MasterGeekMX

Maybe you flashed the .iso image incorrectly. Try another flashing program like Etcher or Rufus.

Maybe you flashed the .iso image incorrectly. Try another flashing program like Etcher or Rufus.

Linux by itself is lightweight. You can run a basic barebones with maybe 128MB of RAM and 800MHz CPU. The things that makes it not so much lightweigt are the desktop environment and background procesess.
 
Also, you don't need to installper se a distro on an USB stick. A lot of linux distros offer what is called a LiveCD, meaning that you can boot up the OS from the install media without the need of making a real installation.
 
I would recommend Xubuntu. It uses the XFCE desktop environment, which is lightweight, but no so barebones.

I want so bad to have a beer with you. I read all over your post, and despite being a bit sad that mine wasn't the longest post on the thread (I think), I recognize another follower of the church of Sain IGNUcius.

Insert meme of the cat being summoned

In no particular order:

Personalization and customization: No offense guys, but in your "10 ways Windows is just BETTER" video, the statement about windows being customizable felt like that The Verge PC build video. In Linux you can choose anything and everything in almost every level. From the icon theme to even the system's random number generator, or even switch up the kernel for a custom one or even ditch out Linux in favor of some compatible ones like BSD or GNU Hurd. Yes, it can get technical the deeper you go, but back again at the aforementioned video, changing window's icon theme is as complex.

Freedom and control: It is not only open source, is free software (but Free as in Freedom, not as free beer). Free software grants you 4 freedoms as an end user (to prevent some injustices):
0: The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (Want to make that sweet Mario Party gameplay with some buddys a youtube hit? Nintendo says no) 1: The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (oops! your program had a backdoor that phoned back to the NSA and China's government. Sorry, we "maybe" will remove that.) 2: The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help others (U Got used for sharing that copy of the software that we do not longer sell or distribute. Pay the fine or bars!) 3: The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (We modified NVidia's drivers so we can save from waste this mining cards, but we are not allowed to give it to you guys) According to the Free Software Foundation, Any program that does not follow these guidelines makes an injustice to the users, because they do not own the thing that they paid for, and the programmers (or the companies commanding the programmers) are the ones in power. When we use Linux, we are the full masters of the system. We OWN the software, and no backdoor or manipulation is happening on the background. User friendliness means making things simpler and easier, so anyone can use a computer, not treating users like toddlers that can't make a thing by their own so daddy company has to make everything for them even if they don't want.

Privacy: We Linux users are pretty sure that our OS does not collect our data to sell it to other parties. We are sure that our mics aren't being activated remotely for """speech recognition improvement""" (and even then, there are option to tell upfront that something is trying to use the mic). We are sure that our OS does not have backdoors to our info so intelligence agencies can track us. The only information that we leak is via the web services that we chose to use (and even then, we tend to choose the ones that respect our privacy: DuckDuckGo, NextCloud, Mastodon, LBRY, etc).

Compatibility: Long gone are the days of a certain hardware not working on Linux. In my own experience, I haven't needed to install ANY driver whatsoever. Except for very few things (like nvidia GPUs), the system recognizes it and makes it work. Also, due it's open nature, folks have modified Linux so it can work with low resources, so you can grab the worst ever PC from Free Geek and use it as a barebones system for maybe your grannies, or leave as much juice as possible from ain insane build. Think why Linux is king on supercomputers, servers, embedded devices, IoT and anything under the sun.

Choice: Linux is just an engine. But you can't drive home with just an engine. You need a chassis, wheels, transmission, steering wheel, and a stereo. There is an endless variety of parts to choose so you can make a full system, and people have made some preconfigured and ready to install compilations of it: the Distributions (distros for the boyz). From what desktop environment to use (or lack of it) to even what use case. Wanna get an easy to use system out of the box? Ubuntu. Want to get an ikea-like DIY bleeding-edge system? Arch. Want to make professional-grade network security auditing and penetration testings? Kali. Want to have a polished and refined experience like the one offered by OSX? ElementaryOS. Want to go  the "gimme a sawtooth and a log and I'll make my own table!" route? LinuxFromScratch. Wanna mount a home server with a rock-solid system that was fully tested? Debian. Wanna use a flexible and versatile system close to the ones used in enterprise environments? Fedora.

Interface: Windows has the taskbar, with a start on the left and a clock on the right. Mac has the top global menu and the dock on the bottom. Linux has all of it, none, or even other things. As I mentioned, there is plenty of choice on the components, and the Desktop Environment is no exception. Some are simpler and lighter, perfect for computers on low resources. Others are flashier and full of effects, transitions and wobbly windows. Some are barebones, while others are full of nifty tricks. Some are straightforward while others may have an airplane cockpit's worth of options. Some imitate windows or mac to prevent alienation to newcomers, while others go full unorthodox, experimenting with fringe workflows. Or you can even throw all of that to the garbage and use the system entirely on a terminal like in the good ol' days (but don't you think that you are going to private yourself from some things by doing that)

Costless versatility: Except for a very very specific piece of software made custom for a specific thing, I am able to do anything that a Windows or mac can do on my desktop and laptop. You guys often laugh that we don't have a creative software suite. Have you ever heard of GIMP, KDEnlive, Krita, Blender, Scribus, Inkscape, OpenShot, Audacity, LMMS, LibreOffice, OpenToonz and a long et cetera? (including BlackMagic's DaVinci resolve, but that is not open source so it does not fully count). Steam has made heaps in Linux gaming, and even then there are tons of native games and emulators up there. And don't get me up to coding: no need to install anything to start making some things. To start, almost all text editors come with advanced features like syntax highlighting, and some run directly on the terminal, so you don't need to switch programs. To compile and run, just two commands are needed. All of this, for nearly zero monetary units. No license key, no cloud account, no subscription fee. Install and use, FFS!

Software and updates: No need to hunt all over the web for that pesky "download" button, just to face a "wizard" that ask you if you want McAfee antivirus and Yahoo search bar. 80-90% of your software will be in an online server preconfigured on your system, downloadable and installable by just some clicks away in an app-store like program (or if you like some verbose, with some terminal commands). Any updates to your software will be delivered with the system updates, so no more opening a program to face "An update is available". Talkin' 'bout updatez, say goodbye to forced updates and compulsory reboots. The system will update and ONLY update on your command, with just a simple notification when the updates are available that knows that no means no. Even then, you can choose a distro that delivers updates slowly and only when fully tested, so you will see a notification of a new version twice a year.

Usability: If you still think that Linux is hard to use and it's all commands and coding, let me tell you two things: ATi has been bought by AMD, and BlockBuster is in bankruptcy. Yes, the terminal has a quite a presence on Linux, but asking not to use it is like asking a Windows power user to not use the Registry Editor. People tend to confuse not being used to something with that something being hard to use. The desktop side has evolved a lot and it still keeps improving day by day, with some systems being nearly grandpa-proof. As I said earlier, some desktop environments try to imitate how windows or mac behave, so you can be in a similar workflow. And some distros go beyond and develop tools so thing that were solely command-line driven now can be made through a nice GUI.

Security: Linux is used on very important and sensitive places, so lots of people put an effort on improving the security of it. First and foremost, Linux can't catch Windows viruses. Like Mac, we come from another bloodline of OS, and windows viruses take advantage of vulnerabilities that only windows and it's architecture have. Also, unless you specify it, a program usually don't run, and if it does, it is quite isolated from the system (and with some technologies like Flatpak, Snap, Kubernetes and Docker, it is even more isolated). And at last; when something needs admin privileges, windows says "cancel or continue?". Linux directly asks for the password of an admin account, even if you are logged in as one.

NOTES AFTER REWATCHING THE OTHER VIDEOS:
MAC:
We may not have (yet) an ecosystem, but we have some QoL things. GNOME Desktop can sync up with a variety of online accounts, sharing contacts, calendar events, mail, an even mounting Google Drive as a network drive, or KDE having KDEConnect, linking up an android phone with a Desktop/Laptop, allowing for shared clipboard, file sharing, notification sync, multimedia control, presentation control, and even using the phone as a touchpad and execution of preconfigured commands with just a tap. We have "mission control" like modes. We invented the virtual desktop. We have search engines as powerful as spotlight. We have distros that are so "ready 2 go" that some purists complain about them being bloated. Bootcamp? Parallels? Dude, we master virtual machines using software that organizations and companies use to deploy their clouds. Also, out Install does not get jealous if it is installed alongside another OS. When talking about mac development, you guys mention that the Unix ancestry is a good point. Guess who is also a grandkid of Unix? And if UNIX makes the system so open, now imagine that the blueprints of every single component of the system are also at reach. We also have the manpages, manuals for almost every single command, program and even libraries on the system. And some of out text editors can compare to xcode. We also don't have ads and data collection (and we are sure about that), but we don't need to pay a couple of grands for that. And we don't force you to use an specific tool. The preloaded are the ones the distro developer liked, but nothing stops you from obliterating it and replacing it (looking at ya critical system component chess) WINDOWS:
Thanks to tools like Wine and Lutris, games and even some apps run flawlessly on Linux, and even sometimes better. Linux using Wine and Windows using "compatibility mode" don't have too many differences on the guts. Windows registry editor is, believe it or not, harder to use compared to Linux. Most config is stored in plain text files with quite some human readable formatting, and any text editor can do the work of configuring the system. And most of the time a simple command does the trick. PowerToys? We use real tools that professionals on IT use, not toys. Task scheduler is just windows version of cron. Support base I will say we are on par, with the bonus that reaching the people behind the making of the stuff is easier, and not only they are open to hear direct requests and issues, they are open to welcome to you to become a part of the development, even if you don't know to code. We blur the line between user and developer. Scientists and investigators? Really? Even in the making of the movie Interstellar Linux was present, and more and more research facilities use Linux and open source software. Try KDE Plasma and then talk to me about shortcut keys. Even the "standard" shortcuts like copy and paste can be remapped. What about easing the life of mom by making Ctrl-C for Copying, Ctrl+Alt+C for Cutting and Ctrl+P for Pasting? The updates do not require a slow restart. Just close and reopen the updated apps to see the new stuff, only requiring reboots for key components like the kernel (and even that is probable to change in the future)  
Here is a screenshot of my setups (My laptop and my desktop with dual scren)

THIS! Being able to always have a terminal to do things is the best. It's like some years ago when touch phones became the norm that my dad said "what if you get yourself in an accident and your phone screen breaks. How yould you call 911?"
 
Also I like to have a TTY alywas on with something visually stunning for the uninitiated like htop, so when someone walks over I do a quick Ctrl+Alt+F1 to pretend that I'm a leet haxorz... by watching my process.

Insert meme of the cat being summoned

In no particular order:

Personalization and customization: No offense guys, but in your "10 ways Windows is just BETTER" video, the statement about windows being customizable felt like that The Verge PC build video. In Linux you can choose anything and everything in almost every level. From the icon theme to even the system's random number generator, or even switch up the kernel for a custom one or even ditch out Linux in favor of some compatible ones like BSD or GNU Hurd. Yes, it can get technical the deeper you go, but back again at the aforementioned video, changing window's icon theme is as complex.

Freedom and control: It is not only open source, is free software (but Free as in Freedom, not as free beer). Free software grants you 4 freedoms as an end user (to prevent some injustices):
0: The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (Want to make that sweet Mario Party gameplay with some buddys a youtube hit? Nintendo says no) 1: The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (oops! your program had a backdoor that phoned back to the NSA and China's government. Sorry, we "maybe" will remove that.) 2: The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help others (U Got used for sharing that copy of the software that we do not longer sell or distribute. Pay the fine or bars!) 3: The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (We modified NVidia's drivers so we can save from waste this mining cards, but we are not allowed to give it to you guys) According to the Free Software Foundation, Any program that does not follow these guidelines makes an injustice to the users, because they do not own the thing that they paid for, and the programmers (or the companies commanding the programmers) are the ones in power. When we use Linux, we are the full masters of the system. We OWN the software, and no backdoor or manipulation is happening on the background. User friendliness means making things simpler and easier, so anyone can use a computer, not treating users like toddlers that can't make a thing by their own so daddy company has to make everything for them even if they don't want.

Privacy: We Linux users are pretty sure that our OS does not collect our data to sell it to other parties. We are sure that our mics aren't being activated remotely for """speech recognition improvement""" (and even then, there are option to tell upfront that something is trying to use the mic). We are sure that our OS does not have backdoors to our info so intelligence agencies can track us. The only information that we leak is via the web services that we chose to use (and even then, we tend to choose the ones that respect our privacy: DuckDuckGo, NextCloud, Mastodon, LBRY, etc).

Compatibility: Long gone are the days of a certain hardware not working on Linux. In my own experience, I haven't needed to install ANY driver whatsoever. Except for very few things (like nvidia GPUs), the system recognizes it and makes it work. Also, due it's open nature, folks have modified Linux so it can work with low resources, so you can grab the worst ever PC from Free Geek and use it as a barebones system for maybe your grannies, or leave as much juice as possible from ain insane build. Think why Linux is king on supercomputers, servers, embedded devices, IoT and anything under the sun.

Choice: Linux is just an engine. But you can't drive home with just an engine. You need a chassis, wheels, transmission, steering wheel, and a stereo. There is an endless variety of parts to choose so you can make a full system, and people have made some preconfigured and ready to install compilations of it: the Distributions (distros for the boyz). From what desktop environment to use (or lack of it) to even what use case. Wanna get an easy to use system out of the box? Ubuntu. Want to get an ikea-like DIY bleeding-edge system? Arch. Want to make professional-grade network security auditing and penetration testings? Kali. Want to have a polished and refined experience like the one offered by OSX? ElementaryOS. Want to go  the "gimme a sawtooth and a log and I'll make my own table!" route? LinuxFromScratch. Wanna mount a home server with a rock-solid system that was fully tested? Debian. Wanna use a flexible and versatile system close to the ones used in enterprise environments? Fedora.

Interface: Windows has the taskbar, with a start on the left and a clock on the right. Mac has the top global menu and the dock on the bottom. Linux has all of it, none, or even other things. As I mentioned, there is plenty of choice on the components, and the Desktop Environment is no exception. Some are simpler and lighter, perfect for computers on low resources. Others are flashier and full of effects, transitions and wobbly windows. Some are barebones, while others are full of nifty tricks. Some are straightforward while others may have an airplane cockpit's worth of options. Some imitate windows or mac to prevent alienation to newcomers, while others go full unorthodox, experimenting with fringe workflows. Or you can even throw all of that to the garbage and use the system entirely on a terminal like in the good ol' days (but don't you think that you are going to private yourself from some things by doing that)

Costless versatility: Except for a very very specific piece of software made custom for a specific thing, I am able to do anything that a Windows or mac can do on my desktop and laptop. You guys often laugh that we don't have a creative software suite. Have you ever heard of GIMP, KDEnlive, Krita, Blender, Scribus, Inkscape, OpenShot, Audacity, LMMS, LibreOffice, OpenToonz and a long et cetera? (including BlackMagic's DaVinci resolve, but that is not open source so it does not fully count). Steam has made heaps in Linux gaming, and even then there are tons of native games and emulators up there. And don't get me up to coding: no need to install anything to start making some things. To start, almost all text editors come with advanced features like syntax highlighting, and some run directly on the terminal, so you don't need to switch programs. To compile and run, just two commands are needed. All of this, for nearly zero monetary units. No license key, no cloud account, no subscription fee. Install and use, FFS!

Software and updates: No need to hunt all over the web for that pesky "download" button, just to face a "wizard" that ask you if you want McAfee antivirus and Yahoo search bar. 80-90% of your software will be in an online server preconfigured on your system, downloadable and installable by just some clicks away in an app-store like program (or if you like some verbose, with some terminal commands). Any updates to your software will be delivered with the system updates, so no more opening a program to face "An update is available". Talkin' 'bout updatez, say goodbye to forced updates and compulsory reboots. The system will update and ONLY update on your command, with just a simple notification when the updates are available that knows that no means no. Even then, you can choose a distro that delivers updates slowly and only when fully tested, so you will see a notification of a new version twice a year.

Usability: If you still think that Linux is hard to use and it's all commands and coding, let me tell you two things: ATi has been bought by AMD, and BlockBuster is in bankruptcy. Yes, the terminal has a quite a presence on Linux, but asking not to use it is like asking a Windows power user to not use the Registry Editor. People tend to confuse not being used to something with that something being hard to use. The desktop side has evolved a lot and it still keeps improving day by day, with some systems being nearly grandpa-proof. As I said earlier, some desktop environments try to imitate how windows or mac behave, so you can be in a similar workflow. And some distros go beyond and develop tools so thing that were solely command-line driven now can be made through a nice GUI.

Security: Linux is used on very important and sensitive places, so lots of people put an effort on improving the security of it. First and foremost, Linux can't catch Windows viruses. Like Mac, we come from another bloodline of OS, and windows viruses take advantage of vulnerabilities that only windows and it's architecture have. Also, unless you specify it, a program usually don't run, and if it does, it is quite isolated from the system (and with some technologies like Flatpak, Snap, Kubernetes and Docker, it is even more isolated). And at last; when something needs admin privileges, windows says "cancel or continue?". Linux directly asks for the password of an admin account, even if you are logged in as one.

NOTES AFTER REWATCHING THE OTHER VIDEOS:
MAC:
We may not have (yet) an ecosystem, but we have some QoL things. GNOME Desktop can sync up with a variety of online accounts, sharing contacts, calendar events, mail, an even mounting Google Drive as a network drive, or KDE having KDEConnect, linking up an android phone with a Desktop/Laptop, allowing for shared clipboard, file sharing, notification sync, multimedia control, presentation control, and even using the phone as a touchpad and execution of preconfigured commands with just a tap. We have "mission control" like modes. We invented the virtual desktop. We have search engines as powerful as spotlight. We have distros that are so "ready 2 go" that some purists complain about them being bloated. Bootcamp? Parallels? Dude, we master virtual machines using software that organizations and companies use to deploy their clouds. Also, out Install does not get jealous if it is installed alongside another OS. When talking about mac development, you guys mention that the Unix ancestry is a good point. Guess who is also a grandkid of Unix? And if UNIX makes the system so open, now imagine that the blueprints of every single component of the system are also at reach. We also have the manpages, manuals for almost every single command, program and even libraries on the system. And some of out text editors can compare to xcode. We also don't have ads and data collection (and we are sure about that), but we don't need to pay a couple of grands for that. And we don't force you to use an specific tool. The preloaded are the ones the distro developer liked, but nothing stops you from obliterating it and replacing it (looking at ya critical system component chess) WINDOWS:
Thanks to tools like Wine and Lutris, games and even some apps run flawlessly on Linux, and even sometimes better. Linux using Wine and Windows using "compatibility mode" don't have too many differences on the guts. Windows registry editor is, believe it or not, harder to use compared to Linux. Most config is stored in plain text files with quite some human readable formatting, and any text editor can do the work of configuring the system. And most of the time a simple command does the trick. PowerToys? We use real tools that professionals on IT use, not toys. Task scheduler is just windows version of cron. Support base I will say we are on par, with the bonus that reaching the people behind the making of the stuff is easier, and not only they are open to hear direct requests and issues, they are open to welcome to you to become a part of the development, even if you don't know to code. We blur the line between user and developer. Scientists and investigators? Really? Even in the making of the movie Interstellar Linux was present, and more and more research facilities use Linux and open source software. Try KDE Plasma and then talk to me about shortcut keys. Even the "standard" shortcuts like copy and paste can be remapped. What about easing the life of mom by making Ctrl-C for Copying, Ctrl+Alt+C for Cutting and Ctrl+P for Pasting? The updates do not require a slow restart. Just close and reopen the updated apps to see the new stuff, only requiring reboots for key components like the kernel (and even that is probable to change in the future)  
Here is a screenshot of my setups (My laptop and my desktop with dual scren)

https://www.reddit.com/r/linux_gaming/comments/did2k7/linus_tech_tips_is_planning_a_video_called_10/
It's kindof like that saying "All Roads Lead To Rome"
In the tech world "All Platforms Lead To Linux", if Windows, MacOS, Android, iOS, OrbisOS, Google Stadia, Atari VCS and all these other platforms and technologies Linux would be @ the middle with OpenGL and Vulkan connecting everything together.
Porting from any one platform to another it just makes sense to code with Linux in mind because dependency code wise you're going to be able to hit so many targets with one throw vs maintaining all these ports each in different code states.
Anyways, that said NASA uses Linux on the International Space Station. Tesla uses it in its cars. In the server market it won in a landslide victory and is King. In the phone market several billions of Android Phones and Tablets use the Linux kernel and are capable of the coreutils to port programs to Android IIUC.
As a platform no tech giant exclusively owns it so work done on Atari VCS can be deployed to Google Stadia without worrying as much about code compatibility, and no Tech Giant can say "You know, we deicided all your hard work is going to now be locked to our store and we've also decided we're taking 70% cut of sales." with no fight back.
Controller support has gotten really good -- there are kernel drivers for virtually any controller you could want save Xbox One v1.0 IIUC.
On Linux consumers are respected as owners of their devices and software. This is a big deal. The OS doesn't cripple you -- if you want to make bad decisions and delete your home directory or any file on the OS you can as long as you have sudo permissions enabled.
Updates are not forced. You can keep your OS in 2019 forever if you please.
Privacy is not broken out of the gate -- assuming you are not using Canonical and allowing them to share publicly and sell some data.
Software is centralized, a few clicks of a GUI or a single short command updates the whole software stack.
Software updates are stupid fast compared to Windows. I can reinstall every package on my Linux ~2000 in probably 10 minuets.
I can setup snapshotting my steamppas games folders making saves available to me from any time and also theoretically have access to old versions of game data files for modding if needed making it easier to DIFF files and see what changed or open other doors potentially.
Some proton games obviously run faster than their Windows counterparts, this is not always the case but it is a source of pride knowing the Linux kernel is faster at some stuff.
WINE IS NOT AN EMULATOR W.I.N.E -- technically Windows games are "native" using SteamPlay to Linux because nothing is emulated and the layer that allows the games to run is just reimplemented on Linux between the base stack os and the software at the top.
Theoretically having greater control over your system means more ability to control overclocking and optimizing. I am not a overclocked -- but theoretically, removing unnecessary packages and cherry picking version numbers among other things could yield maximum performance vs Windows where it's "one size fits all" -- Intel Clearlinux is a good example of optimization.
Linux is scalable. Google knows this. Each license cost $0 so you can deploy 10,000 servers and the costs are the human resources -- server admins.
Development of Emulation, Graphics Libraries and other achievements often have developers who are using a non-Windows platform or have non-Windows targets (Android, iOS) making development outside Windows ideal.
Linux has Multi-seat. Theoretically a single computer with 5 graphics cards can have 5 gamers on a single machine sharing resources of say a 32 thread processor. Throw in a kernel designed to balance the load among threads like Zen or other, and mount the same SteamApps folder to 5 users and you could theoretically save disk space, power, have a single machine with a USB PCI-E card for each user with their own mouse and keyboard and monitors, etc... all on the same machine. Maybe throw some wheels on that and you have a portable LAN Gamer solution.
When a Linux breaks in a upgrade, its actually possible to fix it. On windows you can't trust the tools provided for you. Windows Defender was useless at detecting or correcting problems. Damage done to the computer was rarely undone with a anti-virus. Once security was compromised it often destroyed the defenses of a Windows making it possible to reinfect more easily next time. This lead to reinstallation and repeat instead of repair.
This is not a problem on Linux, AntiVirus is not commonly needed because security is built in from the ground up with advanced file permissions. If a Linux were to get a virus it would be possible to compare all system files against their signature to expose potential "problem files" or files not owned by the system outside user directories. It's also possible to reinstall the entire system with 2 or 3 commands on most Linux distros.
Data transfer between Linuxes is easier with SSH, Rsync, etc... making it possible to clone entire steamapp games on a LAN at a much faster speed. If file transfer is interupted it picks up where left off. Windows explorer.exe often crashes moving 10GB+ and if it fails its near impossible to determine what files completed copying and what files didn't. This causes problems that shouldn't exist. Some will bitch there are other file copy tools but I fail to see that as relevant because the system is locked down and the tools can only perform functions windows exposes and allows.
Linux is not a walled garden like Apple or Windows wants to be.
Basic file operation speeds including zipping, unzipping, copying, etc... are all faster on Linux because NTFS is old and Windows is weighed down with so much legacy code. This also makes advanced filesystem features impossible at the cost of backwards compatibility.
In Windows if you don't like Windows Explorer, or some other part of Windows you are stuck with it, in some cases historically you couldn't even disable or uninstall it -- Internet Explorer for example. In Linux there are at least 10 file managers to choose from, half of them offer different workflows for different kinds of users.
Linux software rarely has advertisements shoehorned into them. Windows is full of "30 day trial" and "click this banner ad", and all sorts of sheepery.
Driver issues in Windows usually result in BSOD and are unfixable.
Microsoft historically has been AWOL with Ballmer doing crazy things like making a big phone interface the main interface, failing tremendously to determine what customers actually want and pushing their own products and ideas on people because they had the dominance to do it.
Most people don't like the idea of the US government, or China automatically having a backdoor to their Digital /home -- it's a bad principle to live by because when 1 person has the backdoorkey then hackers and anyone and everyone can get it leaving your files or maybe your million dollar work files vulnerable to be held hostage for ransom.
I had a friend who had their family photo library encrypted and held ransom. They paid the ransom and the ransomer kept increasing the "cost" at each payment. They never got their photos back. Thanks Windows Bitlocker, Viruses, etc...
Linux FOSS projects like LibreOffice is better in the long run because the file format is truly free and open and could be imported for 100 years into office apps. Proprietary formats aren't even documented correctly and online versions basically own your soul and you are at their whim.
It's nice to be part of projects that give humanity hope in a otherwise technically dysmal post apocalyptic world where everyone is a dumbass consuming media on a rectangle and having no comprehension of how their device works all while being exploited entirely for financial gain. Theres nothing wrong with offering value to consumers, but when a company has unlimited power it secretly obsoletes devices early or slows them down to perpetuate the exploitation by tricking the consumer into thinking they need new devices more frequently than is true.
Linux runs 2x as good on old hardware or more, though I am not keen to make that argument, it also runs better on brand new hardware as well.
On Linux you don't need permission to do crazy things like add drivers to the kernel. You don't need permission to distribute software to consumers. You don't have to get stuck in developer software update check to get screened for the A-Okay. If your consumers trust you software is delivered direct without a middle man.
I expect software that runs in 2019 on Linux can more easily be made to run in 2060 due to the open platform.
There are 6000+ native games and 6000+ proton games. Emulators are installable with the click of a button.
Linux is basically a secret club of cool pc programmers and gamers and if you need help or want to talk to someone they are generally more educated and close-knit compared to the deafening masses and average low IQ of the commoner -- not trying to be that guy but if you are the smartest person in the room you are in the wrong room wasting your time.
I could probably keep going but that's already a wall of text, I could probably double down and do a better job -- maybe the r/linux_gaming community should make a public data list where we upvote the top reasons to the top so we can reference it forever to put this kind of question to an answer more easily.

Hey all, first post here. (As a Linux fan, you know I can't resist the urge to go out of my way for a bit of light evangelizing.) =P
 
Having taken a quick glance through this thread I've seen people bring up many of the classic arguments in favor of Linux (free, open source, powerful, customizable, ubiquitous, etc.). Those are all true, in my opinion, and are pretty strong arguments for why many of us use Linux at home, for work, in our phones, on little gadgets, in virtual machines all over the internet, and even as the basis of consumer products. For the LTT audience, I also see Linux as being kind of the software equivalent to building your own PC from parts--as an outsider it can seem inaccessible and a bit hard to understand why it's worth the extra "hassles", but once you get into it you realize that it's cost effective, fun, and allows you to create the (hardware or software, respectively) environment that you want.
 
Having said that, I want to actually take this post in a different direction and touch upon an aspect of Linux that is rarely discussed but absolutely at the heart of what it's all about; community. Simply put, while Microsoft Windows and Mac OSX are products, which are unilaterally designed by a relatively small group of people and then marketed and sold with the goal of making profit, Linux represents something fundamentally different--a community of users, developers, and companies with a diverse ecosystem of ideas, skills, and use cases who are all collaborating on something that is bigger than any of us as individuals. I know that sounds lofty, but frankly, it's true.
 
Now, I'll be the first to admit that some Linux users can be a bit overzealous, but that passion and enthusiasm comes from a place of truly caring about the platform in a way that I think users simply don't care about Windows or OSX. The same criticism can often be made for other passionate and geeky communities, whether we're talking about games, comic books, etc. People are invested in this stuff and they care deeply about it in a way that goes beyond a mere product in the greater market and, in the case of Linux, we've helped to build it into what it is today. And while everyone online remembers the one annoying encounter they had with some Linux maniac (like you might remember a bad interaction with somebody in an online game), what we often overlook is the bigger picture of a Linux community that started from 1 dude in a dorm room and eventually katamari'd into this global behemoth of geeks, "hackers", developers, companies, and (slowly but surely) even artists, musicians and gamers.
 
This, of course, can't be said about our relationship with Microsoft and Apple. They make something, we either buy it or we don't, we have very little agency over what Windows or OSX can do or how they act, and what little power we have over those companies or products exists by pure luck and is ultimately fleeting. Without getting into fear mongering, it's important to recognize the reality that they decide how we interact with our hardware and that the only thing stopping them from doing something deeply unpopular is the possibility of lost revenue. Logically speaking, in the event that doing something unpopular will make money, they'll do it, as they have in the past.
 
So, to end this wall of text, why does any of this matter? Who cares if Linux is a community-driven thing?
 
Off the top of my head, there are two big reasons why Linux being a community really matters. (1) If there is a will, there is almost always a way. If someone out there wants to do something and has the know-how (or cash) to make it happen, it will happen, no matter how niche the idea or how small the audience. If you've ever witnessed the successes of the open source community you'll know first hand that, what it is, Linux users make it happen. And (2) as the community grows, Linux's potential grows (seemingly exponentially). Linux has only existed since 1991, I first tried it in 2006 and thought it was pretty cool back then, but now, as we approach 2020, it's evolved into something that I barely recognize. The user experience is absolutely solid, the developer environment is unmatched while things like git and containers have taken over the world, you can make art with great tools like Blender, GIMP and Krita (I'm biased, since I contribute to this one, by the way), you can make music with great tools like Bitwig, Reaper, Renoise and Ardour, and you can even play thousands of great games, both retro and modern, with high-quality drivers and things like Proton and Lutris that make it easier than ever to play even non-native games. But none of this fell out of the sky, it was all a product of a community that has grown bigger and built things better than ever before, and as the community continues to snowball, I truly believe that our computer experience will be better than we've ever imagined. =]
 
Thanks for reading and I'm looking forward to the episode.

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux,
is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux.
Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component
of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell
utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day,
without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU
which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are
not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a
part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system
that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run.
The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself;
it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is
normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system
is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux"
distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

My time to shine. Keep in mind, I'm a long time (over 15 years) linux user, I code for a living, and I've not used windows on any of my machines since windows 7. I've had to use OSX for work for a few months, and quit because of it. That's to say: I may have a slight bias here. Here's some reasons why I think that bias is justified, however:
 
1. It's literally THE MOST IMPORTANT SYSTEM OUT THERE
 
Let's get this out of the way first. Linux is the most important piece of software in the world. End of. Why? Can you say, wihtout any shadow of doubt that there isn't a family on the planet that doesn't own at least 1 device that runs OSX? No you can't. Nor can you make a similar claim about Windows. My house has neither an OSX nor Windows device in it.
Are you an avid windows user? OK, have you got a smart device (whether it be a smart kettle, thermostat, phone), do you have a router? Do you drive a Tesla? Congrats, you probably have a linux device in the mix.
Are you an astronaut on board the ISS? Congrats, the ISS runs linux.
Does your job involve you working with any of the 500 most powerful computers on the planet? I guess your job involves using Linux.
You're online watching youtube video's or reading web pages every so often (or very often)? Congrats. The internet runs on Linux.
A bit more outlandish: Medical imaging software (MRI's, CAT scans, etc...): a lot of the solutions here run linux. Do you drink milk? automated cow milking machines run Linux. 
 
Whatever you can think of, whatever requires a micro-processor and some logic to run on a machine, odds are the system that manufacturers will choose will be the free (both as in beer and as in freedom) kernel that is linux. It's more versatile than Windows or MacOS, it's free, it's tried and tested in every environment (terrestrial and in space),... it's everywhere. Imagining a world without linux implies imaging a world without: 
 
* the internet
* the iss
* home automation
* android (most smartphones, by far)
* routers
* anything bar your Windows PC or mac, basically
 
2. To each their own, to each their distro. 
 
You are a PC user who wants to code? Fine, there's plenty of distro's with bleeding-edge packages just for you. If the mere thought of compiling code makes you recoil in horror, there's just as many (if not more) other distro's out there. 
Do you like arcade games and console emulation? There's a distro just for that.
Do you have a weird obsession with Hanna Montana? Try Hanna Montana Linux. 
Whatever you want, there's probably a distro out there with your name on it.
 
3. It's a Kernel, you decide what it is on top of that
 
If you've been around the linux sphere for longer than a day, you've seen this one before: call it GNU/Linux. Linux is just the Kernel. Windows and OSX users can argue back and forth about which system offers better customisation, the simple fact is: Linux rules supreme here. You don't like Gnome? Try KDE. Don't like that one either? Try XFCE, LXDE, Ratpoison, i3 or SwayWM, Cinnamon, or whatever other graphical environment you find.
The same thing when it comes to something like the command line: you don't like bash scripting? Try csh, or fish, or zsh, or sh, or korn, or...
 
If it's something other than the kernel, you can replace it with something else, and still refer to the end product as "a flavour of linux".
 
4. Bug fixing
 
Remember spectre and meltdown? The system that was first to release a fix for these VERY SERIOUS vulnerabilities was.... Linux, of course. Compare that to Apple's famous `goto fail;` bug, which was reported first back in 2012 (if memory serves me well), and took over 3 years to fix... 
If you're sceptical of this claim, let's be pragmatic about it:
 
AS mentioned before: the internet runs on Linux. Big companies (and that includes microsoft) use Linux (Microsoft is a platinum partner, and contributes to the Linux kernel!). IBM bought Red Hat. They all need Linux to be reliable, safe, and fit their needs. If a massive security vulnerability emerges, you can bet your bottom dollar these companies will fix it. Not in the least because they have to. Because Linux is GPLv2 licensed, this fix is free and open source software in its own right, and we (linux users) all benefit.
 
5. Free software
 
Linux is free. It doesn't cost you anything (although some distro's do), but more importantly: you are free to download, look at, and alter/improve the code. That's how software should work. Imagine you run a company. Software engineers aren't cheap. You pay 10 people to develop some software for you, and a client doesn't like something, or wants a new feature. You have to hire someone to handle customer relations, a project manager to plan any work that comes from customer requests, and pay engineers to maintain, and further develop a piece of code. If you ever reach the point where you have 100 engineers working on a single project, that project has to be making you millions for your company to stay afloat.
Linux has an army of over 15,000 developers contributing to the kernel. No company, even a trillion dollar one like Apple has the resources the Linux community has.
 
6. Hardware suppport
 
It's an old joke, much like the "yes, but can it run Crysis" meme, it's often said that linux has crappy hardware support; it did. Over a decade ago, I remember spending hours and hours trying to get audio or wifi to work. The simple fact of the matter is, however, that in the last 5 years, I've had not a single issue WRT hardware support. I rocked up at an office, I saw the network printer, and printed my documents. Meanwhile, a colleague of mine was trying to get the same printer to work on is OSX machine, to no avail, so I printed his documents, too.
Is Nvidia support bad? Well, their drivers support is probably among the worst for Linux. I am currently running an RTX on my main desktop, running linux though. No problems at all there.
 
On hardware support, there are examples of Linux outperforming Windows. My desktop rig is a Threadripper 2990wx. The Windows scheduler coulnd't handle that many threads, which resulted in lower performance figures. A simple example would be blender (also free and open source). I found this review: https://www.pcworld.com/article/3296378/2nd-gen-threadripper-review-amds-32-core-cpu-is-insanely-fast.html?page=2 showing a BMW render time of 95 seconds (1m35). When I installed Fedora, without tweaking any bios settings, no overclocking, just a clean install of my system, I did the same thing on Linux, to get a render time of 77 seconds (1m17). A whopping 18 seconds (about 20%) faster. Seeing as AMD is pushing towards more cores/threads, and Linux having a lot more experience dealing with more threads (because linux runs most super-computers and servers), it's a more mature kernel. Linux is better suited to handle complex hardware.
 
7. Filesystem support
 
Do you want to copy files over from an NTFS drive? sure, go right ahead. How about mounting a zfs partition? Why not. ext{2,3,4}? Easy.... whatever list of filesystems you can think of, Linux will be able to handle more than Windows and OSX, guaranteed. Same goes for networking. Which system is more frequently used for servers? As mentioned earlier: that'd be Linux. Which system is more suitable for networking? Linux, of course.
 
Now I have to come clean here. FreeBSD (in fact the entire BSD family) are probably just as good, if not better at this than Linux is, and MacOS is based on the BSD kernel. Though I can't point to anything major in particular, I've worked with people who know their stuff better than most anyone I know, and they've described MacOS as a "neutered form of BSD". If someone who knows the TCP/IP stacks of all systems discussed can elaborate on this, I'm more than happy to read through pages of nerdilicious details.
 
8. Update freedom
 
You update the packages you want, when you want to, and you restart when you feel like it. Simple. Deal with it Windows users.
 
9. Community driven
 
Even the major distro's still listen to their userbase more than Microsoft or Apple do. If they make a change (e.g. Cannonical's unity UI, yuck!), they eventually cave in to pressure from its users. If they don't, because of the free nature of the ecosystem, someone will create a fork/spin-off version of their distro (e.g. Mint), and welcome the disgruntled users of old.
This is a trait that can be seen on many levels. When Oracle acquired Sun, who initially created OpenOffice, the community (who rightfully dislikes and distrusts Oracle) decided to switch to LibreOffice. The philosophy of free an open software is, despite the sometimes chaotic discourse and choice-overload, preserved. If you care about personal freedom, you should care about free software, like Linux.
 
10. Developer experience
 
I tried to stay broad for as long as possible, but this is the main reason why I stuck with Linux. If you like programming, in whatever language, Linux just is a developer oriented system. It's built by geeks, for geeks. It's only in the last decade that companies have made an enormous effort to make the system a viable option for the everyday user. I believe it truly is an option for everyone now, and most people stick with Windows for gaming and out of habit. The gaming part, I do admit, is an area where Linux has some catching up to do, and it is making progress at breakneck speed. Much more than Windows is progressing in terms of developer experience, that's for sure (why else would so many devs make the switch to a *NIX system like MacOS?).
 
I've developed in many languages (C, C++, Java, Golang, Rust, JavaScript, Perl, PHP... just to name a few), getting my tooling set up either required no work at all, or was as easy as running a single command like "sudo dnf install php-dev nodejs -y"), and be on my way. From that point on, whenever I checked for system updates, I'd automatically be told if I could/needed to updated my development tools, too. Thinking back to the days where I had to deal with Windows, or brew on MacOS, I genuinely wonder how anyone puts up with it.
 
Lastly, on the development side: containers and virtualisation are industry standard things. Popular tools like docker are built around the linux kernel. You can run docker on MacOS, for example, but what it requires is for MacOS to run a virtual machine running linux behind the scenes. This means: you boot into OSX, just to start a VM running Linux, so you can run a container, thus negating the benefits of containers in terms of system resources.
 
11. Stability
 
Linux is stable. No really, I know Windows got a lot better, but Linux is still better. Not all distro's focus on stability, of course. Some aim for more bleeding edge software, which means sacrificing some stability, but run a home server on Slackware and it will be as reliable as the universe. It'll go on forever.
Even if you're being a complete numpty, and do something silly like accidentally delete the kernel of your OS and reboot, you'll be able to recover (you may have to google a few things if you're not an experienced user, of course).
There's a system update, and something broke? No problem, by default, most distro's will keep a copy of the previous kernel on disk, and at boot time, you'll be able to choose which version of the kernel you want to boot with.
Do you want to roll back an update? No problem
 
 
Right, I wanted to limit myself to 10 things, but the longer I spend typing here, the more things come to mind. I'm going to leave it here, because if I don't I'll be typing for days, and nobody will read it. I'd also get lost in more technical details, the amount of knowledge shared on the LKML, and how accessible core contributers can be...
 
Enough fanboy stuff, I've declared my bias at the start, I'm not ashamed of it, I genuinely believe Linux is the best system for me. If I had to make a list of some cons, I could do that, too:
 
1. Too often you'll hit a skill barrier
 
When you run into problems, and ask people for help, quite often you'll get an answer telling you to paste a few commands in a terminal window. Often this will work, but you've learnt nothing
 
2. It's still a nerdy system
 
Linux, although more user friendly than ever, still expects the user to be eager to get stuck in if you want to get the best possible experience
 
3. fragmented experience
 
Because of the myriad of DE/WM's and GUI API's, some applications have a different look and feel. One that doesn't always match your desktop environment. This makes the overall UI look and feel messy
 
4. Design by Engineer
 
It's a known problem. Engineers design a UX with their code in mind, not your experience. click-through wizards will ask you one question in the beginning, and only allow to further specify that option 5 steps later. If you read the code you can understand why, but as an end user, it can be jarring. A fictitious example: imagine you plugged in a mouse. A wizard pops up telling you your system detected new hardware and asks you whether it's a keyboard or mouse. You say it's a mouse, next, you're asked how many buttons your mouse has, you have left, right and a scroll-wheel. You answer 3,  hoping the next question asks about the function of the buttons. No such luck. The wizard goes on about asking you whether you have/want RGB support, what DPI your mouse supports, and after giving you a slider to set the DPI (in increments of 1), you're asked if the middle mouse button is a scroll wheel. Stuff like this happens, less and less, but it still happens and it's annoying for new users.
 
5. Community seems hostile
 
Now Linux users, like myself, want nothing more than for you to enjoy our favourite OS, but because we've invested years learning our way around the system, issues new users encounter can seem so simple we're likely to answer in a single sentence of tell you to RTFM. This can seem unwelcoming and hostile, I admit. There is, however, a good reason for this: you need to know how to get help from the system you're trying to use. It's part of learning to navigate any OS. Be self-reliant, basically.
 
Passionate people are loud. If you care about something, you want the world to know. You can be very enthusiastic, but an all-caps answer can be read as aggressive.
Old school Linux users have tons of knowledge, but are a bit neck-beardy. Show them you've tied to fix your problem, and they'll happily tell you where you went wrong. Tell them your problem and ask them to fix it, and they'll tell you to have intercourse with yourself. A lot of linux folk still chat on IRC channels, and interact in the way people used to do in the early days, when it was perfectly acceptable for a major website to include a bit in their Q&A along these lines:
 
Q: What if someone was blunt/rude/angry?
A: This is the internet, grow some balls.
 
I'm not making this up, the phrase "grow some balls" was somewhere in the "help" section of the well known site "stackoverflow" until about 5 years ago.

Linus has his own distro now. Cool! ?

DaVinci Resolve and GIMP FTW

THIS! Being able to always have a terminal to do things is the best. It's like some years ago when touch phones became the norm that my dad said "what if you get yourself in an accident and your phone screen breaks. How yould you call 911?"
 
Also I like to have a TTY alywas on with something visually stunning for the uninitiated like htop, so when someone walks over I do a quick Ctrl+Alt+F1 to pretend that I'm a leet haxorz... by watching my process.

I guess I can throw my two cents in here.  Can't promise this will be in any particular order though
Command line.  Some say the necessity is a downside, and that may be, but the option is definitely a pro.  You can do some amazing things both manually and through bash scripts.  Hell, you can even run the whole OS like that without any visual system at all.  That's a powerful feature. Efficient.  I've often found that while hardware "support" isn't as good as Windows, "the basics" always work at least as well if not massively better.  It doesn't rape the disk, it uses less RAM, and things just overall load and feel snappier.  I've even qualified it objectively before by playing a game on Linux successfully at 720p60 solid that could not do the same on Windows.  All of these effects really show through on older hardware, which brings me to my next point: Breathes new life into old machines. A second opinion.  If Windows is all you have, it's hard to know what behaviour is the fault of Windows or the hardware.  By having another totally different system you can run at any time, it lets you separate the two. Free, both as in beer and in freedom. Extremely customizable Doesn't slow down over time.  This is less of an issue now since Windows no longer does this either when installed on an SSD, but back in the days of HDD for boot, being able to keep the same system for a while instead of reinstalling every year was a nice plus. Saveable.  If something goes wrong I can kill the graphical environment with control + alt + backspace, or just switch to a command line environment with control alt F1 and kill the program, or run anything else I need to.  On Windows if there's an issue that takes down the interface, you're kinda SOL Security.  Whether it's due to a superior architecture that can't be as easily exploited, or simply because it's less popular and thus less targeted, the fact remains you're less likely to encounter malware on Linux

Background: I first dabbled in Linux use on the desktop when I was 12 or so. By the time I was 14, it was my primary OS, but I would still dual-boot for gaming. As an adult, I've gone exclusive: I haven't booted Windows on my own hardware since I was 18, now ten years ago. I started out on one of those cutesy WIndows-imitation distros (Xandros, an ancestor of Linspire (formerly ‘Lindows’)), terrified of the terminal, tried every distro that ever came in the free DVD bundled with a Linux magazine from 2005-2010, and eventually made my way over to my favorite weird-ass boutique distro, NixOS.
 
Respect: freedom, privacy, and control The most important thing for me about using a free software operating system is that free software operating systems are the only ones that allow me to feel respected as a user. macOS is condescending and restrictive: ‘You will follow our paradigm and you will like it, idiot.’ But the Linux desktop makes no pretensions about the best way to use your computer; even distros designed with a very specific paradigm will stay out of your way should you go to change them. Windows is invasive and controlling: ‘Before you use this computer I'm gonna need you to agree that I'm allowed to spy on you at any time for any reason. I'll be cool about it, but you gotta sign. And oh yeah, you should definitely log into your local machine using a cloud account. It makes perfect sense. What? You don't want to? Alright, take a walk around the back.’ After so many years on Linux, the idea of agreeing to a EULA to use my operating system is very alien, and frankly, deeply offensive to me. The walled garden approach and the nagging panopticon are both insulting to my values. Linux feels just right. Software management: ease and trust Once you get used to it, Linux-style software management is something you miss everywhere else. Other operating systems allow every program to go rogue, nagging you for its own update, spawning background processes and using custom installers for each and every program. And on Mac and Windows, operating system updates are handled by totally different mechanisms from the updates of ordinary software! On top of it all, both Mac and Windows OS updates frequently require you to reboot, sometimes multiple times for a single update or series of updates! Frankly, that's caveman shit. Linux software management, on the other hand, is uniform: you update everything the same way, and all at once. The only upgrades that actually require reboots are upgrades to the kernel (and maybe sometimes the init system or a driver update). And in those cases, you can reboot just once after all of your updates are finished, and nothing hijacks your first boot after the upgrade to ‘finish installing updates’ (wtf is that??). You can literally verify that everything on your system has the latest security patches in one place, and that's not info you get from some stupid, performance-draining, anti-virus program that hooks itself into your system like a rootkit that you had to pay for— it's a native part of the software management system. Manually navigating the web to download executable installers which can contain arbitrary code is the sketchiest possible way to install anything on your computer. On Linux distros, you can put some trust in your distro maintainers and other repository providers to vet the software that is made available to you. In most distros, packages are securely signed, and there's a formal review process (which takes place out in the open!) for adding packages to a distro repository. Transparency: an ‘open-world operating system’ Free software operating systems leave you totally free to explore and inspect the system. When there's a problem, you can always dive deeper, from error messages to terminal output, to debug symbols, to source code. Nearly every component is replaceable, every application has alternatives, and there's always a clear path from your current knowledge level to something more advanced. But Windows is opaque; it's full of invisible walls from the moment you boot it up and it hides what the operating system is dong before you get to your desktop. macOS demands to be used in its peculiar way: the main quest is your mission and that's that. But Linux has no invisible walls; even its most fatal errors are rarely dead ends, and nothing the distro developers have put in place is too sacred for you to use or abuse as you see fit. Linux is an operating system for explorers, for side questers, for archaeologists, for detectives, for vandals— for adventurers. Driver integration: when it's there, it's excellent, and it's there to stay Unlike other operating systems, where hardware vendors are expected to produce drivers and bring them to the OS, Linux often has to fight tooth and nail for the drivers it has, to extract them from uncooperative hardware makers. The selection sometimes suffers for that. But when hardware is supported, that support is extremely well integrated. There is no plugging a damn mouse in and waiting for the OS to figure out that it's a mouse. There are no tedious hardware auto-recognition wizards. If you take a page out of the Mac (or Hackintosh) user's book and buy  systems, components, and peripherals with your OS in mind, you will have a very good time. Moreover, unlike with either macOS or Windows, once a device's drivers are integrated into the Linux kernel, support tends not to age out. You won't really find Linux users doing things like installing an older version of whatever distro just so they can get old hardware to work, a choice Windows users are sometimes faced with, as has even happened at LMG. First-class terminal: the GNU hotness GNU/Linux provides the most featureful, well-integrated terminal experience available, period. I stress GNU here because it is GNU utilities that drive full-fat CLI experiences: GNU grep, GNU awk, GNU find, GNU sed, and GNU coreutils. Apple can brag until the cows come home about how their OS is genuine Unix, but their CLI environment is insanely outdated and so much less capable than the GNU alternatives that the first thing many developers on macOS do is install various GNU utilities in some form. Linux has a vastly superior selection of terminal emulators. The most popular terminal emulators and command-line environments and tools on other operating systems somehow routinely have performance problems, but even the default terminal emulators for Plasma and Gnome (both Linux exclusive) are feature-rich and admirable performers, as are the CLI utilities themselves. And of course, Microsoft's current emulation layer-based approach to the command-line essentially concedes that Linux has the terminal to beat. Real community: even, you know, people who actually hang out together The word ‘community’ gets thrown around a hell of a lot these days; a manufacturer of tablecloths might refer to their customers, most of whom have never spoken to a single other such customer, as a ‘community’. But in Linux, the community is the real fuckin' deal: there is probably a Linux users group in your city. They do things like get together at the library once a month to walk newbies through tough installs or setting up tricky hardware, educate one another on interesting new Linux toys, teach new users how to make their way, and go out for beers and pizza when it's all done. Folks from the Linux users group mailing list in my hometown have done things like drive 50 miles to go help another user's blind mother physically plug in a computer, in exchange for dinner. There are many actual, real Linux communities, and they're characterized by a spirit of generous volunteerism and goodwill. Randos pasting mysterious things like ‘Error Code 0x0001’ into Stack Overflow just don't compare, and neither does Apple's cult of conspicuous consumption. And like their standout in-person counterparts, roots in online Linux communities run deeper than anything you'll find for other operating systems, full stop. Damn, that came out long.

I don't really get that people might think that having many distros is a downside.
 
For people who don't want to mess around much, they'll probably be better off choosing basic Ubuntu right away. It's not overwhelming to just do that.
 
But if you're thinking about the feeling that they might be losing on something better because they don't want to research other distros and other WDMs, that might happen, but is that a downside?
 
Feels like is better to have a monopoly because it's overwhelming to look at all competitors.

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2018/03/10/pc-exclusive-no-more-freesync-finally-lands-on-xbox-one-consoles/#1b48b34848f8
 
AMD states that it will bring Freesync capabilities to the Xbox One later on this year.
 
Quotes from articles:
 
 
 
 
Opinions:
 
AMD wants this to happen to take advantage of the popularity of consoles to make promotion of the freesync technology. With this in mind it will also push TV makers to implement it (because console guys most of the time plug their console to a TV), so this is another step towards gaming-focused TV's. In the other hand I think Microsoft wants this to reduce the boundary between the "xbox experience" and a PC. Of course I doubt that many titles would take advantage of this tech because in my experience drops in performance are more perceptible with sync technologies. Anyways I think this might result well because it will push sync tech into mainstream, and as a fan of open source things (I'm even posting this on Linux, btw) Freesync is a better option than G-Sync for me.

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2018/03/10/pc-exclusive-no-more-freesync-finally-lands-on-xbox-one-consoles/#1b48b34848f8
 
AMD states that it will bring Freesync capabilities to the Xbox One later on this year.
 
Quotes from articles:
 
 
 
 
Opinions:
 
AMD wants this to happen to take advantage of the popularity of consoles to make promotion of the freesync technology. With this in mind it will also push TV makers to implement it (because console guys most of the time plug their console to a TV), so this is another step towards gaming-focused TV's. In the other hand I think Microsoft wants this to reduce the boundary between the "xbox experience" and a PC. Of course I doubt that many titles would take advantage of this tech because in my experience drops in performance are more perceptible with sync technologies. Anyways I think this might result well because it will push sync tech into mainstream, and as a fan of open source things (I'm even posting this on Linux, btw) Freesync is a better option than G-Sync for me.

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2018/03/10/pc-exclusive-no-more-freesync-finally-lands-on-xbox-one-consoles/#1b48b34848f8
 
AMD states that it will bring Freesync capabilities to the Xbox One later on this year.
 
Quotes from articles:
 
 
 
 
Opinions:
 
AMD wants this to happen to take advantage of the popularity of consoles to make promotion of the freesync technology. With this in mind it will also push TV makers to implement it (because console guys most of the time plug their console to a TV), so this is another step towards gaming-focused TV's. In the other hand I think Microsoft wants this to reduce the boundary between the "xbox experience" and a PC. Of course I doubt that many titles would take advantage of this tech because in my experience drops in performance are more perceptible with sync technologies. Anyways I think this might result well because it will push sync tech into mainstream, and as a fan of open source things (I'm even posting this on Linux, btw) Freesync is a better option than G-Sync for me.

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2018/03/10/pc-exclusive-no-more-freesync-finally-lands-on-xbox-one-consoles/#1b48b34848f8
 
AMD states that it will bring Freesync capabilities to the Xbox One later on this year.
 
Quotes from articles:
 
 
 
 
Opinions:
 
AMD wants this to happen to take advantage of the popularity of consoles to make promotion of the freesync technology. With this in mind it will also push TV makers to implement it (because console guys most of the time plug their console to a TV), so this is another step towards gaming-focused TV's. In the other hand I think Microsoft wants this to reduce the boundary between the "xbox experience" and a PC. Of course I doubt that many titles would take advantage of this tech because in my experience drops in performance are more perceptible with sync technologies. Anyways I think this might result well because it will push sync tech into mainstream, and as a fan of open source things (I'm even posting this on Linux, btw) Freesync is a better option than G-Sync for me.

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2018/03/10/pc-exclusive-no-more-freesync-finally-lands-on-xbox-one-consoles/#1b48b34848f8
 
AMD states that it will bring Freesync capabilities to the Xbox One later on this year.
 
Quotes from articles:
 
 
 
 
Opinions:
 
AMD wants this to happen to take advantage of the popularity of consoles to make promotion of the freesync technology. With this in mind it will also push TV makers to implement it (because console guys most of the time plug their console to a TV), so this is another step towards gaming-focused TV's. In the other hand I think Microsoft wants this to reduce the boundary between the "xbox experience" and a PC. Of course I doubt that many titles would take advantage of this tech because in my experience drops in performance are more perceptible with sync technologies. Anyways I think this might result well because it will push sync tech into mainstream, and as a fan of open source things (I'm even posting this on Linux, btw) Freesync is a better option than G-Sync for me.

I had to do it, guys.

I had to do it, guys.

I had to do it, guys.