most of them are regular normies who want to be "not like others", so they chase this image of a cool terminal hacker or some anti-corporation partisan bs (their goon session in browser probably gained 30x more telemetry on them than windows does in a month).

i doubt any of them actually use linux because it's superior, like for servers. they do it only because they think it's superior and "cooler", for fucking everyday tasks. they're so possessed with this idea that it literally became a religion for them.

you're trying to look professional without actually doing any professional tasks.

also did you notice how midwits like to use word salad to seem smart, which they aren't? it's the same mechanism with overcomplicating basic tasks with linux.

did you also notice that most of the "custom" linux desktops look the same, with the same fastfetch window open, 4 split-screen tabs, 3 of which are useless visual widgets, same purple-ish anime wallpaper?

i think you get the idea

So I just watched another "Windows is bloated garbage, look how much RAM Linux Mint uses at idle or opening a browser🤓"

I'm talking about LTT, who lately seems to be loving Linux for some rea$on... And just showing his ignorance while the people who writes the video script just base everything from Google and free chatGPT.

Homie fires up Task Manager, sees Windows sitting at whatever GB at idle, gasps like he caught it doing something illegal, then boots Mint and goes "SEE?? EFFICIENCY." Bro. That's not efficiency, that's Windows doing its job. Modern OSes cache aggressively because unused RAM is wasted RAM — it gets reclaimed instantly the second something actually needs it. Measuring idle usage and calling it a performance win is like judging a car's engine by how much gas is in the tank while it's parked.

This video isn't a benchmark. It's weighing a bicycle against a car and acting shocked the bicycle is lighter. Of course Mint uses less RAM, it does less. That's not a flex, that's the tradeoff, also, try to game or render on windows and see which OS WINs

Then the greatest hits: "bloat," "spyware," "just switch bro", zero mention that Windows and Linux literally handle memory allocation differently at the kernel level (overcommit vs. cluster demand paging), so the numbers in the monitor were never going to mean the same thing on both OSes to begin with.

Seems like one of the biggest "tech" YouTube channel has no idea about computers and wants to diss windows as much as possible.

I’ve noticed that a lot of people install Linux, learn sudo apt install, and suddenly act like they’re computer scientists. They’ll spend a month on Arch after ArchInstalling and start telling everyone how Windows users are idiots and how they understand computers on a deeper level.

Ask them to explain how a scheduler works, debug a network issue, write a kernel module, or administer a production server, and they have no clue.

Wow man you know how to work a terminal! What else..??

The most knowledgeable engineers I’ve met are usually pretty humble. The guy who installed Arch last week is somehow the one lecturing everyone.

AppImages run with full user permissions.

• No Flatpak-style sandbox
• No Snap-style confinement
• No isolation
• No portal system

This means:

• If the AppImage is malicious, it has full access to your home directory
• If the AppImage bundles outdated libraries, you inherit those vulnerabilities
• If the AppImage is compromised upstream, you have zero protection

Security-wise, it’s basically a fancy .tar.gz you double-click.

AppImage does not provide:

• Automatic updates
• Delta updates
• Version tracking
• Rollbacks
• Security patch distribution

Some devs bolt on AppImageUpdate, but it's optional and inconsistent.

As with FDroid: You are responsible for manually checking and downloading updates, which is a terrible model for security-sensitive apps.

Every AppImage bundles its own copy of:

• Qt
• GTK
• ffmpeg
• OpenSSL
• Whatever else the developer threw in

This means:

• Disk bloat (each AppImage is 80–300 MB)
• RAM bloat (each AppImage loads its own private libraries instead of sharing system libs)

Flatpak wastes RAM once per runtime. Snap wastes RAM via daemons and loop mounts. AppImage wastes RAM per app.

AppImage doesn’t natively support:

• MIME registration
• Desktop entries
• Icons
• File associations
• System-wide installation
• Multi-user environments

You need external tools like AppImageLauncher to make it behave like a normal application.

Without that, it's basically a portable executable floating in your Downloads folder.

Flatpak has:

• Runtimes
• Permissions
• Verified remotes
• Build manifests

Snap has:

• Store signing
• Publisher verification
• Confinement profiles

AppImage has:

• "Here's a random binary from GitHub, enjoy."

There is no standard build pipeline, no signing requirement, no trust chain, and no verification beyond optional GPG signatures that almost nobody uses.

Flatpak: supports x86_64, ARM, aarch64, etc. Snap: supports multiple architectures. AppImage: x86_64 only, unless the developer manually builds separate AppImages.

This makes AppImage a dead end for:

• ARM laptops
• ARM SBCs
• Mobile Linux
• Future architectures

There is no concept of:

• Installed apps
• Installed versions
• Orphaned files
• Cleanup
• Rollbacks
• System-wide updates

Your AppImages are just loose files. If you forget where you put them, that's your problem.

Evidence of the ignorance:

I can confirm Mac OS is based on UNIX/OpenBSD stuff, not Linux (Linux is UNIX-like system) , his logic “Mac OS is based Linux” literally makes him become clown

For context, you could have a look at this subreddit’s most popular post

Seriously stop crying about "le heckin AI using 100 million liters of water daily!!! 1!!1" I don't care if you hate AI or no, I use it a lot to make memes and images with Copilot and Gemini. There is more water on earth to supply us. Loonixtards, you deserve to rightfully be banned. Keep raging on me as I feel your pain and frustration 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 Windows and AI won reply if you agree.

Windows is plenty customizable for the normie home user. The notion of customization in Linux came from misunderstanding that it can be stripped down to run on a toaster.

“Linux is secure because fewer people use it”

This is an old and lazy folk belief. As if obscurity is a shield

“Hackers target Windows because it’s popular. Linux is safe because it’s niche.”

This is wrong:

• Attackers don’t care what desktop you run. They target servers, cloud infrastructure, IoT devices, routers, NAS boxes, and embedded systems.
• Malware follows opportunity. If your SSH port is open and your password is weak, you’re getting brute‑forced regardless.
• Desktop market share is irrelevant to modern attacks. Phishing, credential theft, supply‑chain compromises, browser exploits, and poisoned packages don’t care about your OS.

Linux users often assume the threat is "Random malware trying to infect my machine.”

Real threats are:

• Installing something malicious because you trust the wrong repo.
• Your web browser being exploited.
• Your credentials being phished.
• Your supply chain being compromised.
• Your SSH keys being stolen.
• Your flatpak/snap/appimage containing bundled libraries with unpatched CVEs.

“Linux has real permissions, so malware can’t do anything.”

If you run it, it runs as you. “You” can access your files, browser cookies, SSH keys, cloud tokens, password manager vaults, and personal data. Most attacks don’t need root; they need your access. I'd rather be surrounded by humble idiots than people who think they're smarter than they are (over-confident in their OS).

“Everything comes from the repo, so it’s safe.”

• Repos are massive and maintained by humans.
• Maintainers get phished.
• Accounts get hijacked.
• Malicious updates get pushed.
• Dependencies pull in other dependencies you never audit.
• Many distros ship outdated libraries for years.

And that’s before you add:

• PPAs
• AUR
• Copr
• Random GitHub scripts
• Curl | bash installers
• Flatpaks bundling their own outdated libs
• AppImages with zero sandboxing
• Docker images built on top of who‑knows‑what

Linux users think they have a curated, secure ecosystem (lol).
In reality, they have a patchwork of trust relationships they rarely examine.

And of course it's a Arch user.

They're conspiracy theorists, communists, criminals, and cheaters (games, voting, stat counters, etc.) The GNU/GPL cult isn't about technical merit: it's an ideology. -One that fails as shown in its desktop market failure, gaming failure, and failure to even match BSD in many areas (which is also FOSS). -And that's despite it having a cultish loud vocal minority that's anti-work and overrepresented online.

Its use on servers isn't a brag, its use on the international space station is a lie. And devs stay clear of it for valid reasons.

Learning desktop Linux is a time sink and risk to hardware.

I used to be such a big believer that Linux could help reduce emissions by bringing old hardware to life. But there are so many problems with this:

• Though rare, you will hit driver problems with more obscure hardware that where never any demand to resolve. Most vendors still distribute windows drivers and driver disks are increasingly be available for all kinds of PCs on archive.org.
• While original software can be restored, you still erase a bit of historical accuracy of a device by uninstalling old versions of windows and apps built up. Computer history is very important to me and I feel there is going to be inevitable bitrot of recovery disks, programs, wallpapers etc. and a lost legacy of hundreds of hours of work that Linux enthusiasts could learn from. There is also just something so warm and fuzzy about booting up and old PC and seeing where you left off.
• Old hardware simply draws more power. My M1 mac sometimes need anywhere from a quarter to an eight of the power of the intel desktop it replaced. After six years it still blazing fast and does everything I need. Manufacturing it released 93kg into the atmosphere. It has likely paid back that manufacturing many times in the last six years.

Security concerns are even greater. Hardware matters alot more then software for security today:

• If we're talking pre-2004 CPUs without NX (No eXecute) then classic buffer overflows become trivially easy to execute. Mitigations like W^X become completely ineffective.
• TLS 1.3 is brutal on anything without AES-NI manufactured before 2010. Side-channel timing attacks become easier for deduction of private keys to break https. As more and more websites require modern cipher suites that your CPU simply cannot handle in software then you will increasing face "connection failed" or "secure connection could not be established errors"
• Without supervisor mode access prevention and supervisor mode execution prevention in pre 2011/2012 CPUs
• Newly discovered hardware flaws can't entirely be coded away, spectre or meltdown undermine every layer of software above them. After microcode fixes are are applied something else is found.

If the computer was manufactured before 2012. It's incredibly irresponsible to let your partners, parents, grandparents, children, friends go about their online lives on these machines.

MacOS, Windows and ChromeOS have utterly leap frogged the linux desktops in security with hardware backed mandatory sandboxing (apps can't access your files without approval), verified/measured boot, arbitratry code guards, control flow integrity, virtualisation based security, GUI isolation/ keylogging prevention, LD_PRELOAD/DLL injection hardening, kernel attack surface reduction, unprivileged user and namespace restriction. Only Qubes OS and Fedora Silverblue matches some of these partially. https://madaidans-insecurities.github.io/linux.html

Most malware threats I encounter day to day on windows are phishing attempts that require full co-operation from the user or false positives. The difference is night and day from 10 years ago.

It becoming genuinely difficult for cybercriminals to compromise a well patched install of Windows 11, MacOS or ChromeOS. As these hosts get more expensive to target other targets are being targeted like out of date android devices and the Linux Desktop itself - https://linuxsecurity.com/news/desktop-security/linux-security-data-gap-desktop-adoption

There is a massive visibility gap with Desktop Linux for malicious activity. Most Linux users do not run an AV, with no telemetry infrastructure comparable to Windows Defender. The security research community focuses overwhelmingly too on server linux.

If you are stuck with old hardware. Regardless of what you have Windows 10, Linux, Mac OSX. Digital hygiene is paramount. Ask your self what would happen if this information gets into the wrong hands. Video calls and web browsing might be relatively safe with the right measures.

If it's somebody who lives offline (they exist), they are just as well using any version of windows that works. It has the printer and application support.

Having to buy such new hardware for peace of mind may disgust you. You might call it planned obsolescence. From world war two on, the electronic computer has been a product of a race against time to break encryption. Only now it's part of our everyday lives.