And that's the part that everyone ignores. They'll say open a VM or use wine or there's an open source alternative. But if I'm going to run native Linux just to open a windows VM to run the primary software I use, what's the point? I'm not bashing on either side. I use Windows when I need and, and go back to Linux when I'm finished, but that's because that's the solution that works for me.

File the required issues with those manufacturers then. Support for Linux is trivially easy to add compared to Microsoft: the kernel sources and stuff to create your modules are right there.

Same here, to a certain extent.

I was referring only to Linux's lack of bullshittery in comparison to Windows, nothing else.

Linux community arrogance is to deny the device driver issues and think Apple is fine, when the reason Apple thrives is because they don't have open hardware like Linux, BSD, Windows...

Hardware companies are rarely held account for their absent support of Linux - some campaigns have come and gone, but in the end Linux users tend to arrogantly say it's trivial to switch and embrace dishonesty. I guess they figure Microsoft is dishonest, so they normalize it.

100% same

I was needing to boot back to windows multiple times per day to accomplish simple tasks, and that made Linux no longer worth the hassle.