If those are the performance metrics you care about you're probably not thinking about personal computing. In which case, in business terms, Linux is 100% the elephant in the room of cloud computing
I really wanna switch to Linux so bad because of windows 10 support is ending soon and windows 11 suck ass I especially hate chatgpt and edge and boring desktop environment and sloppy navigation around the os and inconsistent design and everything else really, the only reason I use computer is games and a bit of documents editing but I lose half of my fps when I played on Linux which is a big deal when all I have is a potato laptop, hopefully by the time windows 10 ended support gaming on Linux will be at least 80% of the windows performance
the only reason I use computer is games and a bit of documents editing but I lose half of my fps when I played on Linux which is a big deal when all I have is a potato laptop
You might be using the wrong driver or something. Usually Linux has at least comparable framerates to Windows, if not faster.
Don't manually install any drivers, the ones in the kernel by default are ideal. Maybe a power related setting like cpu governor. Newer dxvk versions don't have the shader compilation lag that previously existed either
Applause to them, even if that's all they're doing. For personal computing you can basically always count on Pop!_os to work no matter your hardware configuration (within reason, 32-bit machines aren't really something you need to consider anymore)
I switched to Linux a few months ago after building a new computer as I didn't feel like paying over $100 for an OS that has ads in the start menu and spammy popups.
Almost all of my games work fine and don't have any issues with lag. The exception is GTA V which doesn't work at all and Sims 4 which works fine but EA's launcher has given me a few issues.
You shouldn't have any issues with document editing or web browsing. In my experience printing actually works better on Linux than it did for me on Windows.
If you want you could dual boot or keep an old windows system around to play games that aren't working on Linux, but in my experience, most games, especially indie games, work just fine on Linux.
Dualboot could work, I tried it before and didn't go very well I might give it another chance, by the way does online games with anti cheat that works on Linux under wine will that get me ban?
This is exactly the reason I am going to install linux on my main Desktop, crazy coincidence of this meme. The temptation to play that addicting game is sometimes hard to resist. In linux I am more inclined to spend my time on stuff I learn from.
Might be one click to install it, but it doesn't immediately start working after that, at least according to what I've seen. WINE and Proton work well in general, but I've seen problems when it comes to LoL specifically.
Im still waiting on them deploying it. I have a windows installation that does not boot using uefi, and therefor can not run vanguard. So when they deploy it its finally bye bye league after 14 years haha
Holly shit, after looking things up it's even worse than I thought...
Playing Valorant will need to enable TPM 2.0 and secure boot under windows 11 OS, you have to check that your motherboard is support TPM 2.0 system. (NOTE: If your system unable to support TPM2. 0, the only way that you can play Valorant is change your windows to older version as windows 10.)
There is a youtube video about how even with the "best" anti cheat valorant has a huge cheating community. They are using ardruinos and secondary pcs to ai recognise the other players and simulate a mouse input via usb. (this is the high end cheating with a high cost) and even simple anti recoil scripts are possible without extra hardware.
I will never understand why so many people were just okay accepting all this invasive bullshit like Vanguard. There's so many games I just can't even consider because I refuse to implicitly tell game companies their unchecked behavior like this is acceptable.
These are fucking video games; there is no goddamn reason a glorified toy should have root or kernel-level access. It's wild to me the amount people who will accept anything, no questions asked.
I'm sure Hell Divers is fun, but it ain't worth it to me to find out.
Cheating sucks but a- people are still cheating in these games, b- there are just as effective anti-cheat strategies that don't require invasive access, c- cheating in a literal GAME is not enough of a real world issue to sacrifice real world privacy
Used to be able to before vanguard. When I used SolusOS as my main OS it used to run better than on windows... Apart from the client but that didn't matter too much
Not just yet, they've been pushing it back repeatedly. Currently has a limited rollout in the Philippines. My Windows 11 PC can't run Vanguard so I'm just waiting to be kicked off any day now
I thought all systemd haters would have died by now due to old age. At this rare chance, I have a question: How did it feel to live together with actual dinosaurs?
I think it's largely a combination of curmudgeons that hate change and people who are strict Unix ideologues. systemd, while being objectively better in many ways is a monolith that does more than one thing. This violates some of the Unix program philosophies (small programs that do one thing). The truth is that the script-based inits were terrible for dependency management, which is something that systemd explicitly addresses and is probably one of its greatest strengths, IMO.
That's very fair. Having managed system services for custom application stacks with hard dependencies on one another, that strength is worth it to me.
I don't mean to come across as saying that the Unix philosophy is wrong. Just horses for courses. Systems where there is a likelihood of interdependent daemons should probably consider systemd. Where that's not an issue or complexity is low, more Unix-like inits can still be a solid choice because of their limited scoping and easy modification.
It's slow and heavy, and it does too many things. It's a monolithic piece of code so big it's getting too difficult to maintain, so it has more vulnerabilities than other alternatives. It's also taking over the whole system, to the point where Linux systems will soon be Systemd/Linux instead of GNU/Linux.
It's also developed and funded mainly by Microsoft, which is also something people don't really like. Microsoft are trying to make it similar to Windows in some ways, which makes it way more difficult to debug random errors.
And it doesn't follow the UNIX guidelines, which is just the cherry on top.
Perhaps because I don't use DEs my PCs boot up quickly, and servers aren't supposed to be rebooted outside their maintenance windows. So why would I care about pArAlLeL bOoTiNg.
The thing about parallel booting is it's only faster in systems with lots of cores, and the overhead of the parallelized code is sometimes enough to negate the benefits in older processors.
My machine is a Core 2 Duo lappy, which allows me to run most modern programs cheaply. However, it's slow (even though I don't use DEs either), and laptops are the kinds of computers you boot multiple times a day. That's why I care about boot times. And in this case, you can see that booting with a parallelized init system is slower than booting with a "regular" one.
Yeah, Systemd might be the new fad, but I still believe there are lots of things to learn from the simple init systems. After all, an init system should only focus on initializing a system, and it shouldn't be as complex and complicated as Systemd is.
I might be just another old man yelling at clouds. But hey, that makes two of us now.
