As Windows 10 was falling out of support and I had to do something with my pretty old computer, I had two choices: I could either apply for the extended Windows 10 updates, or I could force Windows 11 on it. However, as I discussed in my post on the topic, doing either one would essentially be delaying the inevitable. Windows 10 updates would last only so long, and Windows 11 would continually be a mess to use until I got the right hardware.

So, I took the secret third option that Microsoft didn't want me to do: moving to Linux. I researched the topic, and there was no shortage of articles, Reddit threads, and YouTube videos explaining why switching to Linux was the right choice for me. Linux would run better on my aging hardware; a distro update wouldn't physically lock me out based on the hardware I was using; getting my fave apps running on Linux is a lot easier today than it was a decade ago; and finally, I could actually customize the taskbar. Unthinkable.

However, there was one feature that people never mentioned to me, but quickly became a major reason for me sticking with Linux. Weirdly enough, it's something that Linux users use all the time, and yet it goes so underdiscussed when discussing Linux's differences to Windows that I feel it's just plain underrated.

Linux users never really told me about package managers

An underrated feature that's, paradoxically, very well-known

Linux users probably raised an eyebrow when I said that package managers are "underrated." However, as I'll get to in a bit, I fully understand that package managers are a beloved and well-used part of the operating system; it's just not given the respect and praise that I think it should.

For those who aren't sure what a "package manager" is, it's a special part of Linux that usually comes pre-installed with the OS. I say "usually" because there are some operating systems where you have to set it up yourself, but in terms of distros like Ubuntu and Fedora, they're there by default.

These package managers talk to a huge repository that contains a ton of apps. There are different repositories for different use cases, and each app stored within is maintained and tweaked to work with said use case. For example, if you use a package manager to download an app on Ubuntu, you get the one tailored for Ubuntu. If you use Fedora's package manager, you get the Fedora-maintained version, and so on.

Using a package manager is really easy. You open up your Terminal, type the word "sudo" to execute the command with the right privileges, then write the command to download an app from your system's package manager. If you wanted to see your PC's specs in the Terminal using "Fastfetch," you could type "sudo apt install fastfetch" in Ubuntu, or "sudo dnf install fastfetch" in Fedora. The middle part is the command to tell your OS's package manager to rummage through the repositories, fetch the app, and install it. And, while it's at it, it'll also install any dependencies the app needs to run.

So, with a quick command in the Terminal, your PC can grab an app tailored specifically to work with your OS, collect all the dependencies it needs to run, verify the download using cryptographic signatures, install it, and set it up on your PC. Takes about 10-15 seconds tops. It's very convenient, and I try to install apps via the package manager whenever I can.

Why I feel package managers are underrated

More people need to know about these things

So, I don't know about you, but when I hear the word "underrated," my mind immediately pictures something that doesn't see a lot of use. That's not what I'm trying to get at here; package managers actually see a ton of use. Instead, I really want to go more into the raw definition of "underrated," which is simply something that isn't valued as much as it should be.

Here's an example: when I originally threw the idea of discussing how underrated package managers are, one of our biggest Linux vets, Jeff Butts, unmuted simply to say, "It's because they work so well." And I agree with them; package managers work so well that they're a novelty for the first week and a toolbox mainstay the next. Before you know it, you're thoughtlessly whacking in commands the moment you want to install something, without paying heed to the excellent tech that goes behind package managers.

It's gotten to the point where I can't really go back to Windows anymore. Sure, Windows has WinGet, but it's pretty bare-bones, and I prefer using APT or DNF.

Linux's package managers are the most-used, least-celebrated feature I know

Are package managers underused? Far from it. They're a staple for Linux users, and often a first port of call when installing an app. Do we give them enough love and advertise them as a fantastic tool that Windows doesn't get by default? Hardly. I think we should definitely rep it more when discussing the advantages of Linux over Windows; after all, it's one of the features that kept me on Fedora.