I used the proprietary predecessor, Stacker.
It was pretty magical. It turned my 40 MB hard drive into a (seemingly) 80 MB hard drive.
I don't remember there being a significant performance penalty, because it was presumably overshadowed by the relatively (compared to processor speed) slow disk speeds.
Can you believe that there was a time when it wasn't frowned upon to offer your kid up to the forest demons?
Man how times have changed.
What about "INSTALL A DIFFERENT OS!!!!!"? Is that better? There are reasonably two others to choose from, and one of those doesn't require the purchase of expensive equipment and arguably a path into an even more controlled ecosystem.
And your analogy is way off. This isn't a malfunction of Windows that a technician is going to fix, never to be seen again. This is more like a rep from the car manufacturer meeting you at your car every morning to ask if you want to install their factory upgrade. You tell them that you never want to see them again, so next week they start sending a different representative. You have no other options.
Well, except getting a free car that doesn't send a rep.
I get that the comment is almost surely circlejerk, but it is also honestly the only real answer to OP's question, isn't it? To switch OS?
So it's kind of hard to get mad at their comment when it's the only viable option. Is your problem with Linux or is it the fact that it brings you anxiety to know MS is in control of you? What if we substitute another OS for "Linux"? Does that make you feel any better?
I'm honestly not trying to be a jerk; these are honest questions. That's probably saying more than for OP, though; they, of course, knew the answer before they asked.
Even without the boot, I would think that a person's thumb would hit the button regardless.
For most utilities (water, electricity), there's a relatively linear relationship between the tangible value provided (energy used, water dispensed) and the cost to provide it (coal burned, water sourced/treated). Even for wind- or hydro-powered electricity, the amount that everybody uses has a proportional amount of wear on the system and consequent required maintenance.
But not so much for ISPs. Instead, you're basically paying for a "fictional" amount (speed) of a non-tangible product. Granted, there is a linear relationship to the amount of electricity the ISP uses to provide each bit, but it's negligible.
Instead, what you're paying for with internet is essentially to recoup the fixed costs of the provider's equipment. They do need to upgrade every so often to accommodate more capacity and faster speeds, but this is proportional to speeds provided and not data volume used.
*edit: replied to wrong comment
The --hold feature was introduced with snapd v2.58 which was released as recently as Dec 1, so less than 9 months ago. So I would consider this a relatively new feature.
Furthermore, as best as I can tell from the documentation, there isn't even a way to configurably hold updates in general or for a specific package like can be done with apt-preferences; refresh.hold only allows 90 days out.
I think it is a perfectly valid criticism that the snap developers didn't implement this feature at all until well into the life of the product and then, even then, done begrudgingly at best evidenced by the minimal implementation.
Now, I feel like I did my research, but feel free to let me know if there's something I can do better or if you have any other general life advice for me.
For starters, you can replace the equivalent of the battery: fuel
Don't get me wrong; my next car will be an EV. But it is disingenuous to hand wave the reality that EV batteries are expensive and difficult to replace, somewhat negating the economical and environmental benefits.
I do all of my work on my own cars in my home shop, including things like dropping transmissions. This is why I'm able to keep cars for over 20 years. But there's no way I would be able to even start to replace an EV battery pack simply due to the weight.
But, for me anyway, that's not a compelling excuse not to get an EV. It's the way of the future and, by the sheer nature of getting one, I'm promoting their adoption, encouraging their innovation, and driving down the cost overall. So I look forward to it, even if there are some inconvenient truths.
I think this satire whooshed most everybody who replied.