[srazzaque]

I have been using Linux on "bare metal" for quite some time, as my primary operating system on the machines I've owned. When I've needed Windows, I've run it in a virtual machine. This has been my MO on my personal machines for over 10 years.

On my most recent machine however, I've opted to do this the other way around. I'm running Windows 11 Pro, running Linux on Hyper-V.

The experience has been.... Fine! I may actually prefer this setup (time will tell). Everything hardware related "just works". As per another thread on HN, Linux does seem to run very well virtualised compared to Windows. People will get riled up about needing an MS account. But I suppose that hasn't bothered me too much yet (who knows I may change my stance on this).

The reality is, messing around with drivers, the Linux wireless stack, display resolutions, firmware updates (ie the nuances of running Linux on a laptop) offers zero value to cloud workloads.

So I don't think running Linux directly on the hardware is an absolute necessity.

You can achieve similar levels of productivity and knowledge uplift if you: reserve Windows use for only things that require Windows (eg Ms office, and zoom meetings with a Bluetooth stack that won't drive you insane), and do EVERYTHING ELSE in your VMs.

[Ekaros]

I have been doing the VM for my entire albeit somewhat sort career.

It actually makes lot of sense in modern development. VMs can be throwaway, you set up them as needed and if they break well, new one is hour or two.

And this model is actually pretty close how server software is developed with cloud. Either you roll VM there, or some set of containers.