See that's the part I don't understand about Linux criticism. The problems are prevalent across any brand of operating system. How many system upgrades have we heard since Windows 10 launch that have reportedly break users computers? Windows 10 seems to be the latest champion on these, but I'm sure if we look closely we'll find the same across all upgrades since Microsoft adopted the on-demand update model with Windows XP. Windows 7, that is nearly unanimously considered Microsoft's cream of the crop (except obviously by Microsoft itself), had plenty of them too. Boy, did I fixed broken updates on Windows 7!...In that case, we should also discuss how frustrating and painful Linux can truly be. I also hate to say it but... drivers. I love Linux but it doesn't have the same commercial support and as such isn't a huge target for companies whose goal is to make money.
Drivers are an argument I have less trouble swallowing up as an acceptable criticism. But even so we have to understand that as a problem largely independent of the operating system and the anger (and pressure) should instead be directed fully at the hardware manufacturers, either for their continued lack of support or the poor design of their drivers. In the meantime, we must accept and use the tool for what it is designed. It never ceases to irritate me all those flustered younglings who cry to the top of their lungs on how Linux sux because they can't make their stupid new shiny webcam to work on Linux. Only thing worse than that is hearing them complaining that linux is bad because not many triple-A games are made for it. And lets not even get started on those that try to run Linux and expect results on any recently released high-performance GPU. For crying out loud, don't do that on Linux! Hell, you'll probably even have problems doing that on Windows. Who hasn't?
Now that's the part we swap chairs. And while still disagreeing with you, it is my turn to criticize Linux. I wish I had an half as decent IDE on Linux as Microsoft Visual Studio. MVS is the citizen kane of IDEs and a true gem for developers with its own single set of (mostly) consistent tools that will guide a developer from design to packaging and distribution. There's nothing even remotely close to that on Linux. And while some may argue Linux doesn't need it, it is only because they forgot the years they spent tracking around the Linux ecosystem and learning the whole development stack and its set of inconsistent tools, each with their own semantics, different rules for configuration files and all its trying to understand all its derivatives or forks and whether they are better or not. Ad they forgot all their false starts, the frustrations of going back after they realize they made a bad choice, and the time they could have instead saved if development on Linux was just a little more consistent and bloody well better documented.Linux is lucky that Windows make developing on it so abhorrent for anything that isn't a scripting language.
And if by any chance you are criticizing the .Net framework, I still think it is a far superior framework to anything I have seen so far on Linux. It's not just that you will have to make choices between GTK or QT and that these frameworks only offer a very small subset of the Linux desktop development and much has to filled in. It's also how poorly documented development is and how hard an entry barrier it presents itself.
I think the biggest advantage of Linux over Windows, concerning development, is the stability of its standards and interfaces. Once you learn them, you can rest assured you will be served by them for decades, with only minimum disruption and few incidents on which you will be forced to re-learn something new. Windows is in constant state of change, with new tech being hailed as the future, only to be driven out by other new tech. This can become exasperating and its a problem not only of the underlying development platform, but also of the UI.
---
One of the big reasons I switched to Linux (the other big reason being Microsoft itself), was exactly my growing hunger for stability and predictability. Linux offers me what I consider a perfect computing environment, on which I can expect a good deal of reason and stricter adherence to old and tested workflows. On the other hand it maintains a huge dose of opportunities for intellectual stimulation, by a huge margin to Windows (but huge! it's almost a joke trying to compare both systems on this detail). It's as such the perfect operating system to grow old with, bar none.
None of it has anything to do with webcams or GPUs, or printers or drivers, games or IDEs. I take its strengths and accept its weaknesses. Because it's become obvious for the past 5 years, perhaps more than any other period in the short story of the PC operating system industry, that Microsoft no longer offers a competing product.
And let me tell you, especially on an office environment.