Some of what you write is true. Some is false or absurd.
> WSL 2 is not stable and it is only available for the Windows Insider program
True but so what? It works perfectly well for many purposes right now (I know this from experience). Work on it is progressing apace, and it'll be in the mainstream builds before long.
> And it does not have X.
I don't even know what that means. You can install an X server (x410's the best in my experience), and run X11 apps in it. I worked f/t on the Linux build of IntelliJ running in WSL2 for a couple of projects, and it was fine.
> NTFS is getting old and it is very slow if you have a lot of small files.
Windows file handling is pretty slow, but not mainly because of NTFS. Working in WSL2 you have a linux kernel & ext4 for your source files, so it doesn't matter.
> Windows is nice to a light development. But if you really need a complete solution you have to search for alternatives.
That's just a silly ideological statement. And it is not a matter of opinion - great swathes of significant and sophisticated software are written by devs using Windows. To suggest something more is 'needed' flies in the face of objective reality. By all means express your taste (mine also runs to Linux right now, though it's a marginal decision), but you'd be better off being aware that taste is just that, and only that.
> WSL 2 is not stable and it is only available for the Windows Insider program
True but so what? It works perfectly well for many purposes right now (I know this from experience). Work on it is progressing apace, and it'll be in the mainstream builds before long.
> And it does not have X.
I don't even know what that means. You can install an X server (x410's the best in my experience), and run X11 apps in it. I worked f/t on the Linux build of IntelliJ running in WSL2 for a couple of projects, and it was fine.
> NTFS is getting old and it is very slow if you have a lot of small files.
Windows file handling is pretty slow, but not mainly because of NTFS. Working in WSL2 you have a linux kernel & ext4 for your source files, so it doesn't matter.
> Windows is nice to a light development. But if you really need a complete solution you have to search for alternatives.
That's just a silly ideological statement. And it is not a matter of opinion - great swathes of significant and sophisticated software are written by devs using Windows. To suggest something more is 'needed' flies in the face of objective reality. By all means express your taste (mine also runs to Linux right now, though it's a marginal decision), but you'd be better off being aware that taste is just that, and only that.