Parent author reporting back. I am going to have to sort of disagree with you there (in Lumbergh voice).

In all seriousness though, you are wrong on all points. Sorry, yes you are wrong. Rather than write a point by point rebuttal, against my common sense (you know, the thing about arguing with someone one the Internet) I'll just write a few paragraphs, provide some professional anecdotal and maybe quantitative evidence, and allow others to decide what's reasonable.

I build laptops and desktops for students of whom I teach programming and electronics. I build both new and used systems, and I loan and sell a lot of computers. Students get the loaners, buyers fund profits to buy more students computers. That said I experience a wide variety of actual system performance information across a large spectrum of computers.

Linux installs faster than Windows by a lot. When booting it's my experience that Linux can open a task manager (sometimes called system monitor on Linux) quicker than on a Windows system, the same goes for the file manager (explore on Windows). Across the board most programs open faster on Linux. You can disbelieve all you want, but that's just an objective reality.

https://i.imgur.com/UxR30xG.png

Regarding less CPU cycles, yes again it 's true, Linux uses less. Linux has far fewer background services and other tasks running in the background doing a bunch of unnecessary stuff.

https://www.pcerror-fix.com/windows-10-services-to-disable-f...

It's not just the services though. Windows is constantly scanning files for viruses or other malware, it's recording your activity, it's indexing the content of your computer as files are written or change. All this causes guess what? More CPU cycles and more memory being consumed. You may now go back and check my second point.

Moving on, you are wrong again on point number three. You don't need to download illegal Windows software to get malware. You can get it attached as an add on to free legal Windows programs.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/oracle-extends-its-adware-bund...
https://www.information-age.com/hotbed-malware-another-blow-...

Next, Windows updates are notorious for downloading updates in the background without your knowledge or consent. There are well known stories of people who were working on an important task on their Windows computer, who got up for a break and came back to see updates being applied from an automatic reboot causing their work to be forever lost.

https://www.howtogeek.com/224471/how-to-prevent-windows-10-f...
https://www.constellationsolutions.com/informational/tired-o...

Without a doubt Windows has more software, but I said the Linux app store experience is better than Windows. On Linux distributions have app stores that come from a curated list, and those apps are built from source by the distribution maintainer. They are verified to some degree and use the same installation methodology. On Windows this is not the case, a lot of software installs automatically without user consent. I keep getting Espon software each time I install Windows on a new computer attached to my network, gleefully telling me I need to buy ink from Epson. Additionally, Windows software often contains other adware or malware even if it comes from a Windows store. The software management side of things on Windows is a big stinking mess, which was the point I made, but yeah feel free miss that point to morph it into "Windows has more software".

When I said telemetry, that means collecting you data. You're not only being disingenuous in asserting that means downloading your personal files, you're also asking someone to prove a negative.

Regarding customization, on my distribution of choice it's very easy to change the icon or control theme, add extensions, and change those settings. There are prebuilt themes you can preview and click on to make a bunch of changes all at once, or you can click the original prebuilt to restore to the default settings.

You say the price of Linux versus Windows is 100% irrelevant nowadays. As a system builder I don't follow. Does Windows cost a system builder money or not? If it does, then it's not irrelevant.