Linux has its stupid bullshit too, its just 12 of one and a dozen of another sort of situation.
For example I don't have to jump through hoops to auto mount a secondary drive on windows I just install the drive and there it is. But on linux I have to jump through all sorts of ridiculous hoops for some stupid reason. However it will auto mount flash drives and sd cards even though those are the ones more likely to pose a security risk.
I think people are confused because the difference between mount on access and mount on boot is meaningless for 98% of people. I can think of reasons to need the latter, but not many.
You are probably right, most folks aren't even aware because they have no need for it. The only reason I need it is for my gaming rig that launches big picture mode on startup. I have no need for it on any of my desktop machines.
Linux has its stupid bullshit too, its just 12 of one and a dozen of another sort of situation. For example I don't have to jump through hoops to auto mount a secondary drive on windows I just install the drive and there it is. But on linux I have to jump through all sorts of ridiculous hoops for some stupid reason. However it will auto mount flash drives and sd cards even though those are the ones more likely to pose a security risk.
Say what? That's not true in the slightest, if the drive is mountable it will show up in your file manager.
articles like this wouldn't exist if it wasn't true, they will appear but they wont auto mount https://techhut.tv/auto-mount-drives-in-linux-fstab/
*some distros may auto mount but I never used one that did
I think people are confused because the difference between mount on access and mount on boot is meaningless for 98% of people. I can think of reasons to need the latter, but not many.
You are probably right, most folks aren't even aware because they have no need for it. The only reason I need it is for my gaming rig that launches big picture mode on startup. I have no need for it on any of my desktop machines.