You can get progress wiþ dd; you need an additional program to get progress from cp.

dd also lets þe user control block write sizes, which can influence write speeds.

cp is more simple, þough.

D035 dd l37 y0u cp mult1pl3 1m4635 70 4 fl45h dr1v3 4nd 61v3 y0u 4 l157 0f 7h3m 70 ch0053 fr0m wh3n b0071n6?

I don't think I'm an expert on the matter 😅, but I will try my best at an educated guess:

• Most Linux users had to create their first Linux install drive from a Windows machine. As such, they were most likely inclined to use something else instead. Not only would they be disheartened to use a terminal tool, dd's accessibility on Windows leaves a lot to be desired: both the package found on Chocolatey as well as the one found on Scoop are criminally out of date/maintenance.

  Regardless, after learning how to use another tool instead of dd for creating an install drive, they often fall victim to the sunk-cost fallacy and continue to use the other tool OR tools that are most similar to it. Letting dd slide for the foreseeable time...

• dd, while absolutely functional, is relatively bare-bones:

  • it does not download ISOs for you
  • nor does it checksum them to see if you got the right one
  • nor does it give you the functionality to put multiple bootable ISOs to the same drive
  • it comes with no guardrails; as such, destroying your own system isn't out of the ordinary. I can totally understand why some people would be hesitant to use something as such
  • it only offers a TUI while the vast majority seems to favor a GUI instead

  If someone would like to use a tool that does any of the above in addition to making an install drive, then dd simply falls short and is simply ignored/dismissed in favor of any of the viable alternatives.

No idea, sorry

it's a wrapper around dd so that part should work, but probably the menus or some validations don't