> You can get the best experience using the most up-to-date APIs available on your platform or the most compatible, lowest common denominator experience, but yo

> You can get the best experience using the most up-to-date APIs available on your platform or the most compatible, lowest common denominator experience, but you can't get both. Thank God the guys who write the kernel never thought about this :-) Besides, this isn't what I was criticizing. What I wrote (it often helps to read the whole argument before offering a counterpoint) is: > Both major projects (Gnome and KDE) are increasingly depending on Linux-specific technologies (mainly through systemd dependencies, e.g. timedated, localed, hostnamed and logind, which are explicitly Linux-specific). They can be replaced by shims, fortunately, but these are difficult to write, because the components that they replace move quickly, often not very transparently, and without much documentation. Windows, MacOS and (at least Open)BSD don't get all this hate because they tend to introduce components when they're reasonably stable and almost always with full, proper documentation. They rarely dump beta-quality code for the community to test and document, like Red Hat did with pretty much every desktop technology they developed after 2005 or so.