Yes, many have switched from Windows to Linux and then to MacOS.
Yes, many have switched from Windows to Linux and then to MacOS.
I used to work with Windows until support stopped. Now I have a dual boot setup with Debian and Linux Mint, plus a Mac running MacOS built on freeBSD. I mostly use the Macbook these days and don’t need the other system anymore. Are others in similar situations? MacOS feels very smooth, and I doubt it would randomly fail like Windows does. I don’t see much need for Debian unless I keep my PC running nonstop for a month. Debian is pretty tough to use, while Linux Mint is okay but looks messy. MacOS is clearly the best of both worlds. Installing Debian feels like waiting until New Year’s Eve to finish half the process—you have to be there for every click. That reminds me of that Simpsons episode where Homer gets a toy bird and pokes his Y button.
The choice mainly depends on personal preference. I don't favor MacOS or Windows 10. I use Arch Linux with KDE Plasma and rely on the AUR for most needs. Manjaro is similar but with fewer extras. I really dislike Ubuntu and any distros built around it, particularly Linux Mint for a desktop feel. With its old packages and extra features, it seems to offer a poorer experience, though that's my view. For server use, Debian and Ubuntu work well. If you're only familiar with Debian, Ubuntu, and Mint, I suggest trying Manjaro KDE.
I moved to Linux mainly due to my dislike for Windows 10 and the fact that support for Windows 7 has stopped. I haven't used a Mac personally, so I can't comment on MacOS. For Windows 10, I have several issues, especially with telemetry data, which I find unpleasant. Initially, I experimented with Mint and Ubuntu, but those caused many problems—likely because I was new to Linux at that time. Later, I tried Fedora for a while, then discovered how to set up Debian properly using non-free firmware. I really appreciate Debian, but since Arch receives regular updates, I switched to Arch and now enjoy it. I still dual-boot Debian, though I had to deal with many dependency issues to get Mesa to work later. On Arch, I use KDE Plasma for my setup and some AUR packages for specific needs like mesa-git for the GPU. There are even AUR wrappers that simplify the process of cloning and building packages, which is quite convenient. Personally, I find it rewarding to learn Linux and see how the system operates in real time. You may encounter some hurdles depending on your distribution, but I actually enjoy that challenge. Package managers are impressive—pacman (used by Arch) works well. Arch is surprisingly easier to maintain than I expected at first, despite some concerns others have raised. When I first installed it, many people claimed it would always fail, but it only breaks if you make mistakes; you can recover using chroot and learn from errors. As Nayr mentioned, if you prefer an Arch-like experience without the manual steps (which lacks a GUI), Manjaro offers a more user-friendly path. It's not identical to Arch, but very similar, and it also uses pacman and AURs.
I switched from Linux back to Windows when 7 launched. During my final years in college, I was experimenting with various development tools—FPGA IDEs, programming environments, virtual machines, serial ports, JTAG programmers, and more. Everything functioned flawlessly on Windows 7, offering a smooth, ergonomic experience for multitasking. I admired how it performed and felt confident about its capabilities. Around that time, some older Sun workstations were still running Solaris for a VLSI course, using similar tools with slightly outdated versions. I was familiar with *nix systems thanks to my prior Linux experience, but Windows 7 was far more intuitive. As the Windows 10 upgrade date neared, many of us considered switching, though I’m still tolerating it. Now I’m searching for a better replacement. I don’t want to revert to Linux—it feels outdated and common, even if it’s still widely used. Google is reportedly deprecating the Linux kernel soon. I’m intrigued by Haiku and have been following ReactOS for over ten years. It seems like a promising option: a Windows-compatible OS built to support users instead of Microsoft’s direction. The challenge lies in Microsoft’s rapid pace; they’re catching up on APIs and frameworks, but it may never fully match Windows. I’ve pondered joining the ReactOS development team, but I’m still undecided about whether Windows NT offers a better design. Backward and forward compatibility seem more important than sleek aesthetics. My college background helps me analyze system architecture, but not the deeper philosophical aspects. I won’t choose Apple—my recent Mac client work showed NextStep’s limitations in 2019, especially with Cocoa and Objective-C. I also tried Swift without enthusiasm. I don’t see Apple as a viable path, nor do I find their desktop setup suitable for fast multitasking.
Linux stands out for its free and open-source nature. Nearly all systems run it, including Android which relies on the Linux kernel. Regarding Windows, I enjoyed XP in the past, then found 7 appealing but felt 8 and 10 had issues. I stuck with 10 due to limited support for 7’s end, but I’m much more satisfied with Linux. A key benefit is the constant opportunity to learn new things through it.
No. I have been on MacOS 9 and X, I then switched over to Linux. I've used quite a few, Ubuntu, Mint/MintDE, Sabayon, Calculate, Aptosid, Archbang, Antergos, Manjaro, MX-Linux - just to name a few. There's a choice, and I love it.
I switched to Linux on my own machine around 2005, started with dual boot using Windows but eventually dropped it because I rarely used it. Windows XP really turned me against it. About 2008 I upgraded to an iMac and decided not to switch back to Macs or macOS. The computer I use at work is Windows since I can’t change to a Mac at my job, which I wish I could.
Curiously, what bothers users about Debian is the way they call the ISO a "CD" while treating the full installer as a "DVD"—a choice that seems quite confusing to me.