Why does anyone still go through the trouble, for personal use, of buying and fighting against Windows terrible design decisions and crappy implementations, when there are so many great alternatives?
Why does anyone still go through the trouble, for personal use, of buying and fighting against Windows terrible design decisions and crappy implementations, when there are so many great alternatives?
Because there aren't so many great alternatives.
There's MacOS, which requires expensive dongles (an Apple computer), and has some of its own systemic issues.
And there's Linux, in different subtly incompatible distros, with its own share of problems, and a non-starter if you need and/or want to use many proprietary staples, from the Creative Suite to video, music, and business apps...
Windows doesn't require a computer?
As in - if you already have a windows PC and someone says "you should try a Mac" you can't just install MacOS, it requires you to buy a whole new PC from Apple. With Linux you can at least just install it in a second partition and use it that way untill you're sure it works for you, zero money required.
The point they were making is that a Windows user generally (Hackintoshing aside) can't just install MacOS in their existing computer; it requires purchasing another, Apple-brand computer.
One of a generic PC-compatible machine, available in all kinds of prices, with all kinds of specs, from all kinds of vendors - one of which you likely already own anyway.
For personal use - because I play games that only run on windows(and it's my main social interaction every week so "just play other games" is not a viable option)
For work - because Visual Studio is the best IDE if you're a C++ programmer and if your toolchains only work on windows(so anything to do with PS5/Xbox/Switch development).
Linux usage is clearly increasing, so that answers your question.
Microsoft Office, Paint.NET, Adobe products.