The Daws of my choice do not run on Linux.

Dual booting is the worst possible combination, given that any windows update will kill the linux bootloader (major update to be fair, but it will happen and then you have to recovery iso to fix the bootloader every time). Plus having to disable all boot optimizations on the windows side because of tainted filesystem that linux can't figure out without risk of data destruction. I'd rather just use a VM - but the same games that don't run on linux also dont want you playing in a VM.

This is no longer true, and has been for close to a decade now. If you sandbox the Windows bootloader in a directory it will not be able to mess up your custom boot loading config, especially booting to the kernel from UEFI.

Dual booting with windows running on the same box? Sooner or later windows WILL destroy the other system.

That or you'll get into an argument with UEFI/Windows/Bitlocker.

I've been dual booting windows/arch for almost 1 years now. Except the rare case that windows fucks my grub and I have to mkconfig again it'd been smooth sailing.

Good luck. And I'm not sarcastic.

I have them on the separate nvmes and I disable Linux nvme before I boot into windows.

Last time I accidentally inserted encrypted pendrive I use in Linux when my windows was booted, it immediately offered razing the partition to the ground, creating a new one and quick formatting it. Very helpfully "OK" was preselected. If I was a bit more tired I'd be a bit sad.

Windows is intentionally hostile to anything non-windows. Enjoy your dual booting while it lasts :)

I like Linux, it's my laptop daily driver, but there's nothing I would do on Linux on my gaming PC that I can't do on Windows.

Linux just has no upside over Windows in a dual boot context.

> Linux just has no upside over Windows in a dual boot context

If you do dual-boot and don't care about the privacy of the data you put into Windows, I guess so.

If I dual-boot, I have to maintain both OSes no matter what.

I also personally keep no data on my devices, but if I did, having data that I need to reboot to get to would be friction I don't want.

> I also personally keep no data on my devices

Now I get your point. But still I would prefer to access my "personal" accounts from a device I trust.

Do you use a cloud service for your files?

Yep. I've been a paying Google Workspace user for almost 20 years now (in the various iterations of the product name).

Some stuff goes in GitHub, none of which I actually truly care about though.

I'm sure you'll groan. :)

But hey, if it's good enough for Cloudflare and Datadog (two past employers), it's good enough for me.

I also may be weird because I don't own any media and I'm perfectly happy with the streaming model. I enjoy not having the mental load of thinking about self-hosting and backing up terabytes of stuff.

I feel "lightweight" and I like it.

Yeah it makes it very easy to be OS-independant. I have backups of my whole home directory so if anything goes awry I can just reinstall software as I go and restore my config files from the most recent backup.

I have a Nextcloud instance for family to store files, though.

If you dual booted but wanted access to your data from either OS, you could easily set up a data drive/ partition that both OSes can access.

Yeah, but presumably that's not acceptable to the person who talks about "(not) caring about the privacy of data you put in windows" in the ancestor comment, which is why I mentioned rebooting.