icdl

Butter fingers

Gnome and awesomewm are apps

Same can be said about Windows users. The default is what defines the just works statement. The default is shit, you just learn to ignore it or find ways to make a bad product sort of work for you. You need to do basic stuff the hard way and still believe the product is alright. "you can pause updates for two weeks" translates to "the product is designed to assume you own it for up to two weeks". It's not a feature mate, it's not a skill to circumvent it, it's bending over backwards and paying money to do so.

Just as a note on what I do on Linux besides programming Browsing, multimedia, bluetooth obviously work Gaming:

• Cyberpunk
• Dota
• Baldur's gate 3
• Titanfall 2
• Batman arkham series
• Assassin's creed, almost all of them except that last three which I didn't even buy
• various pixel art and voxel games

All with the bare setup of Manjaro or Arch gaming profile worked out of the box.

Literally selected gaming profile in arch installer and started gaming as soon as the system booted up.

I'm creating my own desktop environment and deal with bugs here and there that I fix on my own since it's my own product. It's designed with my needs in mind created by someone who doesn't know what he's doing half the time.

There are absolutely awesome products like gnome and kde that just work. You can use them to get a stable environment that are designed to work in multitude of situations for general public. Windows never just works, you just learn to ignore its shortcomings. Like updating in the background even when you need the bandwidth, lack of central update station for your apps, dealing with lengthy custom install processes trying to impose bloatware you didn't ask for, uninstall processes begging you not to uninstall the sweet sweet spyware.

You just learn not to let these problems bother you. And that's not anything personal against you, it's just how a bad product with good marketing works. Linux is objectively better.

You may want a few products that are built for Windows and are not available on Linux and you wouldn't want to try an alternative that may even work better objectively and that is absolutely your choice and is respectable. You may not want to learn a new environment and stay in your safe zone and that's respectable. But you can't use your safe zone to decide what's better. A free product that provides better hardware support, faster communication bus, easier user experience with much faster bug fix and release cycle, tons and tons of choice is objectively better. You are free not to try it.

I've been using arch and manjaro for the past 3 years with awesomewm and gnome (can't get awesomewm to behave with second monitor while gaming so I switch to gnome when using the second monitor, using laptop) and this has pretty much been my experience. Windows is bloated and it never"just works".

You definitely need cli for some stuff at least. Contrary to popular belief, cli is actually much easier for accessing and managing stuff. So most sysadmins and devops use cli at least to some extent.

Most servers and server providers only provide ssh access to ma age stuff, you can get some gui in more advanced panels to for example setup firewall, add ssh keys, open and close ports. You might expect a docker manager of sorts in some places. But since almost anything you can do with gui, you can do with cli, it's considered an extra benefit if you provide the gui.

Some tools used are gui only though. They certainly use some sort of cli stuff behind the scenes but you can't interface with their functions without gui. You certainly can do the same stuff with coding and running commands but why bother when the tool might be decent ane gets the job done.

All in all, it comes down to preference and more important than that, necessity. If you are an expert with cli usage and have a good memory or cheatsheet, cli is mostly preferable than a gui. Cli is much more standardized, there is no design change, commands might change but most of the time it isn't. In gui you mostly get less data, but you can get charts. So in analysis mode, gui would be preferable.

There is no rule to follow, but since most stuff is only done using cli, you see it being used more often. Some applications are implementing better guis, some guis interface with a lot of application cli outputs, making it much easier to understand what's happening. So you might get to see guis in action more often. You might have seen graphana for example in a bunch of movies. But I guess it doesn't give the same hacker vibe as a dude with 50 terminals witg fast scrolling text. Which is useless but there are cli apps to do that as well.