> I just can't understand why anyone cares about WSL2
It works seamlessly with Docker Desktop, the MS terminal has built in support to switch between WSL 2 distros and you don't need to set up an X server to run what feels like a native Linux terminal emulator from Windows like you would if you manually ran a VM.
All of these are advantages over rolling your own VM. Around 6-8 years ago I used to run a self managed Linux VM on Windows with VMware Player and Unity mode. Current day WSL 2 is better in pretty much every way for general purpose web development and wanting to use the command line from Linux.
I believe the question is who actually needs a Windows machine. Office also runs on Macs and, unless you need to do some fancy spreadsheeting, LibreOffice is there for you. If not, the web-based Office or their Google counterparts can do a lot through the browser. WSL is still much slower than a native install of Linux on the same hardware.
I prefer to work on windows. My hardware just works, all of the programs I need just work, and it has better integration with the shell I prefer (powershell). The only time I ever need Linux/Unix is when some Unix dev decides to not use cross platform tools in their project (e.g. posix shell).
While I have been cautious, avoiding bleeding-edge CPUs and dGPUs (and Nvidia), I haven't had a computer that didn't work with Linux in at least 15 years. I am always curious what hardware doesn't work that is essential enough to use Windows.
It works seamlessly with Docker Desktop, the MS terminal has built in support to switch between WSL 2 distros and you don't need to set up an X server to run what feels like a native Linux terminal emulator from Windows like you would if you manually ran a VM.
All of these are advantages over rolling your own VM. Around 6-8 years ago I used to run a self managed Linux VM on Windows with VMware Player and Unity mode. Current day WSL 2 is better in pretty much every way for general purpose web development and wanting to use the command line from Linux.