Windows updates keep breaking, and Microsoft's "agentic OS" isn't helping

[Theinsanegamer]

Fun fact, Linux is compatible with 98% of what people are running on Windows today.

The truth is, it's not the fault of Linux, rather, it's software companies who stubbornly insist making their software as incompatible with Linux as possible. Activision and DXO to name a couple...

Incorrect. ProtonDB lists only 50% of the library as perfectly compatible, 70% if you include games that run with some tweaks. This is also only the Steam library, not including GoG, epic, publisher specific launchers

Why lie about this?

https://www.protondb.com/

Sure — corporations stepping in helps open-source projects. No disagreement there. But that doesn’t explain why it took Valve, a gaming company, to do what the entire Linux community couldn’t coordinate in 30 years. Linux wasn’t just waiting for funding — it was trapped in endless fragmentation and infighting. Valve succeeded because it ignored the community’s chaos, picked a stack, enforced standards, and shipped a working product. That’s exactly what Linux refused to do on its own.

If you ask anyone in the open-source community, they’ll swear up and down that open-source is superior to commercial software in every way. Yet… here we are, and it still took Valve — a commercial company — to make Linux gaming even remotely usable.

Because it is a MASSIVE task, and such a task just isnt going to work when a group of headless chickens are running around the room. You need structure, you need direction, and you need someone to bankroll all those developers working towards that vision.

If you think the open source community can organize a corporate sized effort to enact major changes over a decade+ of development for free, you dont understand reality very well.

 

[MakeMSGreatAgain]

I just don't see that happening. Hell, they had the chance to land a killing blow to Microsoft back when Windows 8 was released and we all remember how hated Windows 8 was.

Think about it... Windows 8 was:

• hated
• ridiculed
• universally rejected
• an OS nobody wanted

Gamers hated it.
Developers hated it.
Enthusiasts hated it.
Enterprise despised it.

And yet, despite how hated Windows was back then, Linux still couldn't land a killing blow. That was Linux’s one chance to kick Microsoft while it was down.

And what did the Linux community do? Argued about:

• systemd
• which init system was morally correct
• whether Ubuntu’s “spyware” was the end of freedom
• GNOME vs KDE vs XFCE vs MATE vs Cinnamon vs etc.
• Wayland vs X11
• Debian purity
• Kernel drama
• Package formats
• Fragmentation politics

They didn’t attack Windows when they absolutely had the chance—they attacked each other.

At this point, I wouldn't even trust the Linux community to organize a kegger in a brewery let alone try and do what you suggest.

An unfortunate truth... Windows 8 and Windows Server 2012 Tablet Edition really pissed everyone off.

Apple has never really had much interest in taking over the enterprise computer networking world. Had they made an alternative product to compete with Active Directory and Azure back then, and actually made it capable but reliable then they could have made a real dent in M$FT's control over the market.

But I don't think that will ever happen, and Linux has even less interest in enterprise it appears. Sure there are linux servers, but no one has really wanted to try and challenge AD and Exchange.

The tech world is changing, and changing for the worse. Now trying to jam AI into everything before we even know how it really works or what it is capable of is just stupid. It is all going to come crashing down like a house of cards. And more simplistic and independent systems will be the only things left functioning.

 

[trparky]

Because it is a MASSIVE task, and such a task just isnt going to work when a group of headless chickens are running around the room. You need structure, you need direction, and you need someone to bankroll all those developers working towards that vision.

If you think the open source community can organize a corporate sized effort to enact major changes over a decade+ of development for free, you dont understand reality very well.

So, what you're basically saying is that open-source isn't an end-all, be-all kind of thing. It's not some kind of magical savior come to rid us from the clutches of Microsoft.

I really wish it was though.

 

[Coisa]

Wasn't one of MS's layoff cycles a couple of years ago getting rid of a large paid and professional Q&A division and staff? Improvements in reliability and quality were going to result from the sheer mass of expert techs, volunteers and early adapters. AKA, The Canary Channel, the Dev Channel, the pre-release Beta Channel, and the final-stage Release Preview Channel. All of this was to be before the rest of us were forced to install fully released updates?

Didn't work, did it?! This practice is an utter failure. Q&A where are you?

M$'s spiel tried to convince us that forced updates to ONE version windows with minimize problems for everyone. So here we are! That doesn't work either, the forced up-dates are not really time-tested. The contemporary state is "if it ain't broke, break it with something new". Maybe M$ should get it's AI to prove why more stable O$'s like Win 7 and Win 10 should still be active. Let the old stuff work, leave it alone, and force New Crap in Win 11

M$ needs to push something other than AI on it's OS. The company forgot one tenet of good business - pay attention to the market demand (over 50% didn't upgrade from Win 10 after 5 years of 11)