Oh my! That's an amazing list. I used to perform many of these changes by hand on every new windows installation. It's such a slog.
And while some of my systems now run linux, as the post says: "Sometimes using Windows is inevitable."
In defense of the much maligned Windows registry, I'll say: isn't it amazing that you can make such a wide array of changes via a single tool (regedit)? If you had to automate such changes on Linux, you would probably need a whole suite of tools. In some cases, you'd write a file into a `.d` directory. In other cases, you can `echo '...' >> subsystem.cfg`. In yet other cases, you'll need `sed -i`. Maybe `awk` gets the job done where `sed` is too simple. Maybe there are more complex cases, where you'd need the power of `perl` (or python or ...) to make the edit. And some subsystems come with their own suite of manipulation tools (ZFS, systemd, etc.) where editing text files would be the more difficult option.
> In defense of the much maligned Windows registry, I'll say: isn't it amazing that you can make such a wide array of changes via a single tool (regedit)? If you had to automate such changes on Linux, you would probably need a whole suite of tools.
Or NixOS, in which case it's a single file you have to load. :)
> isn't it amazing that you can make such a wide array of changes via a single tool (regedit)?
I mean with a basic text editor you can completely configure and control most Linux systems, and even add comments in the files to track changes or provide help where you need it. Many UNIX/Linux apps where automating settings would matter have the ability to have smaller config files that override main config files.
> If you had to automate such changes on Linux, you would probably need a whole suite of tools.
So this is because basic utility applications in Linux tend to be more independent of Linux as an operating system. I cannot remove Explorer, OneDrive, Windows Defender and a bunch of other stuff from Windows that isn't really actually Windows itself without other stuff breaking or worrying about what M$ will do on the next update. It's all weirdly and forcibly integrated, whereas in Linux, for example maybe nautilus has it's own config files in its own places, but if I want to remove it and use rox-filer or something else, it will be possible. And Linux minds its own business with antivirus and does not force me to send files to a third party for review at any time unless I want to.
We do have convergence happening around systemd so you may still get what you want here (systemd-confregistryd?).
> where editing text files would be the more difficult option
Sifting through rows and rows of CLSID GUIDs for file extensions just to change programs associated with file extensions is much more unpleasant.
I will need to take a look at this list later. I just run Windows 11 LTSC and it’s great (previously ran 10 LTSC), curious how many of these are still relevant.
Honestly LTSC has been great for gaming. Highly recommend if you don’t want any compatibility issues and are running a dedicated gaming machine (so no need for any other crap on there)
Don't fall for Microsoft's marketing that it is somehow a Windows that can't do normal things, that it is only suitable for Kiosks, or whatever other tactic they seem determined to use to discourage its use.
It is a perfectly capable Windows installation just without a lot of bloat. Any missing features (like the Windows Store) are easily installable.
I got better gaming performance compared to normal Windows 11.
Well eventually you had games and applications not supporting Windows 10 LTSC because it was so outdated in terms of available APIs. Windows 11 is so new, you’re not at that point yet.
Unfortunately no, Microsoft really does not want normal users using this since it removes a lot of the features they are pushing (like Copilot) and a lot of the telemetry is removed. Especially since it really shows how well Windows can actually run when all of the crap isn't there. So there is not a way for a normal user to get a key.
My personal ethical opinion, I have a license key for Windows 11 already. Microsoft does not give me the ability to get a key for LTSC, so I don't have any qualms about using a script to activate it.
I don't know if I have a unique configuration on my Windows 11 machine besides having several OneDrive and SharePoint folders mapped to various places on disk (with every folder always downloading everything so it's available offline) but the Windows 11 file explorer has a completely borked search function which:
A: will reset the text content of the search bar as I'm typing when it finishes a search from 3 keystrokes ago and
B: doesn't show exact string matches, "no results found", but when I delete a few letters from the query, the exact match suddenly appears
So my favorite tweak and usability improvement is that you can pull up Control Panel and type "Desktop" into the address bar and it will transmogrify into the classic windows 7 file explorer that doesn't have a broken search box. Wish I had a way to map this to be my default file explorer.
I gather that File Explorer in Windows 11 was re-written from scratch and that's why it was missing basic features and UI patterns from previous versions when it launched.
Not to mention abysmal file copy performance.
They claim to be adding things back over time but it probably depends on the college timetables of the Mac-native interns that apparently work on the Shell team these days.
edit: some ways to get back to the old explorer. I haven't tried doing this myself.
For explorer tweaks, I've been using https://github.com/valinet/ExplorerPatcher/wiki for a while. Though it hacks around a bit so has been known to break after Windows Updates until a new release goes out (which was PDQ the only time things broke for me).
ShutUp10 does have a toggle to prevent automated app installs, sometimes on a major windows feature update I'll see 1-2 new apps show up, but overall it stops a lot of the crud.
Is it worth upgrading from 10 to 11 yet? I downgraded back to 10 after I had to change default programs by individual file associations rather than having a 1-click option for default audio player etc.
I switched at the start of 2023 and it’s been fine. It doesn’t seem all that different. It probably took me a week to adjust my muscle memory after configuring things the way I like them. But then I don’t spend all that much time just dealing with Windows. I start Visual Studio, a browser, and a few other applications and that’s where I spend 99% of my time and Windows 10 vs 11 doesn’t really affect that.
But then I like to change things once in a while enjoy learning new things.
How many of these tweeks can be done without editing the Registry? And if they are all registry modifications can’t you just backup the registry before applying the changes?
I haven't tried Windows 11 but on 10, a lot of these tweaks and opt-outs are available in the system settings now.
You can backup the registry or create restore points but I don't think that you can selectively revert these changes like a commit. If you don't intend to reinstall Windows often, I would just take the time to go through these settings manually instead to be on the safe side...
The one that just turns my screen black on "sleep" and leave backlight on? The one that shows my desktop for 0.5s before going into lock screen after I close and reopen lids?
That's what I get from a Debian install on a 2017 (!) ThinkPad. Sorry, 2024 is still not the year of Linux desktop.
Try using Linux exclusively for a few years, then switch back to Windows. You will discover that Windows has just as many quirks as Linux.
Take sleep. While I have not run into situations where Windows will leave the backlight on, I have run into situations where Windows will remain connected to Bluetooth devices. A more disconcerting quirk is pulling a very hot laptop out of a bag. For some reason there are scenarios where Windows will keep chugging along in the background even though there are no peripherals connected and the lid is shut.
Sometimes the criticisms of Linux's readiness are hilarious when compared to Windows, because the criticisms are more valid of Windows. The hardware I own is reasonably compatible with Linux. I can install it without issue. There are even cute benefits like the printer being automatically detected and ready to use. In contrast, installing Windows is a bit of an adventure. Simply getting through the installer involves doing some googling, pulling up a command prompt, and installing a network driver. If I don't do that, I won't get through the OOBE and to the desktop. Incidentally, I'm going through the installer without a pointer: neither the touchpad nor touchscreen will work until their own drivers are installed. Windows will pickup on and install those drivers with a system update, but that is done after the OOBE has completed. Incidentally, the hardware in question is a two year old Lenovo that shipped with Windows and was never intended to run Linux.
I am not bringing up these issues to cheer for Linux, nor am I doing so to proclaim how much Windows sucks. I fully realize that most Windows users won't bump into the installation issues since it comes preinstalled, or because a typical Windows "reinstall" is a system restore that doesn't wipe out all of the drivers. I also fully realize that there are many usability quirks with Linux that I am blind to since I have used Linux for decades. (Yet the same can be said of Windows users who have used Windows for decades.)
The reality is that switching operating systems takes effort. The reality is that individual experiences will vary for any operating system. Sweeping generalizations like "X is the year of the Linux desktop" or "X is not the year of the Linux desktop" simply aren't useful since the experience of adopting Linux depends as much on the individual, on their background and willingness to accept change, as it does on the readiness of Linux.
But if people still want to make such generalizations, I hope they don't mind if I declare that 2024 is still not the year of the Windows desktop because, in my case, it isn't.
macOS also does show desktop and apps for half a second when I reopen the lid, before falling back to showing the login prompt. super annoying. (M3 MacBook Pro, so reasonably new)
I wish that Linux would at least try to seriously copy the UX of the MacOS. If apple can make a desktop OS that jsut works, why do i have to break my back on:
- Figure out which distro actually works on a "linux teady (tm)" hardware
- installing vpn in Linux
- cycle between different package managers looking for an up-to-date version of a software that I need
- not need to worry about differences between different distros and death by a thousand small gaps between them
- have a reliable and secure faceid that leverages dedicated hardware, not needing to compromise on security on the easier to break and flunky photo-id
etc, etc.
I hate windows with all my heart, but I can only see myself migrating to MacOS. I've tried migrating to Linux multiple times, but it always ended in multiple days of googling, copying miles of bash woodoo from the internet (lots of it, and too many issues to have time to understand what I am pasting), and other issues that make the barrier of entry just too high.
So this may come off as salty but in just wondering if I'm the only one
After years if Windows (at work) and Linux at home, I'm now using a Mac at work... Boy...it has its share of warts (like the other two)...and, imho, not the apex of design/usability that everyone raves about
1. Can't show address bar in finder... Seriously, go copy windows or any DE explorer
2. System bar (menu bar?)doesn't handle overflow? Where are the pitchforks ? Have to install Ice from github
3. Wanted to launch an app with CLI params and the Automator etc seems clunky... Both Linux and win do this better
I like the hw and battery life and the sw stack (nix) but UX is at par with windows minus sneaky behaviour..
I mostly don't care since primary goal was a nix for development but UX was a let down... I'll take GNOME any day ( is been rock solid and I don't recall the last time it crashed)
Yet, even here on hn I've never come across any griping at Mac os ux niggles ever
Technically true but… i’m curious in which situation this is a problem for you? 99.9% of times I used the address bar on Windows is either copy-pasting the current path in the console (but on Mac I simply drag whatever file/folder on the terminal window et voilà, nicely shell-escaped too), or to go to a different folder (and either the bottom Finder hierarchy or cmd-g take care of most of that).
A lot of it comes down to what a person is used to. I have a similar gripe about the lack of flexibility with Gnome's address bar, simply because I sometimes want to type in a path rather than navigate to it by clicking on icons.
In rooting for Asahi.. Linux on Mac hw would be so nice
Realistically though, in spite of the heroic effort it'll always be crippled in some way OR if they manage to close the gap enough, Apple might still screw them (and end users) over with the next firmware update
Simple solution. Do what you would do with a Mac and buy a computer with Linux preinstalled.
> not need to worry about differences between different distros and death by a thousand small gaps between them
Why do you care about small differences. Just pick one.
> cycle between different package managers looking for an up-to-date version of a software that I need - not need to worry about differences between different distros and death by a thousand small gaps between them
Why do you need the very latest version of software? Yes, a traditional stable distribution will not have the latest versions of everything in its repos but I think that is fine.
If it is a problem for you use a distribution that uses flatpack or snap. That is very like MacOS.
I have installed many versions of Linux over the years, and some might take a few hours to setup but I have never spent days fixing stuff.
Reading your priorities, Fedora Workstation could be a good pick for you next time you get momentum. Complement the distro packages with flatpak, podman (docker replacement), and/or nix according to preference.
Look I love Debian a lot but I'd never classify it as a user friendly distro. There are forks of Arch that are friendlier than Debian across the board. most users can't deal with hardware not working and Debian seems to excel at that.
And while some of my systems now run linux, as the post says: "Sometimes using Windows is inevitable."
In defense of the much maligned Windows registry, I'll say: isn't it amazing that you can make such a wide array of changes via a single tool (regedit)? If you had to automate such changes on Linux, you would probably need a whole suite of tools. In some cases, you'd write a file into a `.d` directory. In other cases, you can `echo '...' >> subsystem.cfg`. In yet other cases, you'll need `sed -i`. Maybe `awk` gets the job done where `sed` is too simple. Maybe there are more complex cases, where you'd need the power of `perl` (or python or ...) to make the edit. And some subsystems come with their own suite of manipulation tools (ZFS, systemd, etc.) where editing text files would be the more difficult option.