Re: And this is why Linux will NEVER be a useable desktop OS
"Can you imagine an actual user in the real world doing this? or even understanding what this is telling him to do? And this is already sanitized for general consumption."
The last line of the citation you refer to as "this" included this text: "or better yet, wait for libidn2 to be fixed to cope with underscores." Can I imagine people in the real world doing that? Why, yes I can!
With Windows, waiting for someone to get around to fixing something is often your only choice. Sometimes you can roll back an entire month's worth of security fixes to undo a non-security bug like this, since MS has gone to massive monolithic updates, but then you're still waiting for them to fix it so you can get back to where you were when you noticed the bug in the first place.
The Linux suggestions were workarounds for people who know what that means and are inclined to try it, and they're not what I would call 'sanitized for general consumption' (anyone reading The Reg is already outside of those boundaries). The fact that there even ARE usable workarounds is not a negative. People have choices, and some choose to take action. Waiting for a fix is still just as valid in Linux as it is in Windows (though your wait is not likely to be an entire month as it is in Redmond-land, as those massive monolithic updates only come that often).
Actually, now that I have put it into words, I may have convinced myself that Windows isn't a usable OS in any of its versions anymore. Obviously 10 is out of the running as far as being a usable OS (and has been since its introduction), but now that the rest of Windows versions have the same idiotic monolithic patch setup, coming generally only once a month and often without any usable workarounds to get people through until MS gets around to fixing it, it looks like Windows is no longer fit for purpose.
Were you really trying to suggest that is better?