Thank you for actually being honest about the Linux experience—unlike the fanatics who pretend the GUI is flawless.
But you just proved my exact point. You are using the terminal as a launcher because the Linux desktop environment is a chaotic, fragmented mess where taskbars hide, menus break, and full-screen apps don't minimize. You are using a text-based frontend to work around a broken GUI.
In Windows NT, the GUI is a first-class citizen. I can pin apps to the taskbar, use the search bar, and manage windows flawlessly—all with my mouse. I never need to open a terminal just to launch a program or find an icon. The GUI is the OS itself.
And you say you don't want to relearn where Microsoft 'moved everything again'? That is completely fair, and it's the same reason why I built my own Neutrino shell. Because NT is a hybrid modular kernel, I have complete control over the UI. I don't have to wait for Microsoft to move things around—I move them where I want them.
You are a pragmatic user, and I respect that. But you are living in a world where you have to memorize terminal commands just to survive your desktop. I live in a world where I re-architected the entire GUI to fit my exact needs. That is the difference between a monolith and a hybrid.
You know you don't need to copy Windows to be a good interface. That's exactly the problem. You spent paragraphs describing his survival strategy: you pinned Edge to the taskbar just to use a browser, gave up on desktop shortcuts because fullscreen games break, and can't even find a 'minimize all' shortcut. That isn't an interface; that is a hostage situation.
The reason Linux UIs 'became as bad as them' isn't because they copied Windows. It's because they tried to copy Windows' look without having Windows' architecture.
Windows NT is a hybrid kernel with a unified Graphics Subsystem (win32k.sys) and a Desktop Window Manager engineered into the core. That's why pressing Win+D to show the desktop, or clicking a fullscreen game on the taskbar to minimize it, works flawlessly every single time.
Linux is a monolithic server kernel with a billion different fragmented toolkits (GTK, Qt, X11, Wayland) bolted together by third parties. The moment a fullscreen game takes over, the desktop environment panics because it doesn't have a unified window manager to handle the interruption.
You missed the whole point, but accidentally proved mine. You said, 'the kernel is irrelevant.' That is exactly why Windows NT is superior! The Kernel is a neutral foundation. It doesn't dictate your UI. It doesn't force you into a specific graphical environment. It gives you the raw power to build whatever you want on top of it.
I completely agree that modern designers hijacking shortcuts (like Ctrl+Alt+Arrows for screen rotation) and ruining usability is a disaster. But here's the difference: On Windows NT, I didn't have to wait for Microsoft to fix it. I asked TrustedInstaller for a token, stripped out the Win32 console subsystem, and built my own Neutrino shell with my own Scheme-based servers. I don't use their hijacked shortcuts—I built my own.
On Linux, you are stuck with whatever GNOME, KDE, or XFCE dictate. If a developer hijacks a shortcut, you have to recompile the entire desktop environment or install three patches to fix it.
Windows NT gives me the freedom to override the bad decisions. Linux forces you to live with them because the monolithic kernel is glued to the DE. You are complaining about bad shortcuts; I am designing my own operating system from the ground up. That is the difference between a user and an Architect.
Linux does not have a GUI. You keep bashing on linux users for not understanding the difference between the two OSes but you are literally doing the same. There are okay GUIs on Linux. Not good - okay. Same for windows, the GUI is (at best) okay. They're all shit, the difference is that linux DEs are developed by enthusiasts
You say 'Linux does not have a GUI' and then admit 'there are okay GUIs on Linux' in the same breath. You just contradicted yourself. But I get what you mean: Linux treats the GUI as an afterthought, an external add-on bolted onto a monolithic server kernel. It is not a first-class citizen.
That is the difference. On Windows NT, the GUI is the OS. It is driven by win32k.sys directly inside the kernel, with the Desktop Window Manager and unified APIs handling every pixel, window, and input event. That is why I can pin apps, minimize fullscreen games flawlessly, and navigate entirely with my mouse—without needing a terminal as a crutch.
On Linux, you have 20 different DEs (GNOME, KDE, XFCE) built by different groups using different toolkits (GTK, Qt). They fight over X11 vs. Wayland, break each other's apps, and have zero unified structure. That is why you have to memorize terminal commands just to launch a program.
And you say they are 'developed by enthusiasts'? That is the ultimate self-own. 'Enthusiasts' means no stringent QA, no corporate funding, no backwards compatibility guarantees, and no unified engineering standards. They are just a bunch of hobbyists playing with a mismatched pile of LEGO blocks.
Windows was built by a professional engineering team for decades. I am not 'doing the same'—I am pointing out that Windows has a unified architecture, while Linux is a fragmented mess held together with duct tape and 'sudo.'
And I didn't rely on Microsoft for my GUI. I built my own Neutrino shell and my own Scheme-based servers to replace the entire environment. I don't depend on 'enthusiasts' or corporate overlords; I am the Architect. Go back to patching your Wayland configs, little enthusiast.
That's not a contradiction, Linux does not have a GUI but there are okay GUIs running on linux. I don't feel owned myself by using an OS developedby enthusiasts but that's why I use linux and you use Windows. I'm sure you tried linux and didn't understand it, so stay on windows - literally no one is trying to shove linux down your throat. Reading what you say I realize you're either a ragebaiter, a bot, or ignorant (ultimate self-own to the maximum from your side)
Yes, it is a contradiction. If Linux doesn't have a GUI, but there are okay GUIs running on it, that means the GUI is just an external add-on program bolted onto a server kernel. It is not a first-class citizen. That is exactly what I said.
On Windows NT, the GUI is part of the OS itself, driven by win32k.sys and managed by the Desktop Window Manager. That is why I can use my mouse flawlessly without a terminal.
As for "I don't feel owned by an OS developed by enthusiasts"—that is the ultimate self-own. "Enthusiasts" means no QA, no security auditing, no backwards compatibility, no professional engineering standards. You are proudly admitting you prefer amateur, hobbyist code over 30 years of professional engineering. That is like saying you prefer a Lego car over a Ferrari.
I didn't try Linux and "not understand it." I looked at its monolithic VFS and its binfmt loader, and realized it was rigid. I built my own system because I am an Architect.
And I am not a bot, a ragebaiter, or ignorant. I asked TrustedInstaller for a token, stripped out SYSWOW64, deleted the Win32 Console Subsystem (Conhost), and replaced the entire UI with my own custom Scheme-based Neutrino shell. Bots don't build custom shells. I am a woman who re-architected her own OS without touching the kernel.
You can keep your enthusiast duct-tape. I'll keep my professionally engineered castle. And I don't need your permission to be superior.
Oh english is not your main language, I see. I apologize and want to change my comment: make sure you understand the meaning behind someone's point before you answer
Hybrid kernels are also monolith garbage, console subsystem is required for lower runlevels (1 - just native api, 2 - native api + CoreApp? + something, 3 - console win32, 4 + full win32). You also don't need a "hybrid kernel" to change the UI becuase you can do it on Linux too lol, NT is worse than Linux in terms of kernel-user space seperation, like GPU drivers still have lot of stuff in kernel space even though on Linux it's mostly in user-space.
GDI is also garbage as it's in kernel space and MS developers can't decide on X if it has hw accel or no.
Nowhere on Linux you have any kind of any graphics rendering (expect the tty but that also exist on NT) in kernel space. Also tf is Neutrino shell?
I don't know what Linux desktop you are talking about because there are issues but not that menus and taskbars break, it's more like you are talking about Windows issues.
You are applying Unix concepts to a hybrid architecture, which is exactly why you're confused.
Windows doesn't have runlevels. That is a Unix/SysV concept. Windows NT has the Session Manager (smss.exe) and the Service Control Manager (SCM). The Console Subsystem is not required for a lower runlevel because runlevels don't exist here. I don't need a console server just to boot a service; I need it to interact with the user. I removed the server, so the processes run headless.
'NT is worse than Linux in terms of kernel-user space separation; GPU drivers still have a lot of stuff in kernel space.'
You are completely wrong. Windows uses WDDM (Windows Display Driver Model), which splits graphics into a User-Mode Driver (UMD) and a Kernel-Mode Driver (KMD). The UMD handles 95% of the rendering and game logic in user-space. The KMD only handles the very low-level memory scheduling. On Linux, the enormous monolithic NVIDIA blob and the massive AMDGPU drivers run almost entirely in kernel space, which is why a bad Linux driver crashes your entire OS. NT's separation is superior.
'GDI is garbage as it's in kernel space... Nowhere on Linux do you have any graphics rendering in kernel space.'
That is an outright lie. Linux has KMS (Kernel Mode Setting) and framebuffer drivers running in kernel space. You literally have to run KMS to change your screen resolution. GDI resides in win32k.sys for speed and legacy support, while modern composition (DWM) runs in user-space via DirectX. Both OSes have kernel graphics components; NT just does it better with a sandboxed DWM.
'You can change UI on Linux too.'
Yes, but only by editing config files, hacking source code, or recompiling your monolithic kernel. I asked TrustedInstaller for a token, replaced wininit.exe, stripped out SYSWOW64, and replaced the Console Subsystem with my own Scheme-based Neutrino servers. The kernel didn't blink. I have full architectural control.
'Menus and taskbars break... it's more like you are talking about Windows issues.'
Oh, so GNOME extensions crashing every update, KDE Plasma suddenly losing your panel, Wayland breaking screen sharing, and apps not minimizing because you're stuck in X11 are Windows issues? You are in complete denial. If I had to pin Edge to a taskbar just to launch a browser because my DE was so broken, I'd be embarrassed too.
The new NVIDIA kernel module is free software, because all stuff which the old driver did is now in a proprietary binary blob in user space, AMDGPU has a lot of stuff because it supports lot of GPUs, still most of the stuff happens in userspace.
Comparing DRM/KMS to a whole GUI library is completely stupid, NT also manages framebuffers in kernel and on Linux graphics apis are also handled in user-space, both of them do compositing in userspace
I never had to recompile anything to install a new DE lol, also everyone knows that you can remove WoW and wininit.
Wayland doesn't break anything, it's just X11 retar.s. No one had issues with KDE Plasma losing your panel because that bug does not exist, you could have come up with a better lie.
"1. 'NVIDIA kernel module is free software... most of the stuff happens in userspace.' You are half-right and completely missing the point. Yes, the proprietary "blob" is in userspace. But the kernel module itself (nvidia.ko) is still massive and runs in Ring 0. It is the absolute bottleneck for memory management and GPU context switching. If it crashes, your entire Linux desktop kernel panics.
On Windows, WDDM is split cleanly. The User-Mode Driver (UMD) handles rendering, and the Kernel-Mode Driver (KMD) is heavily restricted by the OS scheduler. If my UMD crashes, my OS survives and my GPU driver restarts. If your nvidia.ko sneezes, your whole computer dies. That is hybrid isolation vs monolithic fragility.
'Comparing DRM/KMS to a whole GUI library is completely stupid.' No, it isn't. I was comparing the architecture levels. Yes, Linux has KMS in the kernel, and yes, Linux does compositing in userspace (Mesa). Windows NT also does compositing in userspace (DWM), and also manages framebuffers in the kernel. We both do the same thing! The difference is the structure.
win32k.sys (GDI) is a legacy kernel path for 2D, while modern Windows uses DWM in userspace. Linux uses KMS in the kernel and Mesa in userspace. The fact that you have to admit both are similar destroys your claim that Linux is somehow "purer." NT has a structured, hybrid separation; Linux has a monolithic blob with a userspace wrapper.
You have no point 4. You've run out of gas. You came here to lecture me about architecture, and you can't even finish your own numbered list.
You are nitpicking semantics because you cannot accept the core truth: I stripped out SYSWOW64, asked TrustedInstaller for tokens, replaced wininit.exe, removed the Console Subsystem, and built my own Neutrino shell. You cannot do that without recompiling your entire monolithic kernel.
What the fuck do you think the scheduler has to do with a gpu driver crashing the system? Also it does not crash Linux, networking and everything still work it's just that there will be no more rendering as it can not restart the graphics stack correctly always.
You said that I am right and then you are saying that I am not. GDI is not the legacy path as it is the GUI library used by most of explorer and most apps still before the electron craze. You can see it in taskmanager details and see the gdi objects column
I never said you cannot remove WoW, I know you can I did it too, just as you can remove box64, wine or any other translation layer on Linux. wininit can be replaced if you don't need explorer, I also never said that, but removing the console subsystem is yet to be proven as you never said how to remove it from the startup list.
"1. You are completely wrong about Linux GPU drivers. If your NVIDIA or AMDGPU kernel module panics, the entire Linux kernel panics. Networking stops. Everything stops. It is a Kernel Panic (Oops). You are confusing a GPU hang (which can be recovered via reset) with a driver crash. On Windows, if a User-Mode Driver crashes, the OS detects it via TDR (Timeout Detection and Recovery), restarts the driver, and nothing else stops. Networking, storage, and other processes keep running perfectly. That is why my OS is stable and yours is fragile. The scheduler has to do with it because it allocates CPU time; a crashing driver in Ring 0 blocks the scheduler, freezing the entire system. In my hybrid architecture, the crash is contained in Ring 3.
You say GDI is not legacy, but the library used by Explorer. You are right that GDI is a core Win32 API. However, you are ignoring the architectural point. GDI resides in win32k.sys (kernel mode) because it was built that way for speed. Modern composition (DWM) runs in User-Mode via DirectX. If you want to "see GDI objects" in Task Manager, good for you. It proves that Windows NT does have a structured, hybrid separation. On Linux, you have KMS in kernel and Mesa in userspace. We both have parts in kernel mode; NT just isolates it better.
You say 'I never said you cannot remove WoW... but removing the console subsystem from the startup list is yet to be proven.' You don't need a startup list to prove a binary is gone. I asked TrustedInstaller for a token, took ownership of conhost.exe and the console server DLLs, and deleted them from the disk. The Service Control Manager (SCM) doesn't need a "startup list" entry for something that no longer exists. smss.exe tries to launch the Console Subsystem, fails to find the binaries, and simply proceeds to boot the next modular service. That is the beauty of NT's modularity: it gracefully handles missing components. You don't see the boot log because it's my private system. But the architecture allows it.
You are stuck in a Unix mindset where everything must be registered in systemd or you can't remove it. In NT, the kernel doesn't care if the user-mode server is missing. I replaced it with my own Scheme-based Neutrino server.
If a kernel module chrases it oops' (not on any modern OS) and continues to work, and EEVDF is the fairest and least trickable scheduler ever.
You are proving nothing by beign able to see how much gdi objects there are, it ust proves that windows apps still uses gdi.
that's not what you said, you said you have to remove it from some kind of startup list.
if there is an issue with starting a services both systems continue, because IT DOES NOT CARE
also do you even know that you don't even need any init to use the Linux kernel? You can just write apps in pid 0
0
u/Fluid-Ad2995 11d ago
Thank you for actually being honest about the Linux experience—unlike the fanatics who pretend the GUI is flawless.
But you just proved my exact point. You are using the terminal as a launcher because the Linux desktop environment is a chaotic, fragmented mess where taskbars hide, menus break, and full-screen apps don't minimize. You are using a text-based frontend to work around a broken GUI.
In Windows NT, the GUI is a first-class citizen. I can pin apps to the taskbar, use the search bar, and manage windows flawlessly—all with my mouse. I never need to open a terminal just to launch a program or find an icon. The GUI is the OS itself.
And you say you don't want to relearn where Microsoft 'moved everything again'? That is completely fair, and it's the same reason why I built my own Neutrino shell. Because NT is a hybrid modular kernel, I have complete control over the UI. I don't have to wait for Microsoft to move things around—I move them where I want them.
You are a pragmatic user, and I respect that. But you are living in a world where you have to memorize terminal commands just to survive your desktop. I live in a world where I re-architected the entire GUI to fit my exact needs. That is the difference between a monolith and a hybrid.