3 ms·

>> And most of all: I don't want Linux to copy Mac! If I want a Mac I can get my boss to get me one! > Maybe you and I just aren't the target demographic (and

>> And most of all: I don't want Linux to copy Mac! If I want a Mac I can get my boss to get me one! > Maybe you and I just aren't the target demographic (and the source demographic I guess) any more? I wouldn't expect them to throw out their userbase just for fun? I suspect ux experts with good intentions, having read the latest studies on usability which told everyone including Microsoft (back before Windows 8) that everything should be optimized for touch and for users who have no clue about the desktop. They really want to create an awesome desktop for everyone but forget that for a number of their current users their current desktop is more or less exactly what they want. KDE hits a middle ground by providing (again IMO) sensible defaults and infinte possibilities for styling and tweaking. Edit: weirdly enough one distro I like is Elementary, who managed to copy the looks of Mac OSX without bringing along stuff like the (IMO) broken alt-tab. I'd still like if they could give me my menus back but at least I find that DE tolerable compared to Unity.

Asooka 10y ago
I meant that Libre software is usually written for the people writing it, rather than for third party users, so the older developers wanted to recreate windows for their own use, while the current ones want to recreate MacOS for their own use. A central tenent of Libre software (and the top 4 major DEs are all Libre software) is that the user is the developer. That is, there is no barrier between the person writing the software and the person using the software - they can be one and the same and users can change/fix the software and send the improvements upstream. My hypothesis is that the most proactive developers have always built the software to function as it is most convenient for them, and during the past 10 years enough of the old guard has been replaced by newcomers whose preferences don't align with ours any more. I have very rarely observed a Libre software being written for the benefit of non-developers, rather than for the benefit of the authors - those that are, tend to be some of the highest-regarded pieces of software out there.
- reitanqild 10y ago
  I see and I think it makes sense. Thanks for explaining!

Asooka 10y ago

I meant that Libre software is usually written for the people writing it, rather than for third party users, so the older developers wanted to recreate windows for their own use, while the current ones want to recreate MacOS for their own use. A central tenent of Libre software (and the top 4 major DEs are all Libre software) is that the user is the developer. That is, there is no barrier between the person writing the software and the person using the software - they can be one and the same and users can change/fix the software and send the improvements upstream. My hypothesis is that the most proactive developers have always built the software to function as it is most convenient for them, and during the past 10 years enough of the old guard has been replaced by newcomers whose preferences don't align with ours any more. I have very rarely observed a Libre software being written for the benefit of non-developers, rather than for the benefit of the authors - those that are, tend to be some of the highest-regarded pieces of software out there.

reitanqild 10y ago
I see and I think it makes sense. Thanks for explaining!