4 ms·

>it has become simple to use for the masses Was it not before? is it actually now? have the masses noticed?

hot_gril 4y ago
No. I use Linux on headless servers all the time, and even I don't mess with Linux DEs. The mere fact that there's more than one widely used is undesirable, and even a popular one like GNOME changed way too drastically (2 to 3). Last time I bothered with all this was GNOME 2 before 3 existed, which was ok at the time. The real Linux DE for the masses is ChromeOS, but people don't usually bucket it with the others. And that is Google's way or the highway.
- lordgroff 4y ago
  This never made sense to me. Why is it bad there's several, especially at the current level of maturity, where both GNOME and KDE are perfectly viable options.
  - hot_gril 4y ago
    More moving parts when something goes wrong, which it will. You don't have to specify that you're using "macOS Ventura with the Glendale desktop environment and Hwy 101 window server" or something. Win2000 help might even be relevant in Win10 cause they prioritized familiarity. Even at my job where gurus are managing our workstations full-time, Linux users randomly had to all switch desktop environments cause of X dependency getting too old, and the new one partially broke compatibility with our remote desktop. It's not a perfectly layered cake. I also don't believe that people's use cases are really so different that there need to be so multiple widely-used Linux DEs. I'd get it if there were GNOME for almost everyone then other niche DEs for the rest. Again, so many people with a variety of use cases have managed ok with the basically unchanging Windows UI for decades.
    - kaba0 4y ago
      This is inherent in Cathedral vs Bazaar style of development though.. so, deal with it I guess?
      - hot_gril 4y ago
        What I'm saying is most people don't deal with it.
renewedrebecca 4y ago
The masses will never notice because Linux is simply irrelevant to them unless it's on their routers or something.

No. I use Linux on headless servers all the time, and even I don't mess with Linux DEs. The mere fact that there's more than one widely used is undesirable, and even a popular one like GNOME changed way too drastically (2 to 3). Last time I bothered with all this was GNOME 2 before 3 existed, which was ok at the time. The real Linux DE for the masses is ChromeOS, but people don't usually bucket it with the others. And that is Google's way or the highway.

lordgroff 4y ago
This never made sense to me. Why is it bad there's several, especially at the current level of maturity, where both GNOME and KDE are perfectly viable options.
- hot_gril 4y ago
  More moving parts when something goes wrong, which it will. You don't have to specify that you're using "macOS Ventura with the Glendale desktop environment and Hwy 101 window server" or something. Win2000 help might even be relevant in Win10 cause they prioritized familiarity. Even at my job where gurus are managing our workstations full-time, Linux users randomly had to all switch desktop environments cause of X dependency getting too old, and the new one partially broke compatibility with our remote desktop. It's not a perfectly layered cake. I also don't believe that people's use cases are really so different that there need to be so multiple widely-used Linux DEs. I'd get it if there were GNOME for almost everyone then other niche DEs for the rest. Again, so many people with a variety of use cases have managed ok with the basically unchanging Windows UI for decades.
  - kaba0 4y ago
    This is inherent in Cathedral vs Bazaar style of development though.. so, deal with it I guess?
    - hot_gril 4y ago
      What I'm saying is most people don't deal with it.

renewedrebecca 4y ago

The masses will never notice because Linux is simply irrelevant to them unless it's on their routers or something.