MicroStrategy?

It's about to collapse for the second time.

I've been a software "engineer" for over 20 years, and my personal experience is that software engineers are basically never happy.

> personal experience is that software engineers are basically never happy.

Being happy means:

- you don't feel the need to automate more manual tasks (you lack laziness)

- you don't feel the need to make your system faster (you lack impatience)

- you don't feel the need to make your system better (you lack hubris)

So basically, happiness is a Sin.

I’ve used AWS for almost 20 years and I can tell you it’s more stable than Azure

I have zero doubts.

True enough. The world is never as predictable as the computers we program, and the computers we program are never as predictable as we feel they should be.

Plenty of happy engineers at the other cloud. :)

I presume you mean the Oracle cloud?

Nobody is happy with Oracle anything! It has some users because it is free. It has paid users because Larry Ellison bribed the government. Nobody would choose it voluntarily.

No, gcp. Was a happy customer for many years, now I work there.

A bunch less today than a year ago.

Autonomy, decent pay, non toxic environment and non bullshit job.

It isnt actually all that much but most devs who have all of these I've come across are happy.

Agreed. I've had this more often than not, and while every job has its little gripes, if I have those things the rest is well, just part of the job.

You forgot the more relevant: https://xkcd.com/149/

Someone make this man a sandwich.

https://xkcd.com/149/

/s is pretty good

This is literally Linux Mint, Zorin, and several other distros. I haven't had to "go under the hood" on my daily driver machines that run either of these distros for over 7 years.

I think at this point people are just (reasonably) making excuses not to change.

Those and other big distros are better in that regard, but they're still not perfect. Depending on one's machine and needs, there can still be pain.

One recent example I experienced is jumping through hoops to get virtualization enabled in Fedora… it takes several steps that are not obvious at all. I understand not having it enabled by default since many won't need it, but there's no reason that can't just be a single CLI command that does it all.

Things like that can be unbelievably annoying and confusing on Windows or Macs, too. Even worse, they can just turn out to be impossible: the company can actively be preventing you from doing the thing that you want to do, refuses to give you enough access to your own system to do the thing you want to do, and/or sells permission to do what you want to do as an upgrade that you have to renew yearly.

These are things that don't happen in Linux. Doing what you want to do might be difficult (depending on how unusual it is), but there's no one actively trying to stop you from doing it for their own purposes (except systemd.)

Also, as an aside, a reason that Windows and Macs might have easy virtualization (I have no idea if they do) is because of how often they're running Linux VMs.

One needs to go a fair ways off the beaten path before they'll start running into trouble like that under macOS and Windows.

For macOS in particular, most trouble that more tinker-y users might encounter disappears if guardrails (immutable system image, etc) are disabled. Virtualization generally "just works" by way of the stock Virtualization.framework and Hypervisor.framework, which virtualization apps like QEMU can then use, but bespoke virtualization like that QEMU also ships with or that built into VirtualBox and VMWare works fine too. No toggles or terminal commands necessary. Linux does get virtualized a lot, but people frequently virtualize Windows and macOS as well.

What exactly did you need to do? All I've ever had to do to get QEMU working properly has been to make sure KVM is enabled in the BIOS (which you have to do on all OSs).

Just run a KVM based Windows VM (via GNOME Boxes, virt-manager, etc. On my Fedora install I had to install the @virtualization meta-package and enable dameons among other things, and the only reason I knew to do that is because I looked it up. Without that Boxes, etc just throws an unhelpful error that doesn’t suggest that more packages or config changes are needed.

I had to enable virtualization features in BIOS too, but that’s entirely separate and not the fault of any Linux distro.

Ah, I guess I might be a little unusual in that I use the QEMU CLI directly. I tried some QEMU GUIs in the past but they were annoying to get working so I just learned the CLI.

It's what the Irish said to us Italians when we were immigrating to Canada in droves.

It's a much larger drove this time around, to be fair.

Thank you, Godwin.

Godwin's law is not a useful heuristic, and Godwin himself regrets it. Every universal principle should have its extreme cases tested. If you claim it should be fine to say anything at all, then you have to test that against the limits like HH, or North Korean propaganda, or death threats, etc.

How often does one experience an orderly revolution?

Once a year.

More like once per quarter

This looks great. In your experience, do you run it once and that's it? Or do you need to re-run as updates add or re-introduce "bloat"?

You definitely should run it after updates.

Personally I don't think I've ever re-run it. I think I've clicked a few buttons as I've seen alerts about new options appearing. But ultimately it's just a bunch of powershell commands to remove packages and set options. So I'd assume it's safe to run regularly.

Thanks. I was asking because I was hoping to run it for a relative's computer that I am reinstalling Win11 on now, and they would not be capable of re-running it after the fact.