If the lessons that I've learned about lightbulb replacement are applicable, then the nationality of the developers on the bus will impact the answer to your question.

The sanctions apply to the BSDs too. The only difference with sanctions that I could imagine would be if one of the BSDs had (through happenstance or other factors) a lower starting proportion of Russian developers relative to Linux. If that were the case, then the impact of sanctions on that BSD would be proportionally smaller.

Very user-hostile, but very unsurprising.

Kindle hardware can be very nice, but almost every software decision is designed to keep users within their walled garden.

No epub support, no third party app support, no ability to load non-store audio, and now this. What a waste. These things could be so much more useful than they are.

Woof. The logo was always a hint about what they were planning to do to the customers. First the K and the G came for the letter o...and I did nothing because I am not the letter o.

I don't integrate it with anything else, but facebook remains my best option for getting current contact info for anybody from my past. Even after the enshittification, it remains an effective Rolodex. Rolodex...I am old.

Arch offers a combination of rolling software updates, a simple but easily customized base, pacman for the package manager, the AUR, a barebones installation process by default, good documentation, and active development. That may or may not be a good combination based on your goals.

Other distros offer a different combination of characteristics. Those characteristics are a starting point and you can get to the same destination no matter what you use. The trick is figuring out what starting point is closest to your destination or which starting point makes the journey fun for you. For some people, Arch is that. For plenty of people, Arch isn't that.

I think that phrases like 'anti-consumer' can stick to any target, so long as they're thrown with a sufficient amount of bullshit.

Somebody isn't getting their apple polished.

I use linux to run my law office, so it can be done. Most of what I use is web-based these days, so headaches are minor. That being typed, I've been using linux off and on since the 1990s, and there was a fair amount of learning involved. A few notes:

-Libreoffice is good enough for document drafting, unless you're extremely reliant on templates generated in Word. Even then, that's a few hours of clerical work that you can farm out with, presumably, no confidentiality issues to flag. Also bear in mind that if you end up using different Linux distributions on more than one computer, then you may run into minor formatting differences between different versions of your word processing software. Microsoft Office will be a reliable option unless you run windows as a virtual machine. There are workarounds, but they aren't business ready.

-Some aspects of PDF authoring can be tricky if you're doing discovery prep, redaction, and related tasks in-house. This is very workflow-specific, so if you're not a litigator or your jurisdiction doesn't have a lot of specific requirements for pdf submissions, it might not be something that you need to worry about. If it becomes a problem, then a Windows virtual machine might be a solution.

-Video support depends greatly on the linux distribution, so you may want to do a bit of research and avoid distributions like Fedora, where certain mainstream AV formats are not supported by default for philosophical/licensing reasons.

-Compatibility with co-counsel and clients will be hit or miss. I don't let anything leave my office that hasn't been converted to PDF and I only do collaboration when there is a special request to do so. I can fall back on a computer that I have which runs Office. It sounds like you have more than one computer, so you can have a backup plan.

-Hardware support is critical. If you need to videoconference and it turns out that your webcam doesn't have a linux driver, then you may be hosed. Research and test on the front-end so that you don't find yourself in an embarrassing situation of your own making.

-Learning curves cost money. If you're using an entirely new set of user software AND you're hopping between different distributions to find the version of linux that works for you, you'll waste a LOT of time that you could be using to generate billable work.

Neat! Next time I build a house, I'll go with House Telvanni.

Adding on to this: people overestimate their own expertise.

I've run Linux on a Rockchip Chromebook, several Pi boards, and an M1 Macbook Pro, all with good results. I think that it helps that Linux comes from a long lineage of highly portable operating systems. One of the early victories of Unix was its ease of portability to new types of processor, due (at least in part) to being programmed in C. The BSDs and Linux have always had developers who took joy in getting the operating system up and running on more than one type of architecture. Debian, for instance, has run on one sort of ARM chip or another since around 2000. Windows has a core business that thrives on X86-based chip designs and they have had very little pressure to branch out over the years. Computer companies build around their operating system, rather than the other way around.