Oh, so that's probably fucking why I haven't been able to install updates due to a generic "Catastrophic Failure" error with no further explanation.
it's even worse. changing windows enough, even with it's own tools, and it's gonna break.
my personal focal point of hate is that you still can't move your user directory. I mean you can, and there's even the functionality for it via sysprep... only for then some stuff INCLUDING MICROSOFT'S OWN SHIT to inexplicably break. good luck trying to figure how and why, let alone fix it.
it even goes beyond that, for simple efficiency's sake it's still faster and easier to wipe the drive and re-install when there's inevitable problem (unless it's minor trying to "rescue" a windows installation is a fool's errant), which fucks over especially casual users who save every shit in their registry and elsewhere, so worst case you're not looking at 2-3 extra hours installing all the shit again, you can calculate another 2-3 hours (if you're lucky) setting up logins etc. - if you even can, because microsoft to save money has their account recovery automated, good fucking luck trying to get that back.
JavaScript and its children in general make me MATI. It is a fucking plague. Years ago we built a programming langauge that can't:
* reliably execute code in order
* reliably check if a number is odd or even
* reliably check the type of a variable or function
* reliably compare two values
And we still made it not only the backbone of the internet, but the backbone of a bunch of cancerous libraries that are used to build buggy, slow crappy webapps for desktops. Ugh.
to be fair, it was ok for it's use purpose adding "interactivity on the internet" and other fluff.
if anything blame the retards dragging it into areas where it shouldn't be, out of convenience or ignorance. it also feels like the retarded "good enough" approach where instead of doing something properly with good foundations from scratch you just re-purpose something poorly (but then that's how like half the tech feels like these days).
These suggestions are valid but I am scared that if developers start making Linux a "one size fits all" desktop system it would stop catering to everyone. Someone said elsewhere something along the lines of: "if you cather to everyone, you cather to no one". Maybe there could be different editions, each with a very specific audience and also keep in mind this is just my observation.
there's nothing wrong with agreeing to a common standard everyone can work off, and as long as it's open people can take it and change it to make it fit.
linux isn't a product meant to sell so you have to target the lowest common denominator for maximum profit. sure, redhat tries with forcing the footshit and systemd on everyone, but there is still enough money and ambition to do something different, for now at least. but even if that energy gets low, you just know if shit gets bad enough someone will try to fix it, with probably enough people joining in. something like that is never gonna happen on windows or any other non-open software.