Windows 11, Part 4: Conclusion (and Random Thoughts)
That this review took much longer already than I would have ever expected, does, in a way, speak in favour of Windows. However, for all intents, constructions, and purposes, I still find it difficult to see how anyone, who has ever ventured outside this ecosystem, would want to use it frequently, or even “convert” to Windows (that is, switching to this ecosystem entirely, abandoning all else). I for one wouldn’t — at least not for the time being.
If I had to pick one aspect that bothers me most, it wouldn’t be anything I’ve mentioned so far, but the metaconcept, if you will. The idea, that the system (or rather its manufacturer) makes decisions on the prospective user’s behalf (on no grounds other than being able to do so) — and pretends this to be a sound approach. Such reminds me of a quote from the early days of automobile manufacturing, attributed to old Mr Ford: “Any customer can have a car painted any colour he wants so long as it is black.”
Software Freedom or Death Is Not the Question (Here)
It’s not so much to do with the fact that Windows is not open–source or free software (in the sense these terms are commonly defined in their respective context), or that one has to pay for it (there’s excellent open–source software that also have a price tag), but this one, I think, does not compensate the user sufficiently for their material expenses, let alone “sacrificing their software autonomy”.
What’s that mean? Well, let’s approach this matter from a purely pragmatic angle, shall we? (If the precious reader happens to use Windows for sentimental reasons, now would be the perfect moment to leave this theatre in an orderly manner. Beyond here be … well … penguins!)
Waste Not, Want Not
If you purchase a computer shipping with Windows (an OEM version of it bundled with mainstream devices) the price tag is higher, compared to a computer shipping without an operating system — but the difference should never differ from the actual retail price of the respective software edition.
The individual offer may appear to be a fair deal — that is, a computer with the Home Edition of Windows (which is the one I tested) costs about €140 more than without it (if not, you may want to compare individual hardware configurations thoroughly before you open your wallet).
Yet, at any rate, this money could have been better invested in, say, a faster graphic card, more RAM, a better CPU, or whatever might promise a better performance of the device. Or alternatively, you could have just purchased a cheaper one, because the hardware requirements to run a computer under Windows are (in general) considerably higher than under Linux–based operating systems. And that’s only addressing the obvious costs (those you will find on your receipt).
If you buy a computer without operating system, you get 100% of the available space on your hard drive to install (or store) whatever you please, because you are able to decide which operating system and applications you want to install (if at all).
On a computer with Windows, on the other hand, about 27 GB (that appears to be the most popular “official” estimate out there) go to the operating system (and what applications ever have been decided to be dumped on you “on your behalf”, without you having a say in what is really wanted or needed) before you had the chance to log in for the first time. That’s about 2.6% of the available space you paid for (calculation based on a hard drive of 1 TB).
Well, that’s not half bad, is it? Hmm, yes and no. If you take only the raw figures so far mentioned into account, the story still sounds quite reasonable. Yet considering that these numbers apply to a fresh installation of the default system (without the Office Suite — which still lives in the cloud entirely — or any additional software present), while my entire production system (operating system, Office Suite, and a plethora of software necessary to accomplish a vast range of tasks) takes up a total of about 1.4% (i.e., appr. 13.7 GB) of the same hard drive, I’m not so sure about that.
To translate these findings into everyday situations, this difference of 1.2% suffices to store 11 hours of decently shot videos in FHD (1080p) — or more than 2.5 hours in UHD (commonly known as 4K) — on your hard drive. Alternatively, it is enough space to store more than 2,600 photos of the highest quality possible with a Canon PowerShot SX610 HS (no, they did not pay me to mention them; it’s simply the camera I happen to use — and the way I make sense of such statistics). What a difference 1.2% can make, right?
Yeah, but the Compatibility Issues …
Oh boy! Those infamous compatibility issues between different ecosystems appear to be hardier than your average bedbug. All right, just so I cannot be accused of negligence, I’ll say it once: There are none! In general. That is, if the precious reader happens to be the proverbial “average user” (whatever that is really supposed to mean).
If you are a sought–after expert in some exotic field of profession, you are certain to use bespoke software that does not have to be compatible with a variety of operating systems, because the few other sought–after experts in that particular field will most certainly use exactly the same set of software. In this use case scenario, you may not be considered an average user.
Everyone else corresponds, more or less, to the statistical mean of users. You may be more or less informed than the average guy, but that does not mean you are entitled to any allowances.
If we consider Windows 11 a general–purpose operating system (which I still believe is Microsoft’s definition of it), than the vast majority of users will have to be considered “average”. If the average user is commonly described as not particularly tech–savvy, then why are even the simplest things presented in such a cumbersome manner? Or even more pointedly, why keeps the operating system getting in the user’s way? But let’s not get too philosophical — or too specific …
While writing this review, I spent some time in a number of forums where typical computer user issues are discussed. Interestingly, most (new) Linux users mentioned that they kept Windows only because of a number of games (sometimes even just one of those) they happen to play (anywhere between “now and then” and “quite frequently”).
Well, I, the man who does not know the first thing about computer games, am not in the place to offer any useful advice in this respect, but I am under the impression that I heard of game consoles having being a thing for quite a while. Is that no so, anymore? If so, what’s wrong with them? Perhaps, Microsoft should really focus on that area of digital work.
Anyway, being able to play games on a personal computer may be fun, but it certainly is not the ultimate definition of “general purpose”. When it comes to everyday tasks and the infamous, alleged compatibility issues, I can confidently say that any Linux–based operating system I have tested thus far is considerably more advanced than even the latest version of Windows. And if all else fails, you can still run your Windows–based software in a virtual machine.
But … but Windows Is Easier to Use!
Well, this objection was inevitable, I guess. “Hearsay, precious reader, mostly hearsay — not to mention the outrageous lack of solid evidence.”
At some point during this review I’ve ultimately had it. Talking about Windows was still fine, but I had grown tired of actually using it. So I switched back to my tried–and–true production system and simply went ahead, as if nothing had happened. (I can tell you that going the other direction would have been considerably more bothersome.)
If I had not mentioned it, the “average user” would have never been the wiser. Those who consider themselves “above average” (and perhaps even are) just pricked their ears, sensing an opportunity to find me out and so prove (at least to themselves) that they are not as common as the rest of the lot. Well, good luck with that. (Here’s a hint, though: Beware of red herrings!)