11 ms·

> it lacks well designed high quality GUI applications. If porting to Linux was done easier that could change. Fundamental to most peoples complaints about des

by zanny 10y ago

> it lacks well designed high quality GUI applications. If porting to Linux was done easier that could change. Fundamental to most peoples complaints about desktop Linux applications is the lack of look and feel cohesion across all permutations of distro, desktop, and toolkit. Wine applications using the Windows APIs look like complete garbage and fit in nowhere. The same would be true of OSX Cocoa apps - they wouldn't mesh well at all, and it would be practically impossible to skin them with toolkit theming. That, and recent efforts by Gnome and KDE have been producing tons of good new applications with modern GUI. They just aren't all the applications yet.

Brakenshire 10y ago
I suppose it's useful when almost everything works, but that one thing that you absolutely need isn't otherwise available.
- riprowan 10y ago
  This is my problem. Audio editing on Linux is a joke. For everything else I do, Linux can get me there. So I need a Mac or a PC as an audio editor? Might as well just get a Mac or a PC. I'll have to maintain it anyway, and it can do everything Linux can do, plus probably be better supported.
  - hexscrews 10y ago
    Would like to point out, unless you are running on non-x86 hardware or a tablet, the term pc still applies to linux based hardware.
    - mmanfrin 10y ago
      It technically also applies to Macs -- but in practice it means Windows-based desktops and laptops.
  - babuskov 10y ago
    What about video editing? I mean, I can live with Audacity for my basic needs, but I can't find anything simple as iMovie. Or should I just bite the bullet and learn Blender? Does it have preset screen transitions and stuff like that?
    - ollyfg 10y ago
      Have you tried openshot[1]? I haven't played much with it recently, but when it came out it was the most stable, simple video editor for linux. [1] http://openshot.org/ http://openshot.org/
      - babuskov 10y ago
        No. Wow, a lot of great suggestions here. I need to test stuff now :)
    - Mister_Snuggles 10y ago
      I've had great success with Kdenlive. It's not as simple as iMovie, but it isn't too hard to get started.
    - zanny 10y ago
      Blender is 3d modeling and animation, vastly divergent from video editing with kdenlive / openshot / etc.
      - th0ma5 10y ago
        Perhaps somewhat surprisingly, Blender actually contains a non-linear video editor as well.
        Motomorgen 10y ago
        And it's probably one of the nicer options if/when you finally "get it". But the learning curve is tough.
        jdietrich 10y ago
  - wazoox 10y ago
    What about Ardour?
    - memsom 10y ago
      I've seen a friend use it for some basic multitrack stuff - basically recording his band live whilst practising. But, it is not a patch on something like Reaper.
      - wazoox 10y ago
        You're mistaken, Ardour is comparable to ProTools, Reaper and similar DAW. It's also compatible with VST plugins, etc.
  - jlarocco 10y ago
    It's the same with RAW image conversion software used for photography. I'd dump OSX on my MBP and never look back if Capture One or DxO Optics ran on Linux. The open source alternatives are no where near as fast, they lag far behind supporting new cameras, their interfaces are ugly and difficult to use, etc.
stuaxo 10y ago
If you theme them, then they look quite a bit less terrible. There is a clearlooks theme that makes things quite a bit more bareable.
- mirekrusin 10y ago
  Quick googling "material theme gtk" returns this which looks very nice actually https://github.com/nana-4/Flat-Plat https://github.com/nana-4/Flat-Plat
  - RottenHuman 10y ago
    oh no. Another "flat design" theme. A button must be distinguishable from other design elements in my opinion. I hope this fad goes away soon, it's even more annoying than the glossy look or skeuomorphs.
    - Calamitous 10y ago
      Nothing is more annoying than skeumorphs. :)
    - azinman2 10y ago
      It should be distinguishable, not just from the theme. A good UX/UI design will make that clear regardless.
- ggoss 10y ago
  Paper (https://snwh.org/paper/theme https://snwh.org/paper/theme) is a particularly great theme for the Gnome desktop (it also works with Budgie, Pantheon, and Unity, but I haven't tried it on any of those). The author's icon set is also pretty nice.
  - cpursley 10y ago
    That really is quite nice. Looks great in Elementary.
  - 10y ago
witty_username 10y ago
Using KDE the theme is pretty similar even for GTK apps.
swiley 10y ago
I think a better way to handle this is to show people how to use the command line. That does have a cohesive look and feel and is generally very well behaved compared to nearly anything else. Unfortunately that seems to scare people away so everyone hacks GUIs together to keep them from running and that's how we got to where we are now.
- paulddraper 10y ago
  Doubtful. I like text interfaces as much as the next nerd, but most people want to interact with a computer intuitively: see a thing and interact with that thing. In other words, "point and click". (Or just "point" if it's a touchscreen.) My 2 year old doesn't know the first thing about computers, but he'll jab his finger at the screen when he sees something he likes.
  - swiley 10y ago
    I don't know, language seems fairly intuitive but it's not in style. The only people who really struggle with it are illiterate. (ex: very young children) In those situations you really do need a special UI that will be frustrating for normal people.
    - toufka 10y ago
      That's a strong criticizm. There are a lot of equally valid linguistic ways to view the contents of a directory. But only one grammatical and lexical way to command the computer to do it with text. 'Open folder', 'show contents', 'see items', why does 'ls' make more sense? It certainly has nothing to do with literacy.
      - swiley 10y ago
        The same can be said for GUIs though, look at how different mobile GUIs and desktop GUIs are. It's actually a real problem that people think their GUI is intuitive, they never end up documenting it. CLI app authors know this and are forced to face reality and at least write usage text.
StudyAnimal 10y ago
The "professional" market doesn't care about visual cohesion. They either use just one app anyway or have them custom written to use their nvidia quadros with whatever UI they like, But the senior execs that need the absolute monster for outlook and facebook will always be well served by the top end macs.
- criddell 10y ago
  > The "professional" market doesn't care about visual cohesion. That isn't true at all. I spend all day in a handful of applications and good aesthetics make my day much more enjoyable.
  - skratlo 10y ago
    People will never stop complaining about look and feel. It's such a crap, it doesn't matter. How much clothes do you own? Computers are tools to do work and consume information, they don't exist for you to make a statement about your aesthetics opinions.
    - ygjb-dupe 10y ago
      It's really nice that you feel that way, but I hope to hell I don't need to use software you designed. "Look and feel" and "Aesthetics" are core components of usable computer software, and consistency is the way you enable users to consistently use your software. Setting aside the purely utilitarian aspect of being required to use a piece of software to do a task or as part of a job, consistency increases efficiency by reducing the amount of time spent understanding the deviations from expectation in the user interface.
    - criddell 10y ago
      To use your clothing analogy, consider this: what would you think if you bought a button up shirt and the buttons were not spaced equally, they were different sizes and colors, and some were on the right, some on the left. It works just as well as a shirt with standard construction, but it takes longer to put on and maybe it doesn't look very good. There's been a great deal written about how attractive things work better. It isn't crap and it does matter.
DonaldFoss 10y ago
+1 here. Ubuntu or a desktop that only uses Plasma apps may fit the bill. Plasma looks great but has a limited ecosystem. Ubuntu looks ok, but has a wider ecosystem. What's most amusing to me is that I spend a considerable amount of time with Homebrew and others trying to make my MBP more Linux-like besides running Linux under Parallels. Getting Mac GUI binaries to run on [insert god-like desktop of your choice] would be very nice for the required closed course apps I must use. Developing for iOS (because I must) in Linux would be great. Otherwise, this feels like a step backwards. -Mr. Fully Open Source Software

by zanny 10y ago

Brakenshire 10y ago

I suppose it's useful when almost everything works, but that one thing that you absolutely need isn't otherwise available.

riprowan 10y ago
This is my problem. Audio editing on Linux is a joke. For everything else I do, Linux can get me there. So I need a Mac or a PC as an audio editor? Might as well just get a Mac or a PC. I'll have to maintain it anyway, and it can do everything Linux can do, plus probably be better supported.
- hexscrews 10y ago
  Would like to point out, unless you are running on non-x86 hardware or a tablet, the term pc still applies to linux based hardware.
  - mmanfrin 10y ago
    It technically also applies to Macs -- but in practice it means Windows-based desktops and laptops.
- babuskov 10y ago
  What about video editing? I mean, I can live with Audacity for my basic needs, but I can't find anything simple as iMovie. Or should I just bite the bullet and learn Blender? Does it have preset screen transitions and stuff like that?
  - ollyfg 10y ago
    Have you tried openshot[1]? I haven't played much with it recently, but when it came out it was the most stable, simple video editor for linux. [1] http://openshot.org/ http://openshot.org/
    - babuskov 10y ago
      No. Wow, a lot of great suggestions here. I need to test stuff now :)
  - Mister_Snuggles 10y ago
    I've had great success with Kdenlive. It's not as simple as iMovie, but it isn't too hard to get started.
  - zanny 10y ago
    Blender is 3d modeling and animation, vastly divergent from video editing with kdenlive / openshot / etc.
    - th0ma5 10y ago
      Perhaps somewhat surprisingly, Blender actually contains a non-linear video editor as well.
      - Motomorgen 10y ago
        And it's probably one of the nicer options if/when you finally "get it". But the learning curve is tough.
      - jdietrich 10y ago
- wazoox 10y ago
  What about Ardour?
  - memsom 10y ago
    I've seen a friend use it for some basic multitrack stuff - basically recording his band live whilst practising. But, it is not a patch on something like Reaper.
    - wazoox 10y ago
      You're mistaken, Ardour is comparable to ProTools, Reaper and similar DAW. It's also compatible with VST plugins, etc.
- jlarocco 10y ago
  It's the same with RAW image conversion software used for photography. I'd dump OSX on my MBP and never look back if Capture One or DxO Optics ran on Linux. The open source alternatives are no where near as fast, they lag far behind supporting new cameras, their interfaces are ugly and difficult to use, etc.

stuaxo 10y ago

If you theme them, then they look quite a bit less terrible. There is a clearlooks theme that makes things quite a bit more bareable.

mirekrusin 10y ago
Quick googling "material theme gtk" returns this which looks very nice actually https://github.com/nana-4/Flat-Plat https://github.com/nana-4/Flat-Plat
- RottenHuman 10y ago
  oh no. Another "flat design" theme. A button must be distinguishable from other design elements in my opinion. I hope this fad goes away soon, it's even more annoying than the glossy look or skeuomorphs.
  - Calamitous 10y ago
    Nothing is more annoying than skeumorphs. :)
  - azinman2 10y ago
    It should be distinguishable, not just from the theme. A good UX/UI design will make that clear regardless.
ggoss 10y ago
Paper (https://snwh.org/paper/theme https://snwh.org/paper/theme) is a particularly great theme for the Gnome desktop (it also works with Budgie, Pantheon, and Unity, but I haven't tried it on any of those). The author's icon set is also pretty nice.
- cpursley 10y ago
  That really is quite nice. Looks great in Elementary.
- 10y ago

witty_username 10y ago

Using KDE the theme is pretty similar even for GTK apps.

swiley 10y ago

I think a better way to handle this is to show people how to use the command line. That does have a cohesive look and feel and is generally very well behaved compared to nearly anything else. Unfortunately that seems to scare people away so everyone hacks GUIs together to keep them from running and that's how we got to where we are now.

paulddraper 10y ago
Doubtful. I like text interfaces as much as the next nerd, but most people want to interact with a computer intuitively: see a thing and interact with that thing. In other words, "point and click". (Or just "point" if it's a touchscreen.) My 2 year old doesn't know the first thing about computers, but he'll jab his finger at the screen when he sees something he likes.
- swiley 10y ago
  I don't know, language seems fairly intuitive but it's not in style. The only people who really struggle with it are illiterate. (ex: very young children) In those situations you really do need a special UI that will be frustrating for normal people.
  - toufka 10y ago
    That's a strong criticizm. There are a lot of equally valid linguistic ways to view the contents of a directory. But only one grammatical and lexical way to command the computer to do it with text. 'Open folder', 'show contents', 'see items', why does 'ls' make more sense? It certainly has nothing to do with literacy.
    - swiley 10y ago
      The same can be said for GUIs though, look at how different mobile GUIs and desktop GUIs are. It's actually a real problem that people think their GUI is intuitive, they never end up documenting it. CLI app authors know this and are forced to face reality and at least write usage text.

StudyAnimal 10y ago

The "professional" market doesn't care about visual cohesion. They either use just one app anyway or have them custom written to use their nvidia quadros with whatever UI they like, But the senior execs that need the absolute monster for outlook and facebook will always be well served by the top end macs.

criddell 10y ago
> The "professional" market doesn't care about visual cohesion. That isn't true at all. I spend all day in a handful of applications and good aesthetics make my day much more enjoyable.
- skratlo 10y ago
  People will never stop complaining about look and feel. It's such a crap, it doesn't matter. How much clothes do you own? Computers are tools to do work and consume information, they don't exist for you to make a statement about your aesthetics opinions.
  - ygjb-dupe 10y ago
    It's really nice that you feel that way, but I hope to hell I don't need to use software you designed. "Look and feel" and "Aesthetics" are core components of usable computer software, and consistency is the way you enable users to consistently use your software. Setting aside the purely utilitarian aspect of being required to use a piece of software to do a task or as part of a job, consistency increases efficiency by reducing the amount of time spent understanding the deviations from expectation in the user interface.
  - criddell 10y ago
    To use your clothing analogy, consider this: what would you think if you bought a button up shirt and the buttons were not spaced equally, they were different sizes and colors, and some were on the right, some on the left. It works just as well as a shirt with standard construction, but it takes longer to put on and maybe it doesn't look very good. There's been a great deal written about how attractive things work better. It isn't crap and it does matter.

DonaldFoss 10y ago

+1 here. Ubuntu or a desktop that only uses Plasma apps may fit the bill. Plasma looks great but has a limited ecosystem. Ubuntu looks ok, but has a wider ecosystem. What's most amusing to me is that I spend a considerable amount of time with Homebrew and others trying to make my MBP more Linux-like besides running Linux under Parallels. Getting Mac GUI binaries to run on [insert god-like desktop of your choice] would be very nice for the required closed course apps I must use. Developing for iOS (because I must) in Linux would be great. Otherwise, this feels like a step backwards. -Mr. Fully Open Source Software