>There is no standard Linux UI. This is completely wrong. It's like saying there's no standard init system. Except for a few weird exceptions like Slackware,

>There is no standard Linux UI. This is completely wrong. It's like saying there's no standard init system. Except for a few weird exceptions like Slackware, there is: systemd, because all the mainstream distros have adopted it now. Similarly, there is a standard DE, and that's Gnome, because all the mainstream distros have adopted it (Debian, Fedora, OpenSuse, Ubuntu now). As for alienation, they're alienating everyone who wants something that works like Windows, and they're alienating tons of Linux users who hate Gnome3, which is why we now have the ridiculous mess of not one, but TWO Gnome forks: MATE and Cinnamon, in addition to KDE, LXDE, and Xfce. KDE is not a "viable alternative" on most distros, as it's very poorly supported, if at all. It's not a first-class DE on any mainstream distro that I know of; within Ubuntu-land it's a separate "Kubuntu" spin that's not well supported, and within Mint-land it's the "Mint KDE Edition" which always lags behind the Cinnamon and MATE versions. I hear you can get it to work on Fedora, sorta. Sorry, but that does not make it equivalent to the support that Gnome enjoys. And as the other poster points out, many applications assume you're using Gnome, such as Firefox with its crappy Gnome file dialog. >They're not doing this randomly. No, they're doing it because Red Hat is pushing Gnome hard, and because there's a lot of trend-following in Linux without thinking about what's really good for the community and Linux adoption overall.