, due to diversity (opposite of win monoculture) and mostly sane defaults (no local directory in executable or dll search directory; file name not enough for execute permission).

Buffer overflows and targeted attacks are comparable in ease, but if you are not targeted, you are way safer on Linux.

[Accacin]

So there's a chance someone could snoop on me using X11, but there's a 100% chance of it on Windows because of all the data they're collecting in the background (including being able to get a copy of a file that triggered a crash).

I'll take Linux, thanks.

[ghshephard]

Beats the heck out of me - you make a good point. Windows Systems are certainly more popular targets for Malware than ArchLinux/OpenBSD. I absolutely agree with you that if just want to not deal with that (and still actually use the Internet) - getting off the major platforms is a pretty straightforward play.

But - if you want to use all the Tier 1 Commercial software (or, in the cases of things like garageband, free software ) - kind of hard not to have a Windows or Mac.

[oblio]

All experienced Windows user have a curated list of software. If you download shady apps, sure, good chance of getting infected. But Chrome, Firefox, TotalCommander, 7-zip, Sublime, etc., etc. are all free, mature and malware free.

It may not be as conceptually easy as Arch Linux but on the other hand you get access to Windows-only stuff which has its benefits.

And almost any Linux user should be able to create that curated list within 6 months, IMO. If they aren't, then I doubt even their Linux chops...

[nunez]

Installing apps on Windows is 100% as easy to do now as it is with Homebrew and Linux package managers with Chocolatey. I don't download software anymore on my Surface; I choco install EVERYTHING.

I was even surprised to discover today that I could install IntelliJ via choco install! It is amazing.

[chx]

If there was Hckrnews gold, it'd be yours. This alleviates a lot of problems I constantly had with Windows, namely downloading crap from who-knows-where then contains who-knows-what. This actually might be the deciding factor.

[nunez]

Glad I could help!

[lottin]

Malware, spyware built into the system and the fact that it's not open source, meaning the whole thing it's basically an unmaintainable black box.