4 ms·
You are right, but let's not forget that Windows has very cryptic names and acronyms too (visible in process names and mmc snap-ins, for example). But they are
by embik 11y ago
You are right, but let's not forget that Windows has very cryptic names and acronyms too (visible in process names and mmc snap-ins, for example). But they are much more hidden away than on Linux. I think that's the key difference: There's a (more or less) nice frontend on Windows concealing Windows' bowels most of the time.
But for example, GNOME 3.18 on my Fedora 23 installation has an application called "(GNOME) Software" which automatically notifies me about new updates available and allows me to easily install them. It also summarises all non-application updates as "operating system updates". If you're interested in Linux UX, you really should try out a recent Fedora version in a VM - I think it has come a long way.
And honestly, Ubuntu is a terrible example for the Linux Desktop. They have dropped the ball long ago.
- se6 11y ago>And honestly, Ubuntu is a terrible example for the Linux Desktop. Funny. I just find the opposite: Ubuntu is a superb desktop, polished, clean and powerful, very productive and easy to use for the experienced use with keyyboard shortcuts, but also to new users with mouse and no prior knowledge.
- embik 11y agoHave you used recent versions of KDE (on openSUSE, for example) or GNOME (on Fedora)? Because Ubuntu (or Unity, to be more precise) did not really change since 12.04 and largerly used GNOME applications anyway. The things you actually can attribute to Ubuntu, for example the Software Center, are an absolute trainwreck in comparison to the "competitors" (GNOME Software e.g. is moving fast and is capable of staging upgrades to the next OS release as of recent).