4 ms·

And the whole wildly inconsistent UI elements of Linux shows it doesn't respect users. You have one default app that does things one way (say, with a "Save" bu

And the whole wildly inconsistent UI elements of Linux shows it doesn't respect users. You have one default app that does things one way (say, with a "Save" button, and a nice "Settings successfully changed!" message), and another that does things a totally different way (say, with an auto-save and no message that it's been saved). Linux respects developers, in that it allows the people who make aspects of Linux to do anything any way they way -- but without consistency of UX, is it really respectful of users? Or does it just leave them at the mercy of the devs who often give the impression that they don't care about the user at all and can't be bothered to build anything consistently, or re-factor old code to bring it up to modern consistencies, or put even show a little empathy for users who aren't also advanced software developers. Not everyone wants to learn how to build a car just to drive a car. (Disclosure... My exposure to Linux is running various distributions on my Raspberry Pi side projects... Pi Hole, Retro Gaming, silly home automation toys. I tried to set up my elderly parents with Mint Linux and that was a complete disaster.)

squidbeak 2y ago
Is Windows any different in this regard? Windows itself (at least 10, I haven't used 11) has very different UI elements for something as crucial as its own settings, and third party programs very often have wildly different UI styles.
bitcharmer 2y ago
It looks like you don't understand what Linux is at all. It's just a kernel that other distributions build on top of to create an OS. You have multiple "UIs" available in that space, like gnome, kde and others. I have no idea how having choice and being able to customize your desktop experience is a bad thing but I guess some people won't be happy no matter what.
- dbg31415 2y ago
  Inside of any one distribution of Linux is what feels like a prom dress made out of fabric remnants. It feels like they don't have UX designers planning the workflows (or even involved). And that's largely because they don't, right? They have developers building some stuff and doing it however they want, and not really following any sort of enforced brand or style guidelines. Mostly the various Linux distros still feel like "model train sets" -- built by one guy, for one guy to enjoy alone in his basement. It's work to build something as part of a larger team... designers, developers... then you'd need a manager... and probably some sales people to keep it all funded... easier to just avoid all that stuff and build a model train set. (= Most of the distros don't take kindly to UX people or product people giving suggestions on GitHub, or other places. It's very much a "if you aren't a dev, we don't want your input" type situation. "You don't get to tell us what to build, not here, not outside of work..." and until Linux makes a real effort to include a variety of people (especially designers!) in the build process, the results will always be the same.
  - ric2b 2y ago
    Gnome is very well designed and consistent. And yes, they employ UX designers.

squidbeak 2y ago

Is Windows any different in this regard? Windows itself (at least 10, I haven't used 11) has very different UI elements for something as crucial as its own settings, and third party programs very often have wildly different UI styles.

bitcharmer 2y ago

It looks like you don't understand what Linux is at all. It's just a kernel that other distributions build on top of to create an OS. You have multiple "UIs" available in that space, like gnome, kde and others. I have no idea how having choice and being able to customize your desktop experience is a bad thing but I guess some people won't be happy no matter what.

dbg31415 2y ago
Inside of any one distribution of Linux is what feels like a prom dress made out of fabric remnants. It feels like they don't have UX designers planning the workflows (or even involved). And that's largely because they don't, right? They have developers building some stuff and doing it however they want, and not really following any sort of enforced brand or style guidelines. Mostly the various Linux distros still feel like "model train sets" -- built by one guy, for one guy to enjoy alone in his basement. It's work to build something as part of a larger team... designers, developers... then you'd need a manager... and probably some sales people to keep it all funded... easier to just avoid all that stuff and build a model train set. (= Most of the distros don't take kindly to UX people or product people giving suggestions on GitHub, or other places. It's very much a "if you aren't a dev, we don't want your input" type situation. "You don't get to tell us what to build, not here, not outside of work..." and until Linux makes a real effort to include a variety of people (especially designers!) in the build process, the results will always be the same.
- ric2b 2y ago
  Gnome is very well designed and consistent. And yes, they employ UX designers.