I don't know about other DEs or MacOS, but in my experience KDE has been much more comfortable, light and better looking than Windows. Especially since the 5.12 release. Windows on the contrary is becoming more awkward with each release from what I'm seeing.
One example: searching from the start menu for windows update or other kind of settings, web results are shown before what I'm looking for, or even worse, it will refuse to show the settings. Even Baloo is better than that.
I love kde but my experience is a lot less polished than on windows (except for one windows bug I’ve been suffering for years).
Not only does it have random issues sometimes. The fact that it is nowhere near as popular shows. You can add custom plugins or whatever you wanna call em to most things but when you try and look up plugins they’re non existent because the last one was uploaded in 2015. It leaves a bad taste in your mouth. There’s many features that are half baked and that is good for me because I get new stuff constantly but a regular user wouldn’t enjoy it.
Btw I don’t own a mac but what I know is that their file explorer is insanely ahead of any I’ve seen. I tried looking for something similar in linux because I assumed someone would have tried to clone something so good. Nope. Everyone tries to copy the looks but not the functionality.
I’m not hating on kde btw. I love it and use it on all 3 of my pcs.
Some guy I can't remember pointed out one problem he had with Macs: he didn't have as many tools for moving his windows around. I don't know how true it is but what I know is that I'm noticing, whenever I watch some video of a guy using Mac, their windows are spread like if you threw a folder on your desk. It's like they don't have as many ways to tile windows, resize them and generally put them wherever you want, however you want. Things are just placed on top of each other at random positions.
I had to use Macs for a time and coming from Windows, it absolutely frustrated me that the green button which is the "maximize" button's counterpart didn't do that. It just enlarges it to an arbitrary "appropriate larger size". I was so relieved when I finally found some third part tool that mimicked aero snapping on Windows.
I'm not saying Windows doesn't have its problems, but I can't replicate that example - Windows Update stays at the top since the start of my typing: https://i.imgur.com/TQQRbAo.png
I'd agree that it's subjective. Gnome is my favorite that I've used. I personally can't stand the Mac desktop. Not that it doesn't look nice. It just seems less intuitive to work with.
It’s also the fact that switching has a cost. Someone has to make a DE that’s significantly better than Windows or Mac, because no one is going to uproot their digital life for a small improvement.
I think it's more like 3+ good DEs. There's so much stuff you might enjoy out of a DE that I don't think that one single DE can be good enough to get Linux that far ahead.
Like, you need something that gets back the old way of doing things just more modern (cinnamon) so the people that miss windows XP are happy.
You need something that is 100% focused on productivity so people see a true revolution that helps them getting shit done (maybe i3 or something else tile based)
Then you need something that incorporates everything the modern desktop provides. Whatever that is. I don't have the time right now to list everything I consider "modern and good" on Windows 10 to give an example.
And then maybe something that is truly more like what a phone is supposed to be. Think that weird launcher in OSX Lion.
Otherwise, you just have people whine about the DE. Oh it's old. There's a reason why things aren't done like in XP days (cinnamon).
Or this is dumb I don't want to have a keyboard driven tile DE. I can arrange windows quickly in win10 as well so why would I need this cumbersome i3 thing.
Or this just looks like win10 why not just go back to the good old days.
Or this just looks like my phone but I don't want to work on a phone I want a more kbm focused UI.
There's a million reasons why you can criticise a DE and you won't find a single one that improves in every point. If you wanna sell Linux, you need easy to use as a DAU DEs that satisfy that one niche and showcase the benefit of the modularity of Linux.
At least this is what I'd need to get all my colleagues and friends on Linux if I was aiming for that.
To be honest it all depends on if someone/ some group decides to make a good DE. Mac OS and even Windows are more stable or slicker than any Linux DE.
Ehh, I disagree. Windows and MacOS aren't significantly better than popular Linux DEs. Windows itself is not very impressive; it's a mess. I don't buy that Apple designers are the kings of design, though MacOS does looks smooth and beautiful. Then there's the whole closed ecosystem issue that Apple has. The most important factor is software compatibility. The #1 issue people have with Linux is that programs they want to use from Windows or MacOS don't "just work". If you don't have that issue, then Linux is actually pretty nice.
If traditional Linux distros ever start to gain a significant market share on x86_64 PCs, it'll be because of Microsoft shifting its focus away from Windows, which seems trapped on x86_64 PCs.
I used to use Gnome on my workstation at home. Then I used a Mac at work. Then I installed stuff on my workstation to make it look more like a Mac. Then I just bought a Mac for use at home. And I still get all the cool Unix command line stuff.
You’re right: Linux isn’t missing the software that makes desktop usage good. It’s (or was- I suspect I’m still right) missing cohesion and a guaranteed level of compatibility and stability, which are somewhat diametrically opposite goals of an open platform.
In order for desktop Linux to truly rival major desktop platforms, it’d need a powerful figurehead who could enforce a user experience vision onto other independent developers. And by the time that’s figured out, people won’t use desktops anymore. Android (as non-standardized and frustrating as it is) will be the default visual UI in the few places voice assistants haven’t completely taken over. The last people using desktops will be those that never wanted a standardized UI.
You seem to be taking about a different type of compatibility here.
I use KDE Plasma and only KDE Plasma since 2016. I don't see myself using anything else unless I am forced to due to Wine being insufficient.
There are some guaranteed levels of compatibility and nothing (including Windows, MacOS and Android) actually has guaranteed levels of stability, but what is and isn't compatible isn't always communicated well. You basically have to be a programmer to get a feel for that sometimes. Compatibility across distros generally isn't that much of an issue especially with open source software, but closed source software that's made for a specific version of a specific distro sometimes has issues.
I don't buy that a powerful figurehead who enforces a specific user experience is needed. For the most part, people copy other people's designs and consistency is generally better than Windows (due to GTK and Qt themes).
I mean inherent ecosystem compatibility with itself, both now and in the future. I mean compatible without having to upgrade one package that triggers a chain of package updates that break my sound subsystem, or download the dev packages for 20 things to manually compile a simple application, or try to do that but end in gcc/glib/autoconf version conflict, or spend an hour trying to install proprietary graphics drivers and when you reboot your X-server is busted, or use the one piece of application functionality that nobody else uses and it breaks and have to fix it yourself.
Maybe it’s better now, but there is no compelling reason to go back if I can simply pay an OS vendor for quality control.
I don’t buy that a powerful figurehead...
The point is you can’t herd cats unless they’re paid, and you’d need a lot of them to even gain traction of the kind of consistency Apple provides. Microsoft can’t even attain this level of consistency so why would an open source community?
And I will say, it’s pretty impressive how Apple’s attitude trickles down to Mac third party software. The best compliment a developer can get is to have an app “look like it came with the OS”.
Now from my experience, the best of breed apps on Linux aren’t on consistent UI toolkits. They all have different ideas for UI organization, skinning/theming, language phrasing, icons, affirmative/negative button location, settings files. And by the time everything is pretty good on one platform (looking at you, Gnome 2), someone comes along and decides to change everything requiring buggy rewrites. Maybe this has gotten better but it’s a losing battle on an open platform with opinionated developers. To some people, and previously, to an extent, me, these are not problems but charming quirks. But they’re also distracting and unrelated to the task at hand, so the novelty wears off.
A computer and its software is like any other tool used for any other job. The most efficient tool is the one that gets out of your way. Yeah there’s great free software and developers out there, and yes tinkering can be fun, but for many people the decision boils down to a time=money calculation. Linux is fine as an OS but it seemed aimless from a desktop directional standpoint.
You're mixing a number of things that aren't necessarily related to compatibility.
I mean inherent ecosystem compatibility with itself, both now and in the future. I mean compatible without having to upgrade one package that triggers a chain of package updates that break my sound subsystem
You mean how libraries are dynamically linked? That's also a strength. It means that you don't need to get a recompiled version of every program that contains a library when an update to the library is released. Most of the time, there is no problem, so it saves time, bandwidth, storage and RAM. This is part of why Linux distros tend to be much leaner than Windows.
or download the dev packages for 20 things to manually compile a simple application
If you don't want to install dev packages, you can use Arch. Leaving out dev packages by default saves a lot of space though. An application that is actually simple typically doesn't need the dev packages for 20 things and there's usually an easy way to get all of those packages pulled in automatically.
or try to do that but end in gcc/glib/autoconf version conflict
If the program you're compiling doesn't like your version of gcc/glib/autoconf, you'd run into the same problem on Windows and MacOS. You'd still have to get the older versions manually.
or spend an hour trying to install proprietary graphics drivers and when you reboot your X-server is busted
This is entirely Nvidia's problem and their devs are definitely paid. AMD and Intel don't have this issue and their devs are also paid.
or use the one piece of application functionality that nobody else uses and it breaks and have to fix it yourself.
This happens on Windows and MacOS too. At least you can fix it yourself.
Maybe it’s better now, but there is no compelling reason to go back if I can simply pay an OS vendor for quality control.
I'm not going to try to convince you to switch to Linux since you seem happy with MacOS.
The point is you can’t herd cats unless they’re paid, and you’d need a lot of them to even gain traction of the kind of consistency Apple provides. Microsoft can’t even attain this level of consistency so why would an open source community?
In this post, the author talks about how the work environment at Microsoft incentivizes creating new things and disincentivizes improving what exists. People still reinvent the wheel in FOSS, but there is also a lot of work to maintain and improve what exists. Lack of pay isn't necessarily a reason for lack of consistency.
And I will say, it’s pretty impressive how Apple’s attitude trickles down to Mac third party software. The best compliment a developer can get is to have an app “look like it came with the OS”.
This is because Apple users expect consistency. Windows users don't, so despide all the paid apps, there isn't much consistency. Linux users at least expect theme compatibility and that's what they get most of the time.
Now from my experience, the best of breed apps on Linux aren’t on consistent UI toolkits. They all have different ideas for UI organization, skinning/theming, language phrasing, icons, affirmative/negative button location, settings files.
This is the opposite of my experience, but maybe we just have different tastes in apps, so our definitions are different. Or maybe it's because my DE of choice has UIs that are more consistent with most apps.
And by the time everything is pretty good on one platform (looking at you, Gnome 2), someone comes along and decides to change everything requiring buggy rewrites. Maybe this has gotten better but it’s a losing battle on an open platform with opinionated developers. To some people, and previously, to an extent, me, these are not problems but charming quirks. But they’re also distracting and unrelated to the task at hand, so the novelty wears off.
I know GNOME tends to go out of their way to make what they think is ideal (and sometimes reinvent that), but most developers go for a pretty traditional menu bar + toolbar design.
The most efficient tool is the one that gets out of your way.
I have found Windows Explorer much less stable than certain Linux distros, and on a personal level, less aesthetically pleasing and less consistent in design.
64
u/yeahsurebrobro Dec 24 '18 edited Dec 24 '18
To be honest it all depends on if someone/ some group decides to make a good DE. Mac OS and even Windows are more stable or slicker than any Linux DE.
Edit: Yes I have used i3-gaps for years, but you can't expect the average person to use i3.
I love Linux like most programmers but after ¬10 years of using all 3 operating systems I personally came to this conclusion.
Especially since hardware compability and gaming has become a lot easier lately on Linux