Perhaps you misunderstand.
My point is that the worst supported areas for Linux (mobile, media consumption, gaming) can often (NOT ALWAYS) be “satisfied well enough” with another device that can be covered with the former windows software budget.
Your mileage may vary of course, but it is worth consideration.
Audio is probably the weakest point, agreed - but most end users are not doing audio production.
If you try and fail to get your workload running with Linux that is fair enough.
But again - you actually need to try.
The best way to actually give it a fair shake is to actually get OFF windows for a period of time and force yourself to do the legwork. No one here can positively say for anyone else that “your workload will be fine mate!”
The only person who can determine whether the trade-offs are worth it is the person making the switch. But the only way they can determine that is to actually put the legwork in and actually switch to see how it goes.
Keeping windows around as a crutch makes it all too easy to just give up early and not actually give linux a fair go. I know this first hand - i did it for years (in terms of desktop software).
Thats my point…
edit:
if you aren’t willing to take the plunge (and go single boot) for at least a few weeks, my advice would be don’t bother trying to switch. You’ll just end up maintaining both platforms, you’ll still have all the Windows concerns that make people want to switch in the first place, etc. - except now you’re carrying a whole extra OS around as well.
edit 2:
re: below - affording the time… if you’re using the machine for work - run the OS that your application vendor (you need to do your job) supports. if you are using the machine to make money, don’t fuck about wasting your (or your company’s time) unless you’re already sure of yourself.
If it is for home use, it is a hobby - you’re either willing to spend the time and effort or you aren’t.