Windows still dominates these 3 major arenas, and Linux won't catch up anytime soon

Add Us On

follow

Like

Thread24

Log in

Linux has never been so good. The Steam Deck put a polished Linux gaming handheld in millions of living rooms. Ubuntu, Linux Mint, Bazzite and Fedora have never been easier to install and live with. There's Zorin OS for Windows users who don't want to suffer the whiplash of a transition. And yet, for all of that momentum, there remain pockets of everyday computing where Microsoft's OS decisively wins.

Not because it looks better or feels less bloated, but because of specific technical realities that has plagued Linux for years, and aren't close to being resolved anytime soon. Here are three ways Windows still has an edge over Linux, no matter what distro you're using.

Competitive gaming still has the same flaw on Linux

Kernel-level Achilles' heel

This one particularly stings, because gaming on Linux has genuinely come so far, and Proton saw to it quite well. But if you're a Linux user and your gaming life revolves around competitive multiplayer titles such as Valorant, Fortnite, Apex Legends, Rainbow Six Siege or Battlefield 6, the only easy way your operating system can run the games is either through GeForce Now... or YouTube.

The core issue relates to the architecture, which makes it twice as unfair for Linux users. Publishers such as Riot Games and Epic Games utilize kernel-level anti-cheat software (such as Riot's "Vanguard") which requires verified and trusted access to the OS's lowest layer. On Windows, the kernel is proprietary and attestable, which means that anti-cheat software can verify it hasn't been tampered with. In this case, Linux's greatest strength here becomes its Achilles' heel. Since the kernel is open-source on Linux, it is freely modifiable, and therefore no way for anti-tampering software to verify that the kernel hasn't been compromised or altered.

Related

6 ways modern Linux distros are less infuriating

Thinking about trying Linux? Here's why it's less complicated and annoying than before.

2

By Rich Edmonds

Dec 17, 2024

Out-of-the-box compatibility with peripherals

Hardware compatibility on Linux is hit or miss, but mostly miss

Linux is, counterintuitively enough, ahead of Windows in terms of basic hardware support. Since drivers are compiled directly into the kernel, a standard USB accessory such as a mouse, keyboard, or webcam will frequently be plug-and-play. The problem is that most peripherals are not just passive input devices, and rather complex, dynamic pieces of hardware that increasingly rely on companion software to justify the price tag. No one buys a $100 Logitech mouse to have it behave like a $10 mouse they took from their office, and that's where the surrounding software (in this case, Logitech G Hub) makes the difference.

On Linux, the software that enables the usability enhancements that make the $100 peripheral behave like a $100 peripheral is, for the most part, absent. Now, this is a phenomenon that can be traced back to the economics of the ecosystem. Major peripheral manufacturers like Logitech, Corsair, Razer, and SteelSeries are software companies just as much as they are hardware companies, and their business models rely on keeping consumers glued to their ecosystem.

Since Windows and macOS command the overwhelming majority of the consumer desktop market share, manufacturers don't have much incentive to develop native Linux ports of control centers, especially since Linux holds only about 3-4% of the worldwide desktop market share. This problem is also exacerbated by distro fragmentation, which is one of the reasons why developers are naturally hesitant towards releasing software on the platform.

The professional software ecosystem

It's still light-years ahead on Windows

Just as peripheral manufacturers have a hard time supporting Linux, professional software developers face the same core issue, and it trickles down to the professional users on the platform. Adobe Creative Suite, AutoCAD, and a long list of industry-specific tools in finance, healthcare, and engineering simply don't exist on the platform, and that's another problem that distro-swapping can't change. Web-based alternatives haven't fully plugged the gap either.

The economics, again, tell the whole story. Because the professionals using these tools represent a concentrated, high-paying customer base that's almost entirely on Windows and macOS, porting to Linux offers negligible revenue upside against the cost, and vendors haven't witnessed a credible enough reason to think that this equation will ever flip.

To be fair, the problem is much more narrow than it used to be, especially with the advent of generative AI tools in the consumer market space. General productivity is witnessing a slow but steady move to the browser ecosystem, and Google suite and Microsoft 365 Online have taken a big bite out of the compatibility argument for most everyday users. The remaining gap, however, is what hurts usability the most. What's left is software that's expensive to build and platform-specific by design. For graphics designers who rely on Adobe Creative Suite or engineers with a heavy CAD/CAM workflow, Linux is a complete non-starter, and it may be for years to come.

For most users, Windows is the "easy way out"

Linux has made remarkable strides over the past few years, but market share still seems to be the invisible hand guiding the entire ecosystem. When two operating systems command the vast majority of the desktop market, software, hardware, and even video game publishers are financially obligated to treat it as the default. Until the same incentive exists for developers to solve the key issues in the Linux ecosystem, the numbers will continue to favor the incumbent, and while unfair, it seems to be where Linux stands right now.