3 ms·
I was thinking precisely this. "User-friendly" depends entirely on the user in question. I find Gnome 2 to be considerably more "user-friendly" than Gnome 3, b
by jeremysmyth 10y ago
I was thinking precisely this.
"User-friendly" depends entirely on the user in question. I find Gnome 2 to be considerably more "user-friendly" than Gnome 3, because Gnome 3 frustrated my attempts to do what I expected to be able to do.
For that matter, I consider bash (and coreutils and family) considerably more user friendly than Gnome, for a given value of "user" (me).
- digi_owl 10y agoAnd thats why i think KDE back in the day, before plasma and all that bling, had the right idea. The basic behavior emulated Windows 9x pretty closely, thus anyone passably familiar with Windows could jump right in and use KDE. This in turn lessened the transition friction, as people try to do something but do not find it where they expect it from memory.