5 ms·
> The only successful UNIX interfaces dropped X Window, dropped most of the community's ideas and APIs, and started afresh. Look at Quartz (Apple), ChromeOS (Go
by AlexeyBrin 9y ago
> The only successful UNIX interfaces dropped X Window, dropped most of the community's ideas and APIs, and started afresh. Look at Quartz (Apple), ChromeOS (Google), and Android (Google). They're much simpler at every layer, have a singular vision, and designed for normal users rather than by programmers for programmers.
The above mentioned Unix interfaces were successful not because they dropped X or started fresh but because they were promoted by huge companies with big budgets that could afford to impose on what hardware you run the modified GUI.
- mattmanser 9y agoThere can be more than one reason why they're successful.
- AlexeyBrin 9y agoTrue, but in the end everything is governed by how much money you can invest in a product for quality and publicity.
- Dayshine 9y agoPlease point me at a distro that has a reliable, complete "app store". E.g. installation never randomly fails That's a feature all three nail. apt-get is great, so it's not a hardware problem, but I have yet to come across a GUI that is at all consistent.
- ac29 9y ago>Please point me at a distro that has a reliable, complete "app store". E.g. installation never randomly fails Are you referring to GUI frontends for distro package managers [0]? The CLI equivalents are as close to never failing as they can get on the distros I use (~0.1% of upgrades require manually editing or merging a new config file, or something of that nature). I wish Windows was that reliable in installing/updating applications. [0] As an aside, I dont see any real user-demand for these. They seem about as desirable about the macOS store or the Microsoft Store -- just about no one wants or uses them. Trying to shoehorn in smartphone style features into desktop OS' generally hasnt been done well, or received well.