Linux

Great article, have a few issues with it though:

1. Google docs are free (as in beer) and collaborative and just about as good, and Minihard's web interface also works. This still doesn't account for all use cases, bur that should be about 80% of people who think they can't live with LibreOffice.

2. KeepassXC is cute, but not modern because of it's lack of cross-device sync. I use Bitwarden and it works great. Having options is great. I get their frustration with flatpaks self-contained package formats have only ever given me headaches. Also flatpak isn't a feature that windows does either.

3. I have no clue what their problem is with virtualization, but I've used virtualbox, vmm, and just the CLI for qemu, and I've never had the issues of cumbersome installation or a virtualization disabled error

4. Speaking of virtualization, I've run old software and games with wine all the time. I'm sure there's some performance hit, but it's pretty negligible unless you're one of those people that meticulously tracks performance metrics instead of just relying on feel (cough "5-15% performance hit in games boohoo cough)

5. *some developers and sysadmins. I know people who act as counterexamples and use linux personally and professionally

Windows licenses are cheap and you get things working out of the box. Software runs fine, all vendors support whatever you’re trying to do and you’ll be productive from day zero... It all comes down to a question of how much time (days? months?) you want spend fixing things on Linux that simply work out of the box under Windows for a minimal fee. Buy a Windows license and spend the time you would’ve spent dealing with Linux issues doing your actual job and you’ll, most likely, get a better ROI.
You can buy a second hand computer with a decent 8th generation CPU for around 200 € and that includes a valid Windows license. All computers selling on retail stores already include a Windows license, students can get them for free etc.

Aaaaaaaaaaaand all the previous examples go out the door. All of the aforementioned "benefits" of windows cost money. Adobe is all SaaS, MS office is SaaS, AutoCAD is SaaS, windows itself is arguably SaaS, that hypervisor that isn't jank is SaaS; those annoying janky hardware solutions that have drivers only for windows charge for those drivers and the bespoke UI programs that control the hardware, the securitybrisks of running XP for the aforementioned costs money, those sysadmin and developer solutions cost money (usually also on a subscription). If you want the well-documented and supported software that brings the streamlined experience that fanboys prattle on about, you don't go with freeware; windows freeware sucks just as hard in the UX sense while also being proprietary and spying on you/designed only to upsell you to paid. And don't make me get into the monetary worth of all the data the above programs and windows itself harvests. This rose-tinted windows experience isn't "cheap" unless you're in the global top 10-20%, the rest of us make do with freeware that sucks harder than linux. I'm one of the few who are lucky enough to be able to save 25% of my monthly income and some dick behind their keyboard is trying to convince me to throw 2 months worth of that away every year on software that doesn't do the job better, just more conveniently.

Not to mention the spying! What is this? Stockholm syndrome? Battered user syndrome? Blink 3 times if Windows hits you!

As far as I can tell, most of the actual arguments that hold weight boil down to "For desktops, Windows is superior for businesses and jobs" and that's not a failure of linux. That's fine by me if it isn't profitable, that's not the point of FOSS. In fact that misses the point entirely.