> That sounds arrogant and condescending. In order for that to be true you would have to presume that any given behavior was objectively better, and therefore the anyone who prefers different behavior only does so because they are comfortable with the 'wrong' behavior.

That’s the literal opposite of what I said. I was saying what’s “right” is often subjective and people (ie not just technical users but non-technical users too) often (ie
not always but in a great many cases) chose what’s right based on what is familiar or comfortable.

That’s basic human psychology. There’s a number of published papers that demonstrate this exact phenomenon.

> > That’s a huuuuge generalisation there. The truth is it depends on the Linux distribution

> No, it doesn't

Of course it does. A bleeding edge distro is going to have packages mainlined sooner than a conservative enterprise distro. This isn’t some shocking news, it’s Linux 101.

The whole point of distributions is they are different distribution of packages on Linux. So it should be pretty obvious that some will ship different packages to others.

> and I'm really tired of hearing "you chose the wrong distro, bro" for literally every distro because none of them actually do what I, and many others, want

I didn’t actually say you chose the wrong distro though. I said the age of packages depends on a number of factors including what distro you use (but not limited to).

The second part of your statement reaffirms my point about how there’s not right or wrong with preference. Linux doesn’t do what you want it to do your preferences lay else where. You’re even admitting there that others have told you that you’re trying to bend Linux into behaving in a way that distro wasn’t designed to. Thus that’s a preference you’re demonstrating and not a statement of something being technically superior nor inferior.

> Why is it considered so insane to want a stable base system and be able to install applications of any level of bleeding-edgeness on top of it without jumping through a bunch of hoops?

It’s not insane and there are platforms out there that manage that better than others. However it’s pointless me listing them because there are a myriad of other reasons you don’t like Linux too.

> And Linux, in my experience, doesn't excel at taking the risk away as I have seen updates break other package's dependencies plenty of times

No software is infallible but package managers are robust and have been for at least 15 years. The only times I’ve seen a package manager go tits up is when I’ve intentionally overridden it’s default behaviour and then forced it to proceed regardless. Basically knowingly forced it to break. I’ve had Linux (and FreeBSD too) running for years, constantly upgrading it from the package manager without a single issue. So I don’t doubt you’ve ran into issues but with package management on Linux, after all you seem to find all the problems on Linux, but generally it does work well for most people.

The same is true for Windows. If you’re competent then you can run a stable Windows install for years without any issues. And equally on Windows people might bork the system installing the wrong software. Such as accidentally installing a dodgy copy of Firefox from a spoofing website.

This doesn’t mean manually installing software is worse - I’m just exampling where package management tools do help. Microsoft would agree too since they provide a number of tools for pushing software out in an automated way.

> You clearly haven't kept in touch with Windows through the Windows 10 era

I don’t see why you make that statement when Windows 10 still proves my point: updates happening slower and less frequently than on Linux.

That’s not a bad thing though. It’s just a different operating model.

> We're getting off in the weeds. My original point, I think, stands: Linux doesn't behave the way I think is best, therefore it isn't 'comfort' that makes me not like the way it behaves, it's my preference for a different --better in my reasoned opinion-- behavior.

“Better” in your context is subjective to your preference though. Which is the point you keep missing. And if the term is subjective then it cannot be argued as technically superior.

Then there’s the question of why do you subjectively prefer the platform that you’re already familiar and comfortable with rather than this other platform that feels alien to you. Could it perhaps be because it’s familiar?

> If this is truly your opinion then you have phrased your initial assertion in a very poor and condescending sounding way.

People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones:

> You very much make it sound like "people who don't like the way Linux behaves are just idiots who can't learn new things".

> Oh, I see, it's because you actually did think they're just idiots.

We don’t have to agree on everything but the ridiculously hostile way you’re twisting my post makes it hard to have a sensible conversation with you.