I tried to give this video a real chance, but it’s just… really bad.

Their first main point, as best as I can tell through the fluff, is that choice is actually bad because choices have pros and cons - their example being desktop environments. I don’t think I need to explain why this is a bizarre take; that’s the point of choice. It’s like saying the whole concept of choosing an ice cream flavor is a joke because you don’t like chocolate ice cream.

Then they start talking about using outdated packages in Linux. Which, as should be clear to everyone after a few seconds of thought, isn’t an inherently bad thing in all situations, despite their anecdote about having to use an outdated version of software with a memory leak. Amusingly they say you should keep everything 100% updated all the time because breakage basically never happens (and that updates breaking things is a myth perpetuated by Microsoft) then say Arch Linux is prone to breakage. The real kicker is that this whole point of theirs not only has nothing to do with ‘choice on Linux being a joke’, choice is actually the solution to this problem - being able to choose stability vs cutting edge is a core part of Linux. They actually say if you want stability you should choose a distro focused on stability.

Then they talk about how proprietary software often doesn’t support Linux. Which sucks and is a valid reason not to use Linux, but has little to do with the central thesis of the video (as much as it has one) and is just a pointless snipe at low-hanging fruit.

The video is generic pop clickbait composed from a mix of tired criticisms and complete nonsense. It’s a meaningless collection of ideas and gripes that neither contribute to the larger conversation nor serve to educate people.