Yea bro totally. Totally. I'm gonna copy 2TB of media into the WSL virtual disk just so ffmpeg can run a little faster but still way slower than simply running linux.
(I beta tested the shit out of WSL1 and 2) before I wised up and just installed Gentoo forever.
But either way yeah most people aren't dealing with large media libraries that's obviously a little more difficult. But if you are primarily operating on them with WSL then you would just keep them in the WSL file system and you could access them from Windows whenever you need to...
Indeed. I have my agent edited files in podman in Lima, under two layers, and it's fine, because I do most stuff within my podman VMs. (I have shared volumes so I can review things before pushing the changes to my forge in separate containers that the agent can't access. When I need stuff on my mac, which is the exception, not the rule, I just copy them, putting them in a tar or zip if it's a lot of files.
That helps me exactly zero when I'm running something that is compiled for Linux and has no context in which to use the windows version. Which may not even be compiled with the same ./configure settings and would therefor potentially be missing entire codecs available to it.
This ladies and gentleman is the problem with discussing Windows design patterns on the internets. They say "use this" and you say "well it's broken in X, Y, Z" ways and instead of fixing it they say "you're using it wrong". No. Maybe it's just an inferior architecture.
This ladies and gentleman is the problem with discussing Linux distros on the internets. They say "install this" and you say "well it's broken in X, Y, Z" ways and instead of fixing it they say "you're using the wrong distro". No. Maybe it's just an inferior desktop OS.
What's the point of this question? It doesn't matter.
The entire point of wsl is to be able to run code compiled for Linux on Windows.
ffmpeg underpins so many things these days. It could be used to extract frames in a PHP based website, convert something to a gif, or a demux an mkv. You may as well be asking me why I'm using a computer.
Same here, though I went to Linux first for several years. WSL file speeds, especially when running npm install, were the impetus that ultimately got me to switch off of Windows.
Either you run npm install from Windows if you are operating on the Windows file system or you run it on WSL if you are operating on the WSL file system both cases will be very fast
Well before Windows I spent years with both Linux and Mac and I found Windows to be a good mix of stability and suitability for development now that WSL is a thing. Also for gaming it's the best by a long shot so just all around I've found it to be best and WSL made me never miss Linux.
Unlikely due to the better and more stable NVIDIA drivers available to Windows and the greater compatibility with every game without having to mess around with configuration files or other hacks. But you do you.
Of course just a personal experience, but I feel like I'm getting a much more stable experience with AMD in arch+sway/i3. Some of my friends with RTX5080s and such frequently crash on alt-tab or just simply from opening Steam overlay in their W*ndows setup.
Even with tiled windows I haven't had any game crash like that once. "alt-tab" equivalent takes 1ms and it just works. I can throw around the game window between workspaces, resize etc.
It's worth giving it a try. Unfortunate if games with certain AC setups are wanted, like GTA:O or LOL, but I can live without them.
Linux drivers are now first class and are faster and easier to install than any Windows drivers. There's no bullshit extras with them. They just work. Plus steam launches games in containers so there's zero configuration. If you don't know what you're talking about it is in fact better to say nothing than to just make shit up.
Here's a pre-configured Fedora based distro that is zero clicks. You sign into Steam and go. Drivers are preinstalled. You literally sign into steam and hit play.
Your answer to "GPU driver updates on Windows are one click, how can Linux be easier" is "here's another distro, install this instead"? This is ridiculous
He wanted it pre-configured and I pointed him to the one distro maintained by a Red Hat employee based on one of the most popular and supported distros.
Ya'll will complain about anything.
It is a live USB you can game on. You don't even really need to install it.
Oh yes, I distinctly remember having to use an outdated driver from a third-party repository to fix some sort of compatibility issue. Never had to do that on Windows
Well, my integrated GPU has a hard time with external 5k screens on Windows fairly often. I need to manually install the Intel drivers, which work for a while, but then Windows helpfully updates them to the earlier, borked version.
At least now this sometimes works if I turn the laptop on with the screen plugged-in. If I go to the toilet and the screen turns off, it's back to some low resolution. When my computer was new 5 years ago, it never did work in 5k, so... baby steps, right?.
I, who has to professionally support installs running Linux with Nvidia hardware, would personally say the situation is very far from ideal on Linux.
I dislike this 'my dad can beat yours' kinda competition when it's very clear Linux still has significant issues to resolve.
Proprietary for now, not sure how good the open source one is. But the proprietary has many quirks/bugs and limitations especially when i comes to things like Linux specific Vulkan extensions.
I don't know the full story, but afaik, AMD/Intel Mesa based drivers are fully open source and are built in a much more Linux-native way. But unfortunately hardware choice is out of my jurisdiction.
I’ve run the open kernel module for some time and it seems to work well although I had to patch it to fix support for some VR hardware until upstream fixes it properly. What Vulcan extensions were you having issues with?
> better and more stable NVIDIA drivers available to Windows
Huh? It's the same driver. It works the same on every platform. There's no consistent difference in performance (at least not between FreeBSD and Windows, it's been a while since I ran Linux).
Believe it or not, there's plenty of people that specifically choose windows, not just out of fear of getting fired or inertia. The idea that all devs use a mac and that windows is garbage for any kind of development is purely a silicon valley bubble thing.
And there's still a big niche that Windows is your only choice since the move to Apple silicon. If you need both a dGPU and access to commercial software, its literally your only choice. Game dev especially comes to mind if you're jumping between maya, after effects, etc. Windows is also huge in finance.
Windows _is_ garbage for a lot of modern development (except thise targeting Win32). But that does not matter to the ICT department tasked with controlling and securing all endpoints, preferring a single, very well known and controllable OS over freedom and performance.
When you run a game through a wrapper like GameScope it will draw to the Wayland Server that GameScope is running and then that subsequently writes to the parent display server (which can actually be X or Wayland).
Anyway it's a far superior and more secure protocol than whatever Windows is doing and you should for sure have ChatGPT explain it to you.
Humans do this too though. I have close friends that ask for advice. Sometimes if I know there’s risk in touchy subjects I will preface with “do you want my actual advice, or just looking for a sounding board”
I’ve seen firsthand people have lost friends over honesty and telling them something they don’t want to hear.
It’s sad really. I don’t want friends that just smile to my face and are “yes-men” either.
> Water, Yellow Pea Protein*, Avocado Oil, Natural Flavors, Brown Rice Protein, Red Lentil Protein, 2% or less of Methylcellulose, Potato Starch, Pea Starch, Potassium Lactate (to preserve freshness), Faba Bean Protein, Apple Extract, Pomegranate Concentrate, Potassium Salt, Spice, Vinegar, Vegetable Juice Color (with Beet).
Texas has these free electricity nights. Anyone know of a battery system that can fill the batteries at night (from the grid) and use them during the day? And then recharge at night again. Due to location solar isn’t an option but still interested in batteries due to free nights.
No batteries I know of will make economical sense though. Batteries are expensive, wear down and/or require maintenance. After x years / cycles your batteries will be dead and will need to be replaced.
Storing your "free" energy in a battery will end up costing more than just buying the energy when you need it.
Expensive energy storage is a big part of the reason why "green" energy countries like Germany have some of the highest energy prices in the world. And also some of the highest CO2 emissions per kWh in the EU (they need coal and gas powered plants as backups for when there's no wind and solar, because batteries don't make economical sense).
I agree about home batteries being too expensive, hopefully prices will come down with scale.
But the part about battery degradation is not true. Tesla Powerwall has a 10 year warranty[1] with 70% capacity retention. This means that Tesla has data showing that the battery will have higher capacity than 70% after those years. That's a lot of cycles and a lot of renewable energy that the battery will provide in its lifetime.
There's a reason why Tesla picks 10 years (8 years for car batteries) as a warranty period. Ask yourself: why 8 years and not 10 for cars? Why 10 years and not 15 or 20 years for home batteries? It's not arbitrary.
Battery degradation is not linear. It's not like: 10 years = 70%, 20 years = 40%. It's probably closer to 20 years = 20 % capacity left. The decay becomes exponential-like after a relatively linear period of roughly 10 years.
The Tesla warranty will fall under "first life" in the image in the link above.
So batteries (even Tesla Powerwalls) do degrade and do degrade to the point where you need to replace them a bunch of times during lifetime of a house.
Tesla and other car makers set their warranties at the mandatory minimums. Why would they offer more when they don't have to and consumers find them long enough and/or other car makers aren't competing on warranty length? That doesn't tell you anything about battery longevity.
Edit: Does my MacBook Pro die after 1 year when it's applecare warranty is over?
The mandatory minimums? Got a source of the mandatory minimum for cars (US and/or EU) as well as power walls?
The fact that other car makers aren't competing on warranty length seems to me to prove my point, but you seem to think it doesn't? What I mean is: if battery degradation for cars isn't that bad after 8 years, then why are other brands not offering significantly longer warranties to compete with the Tesla one?
Not sure about the competition argument anyway, since Tesla didn't have any competition initially and arguably still doesn't have real competition (depending on what features of the car you value most).
Edit: Does my MacBook Pro die after 1 year when it's applecare warranty is over? --> Pretty close yes IMO. My personal experience is that my laptop and phone battery capacities degrade very fast after 1 year and need to be replace after about 2 years, 3 years if you really really push it and are OK with constantly charging.
RE: MacBook Pro dying close to a year right after it's warranty it over --> well now you're just trolling. My iPhone 15 pro battery still maintains 100% battery health a year after its manufacturing date. It obviously won't need replacing in 1-2 more years even if I "really really push it and are OK with constantly charging". I used an iPhone XS until last year after it was about 5 years old, 5x longer than your supposed device-dead date. I don't think this is unusual.
LFP cells prices for direct sale to consumer are about 70 EUR/kWh right now. With 5000 cycles that's 1.4 EUR cent per kWh cycled out of the battery, so it fully makes economical sense in all electricity markets.
Fully integrated consumer battery prices haven't (yet) followed the decline in cell price, probably because there's lot of demand for this kind of product.
The real number is likely still significantly higher than 0,12 EUR / kWh due to battery capacity (and charge discharge efficiency) going down due to wear over time.
It does look like when the price of integrated storage products goes down more, it could become interesting for countries who have had very expensive energy policies (Denmark, Germany, Netherlands etc).
Your computation is off: it's 0.014 EUR/kWh, ten time less and far below kWh market prices about everyhere in the world.
As for cycling the industry standard is give the number of cycles to 80% capacity remaining so the battery is far from dead at 5000 cycles. The simple division I used is conservative.
No, it's not. From the link I posted (in Dutch unfortunately, I'll translate the relevant bit):
Small integrated battery:
3.5 kWh
Starting at about € 2.100,-
You yourself indicated in your post that integrated batteries (as in: the ones with battery management, that you can actually use to store energy in as opposed to a bunch of lose cells) are more expensive. They are more expensive indeed. I did the calculation. They boil down to 0,12 EUR / kWh in the example above.
The price of cells is not directly relevant, since you can't actually buy cells and just throw them at your house to magically start charging/discharging when you desire.
Well I bought cells a few years ago and use them with the necessary components, and those don't multiply the system price by ten.
BTW because I'm lazy to expand my system I just ordered 14 kWh of fully packaged LFP battery (box, BMS, cells, breaker) for $1800, $130/kWh, $0.026/kWh cycled.
Not sure why you consider them to be "green" given the facts you brought up. Germany has never been particularly green energy wise. It's a big population and lots of heavy industry with relatively little energy resources like hydro.
The are building solar and wind quickly now. Maybe that's why you got the impression that they are "green".
Germany is still very much captured by its coal lobby. The extent to which they are green is that they have a fairly vocal green party .. with 14% of the vote. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alliance_90/The_Greens
(This is incomprehensible to Anglosphere FPTP two-party systems)
The reason I wrote "green" is because, Germany actively hypes itself up as being very green and many people believe them because they have such a vast amount of solar and wind installed.
Germany's energy policy is one huge cognitive dissonance at best, gross mismanagement in the base case and a three-decade-long foreign intelligence job at worst.
This is a bit like the joke about economists seeing money on the ground and not picking it up because if it was there someone would have already taken it, but:
Note how ridiculously fast the battery rollout in Texas and California has been recently.
If you've not got some local regulation that stops early adoptors from being left high and dry when the market changes, then you're in head to head competition for that cheap nighttime energy with big corporations building out grid scale batteries.
You would have to be able to store a significant portion of your daily usage to make it worthwhile and that's before you even consider the price of the batteries.
It's a weird vibe going on in this post. A lot of people are cheering the withdrawal from Afghanistan. I wonder how many know that the Taliban has all biometric/financial data that the US left behind enabling them to round up anyone who ever helped the US.
Sell it back at night when there's already a surplus of electricity? This is exactly why they want EV's charging at night, because there's less demand.
In a lot of places, peak supply is during the day now. Overnight conditions are more about a lack of demand than a surplus of supply (although they're sort of equivalent), but really the most effective use would be charge while the sun shines, dump the battery onto the grid when you get home, and then charge slowly overnight after the end of peak. Assuming there's no downsides from cycling your battery and you and the system have perfect knowledge of your evening plans.
Depending on the renewables mix the grid settles on, selling some back during the night might make sense. Both solar (obviously) and wind (less obviously, at least to me) decrease during the night so we may find we need to supplement the generation with battery reserves during the night for demand peaks.
Nuclear and traditional dammed hydro prefer to be setup to provide extremely consistent power too so there's a gap in the power generation if we completely eliminate fossil fuels. Even if we don't completely eliminate them, peaker plants are extremely expensive to operate because their base costs and ideally low usage means their cost per megawatt is pretty high.
I there is a surplus of electricity at night, then why have batteries? There seems to be no problem at all with just spot market demand in that case!
I thought the issue was that solar panels are generating electricity during the day only. So as someone with solar, you want to sell during the day and buy at night. No?
My point is, rather than using batteries to store huge amounts of energy and lose much of it in the process, find efficiencies and use credits instead.
Typically the sell back time is in the evening, after solar production is done but before people go to bed. Also some in the early morning, albeit to a smaller degree.
Yes and assaulting someone is also illegal (whether with a weapon or not), reckless driving is also illegal (whether you are drunk or not), and violent hate crimes are illegal (whether you had discriminatory hate in your heart or not)
The existing criminal process can prosecute fraud after the fact; but there are potential FTC regulations which could make it either harder to commit it or easier to detect it, acting as a deterrent before fraud is done.
reply