I'm using Windows as my daily driver due to prioritising gaming over everything else. But I also have a 8-year old laptop which is stuck with Win 7, and I've been wondering if I should just install Linux on it to try things out. In the past, I've only ever tried Linux for short times, never used Linux as my main OS or longer than a week.

With this context, I've had the "which distro should I choose?" on my mind a few times. There's some obvious and some non-obvious issues with this questionnaire. I'll just go over my thoughts step by step:

• "I want anonymous web browsing" and "distro which is supported by game publishers" can't be selected at the same time. Is this really true? I'm doubting my understanding of what "anonymous web browsing" actually means.

• "I often need help from others" and "I have already used Linux for some purposes" can't both be selected. Why? The logic behind this is "You have used Linux at some point, so you can clearly solve some problems without asking anyone". Makes no sense, and/or the questionnaire's creator thinks that Linux is impossible for newcomers. I have used Linux in the past and I'm generally good in troubleshooting, but anyway.

• "I want to use the default preset values in the installation assistant" is impossible to answer if I don't know which values are given as the default. My general answer would be "give me a default value for everything, but also let me change the things which I have an opinion about". An answer equal to this doesn't exist.

• Pre-installed programs: this does feel like it lacks the answer of "let me choose what to install during installation of OS", but I guess I can just skip this question without answering since I don't care.

• "There are many way to administrate a linux distribution" -> "I want to avoid systemd". I've never heard about systemd, and the explanation give on the page doesn't really help. For what reasons would I want to avoid it? My actual answer for this is "I really don't care", so I just skipped it.

About the result of the questionnaire: I did answer that "I'm fine with paying something", but it's not really something I aim for. The suggestions seem to tag "There is a non-free version available" as a plus for the distros, which really isn't what I answered - there's a difference between "I'm fine with something" and "I want something".

I also marked "supported by game publishers" with a star, because gaming is what I'm aiming to do on it. I have no idea if this even matters in practice, but it made sense as an answer when asked about. The smoothness of gaming experience will always be the primary reason for any choice of OS I'll make.

The first EIGHT answers on the list have either "Programs versions may not be up-to-date enough for gaming" or "May require additional configuration for gaming" as a downside/warning. The game publisher question is the only answer which I marked as important.

The first distro from the suggestions that included "supported by game publishers" is Linux Mint - which does match what I already had in mind, but I really feel like the ordering of the suggested distros feel off.

Short "review" about this: it really didn't help much. The list of suggestions is practically full of equally good distros, and I'm still stuck with the question "which one of these should I choose?". I only learned about more distros that I had never heard about before.

As for actually choosing the distro at some point later: I think that I'll just find out the top 5 most popular distros, and select from those. My reasoning for this is that it's much easier to find answers if/when I run into issues. Using a niche distro wouldn't really work for me - Linux isn't my hobby, I think OS is just a tool to run whatever programs/games I want to.

But this questionnaire doesn't have any data about popularity, so for my usecase, it lacks some information. I feel like it could use an additional question about "Are you fine with using a niche distro, or do you want to use a popular one?" - this question does have the issue of not being objective though, as there's no clear answer of what can be counted as "popular".

TL;DR good idea, but execution could be better.

Roughly 30 000 hours in WoW. I've been playing it since 2005 - mostly active, only a couple of 1-6 month breaks.

Quick approximation - let's just ignore the exact dates:

• 18 years * 365 = 6570 days
• 30000 hours / 6570 days = ~4.57 hours/day

During the last 18 years, I've played an average of 4h 34min of WoW every day.

In other words: if I sleep 8 hours a day, during the last 18 years, I've spent about 28% of my waking hours playing WoW.

While I'm at it: I'm 34 years old. I have spent roughly 10% of my life playing WoW.

jfc lmao

Other MMOs: Guild Wars 1 & 2, FFXIV, are all between 1000-1500 hours each.

Outside of MMOs, the #1 is probably Trackmania (2020) at ~600 hours.

The song is also 23 years old at this point. :D

I guess I pay for the convenience that I get when I buy a new game, simply press Install and start playing. I spend most of my free time playing games on PC, I have no other reasons to stick to Windows. I'll happily switch to Linux on the day when every new release works with no extra problems, tinkering, waiting or searching caused by my choice of OS.

This is going to sound selfish, but I don't have the "energy" of fighting against whatever the current meta is - I just have to appreciate the more invested people that drive Linux forward. I'll just follow and use the OS where I get the smoothest overall experience for gaming (including thing like mouse/kb driver support). Windows is the current answer for this, one day it'll be something else - hopefully Linux.

Shit's been progressing really fast recently - I guess Steam Deck is doing some heavy lifting when it comes to motivating developers to keep Linux in mind. Direct support will always give the best results for everyone.

I often describe Elden Ring with the following sentence: "If you gave me this game with no title and told me it's Dark Souls 4, I would have no reason to doubt you".

It's great for everyone that wanted more Dark Souls, and ER is arguably a good starting point for anyone that hasn't played any of the Dark Souls, but it's still Dark Souls. If someone had tried Dark Souls in the past and realized that they don't like the game, I really wouldn't expect Elden Ring changing that.

For me personally: Elden Ring is pretty much my favourite game of all time. I feel like it's the "culmination of Dark Souls design", and just happens to be exactly what I was personally looking for in DS games - but even with this in mind, I don't feel the need of getting more of the same.

But hey, as for Fromsoft just doing the same thing over and over - Armored Core VI coming out next week, and that's quite different. :D

Considering the amount of “yarrrr” in this thread I’ll probably get stabbed for this take, but: shows/movies take time and money to create, and running these services isn’t free either. Is $15 really impossible to pay when you want to watch a show?

Cable doesn’t answer the problem of “I want to see [insert show] from start to finish, starting right now”, so it’s worthless as a service for most(?) people. As such, I feel like cable should be forgotten as a point of comparison - it’s a different and much more limited type of service.

Let’s say I have no streaming subs running right now. I feel like I want to check out [insert show]. I find out which service has it, and buy a month of [service] for like $15.

I watch the whole show. Now I also have the rest of the library to check out for the rest of the month. Maybe I find a couple of other movies/shows from the service, maybe not. It still cost me a whopping $15 to watch a full show, and I also now have temporary access to a practically random selection of shows (“random” = depending on whatever service I ended up buying).

Sure if it’s a long show it can take multiple months to view it, but I still feel like the cost is minimal compared to what I get. Nobody is asking you to pay for all of the different streaming services every month.

I’m using a show as an example - but if we’re talking about buying a month ($15) just to watch a single movie, I do agree that it can feel a bit expensive. But in most cases you can find a few other movies that you can check out during the next month. If you’d want to buy a single movie digitally, they often cost like $10-15 per movie anyway - might as well buy a month of sub at that point.

Sure, I’ll also be happier if stuff stays cheap, but anyway. The usual works here: if you don’t feel like a service is worth its cost, don’t buy it.

It’s not like there’s lack of entertainment in today’s world - some free, some filled with ads, some cheap, some expensive. Pick your poison, I guess.

How do you save stuff without knowing where you're saving it? Genuinely curious, as I really don't understand what this meme is referring to. Windows search has also become better over the years, and recently it's been good enough for my uses. "Everything" is still a handy tool though.

Almost all software that I use, ask about the target location and/or filename when you save it. There's also some software with default saving location, but it's usually quite easy to find out from i.e. settings or some other part of the interface.

Also - saving stuff to unknown folders is related to the software not being clear about the target folder, I don't really know why people would blame Windows for the software being unclear. Unless we're talking about something specific to Windows which I'm just not familiar with. :D

Genuinely curious, because it's quite apparently about lifestyle in general: how often do you need a flashlight, especially a good/bright one? I mean, a bright one is nice to have, but it's not like I'd need one. Basically I can understand why people just pick whatever they happen to find from the first store they walk into, and they're happy with their purchase.

Currently, I don't even own a flashlight. I rarely need one and when I do, I've just used my phone's flashlight and it's been just fine for whatever I needed to do.

Stop posting the Lemmy logo every day

I really think this thread is a great example of why the average person doesn't care that much.

The whole thread is full of comments like "the issues caused by giving away all your data are too abstract, too far away, or too difficult to understand". This is true by the way, I completely agree.

But I haven't seen a single comment trying to explain those possible issues in an easily understandable way. The average person (or, at least me) reading threads like this won't learn anything new. Give me a practical issue that I might face, and if I agree that it's an issue, I'll focus more on avoiding that issue.

In other words, an example:

• Let's say I'm a person using lemmy/mastodon, only using privacy-focused search engines etc.
• If I would now change to using facebook/threads, started using Chrome as my browser, etc the usual mainstream tracking stuff - what problems can this cause for me in the future?

PS. I do agree with the notion of "minimize the data you give away", which is one reason I'm here, but I really don't have an answer for these questions. I'm like "I understand the point of privacy, but can't explain the reasons".

1. Googled "Lemmy" to see what it even is
2. "wtf is an instance"
3. Checked some of the most used instances. At this point I wasn't sure if it matters much, but I just figured it's best to just pick a popular instance.
4. found lemmy.world, and the description goes "The World's Internet Frontpage - Lemmy.world is a general-purpose Lemmy instance of various topics, for the entire world to use."
5. "sounds good enough", created account