[43224gg252]

Agreed. No "hacker" would ever use or recommend Windows. It's awful for development, and even microsoft agrees, which is why they created a Linux sub-system.

Why would a so called "hacker" choose to use an OS that's slow, has horrible update policies, horrible privacy standards, injects ads into the main programs and start menu, requires anti-virus, etc?

Also, the idea that Windows has good drivers and Linux doesn't is asinine. My current dell came pre-loaded with windows 10 and failed to wake from sleep without me opening and closing the lid, then when it woke up, wifi would not come on and the only thing that fixed it was a reboot. Then when I used the touch screen things were going fine until I tried to select text and got an instant BSOD. Also I learned not to accidentally touch the screen and then try to type immediately afterward, or it would lock up the whole OS.

Linux just worked. Literally. Even the touch screen. I get 15 minutes less battery life but it's worth it.

[kyberias]

Why are there no ads on my Start menu? I'm also quite happy developing software with it.

[geofft]

> Why would a so called "hacker" choose to use an OS that's slow, has horrible update policies, horrible privacy standards, injects ads into the main programs and start menu, requires anti-virus, etc?

I don't know, but that's why I use Windows 10 instead of Ubuntu.

Please back up your polemics with facts. I don't run antivirus on Windows and never have; it's the same fundamental security model as desktop Linux, and if you don't go around installing programs from untrustworthy places (whether download.com or SourceForge), you don't need it. And at a more-than-first-order level, Windows' security model is far better.

I have patches in the Linux kernel and I strongly recommend that someone looking for a secure desktop OS use Windows instead of Linux.