post
Let's not pretend that Linux is without bugs.
It's a lot easier to accept bugs when you're not paying for it, it's not spying on you, it lets you do what you want, and it respects your freedom.
It is a hell of a lot less buggy
And the bugs that are there we are aware of. Microsoft may or may not fix severe security bugs, opting to hide the information instead because it's better for their bottom line
Microsoft always had been a bug riddled mess that people paid for and then they needed to pay even more to be able to get their shit still working
Now with the AI slop apparently contributing 30% of the code, things have gone off a cliff
So no, nobody is pretending Linux is bug-less, it's just that Microsoft is that bad
It doesn't lock you out of your C: drive
Let's not pretend that Microslop is capable of producing good software.
I don't know about that, XP, 2000 and 7 was pretty solid.
That was Microsoft. Microslop lacks that ability.
Not gonna mention Windows 8? Hmm I wonder why...
Or vista lol, or windows 98 that was so bad they essentially recalled it and re-released it as a second version?
I used 98 as a teen, it came pre installed, what was wrong with it compared to 95? Asking out of curiosity.
Man it’s been a long time but essentially 98 was the first one to allow for plug and play without drivers if I’m remembering right. That and a few other stability issues made the original crash constantly, including during the demo at a tech show. They re-released it as a second edition that fixed most of it. If you bought the computer towards 1999 they had fixed it.
Because it was shit.
I never claimed that everything MS did was good
XP was probably their most solid OS. And that shouldn’t be a brag.
Reputation is such a strange phenomenon. XP was considered a disaster at launch. It took them years to repair everything that didn't work.
The rollout of 64 bit architecture support was so sloppy that people were holding on to old hardware so as to not have to install the x64 version of XP. The premiere of the NT kernel meant that nothing had drivers, most software wasn't compatible yet. DirectX 9 broke half of old games compatibility. There were also two entirely different versions of the shell with dramatically different start menus. Some versions didn't support multi core CPUs.
Not to mention that XP actually spans three different OSs. Upgrades were just a reinstall wizard of the OS.
It wasn't until the end life of XP and the launch of Vista that people started to cling to XP SP2 and its reputation switched due to a mix of nostalgia and fear of the much worse launch of Vista.
I think .net is pretty good. I don't use it, but people seem to love VS Code.
The downvotes for this little nugget of truth suggest to me that linux fans are somewhat cultish.
Yeah, I made my comment as I am tired of fanboyism, I have daily driven Linux in the past, I was the Linux sysadmin at a major financial institution for years, Linux is awesome!
But please don't get arrogant and claim it is faultless, with constructive criticism it can only get better.
Right now I am running Windows as my daily, and my work is only in Windows.
I dailied Linux back in the 2.8 days, I remember a class mate having to manually edit the kernel source code to get his USB mobile broadband modem to work, I had modems from another brand, so I only had to run USB mode switcher to get mine working.
I set up Fluxbox from scratch to get a fantastic UI experience on my laptop.
I know Linux.
I switched back to Windows for gaming, and now with W11 and gaming support for Linux, I am looking to move back to Linux.
I am no Windows nor Linux fanboy.
It's not so much Linux fanboyism as it is Windows (whatever the total polar opposite of fanboyism is)
The only good argument for Windows is specific software compatibility. If there were equivalent solutions on both for everything, it is an absolute truth that Windows is worse.
That is not an opinion, outside of intentionally wanting to be commercially oppressed.
Also games access to your kernel just screams to me "I wanna have fun and don't care about security at all, now gimme my fortnite vbux mom" in the most middle-school voice possible.
Also games access to your kernel just screams to me "I wanna have fun and don't care about security at all, now gimme my fortnite vbux mom" in the most middle-school voice possible.
Wow, how quickly people forget....
Back in 2011, with kernel 2.8.x, gaming on Linux was nothing like it is today, it required dedication, skills and time.
And at the time I didn't have the energy to deal with it.
Microsoft believes the issue may be related to the Samsung Share application, although the exact cause has not yet been confirmed.
30percentofcodewrittenbyai.jpeg
There was a story going around back in September ago about the person whose wife used OneDrive on her phone. It had taken upon itself to copy 25+GB of data on the phone into OneDrive, despite only having the free account tier, and copying it to their Windows 11 PC. There it completely filled up its small SSD boot drive, putting it into a condition of extremely low disk space, which in made it impossible for Windows to boot. Here it is.
I doubt that story. I'm a linux user at home but at work I admin windows and linux systems. I can see his logic because hes thinking how I would. But windows doesnt behave like that. On linux you can fill a drive and get issues booting but windows leaves space so that even when the user drive is full the system can still create temp files needed for operation. Whatever he did trying to get around the default behavior he misconfigured something
I dunno? It sounds very plausible, exactly the kind of thing that Windows would do. I posted about it to Metafilter some time back and no one there seemed to think it couldn't happen.
It sounds like user error to me. There is like 2 settings on onedrive and they couldnt even be bothered to configure it yet hes going through all this complicated troubleshooting.
If you can't log into Windows you can't change its OneDrive settings! What's more, the user had no idea what was causing the problem, be it OneDrive or something else, until he did that troubleshooting! And, just setting up a new phone shouldn't make your computer unbootable for any reason! Geez, way to victim-blame there.
Huh, my computer doesn't seem to be affected.
I'm using Arch, btw.
I think I'm affected because I can't access the C: Drive.
I'm using Debian, btw.
I think I'm affected because I can't locate a c: drive.
I'm using Mint, BTW.
I managed to park over half the c:drive. I drive an X5, BMW.
There's your problem. You should be using Arch.
I use slackware, btw.
Seems like your pc isn't affected because you don't have a C drive? Try create a C drive and see if there's an issue.
Fedora's better ;) I posted this in a jocular mood, don't take it seriously
I like how, once AI is invented, there is never a problem that isn't AI related.
Microsoft made broken shit before AI, it isn't like they suddenly lost that capability once AI was invented.
It's more like the old adage but extended: "To err is human, to really foul things up you need a computer, but to make an unbelievable mess you need an AI."
AI enables them to automate the generation of shitty code for broken systems even more efficiently
That seems like an easy statement to prove. How many bugs were there before AI vs after?
I may be wrong, but I would guess that you haven't seen any data to back up your statement and you're basing it on your perception based on social media posts.
You see a lot of clickbait articles where the author highlights a specific patch note or vulnerability and tries to tie that to AI. They're doing that to earn revenue because anti-AI posts get traffic... they're not trying to objectively inform you about the rate of bugs in Microsoft's products. Your perception is being skewed by selection bias.
I would guess that you haven't seen any data to back up your statement and you're basing it on your perception based on social media posts.
Well, that's certainly what you're doing at least.
You think I'm basing my perception based on a social media post? That's very observant.
You're right.
I am responding to a social media post and so my perception of that social media post is based on a social media post (specifically the one that I'm responding to).
The difference between my comment and their comment is that they present their statement as a fact and I indicate uncertainty.
I don't know the person, I may be wrong and they may have the statistics to back up their fact claim. Since I didn't know for sure I wrote:
I may be wrong, but I would guess
This indicates that I am not confident in my answer but it is the current top hypothesis among many.
I assume (<- see, indicating uncertainty) that they don't have this data and are simply making it up.
As far as WHY they are making it up
Considering that social media is the top news source for most people. (Since this is a fact claim, here is a source: https://www.niemanlab.org/2025/06/for-the-first-time-social-media-overtakes-tv-as-americans-top-news-source/). If you don't know about a person you have to assume an average person. An average person is more likely to receive their news from social media.
I don't think it's uncontroversial to say that AI is a divisive topic online and so guessing that this person's perceptions are built on misinformation about AI posted on social media seems to be a pretty rational conclusion based on the facts that I have before me.
You sure love your weasel words.
I think maybe you don't know what 'weasel words' mean.
From Wikipedia:
In rhetoric, a weasel word, or anonymous authority, is a word or phrase aimed at creating an impression that something specific and meaningful has been said, when in fact only a vague, ambiguous, or irrelevant claim has been communicated. The terms may be considered informal. Examples include the phrases "some people say", "it is thought", and "researchers believe". Using weasel words may allow one to later deny (a.k.a., "weasel out of") any specific meaning if the statement is challenged, because the statement was never specific in the first place.
There's none of that here.
Summary review:
The passage does not contain significant weasel words. It acknowledges uncertainty explicitly with phrases like "I may be wrong," "I would guess," and "I assume," which actually counteract weasel wording by qualifying claims. The author distinguishes between fact and opinion, admits lack of knowledge about the individual, and provides a source for a factual claim about social media as a news source. Overall, the language is transparent about uncertainty rather than using vague or evasive phrasing to appear more confident than warranted.
I use Linux exclusively, my family's laptops are all Linux, I self-host, etc. I'm no Microsoft fanboy, so believe me when I tell you...
...that is a stupid name and anyone using it sound like a clown.
AI's use in industry is destructive to knowledge workers, the massive dump of capital in the computer hardware markets have caused massive disruption in secondary markets and the coming market crash will affect everyone in the world. There are plenty of easy arguments to be made against using AI.
Going into a comment section and posting "Well, acktually, you mean MicroSLOP!" does none of that. It's performative, not substantive.
What a sloppy OS they produced!
You don't need C:\. All your data should be in the 365 cloud anyway. Storing files locally in C:\ leads to antipatterns like not paying Microsoft for 365 access (a.k.a "Software Piracy")
We just had this month's Patch Tuesday and they're still dealing with problems caused by last month's?! I really need to try harder to convince my father putting Linux on his current computer is a better idea than buying a Windows 11 computer.
What would happen if you trained an AI entirely and solely on Microslop's knowledge base?
Who could have possibly predicted that an operating system with vibe code in the kernel would be complete ass
Its funny how literally every bug in code now is assumed to be AI, as if we didn't live/deal with buggy programs for decades before it.
Sure, but it certainly seems like we are seeing a greater number of software errors caused by bad or sloppily implemented features now, compared to before LLMs were readily available and good enough to produce (mostly) passable code. Far too many companies, including Microslop, put too much faith in the technology, and that seems to correlate with many of these problems popping up.
Is there any data to back that up? I remember many Microsoft issues throughout the years, pretty bad or dumb bugs frequently.
I have no scientific sources I can point to to back it up. A hunch is what it is, ultimately. It seems true to me, but I suppose I could be wrong. I suspect it's difficult to really prove this one way or the other.
Can you imagine if heartbleed happened today? Everyone would just assume it was AI immediately lol.
But yeah, it would pretty difficult to know for sure, it was funny at first but at this point it's just annoying because a bunch of people who know literally nothing about programming just assume it was an AI fuckup when I've been using buggy software my entire life already lmfao
A lot of people didnt read the issue. This was an issue with the samsung connect app.
ffs how can at this much further into Windows cycle, and we still have shit like this? I mean the main drive is the most important one, I can understand if this happens to Win 1 or 2 but after soo many iterations? Just no.
I'm sick of it. I had 4 different problems with it this year at work. And we are paying them money for it....



top 99 comments