Complaints vary, I find Linux users seem to prefer the low overhead, Windows updates a lot, and privacy concerns.

So if you're operating servers or something like that, I suppose Linux makes sense.

For practical use though, its evident the average consumer wants something easy to use and Windows 10 is surprisingly well optimized for low end hardware.

Frankly, that's really what's keepin us on Windows. Its has great support it just works fine.

Specifically it is open source drivers such as mesa drivers that benefits most ... 

And finally we can have new players that can support modern Direct3D and Apple could move on to support S3TC instead of PVRTC1/2 for their iPhone GPUs ... (soon we'll see Adreno on Windows)

Not really, PS4/X1 has comparable texture compression algorithms to match ASTC in quality such as BC5/6H/7 ... (the only advantage with ASTC is that it's far more scalable to lower qualities but that's moot when it's expected of home consoles to have the highest quality texture compression) 

I'd say Switch supporting D3D12 feature level 12_1 and doube rate FP16 is more interesting than ASTC. Switch has support for overestimate conservative rasterization but the vast majority of the use cases are hardly performant considering Nvidia HFTS used in games will make the framerate tank so that kills a the enthusiam a little bit. Switch supporting raster order views is optimal for transparent and volumetric rendering. Double rate FP16 is good stuff for increasing performance on Switch ... 

Linux could become viable for common use case but it'll never match Windows in gaming and I bet AMD wants it that way too since Microsoft keeps throwing a bone for them known as Direct3D updates ... (D3D12 does so much more for AMD than Vulkan does so far and it's far more advanced too, I actually sort of lamented that Star Citizen wasn't going to support DX12 since it's lost opportunity to show the true advantages of being built around WDDM 2.X/shader model 6.1+) 

We are talking about texture compression here, I am sure Microsoft has patents on AA that cause people headaches, but to my knowledge AA is not really an issue.
Personally I don't really care for AA anyway, and it is not really mission critical.
Especially when we are talking about text, for reasons I am sure I will eventually turn into its own thread.

Texture compression compatibility causes major issues when trying to, for say run Windows apps on a Linux machine.
S3TC is not a Microsoft patent, but the nature of the licensing restricts its use on Linux all the same.
Microsoft has been a big part of its success though, with the support found in / with DirectX.


Using ASTC Texture Compression for Game Assets

Data size will be referring to VRAM usage from here on out.
bpp = bits per pixel.
There are 8 bits per byte.
I will make the assumption that a gigapixel is one billion pixels from here on out.
And from here on out I will assume (for the sake of simplicity) that one billion pixels is equal to 1GB,
eight bytes per pixel as a baseline.

The left is uncompressed data at 2 to 3 GB per gigapixel.
The middle is S3TC (Microsoft's name for it anyway) using 1 GB per gigapixel.
The right is ATSC using 0.64 GB per gigapixel.

So in short ASTC uses less data than S3TC and looks better (less artifacting when comparing the given example).
It will not always be this biased towards ASTC, and there are different quality settings that could be used.

Apologies for anything I have gotten incorrect, and / or oversimplified.

I don't like that a company (e.g. Microsoft) can dictate so much about what happens on my computer. With Windows 10, it's pretty obvious not everything Microsoft does is good for consumers. I'd say that's the main issue. The other is that for my use, Windows has some serious problems. For example, I'd like to automate a lot of tedious stuff, but doing it is pretty difficult in Windows. In Linux, it's usually very easy if you have any idea about what you're doing. One example is updates, which are familiar to pretty much every computer user. In Windows, more often than not you have to restart the computer after updating the OS. In Linux, there's no need for it almost ever, and you don't even have to closer the programs you're currently using even if they're being updated! (Mind you, the update gets applied only after restarting the program, but still - no need to close the program while the update is being installed.) Considering the slowness of updating Windows, that alone can be a big thing.

Really ? Their going to use BC3 for comparison when better formats are available ? I bet the guys behind the comparison won't even mention BC7 when the quality argument for ASTC goes out the window ...  

ASTC is only superior when using older formats in comparison but the newer desktop formats are just as good in quality and data compression ... 

ASTC's biggest selling point is that there's more options for lower bit rates across the spectrum of quality ... 

Not to mention modularity.

GNOME 3 (my current desktop) allows me to pin any window I like to the top of the display stack.
So I can have a video or terminal open on top of a web browser, something I don't think you can do on Windows (and if you can you have to jump through a lot of hoops).
My video or terminal can be doing its thing whilst I click on / use my browser (or other app), this allows me a much greater degree of productivity, when working in my Linux environment.

Not to mention all the other neat power user stuff that you can only do on Linux and co.

Oh and installing software (when it is supported) is super easy.
On Debian and its permutations, all I need to do is type into the terminal:

#apt install mpv

To install my video player of choice,
No need to use a web browser, no (reasonable) need to worry about viruses.

And I understand I am replying to the wrong post, but, meh.

I did say the test was biased and that I was oversimplifying.

I honestly don't get the hate for Windows when tons of people here adore consoles which are poster childs for closed and proprietary platforms ...

Most people don't have all that bad of an experience with consoles.

But everyone has plenty of bad experiences with Windows.

Consoles make you feel joy; Windows, just hate or satisfaction.

To be fair I never claimed that there weren't issues with windows. It's just not some that I can notice. I won't say that i'm super knowledgable about computers. But windows is great as a computer os and a gaming os and that's all I really care about. I feel like a lot of the issues are just overblown. 

I'm not saying Windows is perfect or that Microsoft is god, I just think Windows 10 is surprisingly good. Then again, it shouldn't take much for an OS to work like it should!