I like Linux better

All the other reasons don't really matter.

• boot from a btrfs snapshot
• run docker without running a second kernel
• boot an older kernel, in case something fails
• run the system completely without a gui, to save video RAM for other tasks
• distro hopping
• use multiple desktop environments
• use your computer without a mouse
• create a directory named CON
• use old hardware painlessly
• have your system not spy on you without extra effort
• create weird stacks of software raid, volume manager, disk encryption and filesystems and then boot from it
• read the kernel developer mailing list and be hyped for new kernel features like bcachefs, which will hopefully come someday

Others have already answered your specific points, which are all (sort of) possible on Windows. I would like to present a quick list of things are not possible on Windows, this is split in 3 parts: Truly impossible, Possible but so convoluted it might as well be impossible, and possible but much harder than what it should.

Truly Impossible

• Choose your preferred program for things. Sure you can do it for simple stuff like text or video, but what about my graphical interface backend, my file explorer or my DE.
• Choose your disk format. Again you can use an incredible array of (I think) 3 formats, and while I also only use ext4 on Linux I know BTRFS is there for me if I ever want to switch to a modern filesystem.
• Customise your system. Again people are going to claim that this is possible on Windows via regedit, but it's not on the same level, I can't have a Windows version stripped of controller support or wireless support if I know I'll never plug a controller or a wireless card on the machine.
• Upgrade every single component of your system in one go. Because the way programs are installed on Windows you need to upgrade each one on its own.
• Fix issues with the system, say you found a bug on Linux if you have the expertise you can 100% fix it, on Windows the best you can do is report it and hope for the best.

Almost impossible

• Using a tiling window manager
• Virtual desktops that actually work

Harder than what it should

• Customise Super+ commands
• Prevent auto updates

It's not only what you can do, but what it won't do to you.

Using your computer is not wrong. You shouldn't be punished for it.

Using your computer is not an imposition on someone else. You don't owe anyone for the privilege of using it. You have already paid for it. The OS vendor doesn't have a lien on it; they aren't paying you to rent ad space on your desktop.

You bought it, you own it, you can break it if you like but it's not anyone else's place to tell you what you're allowed to do with it.

Your computer is yours -- just yours -- and it shouldn't be spamming you with ads, filling itself up with junk, or telling you "you're not allowed to do that because of the OS vendor's deals with Hollywood".

I'm not anti-commerce or anti-corporate. My preferred browser is plain old Google Chrome (with uBlock Origin). I buy games on Steam. The game I spend the most hours playing on my Linux system is Magic Arena, hardly an anti-commercial choice. But that's my choice. I buy computers from Linux-focused vendors (currently System76) and I expect my computer to be mine, not the vendor's to do with what they like.

Personally I don't care so much about the things that Linux does better but rather the abusive things it doesn't do. No ads, surveillance, forced updates etc. And it's not that linux happens to not do that stuff. It's that the decentralized nature of free software acts as a preventative measure against those malicious practices. On the other side, your best interests always conflict with those of a multi-billion company, practically guaranteeing that the software doesn't behave as you. So windows are as unlikely to become better in this regard as linux is to become worse.

Also the ability to build things from the ground up. If you want to customize windows you're always trying to replace or override or remove stuff. Good luck figuring out if you have left something in the background adding overhead at best and conflicting with what you actually want to use at worst. This isn't just some hypothetical. For example I've had windows make an HDD-era PC completely unusable because a background telemetry process would 100% the C: drive. It was a nightmarish experience to debug and fix this because even opening the task manager wouldn't work most of the time.

Having gotten the important stuff out of the way, I will add that even for stuff that you technically can do on both platforms, it is worth considering if they are equally likely to foster thriving communities. Sure I can replace the windows shell, but am I really given options of the same quality and longevity as the most popular linux shells? When a proprietary windows component takes an ugly turn is it as likely that someone will develop an alternative if it means they have to build it from the ground up, compared to the linux world where you would start by forking an existing project, eg how people who didn't like gnome 3 forked gnome 2? The situation is nuanced and answers like "there exists a way to do X on Y" or "it is technically possible for someone to solve this" don't fully cover it.

Soon with Plasma 6 and Wayland, you can let your Desktop crash but still keep all your Windows after the new Desktop spawned. This also means you can replace your KDE desktop with Gnome, XFCE Hyprland and some others whithout needing to logout or close applications.

Additionally you can save current states of the application with Wayland. Shit is getting so interesting right now.

Source: https://m.youtube.com/watch?si=sAlIcn5meSCDKq3K&v=jlDhpFjBWiw

Not be spied on by microsoft

I can declare the complete state of my systems in a config file that I store on sourcehut with git and pull down to have a fully configured system on new hardware whenever I want it.

I can use tiling window managers.

I can work with native containers easily.

I can run an operating system that is designed to be the most useful tool it can be, not the most profitable product it can be.

Haha it's very easy now: I have an os with no adds.

I am the one telling the os when it updates or not and when it reboots or not.

I have a working terminal so I don't need dozens of shady softwares to do basic stuff like transferring a file on a local network.

And the biggest ones: I can disable my firewall and no defender will erase files from my computer without my consent.

Video games work surprisingly well today. Recent ones at least.

Docker! I have never experienced a more unpleasant software than Docker for Windows.

Be the only user that can run code as root.

Microsoft and their "trusted partners" do not deserve closer access to my hardware than I have.

Have an actual sane developer experience? There is a reason why almost every developer that uses Windows actually uses WSL.

Update the OS and all installed applications using a single command.

Use a system that's not a personalized ad billboard

Connect a printer and have it just work.

Feel Free and secure with privacy

It's easier to run C/C++ compiler (GCC) on GNU/Linux

Install software updates when you want, and not lose half the day while they install.

Most if not all of these seem very easily done on windows. You can create scripts as you like and set up environment variables like vlc. Control of updates I’m not so sure about, I haven’t messed with it I just let it auto update.

Use only the amount of CPU power I need, and have my stuff be top priority, rather than picking up the dregs when Windows indexing and updates and other services have a little bit of CPU to spare.

1. adjust the drift speed of a thinkpad trackpoint
2. stream audio from one computer to another one (or a phone) with ease (thanks pulseaudio)

Easily add libraries to my C and C++ Projects without f'cking around in visual studio

• Have a really good keyboard-driven desktop environment.
• Many good options for tiling desktop environments.
• Extremely good logging, enabling you to diagnose most problems.
• package manager-first approach: I don't want to manage package installations, routine updates, and dependency resolution myself. Package managers do the work for me
• extreme customizability: I choose which kernel features are turned on or off, and compile them. For example, I can compile in PS4 controller drivers
• first class support for the terminal and terminal-driven workflow
• Enhanced security system: being able to sandbox apps easily, for example.
• Enhanced transparency into the system: can easily get into the weeds of seeing why my Internet is not working.

Sanely use multiple workspaces.

I can use my computer without it installing software I don't want (like when Windows installs candy crush) and without it advertising to me.

FYI you can use LibreOffice with a ribbon-like toolbar or better yet experimental contextual groups.

Not update if I don’t want to

In a nutshell:

• Have (real) user control.

Find my hosts file without googling where it is.

unlink

Specifically the operation of removing a file from a path without requiring the file to be unused. Open references to the file can still exist by processes.

Pass-through hardware in Docker.