5 ms·

Linux doesn't need more Linux Distributions, Linux needs new Desktop Environments.

by theboywho 13y ago

DanBC 13y ago
What is missing from the available DEs?
- odonnellryan 13y ago
  I would say nothing, but they can be refined. This might get me hate, but the thing with using Windows for work and Linux for my personal projects: the GUI feels much more "refined" for Windows, even though that can be highly subjective...
  - mavhc 13y ago
    They just need the second 80% of work doing to them
- wanda 13y ago
  Nothing. It's what needs to be removed that's the problem. I basically never use a DE because xmonad is all I need, and if it needs to be customised, it's not limited at all.
  - dllthomas 13y ago
    Similar, but ratpoison for me.
    - wanda 13y ago
      I used to use dwm and I remember looking at ratpoison and wanting to use it, but I was learning Haskell at the time so I chose xmonad. and likewise when I'll care to learn Lua I'll move onto awesome-wm. Which will probably never happen.
      - dllthomas 13y ago
        As a fan of Haskell, I've tried to move to xmonad, but realized that most of what I wanted to do to it was make it behave like ratpoison so I moved back. In particular, retaining my screen muscle-memory, and the "commands in a tree under a single initial character, which can be sent with a command" which nicely keeps everything a couple keypresses away while allowing easy logical groupings and still makes sure that key bindings never get in the way of something that I want to send to an application.
fit2rule 13y ago
ROSA looks like exactly what you're complaining about.
atmosx 13y ago
New? More? Really? I beg to differ... I thin it needs the KDE + GNOME + Englightment + etc. Guys to unite and create 1 full-featured DE, bug-free, with at set of SOLID applications (mail, browser, etc.) and 1 unified layer underneath. But then again, we all know that's not going to happen and licenses is not the only problem here or anywhere else where you see this kind of fragmentation (android?).
- dagw 13y ago
  First you say "I beg to differ" then in the very next sentence you suggest that a large bunch of people should get together and create a new DE. So which is it?
- nly 13y ago
  The GNOME and KDE communities seem to have two completely opposing philosophies. I'd argue the best way to achieve unification would be to make GNOME 4 a Qt based DE. Qt is just superior and GTK+ only exists because of ancient Qt licensing issues that are no longer relevant. That said, this will never happen because, being C++, it'd alienate a lot of GNOME developers. During the transition you'd also set back GNOME for years.
darklajid 13y ago
A one line statement like this is .. not helpful. Why do you think that? What DEs did you play with and what were the problems? Why do you feel that new distributions aren't needed/useful? Can you expand your point and create a real argument?
- theboywho 13y ago
  I think there are so many words written on why the available Linux DEs suck that I don't see how is my (yet another) opinion is gonna help you. My point is that the real problem of Linux on the Desktop _is_ the Desktop Environment, and I just don't understand why people trying to fix that problem think that assembling a new distribution _is_ the solution.
  - darklajid 13y ago
    That's a lot more helpful, but I still don't quite get the conflict. Building a new distribution gives these people the choices they want (a custom installer, better quality repositories, a decent system-wide configuration interface) - it's a way to create a unique take on Linux. A desktop environment is but one part of that - and it seems those people don't agree that it should be the most prominent one. All these words written on why the available Linux DEs suck were so far unconvincing from my point of view and I would've loved to see another thorough explanation. Most of the things I've read aren't specific to any Linux DE and mostly "I don't want to adapt to change" arguments - just like "Windows 8 is the downfall of Microsoft Windows" and "Maverick is the worst OS X ever" (or "Firefox changed the default theme!!"). Technically I'd say that there are a number of decent DEs available, all with benefits and tradeoffs. In fact, my biggest gripe with Linux on the desktop isn't that there's no decent DE, my pet peeve is the inconsistent looks between applications written for different DEs/in different Toolkits. Mixing GTK with QT (with motif, tk, swing, e17's libraries and whatnot in the mix) looks bad, feels unnatural and restricts my selection of tools for a job ("Am I going to install that thing? Naaah, it's based on QT"). I don't want more DEs, I'd prefer more progress a la freedesktop / a unified path forward. Obviously this is all a rather subjective thing, but Linux runs fine on my desktop for a long time already.
lmm 13y ago
It needs a distribution that supports the Trinity desktop, still the best linux DE ever.
- mkesper 13y ago
  Oh no, that really looks _old_ nowadays.

Linux doesn't need more Linux Distributions, Linux needs new Desktop Environments.

DanBC 13y ago

What is missing from the available DEs?

odonnellryan 13y ago
I would say nothing, but they can be refined. This might get me hate, but the thing with using Windows for work and Linux for my personal projects: the GUI feels much more "refined" for Windows, even though that can be highly subjective...
- mavhc 13y ago
  They just need the second 80% of work doing to them
wanda 13y ago
Nothing. It's what needs to be removed that's the problem. I basically never use a DE because xmonad is all I need, and if it needs to be customised, it's not limited at all.
- dllthomas 13y ago
  Similar, but ratpoison for me.
  - wanda 13y ago
    I used to use dwm and I remember looking at ratpoison and wanting to use it, but I was learning Haskell at the time so I chose xmonad. and likewise when I'll care to learn Lua I'll move onto awesome-wm. Which will probably never happen.
    - dllthomas 13y ago
      As a fan of Haskell, I've tried to move to xmonad, but realized that most of what I wanted to do to it was make it behave like ratpoison so I moved back. In particular, retaining my screen muscle-memory, and the "commands in a tree under a single initial character, which can be sent with a command" which nicely keeps everything a couple keypresses away while allowing easy logical groupings and still makes sure that key bindings never get in the way of something that I want to send to an application.

fit2rule 13y ago

ROSA looks like exactly what you're complaining about.

atmosx 13y ago

New? More? Really? I beg to differ... I thin it needs the KDE + GNOME + Englightment + etc. Guys to unite and create 1 full-featured DE, bug-free, with at set of SOLID applications (mail, browser, etc.) and 1 unified layer underneath. But then again, we all know that's not going to happen and licenses is not the only problem here or anywhere else where you see this kind of fragmentation (android?).

dagw 13y ago
First you say "I beg to differ" then in the very next sentence you suggest that a large bunch of people should get together and create a new DE. So which is it?
nly 13y ago
The GNOME and KDE communities seem to have two completely opposing philosophies. I'd argue the best way to achieve unification would be to make GNOME 4 a Qt based DE. Qt is just superior and GTK+ only exists because of ancient Qt licensing issues that are no longer relevant. That said, this will never happen because, being C++, it'd alienate a lot of GNOME developers. During the transition you'd also set back GNOME for years.

darklajid 13y ago

A one line statement like this is .. not helpful. Why do you think that? What DEs did you play with and what were the problems? Why do you feel that new distributions aren't needed/useful? Can you expand your point and create a real argument?

theboywho 13y ago
I think there are so many words written on why the available Linux DEs suck that I don't see how is my (yet another) opinion is gonna help you. My point is that the real problem of Linux on the Desktop _is_ the Desktop Environment, and I just don't understand why people trying to fix that problem think that assembling a new distribution _is_ the solution.
- darklajid 13y ago
  That's a lot more helpful, but I still don't quite get the conflict. Building a new distribution gives these people the choices they want (a custom installer, better quality repositories, a decent system-wide configuration interface) - it's a way to create a unique take on Linux. A desktop environment is but one part of that - and it seems those people don't agree that it should be the most prominent one. All these words written on why the available Linux DEs suck were so far unconvincing from my point of view and I would've loved to see another thorough explanation. Most of the things I've read aren't specific to any Linux DE and mostly "I don't want to adapt to change" arguments - just like "Windows 8 is the downfall of Microsoft Windows" and "Maverick is the worst OS X ever" (or "Firefox changed the default theme!!"). Technically I'd say that there are a number of decent DEs available, all with benefits and tradeoffs. In fact, my biggest gripe with Linux on the desktop isn't that there's no decent DE, my pet peeve is the inconsistent looks between applications written for different DEs/in different Toolkits. Mixing GTK with QT (with motif, tk, swing, e17's libraries and whatnot in the mix) looks bad, feels unnatural and restricts my selection of tools for a job ("Am I going to install that thing? Naaah, it's based on QT"). I don't want more DEs, I'd prefer more progress a la freedesktop / a unified path forward. Obviously this is all a rather subjective thing, but Linux runs fine on my desktop for a long time already.

lmm 13y ago

It needs a distribution that supports the Trinity desktop, still the best linux DE ever.

mkesper 13y ago
Oh no, that really looks _old_ nowadays.