Must have had bad luck! I mean I've fixed many a Linux computer in my time so I know it's not perfect, but I guess my expertise helps me avoid a lot of the pitfalls of Linux by generally reading the fucking manual and understanding what I'm doing.
Windows though will break and also install bullshit updates and reset your settings when you do everything right, and that's what gets me every time.
You know, you can have the same options in both systems. One has the default behaviour A, the other has the default behaviour B. You prefer A. I prefer B.
My 10+ year arch installation is certainly more reliable than my prior windows installation that would randomly decide that the registry is borked and won't boot at all, for no apparent reason.
Why is automounting at boot without credentials a necessity and intuitive for you. No, I would expect it to mount exactly once and to require me to input username and password before I mount my porn collection so that my sister does not see it.
I don't get why you claim that windows does this correctly and Linux does not. It would be the opposite for me.
Besides, the important point in this example is to actually mount the folder to do your job. In your example, both systems do this equally well with an equally well UI, before your automounting nonsense.
Yes. If I ever need something else because something unforeseen happened (which has not happened for years, and I use a non-default one), I can boot up from a live USB and fix things.
If anyone knows, also let me know.