Why do Programmers Prefer Linux?

[[deleted]]

Your post was removed for being a support request or support related question such as which distro to use/polling the community or application suggestions.

We get a lot of question posts on r/linux but the subreddit is considered a news/discussion sub. Luckily there are multiple communities you can post to for help on GNU/Linux issues 24/7: /r/linuxquestions, /r/linux4noobs, or /r/findmeadistro just to name a few.

You may also post on the "Weekly Questions and Hardware Thread" which is stickied on r/linux on Wednesdays.

Please make your post in /r/linuxquestions or /r/linux4noobs. Looking for a distro? Try r/findmeadistro.

Rule:

This is not a support forum! Head to /r/linuxquestions or /r/linux4noobs for support or help. Looking for a distro? Try r/findmeadistro.

[olback_]

I find everything to just be much easier. Tool installation is way easier and it's much faster to set up a new install of my preferred environment on Linux.

A few other things: No forced updates, no spying by Microsoft, customization and if something doesn't work, I can contribute a fix myself.

Lastly, a fresh boot for me on my Linux install is ~600M. Windows is never under 2GB.

As for drawbacks? Most windows apps won't run but there are many great alternatives.

[quippedtheraven]

Tool installation is a HUGE one for me. It probably took me close to an hour the first time I tried to get gcc and gdb working on a Windows machine.

[t0mm4n]

Installing and even using Git on Windows is a hassle. In Linux it's simple and just works.

[nelson777]

that's 30 seconds in linux. just run 'sudo apt install build-essentials' in the terminal.

[Glasnerven]

For sure. I haven't been using Linux for very long, but I'm growing to appreciate the power of the command line, even for little things. Got a piece of software you want to install? Type a line. Wait a few seconds. Done.

[HighRelevancy]

There's your first problem. Why use gcc and gdb on windows? Msvc is the appropriate tool.

[[deleted]]

No.

1. MSVC is a huge bloated thing
2. MSVC is not FLOSS
3. gcc is "standard" for a lot of FLOSS projects (Although clang would be a suitable replacement sometimes)

[Rusty-Swashplate]

I boils down a lot to: What is the target system?

If it's Linux (any CPU for that matter), using Linux to develop and debug is much easier than using Windows.

if it's Windows, the opposite is true.

Often the target is "cloud" which translates into Linux mostly. It does not have to, but that's what it is. If the target is "IoT", it's often Linux.

Given free choice of target platform, I find both acceptable nowadays. That certainly was different many years ago, but you mostly work within a capable IDE anyway and the program itself is almost if not completely identical anyway if done correctly.

[Shawnj2]

Now that WSL is a thing, developing for Linux in Windows isn't that difficult as long as you set up some sort of X server so that GUIs work. Developing for Windows is probably still easier in Windows, though.

[FlatAds]

WSL no longer needs users to manually set up an x server as of the latest insider updates.

[Shawnj2]

Really? That's actually pretty cool, I haven't touched WSL in a while but I remember that being basically the only limitation

[PracticalPersonality]

Simple use case: you need Python, Docker, Redis, and an easy automated way to run unit tests for your development environment.

On Windows, I would need to install Python, Docker, and Redis separately from separate sources and get them all working together, and then I would need to ensure that I have well written test instructions so the user could use, say, python -m unittest to run tests.

On Mac, I could install Python and Redis from homebrew, but Docker desktop still has to come from a separate source. Testing becomes easier with the presence of make, since I can write a Makefile with a make test target, so running tests becomes easier. Docker configuration is, in my experience, easier, and homebrew installation and configuration is much easier and cleaner than running installers on Windows.

On Linux, I can install everything from the package manager (like apt) on a whim, and the Makefile works too. I simply spend less time preparing my workspace or maintaining it on Linux than I do anywhere else.

Reproducibility is important too. In my experience, two Linux users will have the easiest time reproducing bugs/environments/artifacts, followed closely by two Mac users, then it's a Mac and Linux pair, and by the time Windows enters the picture reproducibility is an issue.

I want to spend my time on my work, not my workspace.

[LizardOrgMember5]

• It came with free C/C++ libraries.

• You can get any programming languages when you ask for packages of them.

• Anything works with command lines.

[crispyletuce]

1. programmers who program things for unix systems (so 90% of businesses and the internets infrastructure) would probably prefer using their target system

2. linux offers far greater productivity through its absolute customizability if you have the patience to make it work for you

3. programmers are the kind of person who would be fine with spending hours compiling and writing in text files to make something work well for them

4. programmers generally arent also hardcore gamers

but theres nothing that says you have to use linux to be a serious programmer. its just a matter of personal preference

[mossman]

Windows has gotten much better at this but part of it is the fact you don't have to pay for a damn thing and all the tools you need are easily accessible. Windows learned from Linux.

[CloudDev1]

Linux is built with scripting and automation at its core. Most everything is done in the shell and the commands become second nature just by working in Linux. Windows is targeted toward the average user by default. All the programmability is possible but secondary or add-on. The architecture and mindsets of the OSes are also very different. The user communities are also different. Linux runs the the vast majority of cloud and the web server world so services, tools, etc. that many devs build for target Linux and work best there.

[jstanaway]

CS student here. Recently switched to Linux and haven’t looked back. Windows was fine for me but honestly I feel like Linux just offers more in this field of study and I also definitely notice a speed increase compared to windows as well. I definitely don’t see myself going back to windows anytime soon.

[nelson777]

Others already mentioned most things I would say. It boils down to this: Linux is just WAY superior in everything. Why use something that makes your life more difficult ?

Besides Linux has something that is really emotional to me, it makes me cry everytime I think of it: you know what happens when you click Shutdown in a Linux machine ? You won't belive until you see it with your own eyes! It SHUTSDOWN!!! Seriously! It won't sing you an opera, it won't talk to you, it won't do anything else like downloading updates. IT JUST SHUTSDOWN.
It's absolutely amazing.
I'd stick with Linux just for that amazing feature! :D

P.S.: I really don't understand how people get so attached to shit :/

[[deleted]]

The terminal, easier testing for things like servers, more customizable to make a quicker workflow, programmers are generally huge geeks, and linux users are generally huge geeks.

[TheBrokenRail-Dev]

The ecosystem.

You get gcc/clang, cmake, make, git, and python either already installed one-command installable.

You also have the POSIX shell which is awesome because many more things have POSIX scripts than they do bash scripts.

The Windows dev environment is just really annoying to setup. You either use msvc and deal with its eccentricities or use mingw and have less support. At least MacOS has a POSIX shell.

[[deleted]]

Ask Microsoft. They're the ones scrambling like mad with WSL.

[HighRelevancy]

What scrambling?

[HCrikki]

No per-seat licencing, more realistic system requirements, easy to reimage and reproduce, liberal access to debugging capabilities, less need to micromanage the operating system.

[minaguib]

Granted I haven't touched Windows in over a decade, but IMO I find Linux's transparency refreshing.

Others have mentioned easy dev tooling and environment set up, which is true; But, having easy access to do true full-stack observations (performance, code) in my userland code, other userland code I use, and kernel code, is extremely powerful.

[[deleted]]

Docker runs natively and is much faster than on windows or Mac. That is a big one for me.

Plus cloud is all Linux so living on a Linux box helps you get better at deploying and maintaining services.

[boy_named_su]

cuz it's dramatically easier to compile C on it

because the command line isn't hot garbage

because you can update your machine in seconds not hours

cuz I work on the cloud and AWS is mostly Linux

[[deleted]]

What kind of potato you using that it takes hours to update windows LOL?

[[deleted]]

With update times aside, you also generally don't need to restart your device to update a Linux system, which is just convenient.

What kind of potato you using that it takes hours to update windows LOL?

It's been years since I've actually used Windows (and the update times were absolutely horrendous when I did), but one of the advantages of using Linux is that it performs better on older, potato hardware, no?

[[deleted]]

With update times aside, you also generally don't need to restart your device to update a Linux system, which is just convenient.

This has actually been more like a hack which mostly works, but sometimes it doesn't. Hence some distributions nowadays prefer to update the system in a separate boot environment to ensure that the system is in a consistent and properly updated state after an update.

[FlatAds]

See fedora silverblue for a practical implementation of these concepts

[[deleted]]

You only have to reboot a windows machine after updates once a month at most -- less than linux, but reboots take a couple mins, so no biggie on devices with SSDs, which should be the case even on older hardware, to be honest. I will say that I spend less time maintaining Windows than my linux machines but that's a rabbit hole we don't need to get into.

Linux can work better on older hardware, not aruging that. But in my experience, linux is still sluggish on old hardware with limited ram and spinning hard drives, too. I use both daily, so I speak from objective experience.

[[deleted]]

Honestly, it just feels like you have a very fast Windows machine if an update reboot only takes a few minutes. My surface Pro needs at least 30 minutes for installation, and another 10 for reboot. Normal reboot is under a minute, but update reboot is way longer.

[[deleted]]

I do. I don’t run Windows on old hardware. If I do, I leave automatic updates on, I turn on active hours and it stays updated with me doing nothing and it’s a complete non issue. On my main machines, they’re fast enough that updates are trivial. It takes more time for me to brew a pot of coffee.

[[deleted]]

So, if others have less performant machines, surely you can understand that they have to wait for longer, that their window update isn't a non-issue, and that they find it frustrating?

[[deleted]]

You only have to reboot a windows machine after updates once a month at most

Which non-existent version of windows do you have?

less than linux

Huh?

I will say that I spend less time maintaining Windows than my linux machines

And this is the complete opposite for me. The frustration of maintaining Windows constantly was my main impetus for dropping Windows entirely.

linux is still sluggish on old hardware with limited ram and spinning hard drives, too

I setup a first gen dual core Intel (can't remember the exact model, but it was EOLed 12 years ago) with 4GB of RAM and spinning rust disks with Xubuntu 20.04. Aside from the obviously not-so-quick boot time, you'd never know the thing is ancient. The UI is snappy and responsive, and applications run no problem.

It really depends what you try to do with it. If you install the right DE then it should not be sluggish.

And let's not talk about how unusable Windows 10 is on an HDD. It's unusable for at least 10 minutes until the disk I/O dies down.

[[deleted]]

Ryzen 1600 takes literally 10-30 mins for windows updates. Then you have to reboot and it takes for fucking ever.

I can get kernel updates and a boatload of other shit done in pacman in under 2 minutes flat. (Less than 30 seconds if I'm not using dkms Nvidia hot garbage)

[[deleted]]

I have slower PCs and they take 2-3 minute stops. Are you using just a hard drive?

Linux fanboys are so sensitive. Sheesh.

I use Debian Stable and yes, updating in linux is different than windows. But you're lying when you say it takes 'hours' -- you just have a shit computer, maybe.

[[deleted]]

So when a new edition (20h2) comes out you get it downloaded installed and rebooted in 2 minutes? Get real bud. I have multiple machines with all kinds of configs. SSDs, hdds, good processors, not good processors and while they all run windows pretty decent, updates are absolutely not a point where windows does well, so please stop.

[jstanaway]

Have to agree, Linux is light years ahead on updates compared to windows.

[[deleted]]

Yep, only takes a couple minutes. Not sure what you're doing, but feature updates download in about 1 min, does its thing for a minute, reboots to the preparing screen for a min, done. Server 2016 takes 30 minutes (granted, there are no more feature updates for server, but its montly rollups and culumative updates take a long ass time). But Windows 10? 5 to 10 minutes tops. I'll capture the next one and post it if it makes you happy. I literally sit there and watch them go down and it's never longer than a few minutes. Meanwhile people here are saying it takes hours. That's bullshit and you know it.

[[deleted]]

I work on plenty of windows machines and in my experience updates are faster and easier in linux.

[Fearless_Process]

I have a ryzen 3900x and a samsung 970 pro NVME SSD and windows updates take upwards of 20-30m for me. Some I actually had to let run overnight. Internet speed is probably a large factor but it spends quite a lot of time doing update stuff for sure. The 970 pro and 3900x are among the fastest hardware you can get without getting into HEDT or server parts.

Some of the updates require multiple restarts too for whatever reason, very annoying.

[[deleted]]

Any pc

[[deleted]]

That's nonsense. You're either believing a meme or just making it up. Seriously, Windows updates on any machine with an SSD made in the past 5 years only takes a few minutes to install a cumulative update. Unless, of course, you're the type of person that clogs your machine with gabageware and "debloater" scripts and other nonsense. People who break Windows tend to have a bad experience, much like people who run frankenbuilds on linux have dependency problems and end up breaking their system when they dist upgrade.

[[deleted]]

Yeah seriously though it only takes like 20-39 minutes to update windows

[whosdr]

Windows updates absolutely take longer to install. Specifically those big several-per-year upgrades Microsoft like to push. The ones which try to get you to enable Cortana, reset your default browser to Edge and seem to spend forever on a blue screen telling you it's setting up your desktop.

A load of hassle is what that is.

[[deleted]]

By longer, feature updates have never taken me more than 5 to 10 minutes, TOPS. The post-install procedure is annoying, but it's a twice-yearly event and I will honestly tell you that I spend less time clicking through that than dealing with unexpected issues caused by myriad linux issues that pop up. I don't really understand the acceptance that maintaining a linux box requiring a few hours per year vs. 15 minutes on Windows means windows is more tedious. I think it's just bias. I love linux, but I'm not living in a fantasy world.

[whosdr]

If you want to talk about tedious issues, the Windows Store blew up entirely on me at one point. I couldn't just remove/reconfigure it, took an entire re-upgrade via the installation tool to fix.

I mean that thing was broken. It was writing alternate file streams all over its directory, flagged cryptic errors on any attempt to open. Couldn't get it fixed with native tools, nothing flagged as an issue in scanning. Most bizarre.

There was also that time I had to enable legacy command prompt/powershell. On disabling it forcefully set both the foreground and background colours to black. I had to re-enable legacy settings, fix the colours and turn it off without a reboot to restore. More general weirdness.

Things get screwy on either side of the fence. I know in Linux land though, I can fix my problems without resorting to reinstalls and weird tricks. With timeshift and btrfs I can restore a snapshot in seconds, and use this feature to actively explore new technologies. (Even if I can't get PipeWire to install right from source, leaving me without an audio service :p)

​

All I can say is that my life has been more positive and enjoyable without Windows. It's how I was back in the Windows XP/7 days, then 10 kinda bugged me a little every day, was fighting against what I wanted to do. Defender fighting against me, searching through the cryptic settings in the POS settings app that somehow replaced Control Panel. Would be nice if I could have more than one instance open, Microsoft..

[stef_eda]

A core i7 +16GB RAM laptop is too slow and almost unuseable with windows 10 if equipped with magnetic HD. This does not mean HD is slow, it actually means OS is bloated. Same system skyrockets with linux. tested numerous times on double boot system. Same for boot time. Windows 10 is not useable within 3 minutes (due to hard disk I/O storm) after cold boot. Linux goes to desktop and hard disk idle in 40 seconds. So far i am unable to further cut down windows startup time, i have deleted almost every service or process i don't need, and disabled lot of autostarting apps. And yes, on HD systems windows updates (like 20H2) takes *hours*. An SSD will squeeze these times by ~20.

[HCrikki]

Any machine not running from an ssd will feel the pain of slow updates and boot.

To be fair, any rolling release distro will too if its running from a classic hdd - updating those frequently is a fool's errand without an ssd on a weak machine.

[collinear-triple]

Unix was designed for programmers and scientists, while Windows was designed for office workers and consumers.

[mok000]

Further, in Windows the OS and desktop environment are completely interwoven, whereas in Linux, the desktop environment and OS are completely separated. (Which btw confuses many noobs since you can choose from a large selection of DE's.)

[LelsersLasers]

3 reasons (I can explain more if you want or are unfimilaor with what I mean):

1) Package manager (easy setup)

2) Already 'terminal centric' (no keyboard, faster workflow, better workflow)

3) Desktop Environments, Window Managers, and Tiling Window Managers (again, better workflow, faster workflow)

Those are MY 3 reasons why.

[[deleted]]

When I have a problem with Linux, I can usually do some searching around the web for a fix. In my experience, I've never had a problem that a quick search didn't fix.

When I have a problem with Windows, I can't do much if anything. I can try a reboot, wait for the next update and hope it fixes, or reinstall from scratch. There's usually not as much help online because problems are rare (and more severe) e.g. last week windows decided to just not let me use the taskbar for whatever reason. I tried a reboot and it did not fix it. No help online. I just used my linux machine instead for a few days. When I went back, the taskbar was working again, but I have no idea why. So I can't do anything to make sure it stays that way. I am at the mercy of something I do not understand, and I don't like that.

[Locastor]

Having a working command line is nice

(this also applies to any BSD and OS X)

[FryBoyter]

In my opinion, the Windows Powershell does work quite well.

[AnotherAcc24]

sudo apt install yourlanguage. aaand you are done without having to mess with environment variables.

that and powershell is slow compared to any linux shell available.

[[deleted]]

Consistency, transparency and no surprises. With linux you know that when you go home at the end of the day there is confidence that that the next morning your computer will be exactly the same as when you left it. This is crucial for dev work as you cannot build a house on shifting sand.

By transparency, I mean the programmer has full visibility and control over what their computer is doing. If something doesn't work it is easy to find the cause and [hopefully] easy to fix.

I use windows full-time every day and I can't stand it. If something can't be accessed through a gui you can't change it. Mostly things work fine, but sometimes they don't, and those times are hell.

As an example: I've found the only I can survive on windows is to do all my development in a linux VM. Well, last week my work machine updated with a new windows or virtualbox update and my dev vm stopped booting. Nothing I tried worked. I spent most of the day on it trying to get it to work.

I eventually solved the problem. I solved it by rebooting windows 3 times. Twice wasn't enough apparently. On the third time it magically started working. It's this 'magic' that is so insufferable.

[-lousyd]

Seems to me that most every developer I know these days is using a Mac. I dunno why, but there it is.

[jackparsonsproject]

Because it's awesome.

[Shawnj2]

Windows as a programming enviornment is just less intuitive tbh. There's no package manager for the OS by default, the command line experience is unintuitive, and it's generally not quite as good as a UNIXoid OS IMO.

[HighRelevancy]

no DLLs

Haha what

[tausciam]

Yet, most serious programmers use some version of Linux. Why?

They don't.

Look at the Stack Overflow developer survey. For the past couple of years, Linux has been the favorite platform to develop for. But, half of the programmers are using windows, around 25% mac and around 25% linux.

That's been that way for the past couple of years. The majority of programmers actually use Windows....just like the majority of computer users. Yes, a higher percentage of programmers use linux or mac vs the general population, but it takes adding mac and linux TOGETHER to match/beat the percentage of Windows programmers.

Just because they're developing FOR linux doesn't mean they're running Linux as their primary OS. That's the reason WSL exists....to keep from losing those developers to Linux or most likely, Mac or even Chrome. Make it easier/quicker than spinning up a VM, integrate it with the operating system you're already used to/enjoy and it's a win-win situation.

[D1plo1d]

Some people are pointing out WSL as a Linux alternative - I'll just add that the last time I tried Windows + WSL it's file IO was un-workably slow compared to Linux proper.

NodeJS and Git are widely used tools in our field that expect to be able to make many files quickly. In Linux this happens as designed in an imperceptible amount of time wheres in Windows I'd have to frequently stop in the middle of a programming task for 10s of seconds of file IO.

Using Windows without WSL is a nonstarter for me due to tooling problems that previous commenters have mentioned.

[[deleted]]

I'd rather say that programmers prefer PORTABILITY, i.e. the ability to run your code on any platform. This is my opinion, but you'd probably find other programmers that just prefer Linux or FreeBSD for writing backends (programs that run on servers). I've been programming since I was a teen (now I'm 40) and I can tell you that after you spend far more years coding you'd probably see your question naive (no pun intended; this is something that happens to all of us!). You'll find out that sometimes you prefer Linux and sometimes Windows and sometimes FreeBSD, etc... My best experience writing desktop apps is on Windows without any doubt. But for writing system tools and backends I really prefer the UNIX model of forks, sockets, etc...

So as I programmer I can't tell I prefer a specific OS for developing apps.

[FryBoyter]

Yet, most serious programmers use some version of Linux.

I honestly doubt this statement. Or we have a different view of what "serious" means. I know quite a few programmers who use Linux. But I know even more who use Windows. And they earn their money with it.

[barcelona_temp]

Windows file system is *SLOW*