3 ms·
Yeah, KDE has always felt more Microsofty while GNOME has felt more Apple-adjacent. GNOME 2.x kind of reminds me of Classic Mac OS with a taskbar duct taped on
by kitsunesoba 4y ago
Yeah, KDE has always felt more Microsofty while GNOME has felt more Apple-adjacent.
GNOME 2.x kind of reminds me of Classic Mac OS with a taskbar duct taped on while GNOME 3.x+ is kind of like what you’d get if you tried to turn iPadOS into a desktop OS.
Nothing in the open desktop world really mirrors Aqua-era OS X or modern macOS which is a bit weird to me. ElementaryOS aesthetically reminds me of OS X 10.9, but doesn’t operate like it at all in practice, instead also feeling kind of iPad-ish like GNOME does.
- smoldesu 4y agoGNOME 3 took most of the parts of Aqua that I liked and removed the ugly "lickability" from it to seem more professional. It was good (and controversial), but eventually they threw all that work away to Big Sur-ify their desktop.
- Macha 4y agoMany of those "Big Sur" changes came to Gnome first, I remember my first impression of the design changes being "Looks like Gnome"
- ahartmetz 4y agoI guess it's because: - Copying something old is kind of embarrassing, especially if - Seriously, macOS isn't/wasn't clearly superior at everyhing. For example, I think the dock is a rather terrible idea.