Why a Linux veteran is going back to Windows

Why a Linux veteran returns to Windows after years of dual-booting

A guy who has been installing distros in dual boot since the Windows XP era has announced he’s giving up. He’s no newbie or tourist: he has tried “them all.” His diagnosis is as specific as it is contentious: Linux is no good as a daily driver unless you’re a programmer, only use your computer to browse, or can’t afford the few euros a Windows licence costs. “You always have to sacrifice something essential,” he sums up. A good operating system needs stability, up-to-date software and program availability, he argues, and no distro delivers all three at once. It’s the same trench that gets dug every time someone says out loud that they’re going back to Windows.

Linux desktops, one by one

The first charge is aimed at desktop environments. Gnome is, for him, “a bloated phone,” with no desktop icons or folder previews, and extensions that break with every new version. KDE Plasma accumulates “piled-up bugs” and dozens of theming apps that all do the same thing. Cinnamon is “a cheap Windows clone.” Xfce, Lxde, Lxqt and Mate are fine for old machines, but none of them reaches a modern computer with full antiestéticatures, and minimalist window managers are left for those who, he says, “have no life beyond improving their Arch Linux system.”

The most repeated counterargument doesn’t deny the diagnosis: it reframes it. Some argue that a Linux Mint with Xfce is a system that just works, no fighting required. “It’s the most stable thing in the universe. I’ve never had a problem with it in six-plus years of using it,” one voice sums up. The nuance matters: almost none of the complaints are about a freshly installed machine, but about the second or third breakdown, when it’s time to look for answers and nobody answers in plain English.

There’s also a historical rebuttal that the author dismisses without hesitation. “Windows had working backup and restore twenty years before Linux, as well as a consistent theme and great usability even in the Windows 95 days.” He doesn’t care who came first; he cares who works better.

The software: from LibreOffice to Steam games

Here the inventory becomes concrete. LibreOffice is “like Word 2003,” with no equivalent for publishing, and with problems adjusting margins or page backgrounds. GIMP is “clumsy and with a neglected interface.” Inkscape “fails all the time” and drags. Kdenlive only survives because it’s the one usable video editor: the rest either lack antiestéticatures or crash. VirtualBox won’t run guest additions without compiler headaches, whereas on VMware, they say, it works first time. And games are “a battle of piracy workarounds” that can leave the system unable to boot.

The reply is pragmatic again: for the average user—browser, email and basic office work—the problem doesn’t exist. “95% of users would be fine with LibreOffice,” the argument goes. And for gaming, Proton and Steam cover much of the Windows catalogue.

The technical inventory cited is more uncomfortable: no HDR or 10-bit colour support, fractional scaling—125%, for example—still experimental, newly released bridges for screen sharing, and incomplete support for multiple monitors at different refresh rates. None of that is an aesthetic preference.

Linux Mint Xfce and the cases that actually provide data

The accounts with numbers come from people who have installed Linux for others. One of the most detailed is that of four elderly people: swapping hard drives for SSDs, installing Linux Mint Xfce, configuring Firefox to delete cookies, DNS with ad blocking and creating web apps. Three hours per machine. “They invite me to afternoon tea and I get them out of Microsoft’s ecosystem,” he says. On 2007 machines with a Core2 Duo T7100, or on single-core Centrino laptops with 1 GB of RAM, he claims, Mint is still capable.

The flip side: another account tells the opposite story. Installing Mint and being hit by update after update—“much worse than Windows”—until a black screen forced a return to Microsoft’s system for lack of time. Updates piling up isn’t exclusive to Microsoft, the response seems to say.

How much does a Windows licence cost?

Here comes the fact that undermines the free-of-charge argument. Several voices confirm Windows 10 and Office licences for between 10 and 15 euros, and an Office 2019 seen at 9.90 euros in a physical shop. At those prices, free software’s cost advantage loses its bite. The warning comes quickly: those cheap keys come from corporate volume licences, aren’t official and wouldn’t pass a Microsoft audit. Cheap, yes; clean, not necessarily.

The problem isn’t technical, it’s product

There’s a diagnosis that comes not from the distro world but from product. The argument goes that Linux is “like a company where only technicians work, with no market vision,” and that the usability layer—studying what users need, refining how they work and not just the guts—has never been its priority. That’s why it dominates servers and falls flat at home. The terminal remains the glue holding everything together, and for part of the public that obligation is exactly what pushes them away.

On the other side, the classic defence: polished interfaces turn the computer into a household appliance. Convenience versus control, the eternal axis. And a complaint that keeps resurfacing: fragmentation into distros. The answer to any problem is “it depends on your distro,” and some argue that in reality there are only two big branches—Debian/Ubuntu and a rebranded Red Hat—and that the rest is cosmetic.

A side criticism also appears: so-called digital natives don’t want complications; they want everything chewed up for them. The answer is usually the same: technology is there to make life more comfortable, not to demand that everyone become a sysadmin.

Not everyone who leaves leaves completely

The conversation doesn’t close. Some confirm they use both systems: Windows for everyday use and Linux for programming neural networks or Python libraries, where installing dependencies “causes less trouble.” Others admit they’re going back to Windows without drama, and that the decision ultimately depends on Windows-exclusive software. As long as those tools have no real alternative, those who need them have no choice.

It’s worth looking at the full calculation—which cases are cited, with which machines and which licences—before closing the question. Because the discussion returns, again and again, to the same point.