Man, imagine being in a financial situation where you could afford to turn down a job just because of if the OA you’d be using
Fucking based.
In a Gmail client 🤮
While it takes about 8-16 hours of concerted effort, there are ways to castrate Windows into a mild approximation of what it was before.
The big question mark is Windows 12… and whether AI and spyware/malware features such as Recall will be baked into core functionality such that it will be impossible to remove or reliably deactivate.
I’m still with Windows for now, owing to requirements that have no non-Windows alternative (which include supporting and actually opening client data files for the desktop version of Quicken, for example), but I do foresee a time when I would reliably extract my last foot out of the Windows ecosystem.
Thankfully, their server products still appear to be enshittification-free. For now.
God you must make a ton of money
You’re doing the lord’s work.
Same here, except Mac is no better. I was forced to use one at my last job, I’d sooner code on Windows
While I prefer Linux and use it wherever I can, I use about every major OS on a regular basis. I have a machine that dual boots Windows due to some expensive specialized software I own that doesn’t work on Linux yet, I have an iPhone because Linux phones aren’t good enough to be a daily driver and Graphene doesn’t work with certain apps I need, I have an Android tablet / Android TVs because they have a usable UX while allowing sideloading of OSS apps that respect my privacy, and I use macOS on my work machine because company IT doesn’t support Linux. Yes, I’d prefer to run Linux on every device, but there are practical reasons for using other OSes, and it’s not like a competent techie can’t learn to use whatever. I assume Linux will continue to gain market share across form factors, but we are not there yet. I’ve actually never worked anywhere where Linux was supported, and while I’ll refuse to work somewhere with unethical business practices, I probably won’t choose to be unemployed to avoid using Windows. Google, for example, does support Linux devices for employees, but I’d rather use a Windows laptop somewhere else than actively build tools for surveillance capitalism.
TL;DR - Pick your battles.
Hey can I have that job instead? I’m happy to use any version of Windows if it means I actually get paid fairly
Just wondering… Is there anyone on Earth using Windows Server?
At school we were tought how to work with it (my teacher was so outdated, he barely knew what Linux was) but I can’t find any good reason to use it instead of Linux
Guy just sounds entitled and precious they wouldn’t stump for a Macbook.
Honestly, yeah, I’d do the same. After several past jobs required Linux, even downgrading to a Mac feels pretty bad. Can’t imagine Macroslop Wangblows.
Completely fair
Lmao mac elitists
Don’t have to be a mac elitist to reject windows
Windows is shit for most things. Especially shit for development.
this is entire statement is ridiculous. anyone who puts a completely closed system above anything isbretarded. and since you are retarded i have to explain that open system does not mean open source.
you probably thing development is made up of front end and back end like op. when in fact front and back tohlgther is web dev and web dev is a very small portion of development.
I think this person actually wants to run linux, but they are using Mac as a test case.
They mentioned “install an alternative operating system” - which on hardware sold for Windows very much implies Linux.
But if Linux is a no, and even macos is a no - which is from a “big proper company” with support agreements and everything - then the company is obviously a lost cause who are set on windows for life for all time.
Meanwhile, the people at Red Hat are left asking, “are we a joke to you?”
Ubuntu and Suse join the chat
Ubuntu is even more hostile towards developers than microslop.
Red Hat is not really meant for the desktop.
IBM, which owns Red Hat, uses Fedora for the Linux desktop for engineers who want Linux.
I think this person actually wants to run linux, but they are using Mac as a test case.
They mentioned “install an alternative operating system” - which on hardware sold for Windows very much implies Linux.
But if Linux is a no, and even macos is a no - which is from a “big and proper organisation” with support agreements and everything - then the company is obviously a lost cause who are dead-set on windows for life for all time.
I’m just replying to see if you copy the same response, for science.
Whoops. I commented, decided to rephrase and edited. But it didn’t result in an edit and I didn’t notice as that’s when I went to bed.
It was just a light hearted dig, no need to explain yourself .
It’s what happens if you submit a comment and fall for the egregious lie that is Lemmy telling you it didn’t go through
I think this person actually wants to run linux, but they are using Mac as a test case.
They mentioned “install an alternative operating system” - which on hardware sold for Windows very much implies Linux.
But if Linux is a no, and even macos is a no - which is from a “big and proper organisation” with support agreements and everything - then the company is obviously a lost cause who are dead-set on windows for life for all time.
I’m just replying to see if you copy the same response, for science.
I think this person actually wants to run linux, but they are using Mac as a test case.
They mentioned “install an alternative operating system” - which on hardware sold for Windows very much implies Linux.
But if Linux is a no, and even macos is a no - which is from a “big and proper organisation” with support agreements and everything - then the company is obviously a lost cause who are dead-set on windows for life for all time.
I’m just replying to see if you copy the same response, for science.
Why would you not be very clear about this right at the start of the interview process so you’re not wasting everybody’s (including your own) time? If this is one of your absolute show-stoppers, then say so up front and we can either work with IT to get you what you want, or decline and move on to the next candidate.
You have a lot more negotiating power once they give you an offer because of the sunk cost.
They didn’t even attempt to negotiate. They rescinded their acceptance as soon as “IT specialist” told them they only officially support Windows.
That happened to me prior, and I actually told them “hey, I really want this position, but you can’t expect me to do it properly on the same hardware/software you give the data entry employees.”
They gave me a budget to buy whatever hardware I want and told me I can install anything I want but I cannot reach you the sysadmin for any support outside of roles/permissions.
They didn’t even attempt to negotiate.
you’re seeing a snapshot of an entire interaction between multiple people. you can’t be sure there was zero negotiations.
besides, you can’t even be sure any of this is even real.
keep your unfettered outrage bottled up for something else, because this ain’t the one for you.
Yeah seems like it could be ragebait.
I’m commenting on the context given, I don’t intend to waste energy seeking more context on this story…
Are you talking to the employer or the applicant, because it works both ways?
Fair point, and taken. Interviews are a two-way street: the candidate should ask about everything that matters to them, and the company should ask about everything important they want.
To avoid situations like this, it’s best not to assume anything unless you ask first. Windows is the de facto standard in business, yes, but not everywhere and not in every industry.
If your work OS matters to you enough that you will pass on the job if you can’t pick, then you should ask. I would not want to hire someone who will be miserable in the job. And as a middle manager I probably don’t have enough pull to make an exception just for this guy anyway.
Rock stars play by their own rules and they will get whatever they ask for. For the rest of us, we just have to take what we’re issued.
Windows is the PC operating system used by almost every organization. If you aren’t willing to work with it, you really need to be clear about that up front.
It’s like trying to get a job as a mechanic at an auto shop and telling them after the interview you refuse to work on Toyotas.
refuse to work on Toyotas.
Nah, the analogy that would be closer would be if the shop said you must use some overpriced but notoriously fragile tools and you’ll be on the hook for any tool that breaks and any delay you incur will be your fault while they go buy a new tool. Plus the tools tend to have sharp edges on the handles for some reason and are just painful to use.
Now if the job is “you need to administrate the group policy of the company systems”, then “I refuse to run Windows” is a pretty stupid take. But frequently the job is rooted entirely in Linux based infrastructure for internet facing stuff, and Windows on the entry point is just horribly awkward for that job. You can kind of/sort of get there but I haven’t found a single decent ‘Terminal’ even compared to that being pretty trivial with Mac and Linux. WSL starts to provide something useful, but it is kind of fragile and WSLg sucks with the worst window management possible, even by the standards of Windows broadly. Meanwhile, starting from a Linux system you can use a desktop shell that is probably better for your productivity than anything Windows allows.
There’s not really a whole lot of logic for a lot of “Windows required” jobs in tech. Office365 is mostly fine through a Linux browser. Onedrive works with Linux. If you have some applications that are Windows only, again, sure, but a lot of tech folks don’t need any Windows only tools.
Recent example from my real world, someone was around my desk and asking questions about stuff that required me to hop between a few contexts. They were shocked how quickly I could navigate a bunch of the windows in the discussion, and asked how in the world I got Windows to do that. Of course, I couldn’t.
Besides, the general tone of the conversation could have been just full of redflags about how tortuous the company was going to be. One company blocked SSH between anything saying SSH was insecure, and said that, somehow, we had to do everything through the graphical console of the Linux instances. Which meant no rsync, no scp, having to create some file serving facility to upload files to and then download from. If my daily workflow depended on such draconian crap, I’d be out of there too.
I’ve worked in all sizes of companies, in various industries and 3 different European countries.
In my experience it very much depends on the industry the company in, the division one is working in and the size of the company.
Engineering types in an Engineering/Tech company using Linux isn’t at all unusual in smaller and mid-sized companies. Sales types or accounting, definitelly are using Window. Creatives tend to use Macs, mainly because the Adobe suite runs perfectly in it and the hardware is superior to PC hardware - designer types almost literally salivate at things like 4K monitors.
Real startups (so, not mature Tech companies that try and still be startups) will definitelly have their devs running whatever they want, whist for example big financial institutions will have everybody on Windows, except perhaps top-level management if they’re quirky and prefer Mac for some reason or other.
Then to this add that the kind of professional who not only prefers Linux but can actually say “bye, bye” if they don’t get it is almost certainly be a pretty senior Techie (say, a Senior Designer Developer) and even now those are pretty hard to find for a permanent employment position (you can’t replace those with AI or outsourcing, not even close, and in the path to such seniority many devs who keep on progressing eventually step into management instead of staying on the Technical career track) - outside a large company (were the hiring manager doesn’t have the pull to make it happen), it a pretty good idea to let them use whatever OS they want in their work machine, even if it has to be with the proviso that they won’t be getting any support for it from the IT Support group (which, trust me, they will be fine with).
If a hiring manager has the pull for it and there are no regulatory reasons to make it be otherwise, it’s pretty dumb not to let a rare resource like a really senior dev use whatever the fuck they want on their work PC if that’s going to allow you hire/keep that person.
This is clearly in a field where that’s not true
In my company, everybody is on Linux and if you want a Mac you need to make your case. 0 Windows laptop.
Your company is an outlier.
Yes. Doesn’t mean they don’t exist. Everybody is complaining about AI, Windows, whatever and nobody accepts to work for a smaller company because you earn less.
Either take the money and stfu or take the loss and work where your heart is.
Nobody said outliers don’t exist.
What we are saying is that the majority (like 80% or something) are run entirely on Windows. No matter what the Linux fanboys want to believe.
And I’m not denying any of this.
“I only work on carbureted engines.”
