All of our laptops are either Mac or Linux. Eight or ten years ago it was all Mac but now it's mostly Linux. Ultimately, clients that have closed Windows ecosystems always provide us with laptops or a jump station to connect to. So if they are going to do that anyway, there was no need for us to Windows internally.

[–] MonkeMischief@lemmy.today 5 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I bet that saves you a boatload in senseless licensing costs and lost time dealing with Microsoft's shenanigans!

[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Absolutely. Enterprise license and MSDN was expensive and a pain in the ass. Once we dropped support for Microsoft as a whole and transitioned to Google Apps (early adopters) everything became easy. OSX never broke, although the hardware could be problematic at times. The main reason most of us started transitioning to Linux from Mac was Apple's hardware choices. That said, I have a MBP M3 Max for music and graphics and that Apple silicone is absolutely beastly.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago

Maybe hardware requirements have been met nowadays with even basic hardware (gaming excepted), I have a quad core linux and my SO has an old quad core mac, no real need to upgrade those. My brand new thinkpad for work is running windows, well not actually running, merely walking IMO, everything has to be scanned and uploaded, there are moments the whole PC freezes up for 30-40 seconds to check if you should be able to launch that same app again ...

[–] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 5 days ago

That sounds like a dream. I use an MBP for work because the alternative is Windows. It really just ends up being a glorified ssh terminal to get to my Linux VM. I felt bad enough at one point that I switched to kitty to make better use of the M2 capabilities.