When I switched to Windows as my main machine last January, I found that, except for one thing, it worked more-or-less the same as MacOS. Many details were different, of course, but both systems had the same functionality (almost). Some apps, such as Lightroom, Photoshop, and a few others, were identical.
The feature I missed was being able to open up a UNIX shell. I used that a lot, especially when running scripts.
Well, I just discovered that Windows now has a Subsystem for Linux, which runs a genuine Ubuntu shell. It’s the real thing, a joint project between Microsoft and Canonical. Linux itself isn’t there, but the kernel API is. (As I understand it–I only spent 2 minutes looking into the technicalities.)
This is somewhat more convenient than what MacOS has, because its shell has BSD commands, whereas the Linux (GNU, really) commands are more widely known.
Now, as far as I’m concerned, there is no non-superficial difference between Windows and MacOS as OSes. There is still a difference between what apps are available. For example, there’s no Coda for Windows. In fact, there’s no ProofSheet or ExifChanger, two of my own apps. There are also, of course, lots of Windows apps that aren’t on MacOS. But all of my important apps (notably Lightroom and Photoshop) are on both.
And Windows hardware is substantially cheaper, no matter what Apple and Mac fanboys say.
Your situation is, of course, different.