> Running a Linux VM on Windows is nicer than just booting into Linux
Indeed, it does. Having stable system and not dealing with Linux on Desktop, clear tradoffs (like "just add another 16gb RAM stick in laptop/desktop and you are golden") is great for peace of mind.
The average uptimes on my laptops (note for plural) is ~3 weeks, until next Windows Update to be applied. I don't have nostalgia on the days of using Linux on desktop (~2003 student times, ~2008 giving it one more try, ~2015 as required by dayjob)
Of course it adds up that I can tell people around me (who are not tech guys often, but smart enough to know basic concepts and be able to run bash scripts provided to them) - "yep, machine with 32GB+ of RAM will work fine, choose any you like" - and it works.
I'm confused, in what world does running Linux require more RAM than Windows?
The suspend/hibernate on laptops isn't that great, but tbh I never had great results on windows either (macos is decent though).
And uptimes for desktop systems are similarly just limited by whenever there's a kernel update.
I meant overhead you need to spend in RAM to run WSL2
This is the opposite of what I've heard. Most often you hear of people installing Linux on old machines due to it performing better than Windows on low resources.
I'm talking about more regular situation when you deal with new hardware- why on earth I'd go with outdated and limiting me T480 when T16gen4 is around the corner. Or ARM based laptops.