Windows ‘just works’? What about all the programs crashes that you need to go through endless YouTube tutorials to fix? What about having to fill up a form and register your credit card for every closed source program you need to install?
I’ve literally never had either of these experiences with W10.
At least not in the past 5+ years.
Yes it was longer than that.
My main thing is that, then and now (based on discussions I read between users), most any user experience that I relate to seems to be equal parts:
“try to figure out the Linux equivalent of what you were doing in Windows and hope it’s compatible with the rest of your needs”
“Try to figure out how to get Linux to behave like Windows to accomplish something you did with that os”
“Become a hobbyist…programmer? IT specialist? And get familiar with tweaking and adjusting the details of how your computer works just to get it to do things you want”
Like…for people who enjoy it, I’m happy for them. Really! But I don’t want to have to familiarize myself with commands, learn how to boot things up, or learn a whole list of things just to get the simple mindless functionality I have with Windows from decades of time in the system.
I think back then I tried Debian, Ubuntu, and…is ‘OpenSUSE’ a thing? I even had a group of three friends who were all super into Linux encouraging me and helping me every step of the way, and I was young and technically inclined and happy to have a challenge…and in the end, I went right back to Windows after a semester or two of that, because I just found that my experience was, broadly speaking, “Enjoy a problem solving exercise in software management every time you want to do something, just to get to a basic level of function, with added quirks that you’ll just have to deal with…and little real benefit for the order of magnitude of extra effort”.
And while I’m sure some of that would have had to get better in the years between, most of the conversations I still see about Linux are enthusiasts enjoying coming up with solutions to the issues of using their chosen system. Which again, that’s fine, but I don’t want to have to become an enthusiast of an OS.
Given a choice between, “have to learn how to get the OS to do everything” vs “put up with data collection and some intrusive ads once in a while”… I’m happy to go with the latter to have things just work without having to learn a new skill set just to get the same level of functionality.
I’m happy to use W10 well after its official support ends, though I strongly suspect there will be significant extensions to that timeline. Even then, I’m happy to use it until it’s no longer the path of least resistance, at which point, I’ll reevaluate my options. When we get there, if it seems reasonable, maybe I’ll dip my toes into the Linux pool again.
Man, it’s a toss up for me as to which I hate more: Microsoft threatening and badgering me toward W11 (and by extension, a new computer) or Linux fanboys evangelizing for their preferred system.
Both are complete non-starters for me. I’m not buying a new machine while my current one does everything I need just fine… And after a few years of using Linux on my laptop back in college, I have no desire to set foot in that environment again either.
My perfectly good PC has an incompatible processor with W11, so I’m not upgrading.
I imagine it’ll still be just fine next October, so even if Microsoft doesn’t extend support for W10, I’ll still be using it.
They absolutely will.
Either directly, because those goods are now more expensive to Best Buy and they’re not about to eat that, so it’ll get pissed directly on to the consumer (with a mark-up)…
…or indirectly, when any one or more of the corporate entities involved in the domestic supply chain sees that domestic goods are now cheaper than imports for the consumer, which means that they now have an opportunity to simply raise their prices to match and pocket the difference.
Nevermind that domestic supply chains often have roots in China anyway, so it’s not like the domestic electronics are going to be able to hold price either, since their imported components will still be getting hit with the tariff.
My favorite part of this aspect of it in particular is that while electronics are no doubt ubiquitous, most electronics purchases are more discretionary. It’s not like a car where if yours dies you are definitely buying another one. Most times, people are getting a phone because a new model came out, or they decided theirs was too slow. They’re getting a new TV because they want to upgrade or found a good deal.
So when these tariffs hit and prices lurch up, expect sales to plummet as people decide they can keep going with their current electronics just a bit longer.
So congratulations, domestic beneficiaries of an electronics tariff, any profit increase you might have gained will now be more than gutted by the nosedive in overall sales!
My guess?
He’s far less concerned about the specifics of this situation and far more concerned about what happens if/when his Twitter is host to something horrible enough that people are calling for his head, and/or he is wanting to sell…or being pressured to sell Twitter…but there’s something specific he wants to stipulate in that transaction that a precedent set here might fuck up.
Yeah, it sounds like it might be a great case to run up the flagpole to SCOTUS for an official ruling, since it crosses state lines.
Like …okay the child is behaving in a way inconsistent with State B Law, but they’re not in State B. That happens all the damn time, every day, with vice laws, weed laws, gun laws, etc.
Also, presumably, if the child moved out of the country, State B would be completely unable to enforce its laws in country B. So there’s a limit to this enforcement, but where is it?
I mean, it’s all very subjective, so “too much” for you seems to be what is a good amount for everyone else…but realistically, I don’t think this is a legitimate complaint since you still need to be able to make all these adjustments anyway… it’s just a matter of the way the adjustments are being made.
All a touch screen changes is that it can play host to multiple functions depending on context…but it loses much of the visual recognition and almost all the tactile feedback of a physical control.
And while vehicles keep getting more and more complex for sure, I feel like when I’m riding in a more touchscreen heavy vehicle, that screen is displaying the same static set of controls 99% of the time…and at that point, the flexibility it offers is largely irrelevant, and the tradeoffs mean giving up a lot to get very little in exchange.
They get really spicy!
Disagree.
Personally, I feel the problem is absolutely touchscreens.
I’ve only got five senses, and taste and smell aren’t helpful in a driving situation.
Of the 3 left, sight is the most important for the most important task: driving.
For other tasks, sound is best used to alert or remind about something, and is frequently diminished as a driving aid by music.
That leaves touch and sight for all remaining tasks.
Touchscreens are, despite the name, effectively 100% reliant on sight, since there’s no real tactile feedback to enable the user to make eyes-free adjustments. To use a touchscreen, you have to take your eyes off the road to see what the screen says and make your selections.
While some are better than others, I also feel like touchscreens are still embarrassingly and frustratingly prone to errors, missed touches, and generally not doing the things the user intended, requiring even more eyes off the road to undo whatever actually happened, get the interface back to the place you want it, and try again, hoping that this time it’ll work.
My mid-teens vehicle has a mix of a medium sized touch screen for the entertainment unit but physical controls for climate, driving, and a few of the entertainment adjustments, and while I was all about the advanced new touchscreen when I bought it, I find it’s my least favorite part of the controls this far along in ownership.
Could the Democrats do more? Sure. But they’re still recovering from the fever that took the party over with Clinton in '92.
If that’s true, Jesus H. Christ, Democratic party, just get out of the way and let someone else fight fascism. If you’re “still recovering” 32 goddamn years later, you’re not recovering. That’s just a permanent part of the party identity. And the people are clearly not wild about what you’ve become if you lose to Donald Fucking Trump two out of three times.
So just quit.
Shut the party down and let something else take its place, because whatever happened in 92 is chronic and terminal, and you’re bringing the rest of the country down with you.
I think the American middle got taken by surprise at their own apathy in '16. Then in '20 they were motivated by fear. This week, they showed that they’ve simply lost faith in the Democratic party, plain and simple. That they’re tired of what they’ve been getting from the party and they’ll accept a horrible person over perpetuating the arrogance and inaction of the Democrats.
And while I can’t say I was too fed up to support Harris, now that Tuesday is behind us, as much as I despise Trump, I have to admit that the Democrats got exactly what they deserved at the ballot box: the same lukewarm apathy they’ve shown the American people the past 12 years.
Maybe they’ll finally get the message and put together a cohesive, intelligent, inspiring platform and message for the midterms, but if history is anything to go by, I’m guessing that this time in 2 years, they’re thrilled as fuck to take back the House (with too slim a majority to do much beyond hold up legislation), with progressives gaining slightly more seats than now, and the party as a whole will still have the same lack of focus, direction, and message…
…and I would bet money that this time in 2026 they still don’t have anything close to an idea of a possible presidential nominee that gets people excited.
Agreed 100%.
If they did this, they would easily carry states with high populations of blue collar and union laborers. Stop paying lip service and actually do it.
States that have had major manufacturing centers in the late 20th century like the Rust Belt.
Like…Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin.
The Democratic party is just paying the price for ignoring blue collar middle class voters since the late 80s. They took those votes for granted, and they lost them over time. Just like after blue collar folks they then took the votes of minorities for granted…and now they’re losing those.
All they need to do is ask what they’ve done for these people lately…like in the past few decades. And when they came really answer that in any terms other than what they prevented the other guys from doing, they shouldn’t have to wonder why enthusiasm for their party’s candidates is at an all time low.
Literally ZERO people I know personally have actually liked and actively, enthusiastically supported any democratic presidential nominee since Obama. That’s twelve fucking years and zero candidates that got people excited and inspired. Most of my friends voted for these candidates, but nobody liked them.
Honestly, if it weren’t for the opposition being so unbearably awful, I’d almost be happy to see the Democratic party handed loss after loss until and unless they learn their lesson and stop taking their base for granted.
A lot has shifted over time, but the default state of American politics has always been two dominant parties.
That said, I could absolutely see a scenario where an American centrist party forms, still solidly to the right of most Western democracy, but centrist by current local standards, which not only pulls in the non-MAGA Republicans but also moderate Democrats, blue collar Dems from purple states, and once it gains traction and wins a few races, massive support from corporations and lobbies.
They’d win landslide victories over both older parties, especially as progressives and leftists gained greater control of the Democratic party through the flight of the moderates to the new centrist party, which would in turn drive even more establishment Dems to the new party.
They could run on nothing more than “common sense compromise, unity, and moving beyond the partisan squabbling that has plagued the country for decades”, and be successful for at least 3 cycles before they even had to really take up any issues in earnest.
The deep South would stay red, the West cost, new York, and Illinois would stay blue, but I could see all of the mid Atlantic, Midwest, plains states, new England, and Southwest going for a viable centrist party.
For a long few years, national level politics would be absolute fucking chaos.
I wouldn’t want to make martyrs out of them, which is what that would do.
Instead, have a significant law enforcement presence on standby, and if things go that way, call them in, and round up every single one of them, in the moment, and put them all in jail, pending prosecution.
Speedy trial, sure, but another event like that will easily take months for investigators to sort out all the details and build the state’s case against them. Meanwhile, they’re all sitting in cells, losing their jobs, falling behind on rent and payments, having things repossessed, bringing shame and embarrassment to their families, and just so the state can’t be accused of any sneaky legal maneuvers, their names and faces are to be plastered all over the media.
And bring reasonable charges, no plea deals or consideration of good behavior or lack of prior issues. When these people come out the other end of their sentences (years from now) make sure they have a nice felony conviction dogging any attempts to get their lives back on track for the next decade or three.
Make their actions and the consequences truly hurt. For them and their families. Make the spouses and children feel the pain, create resentment toward their flawed ideology that will last for a generation. And again, make it public. If these idiots want to overthrow our government, they don’t get to slink back into the shadows of whatever armpit they crawled out of for the next 4 years. Let the media hound them, cameras in the street in front of the house, investigative reporters digging up embarrassing details of how they lost their jobs, the whole nine yards. Make their lives suck bad enough that the neighbor’s wife starts telling her husband, “You can be pro-Trump all you like, but so help me, if you bring that shit storm to our family, I will divorce you and take the kids somewhere safe so fast your head will spin!”
In short, don’t make martyrs out of them, make examples out of them.
I’ve long felt that regardless of the levels of “we factored that into our results” that pollsters can accomplish, at the end of the day, these polls can only survey that demographic of “people who agreed to be polled”.
That being said, I feel that Trump gets a slight advantage in any advanced polling thanks to his cult of personality: between Trump and any opponent thus far, a greater percentage of Trump’s followers are more likely to be “loud and proud” enough to want to have their voice heard by a pollster.
I feel this effect is even more pronounced now, with a significant portion of the voting public falling into the camp of “conservative, but put off by Jan. 6th”. People who voted for Trump twice but who won’t this year. These people are also less likely to want to participate in polls.
Where I feel this effect may have tricky implications is whether they stick to their beliefs in the polling booth or just cave in the final moment and still vote Trump…or if they simply don’t vote at the top of the ticket (or vote 3rd party)…but still vote for Republicans down-ticket.
While I’m no pollster, I would not be surprised to find that Trump underperforms vs projections, even as the GOP overperforms in House and Senate elections.
It’s also easy to say that when you’re the living embodiment of the luxury and excess of the establishment/status quo.
Like… dude…of course you don’t want to see revolution… every single fucking element of the system tilts not only in your favor but also in favor of perpetuating and furthering your absolute stranglehold on wealth, power, security, etc.
The more interesting answer would be to the question: if, as a society, we became so united in our acceptance of this that it literally became commonplace for CEOs to get whacked and then for juries to nullify the charges and for the killer to walk free…and it was happening dozens of times every year, or month…
…would you support a revolution to change the status quo that was literally killing people like you with zero repercussions?
If not, you’re an absolute idiot, or you’re actually on our side in this.
If yes, then you know damn well what’s going on and, shocker, you’re playing dumb for a cheap attempt at sympathy.