In my case: There was some learning curve in the beginning end sometimes a little bit from time to time. But in general: I need less time (and much less stress) compared to some other OS where every update breaks something or results in data-loss and restoration.

I mean: I heard that Arch should required a lot of time to understand everything. With Mint and Debian I'm running fine :)

It's free as used in freedom not as used in terms of costs.

If you really want to see it in terms of costs: I help (mostly elderly) people using tech, and I can't say that Windows is any better than Linux.
Windows Update -> Performance drops. New major release -> costly new hardware.
Clicked the wrong button/file -> Viruses (and man, this is time consuming).
Kaspersky, Avira etc. plays with the fears of Viruses. -> Confusion and Uncertainty

Installed two of my participants Linux (60 and 80 years old) all the above is gone. They tell me every month they've done updates, they love to update their system (don't know why, guest because it just works and feels good).
They saved a lot of money cause they can use their "old" hardware and so on and so on.

I think this is a common statement from people who were taught to use Windows in their childhood. In fact, as others have said here, people forget that it was also necessary to learn Windows.

In my opinion, each operating system has its own purpose (with a lot of overlap with the other operating systems, of course). I use MacOS, GNU/Linux, Windows. Each OS has required me to learn something and I don't regret the time spent learning.

I would say: not true. Installing Linux mint take 20 minutes. Installing windows 11 on the same computer about 2 hours.

Not mentioned the data security.

the point is, it's kinda true.

I run the same distro on my notebook since years now and don't have any troubles. Everything just works. So it would be free for me. (Unlike as with my other notebook from work that is running windows...)

However I don't actively work on the Kernel or any distro. Those people are paying. We should give something back to them.

anything takes time to learn but once a point is reached, Linux is just simpler to manage as it keeps it simple.

Nothing beats working with text files to configure stuff and then there is the excellent #ansible to do things en masse.

I have done admin for other systems as well and I find Linux the least time intensive, by a large margin.

And then come Telegram groups that scream weekly to update Windows, because otherwise it won't function or there is yet another critical vulnerability that stems from the ugly mishmash of an operating system. Absoluuuutely missing that time I had to update the garbage into more garbage.

I'm better off doing my normie video editing and graphic design on systems that actually value my time as a user. Fedora, Mint, PopOS, Elementary, there are quite respectable choices to make in distro world!

Completely untrue. Installing Linux Mint* takes about 20 minutes and updating all software happens with a single click (nothing done without approval). Windows takes far longer to install and there's no one click update of software from various sources.

Yes, there are distros that require more active maintenance, just as there vehicles. Frankly, Linux to Windows is like an EV compared to manual transmission ICE car.

*good alternative to Windows

Houses and buildings lying in ruins, following a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, in Jabalia in the northern Gaza Strip, January 19. REUTERS/Mahmoud Al-Basos

#Gaza