4 ms·
Agreed. Visually, it is... fine, I don't care that much and the iconization of everything is probably just trend chasing. And personally I don't care too much a
by _jal 5y ago
Agreed. Visually, it is... fine, I don't care that much and the iconization of everything is probably just trend chasing. And personally I don't care too much about theming, but either it should be supported, or not.
But it is so dumbed-down now that I find it pointless as a desktop. I try it out every time I rebuild, and become frustrated with how it doesn't do any number of perfectly reasonable things to want from a Linux desktop. Then some random component I don't even care about starts misbehaving enough to be distracting, and I switch back to blackbox.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- zozbot234 5y ago> and the iconization of everything is probably just trend chasing Icons work better as touch targets due to their uniform shape. So I think the change is driven by ergonomics as well, in a context where touch support is already expected.
- jcelerier 5y agoTouch is as relevant as 3d screens lol. I remember buying a laptop with a touchscreen back in 2011, there are as many today as there were back then. Tablet usage has dropped to less than single digits and are pretty much a dead form factor except maybe the iPad pro. Etc..
- brimble 5y ago> Agreed. Visually, it is... fine, I don't care that much and the iconization of everything is probably just trend chasing. And personally I don't care too much about theming, but either it should be supported, or not. I'd take inability to cope with, at the very least, color palette theming, as suggesting that a program or ecosystem probably has some serious problems with accessibility.