[dumpsterdiver]

> I will never again accept a job where I must use a work-provided machine. I spend 8+ hours a day at work. Being forced to spend that time in some crappy, bloated, locked-down OS is 100% a quality of life issue. If I can provision and manage the machine myself, fine. I'll even purchase the hardware. Prefer it that way.

From experience, I totally understand your frustration - and to anyone in this situation, I would suggest leaving to a company that provides modern hardware. That being said, I humbly ask that you try to put yourself in the shoes of those who are charged with ensuring these machines remain complaint (contractual obligations that must be met). Meeting these compliance obligations means continued, uninterrupted business, and that business pays our salary.

From a security/compliance perspective, I don't think it's unreasonable to do your work on a locked down machine if you are able to do your job, assuming that you have a modern machine that will plow through the overhead effortlessly. If you weren't provided with a modern machine though that can do this - get out of there as fast as you can.

[plorkyeran]

Modern hardware isn't a panacea. My work m1 laptop went from the fastest machine I've ever used to painfully slow as soon as the antivirus garbage was ported to arm64 and I had to start running it again.

[dumpsterdiver]

It's really unfortunate how limited the current m1 systems are on ram. My current usage exceeds the available specs by far in that regard - 16gb, are they joking? There's nothing "pro" about 16gb of ram, that's pedestrian. You are absolutely right though, that no matter how good the hardware is there will always be bad software that manages to slog it down. I'm sorry that you have to deal with that.

[gjasny]

Same here. Microsoft Defender is a real productivity killer. Cached C++ compilation now takes nearly twice as much time if the cache is hot. And git operations or she'll prompts take forever in large repos like LLVM.

[thefr0g]

> From a security/compliance perspective, I don't think it's unreasonable to do your work on a locked down machine if you are able to do your job

Not at all. But from a security perspective I think it's also not unreasonable to request that my data isn't exfiltrated to some shady anti-virus company and my personal details aren't stored in a rancid (active) directory service.

[vinceguidry]

I don't think it's reasonable to be forced to choose OSX or Windows. Not reasonable at all.

And I just... don't care anymore. I know it's not y'all's fault. It's the fault of the biz world which refuses to cater to any but the lowest common denominator. They could go for a solution that works with minimalist Linux systems so their sec suite doesn't conflict with my desired userland, like say a kernel extension interfacing with a daemon that just does the basics. Offer instructions and say you're on your own if you wanna go this route. Instead I get Carbon Black rammed down my throat. Which is better than McAfee but still. And McAfee still won't uninstall cleanly, and guess whether I have root access.

The problem is these companies simply don't want to work with their most capable and talented engineers. And, well, I just don't care anymore. These companies can just bleed talent to the free software sector for the next decade or two.

[rofrol]

Modern or not, still can bloated and locked down.