desktop choice
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| rgviza Apr 22, 2008 8:07 AM EDT |
”I’m using Ubuntu, but I have to choose a ‘desktop interface’? Why isn’t it built in, like it is with Window and Mac? And what the heck is ‘KDE’?” The Linux desktop needs to eliminate that extra choice if it wants to reach a mass audience.
-----------------------
The whole point of FOSS is choice... eliminating choices would bad mkay? Also, _nothing_ is built into linux. Ubuntu provides the desktop packages it likes... but they aren't really "built in" per se. You are likely to see various desktop choices depending on the distro you choose. The distro people build stuff like desktop choices into their distro, not linux itself. It's likely that the Ubuntu distro will offer KDE and Gnome into the forseeable future as long as both remain stable and usable. Coming from a Mac background you may not realize this stuff, but the philosophy of FOSS is important background info to understand to understand why you see things like multiple desktop choices when you build a system. A huge component of this philosophy is choice, too much of which, I agree, can confuse a user. Think of any single distro as a collection of (mostly) GNU software that will run and play nice together, put together by people as the tools they believe to be useful. None are representative of what linux is, since linux is just the kernel. The rest of it is a collection of stuff that can run in a system running a linux kernel. That's why a lot of people call it GNULinux, since most of the system is GNU. An analogue is that Apple systems run a Mach kernel with a lot of BSD tools and apple's desktop and applications. -Viz |
| Steven_Rosenber Apr 22, 2008 9:36 AM EDT |
The whole idea of more than one desktop environment, plus console windows (or the console itself) is so utterly foreign as to be mind-blowing for Mac and Windows users. Apple just made a big deal out of "Spaces" in the latest OS X release. Yep, took them until 2008 to offer multiple desktops to users. |
| rijelkentaurus Apr 22, 2008 11:35 AM EDT |
Yeah, most Windows people think that the "multiple-desktop" tool in the Power Tools download is a cool thing. Actually, it is just controlled minimization of windows, and it really sucks anyway. Expand your horizons, people!!! |
| tuxchick Apr 22, 2008 1:09 PM EDT |
Ubuntu only comes with one desktop, Gnome. "On start up, it offered me a choice of interfaces (KDE, GNOME, etc.)" makes no sense. |
| Sander_Marechal Apr 22, 2008 2:11 PM EDT |
@TC: Most likely a modified Ubuntu that had full KDE installed. He said it was a demonstration laptop. |
| tuxchick Apr 22, 2008 2:43 PM EDT |
That makes sense, Sander, so in the context of the article it's misinformed, because he complains that having to choose a desktop is too confusing for a Mac or Windows refugee. You don't have to make that choice on a stock installation. |
| Sander_Marechal Apr 22, 2008 2:53 PM EDT |
Absolutely true. And I bet that the author alreday got a thousand mails from Ubuntu users telling him just that :-) |
| rijelkentaurus Apr 22, 2008 4:47 PM EDT |
Quoting: There’s a reason that Apple has always been the choice of artists and musicians. The machine itself is artful. Yeah, it’s expensive, and it crashes, but it’s artful. And that counts for a whole lot. {pukes} I don't find OS X all that pretty...sorry, I much prefer KDE tweaked to heck and back...and it crashes? Wait, wait...Apple never mentioned that...I thought OS X was perfect!!!!! |
| tuxchick Apr 22, 2008 4:57 PM EDT |
My very first ever computer was a Mac, an LC II. Even back then it felt itchy and galling, so in short order I discovered Windoze 3.1/DOS5 & 6. I liked DOS, though it wasn't much of a choice since Win 3.1 could barely boot, let alone do anything useful. Then along came Linux, ta daaa! And here we are. It is true that some folks prefer style above all else, even at the expense of functionality. Exhibit A: horrid ugly non-functional fragile women's fashions and silly hair styles. In a sane world who would wear pantyhose? They are breeding grounds for nasty female troubles, they're uncomfortable, and they rip at a harsh glance. Don't even get me started on high heels. Though I guess the women wearing them think they look good. I'm convinced most fashion designers hate women and die laughing at getting rich off overpriced junky crud. But I digress. In fact I completely lost track. Thought train derailed again. Oh yeah, Windows has neither style nor functionality, yet it dominates. Truly the world is weird. |
| bigg Apr 22, 2008 5:40 PM EDT |
> I don't find OS X all that pretty Amen. Finally someone else agrees with me on that. It just doesn't do anything for me. And it drives me crazy when someone complains about Linux fonts. That was one of the things I found attractive about Linux. The default fonts looked so much better than on Windows. I hate the Mac fonts more than I hate the Windows fonts. Whatever was the default in the days of Red Hat when I got started on Linux was pretty good. Maybe I just spent too many years working on computers in the pre-GUI era to appreciate Macs. I still hold to the goofy view of an OS as the thing that allows me to run applications and do work. |
| techiem2 Apr 22, 2008 6:04 PM EDT |
Me either.
I find OS X to be...I guess Cluttered would fit.
Of course, I'm the type that uses Fluxbox at home with no icons and hidden taskbar, and XFCE on the laptop with minimal icons (just the default home, mounted disks, etc) and a hidden bar....
hehe.
While I think my computer should be "fun" (i.e. cool wallpaper I like and Compiz prettiness on the laptop), the main purpose is for the machine allow me to work efficiently. |
| rijelkentaurus Apr 22, 2008 6:06 PM EDT |
I used twm on CentOS a lot, particularly on older hardware. That would confuse Winders and Mac users sooooo badly... :) |
| tracyanne Apr 22, 2008 6:08 PM EDT |
@Bigg, I don't find the Mac to be all that intuitive. I have to work with Windows, and Mac on a daily basis and I use Linux at home. The Mac is only intuitive if you use it a lot, just like Windows and Linux , I use KDE. I also don't find GNOME all that intuitive (I rarely use it), but it is far more so than the MAC, in my opinion. |
| theboomboomcars Apr 22, 2008 7:10 PM EDT |
Mac is intuitive if you want to run one of the applications on the dock, you just click on it and it runs. Quitting that application isn't quite as intuitive since if you click the red x it just closes the window and doesn't exit the program... If you decide to do something not on the dock things get a little sketchy. |
| rijelkentaurus Apr 22, 2008 7:59 PM EDT |
Quoting: Quitting that application isn't quite as intuitive since if you click the red x it just closes the window and doesn't exit the program That always kills me...but of course it really needs to kill the program. WTF? X=Exit, dang it. |
| Steven_Rosenber Apr 22, 2008 8:29 PM EDT |
I kind of enjoy being able to close a program's window while keeping it running. It helps keep desktop clutter down, especially if you don't have the Spaces feature that 10.5 just introduced. I wouldn't mind a Linux/BSD environment in which programs could be kept running without their windows. |
| herzeleid Apr 22, 2008 8:41 PM EDT |
> I wouldn't mind a Linux/BSD environment in which programs could be kept running without their windows. Most linux desktop environments feature a "minimize" button which does pretty much just that. The app disappears into the tray, until you unmimize it again. An anecdote about mac users: (disclaimer - I have a mac too) I had a co-worker borrow my linux box one week while I was out sick - he did a "switch user" from the kde screenlock, and when I came back, I discovered his session still running. I couldn't figure out why he had about 40 minimzed konsole sessions in the panel, til I realized he was mainly a mac user at home. He didn't realize that when he minimized a konsole and then clicked on the konsole entry from the menu again, it started a new instance. He was used to the mac behavior, and had assumed that clicking on the icon to start konsole would just pop up his minimized konsole. |
| Steven_Rosenber Apr 22, 2008 8:43 PM EDT |
That's true ... but it's different than the Mac, on which you can minimize OR totally close the window. For me, it's one of the best "simple" things about OS X. |
| jacog Apr 23, 2008 2:32 AM EDT |
Yeah, the OSX look has gotten tired... But I have to say, I don't think there are many Linux distros that have an out-the-box sexy look. Most are horrendously ugly, some even downright vile. |
| jdixon Apr 23, 2008 2:45 AM EDT |
> I don't think there are many Linux distros that have an out-the-box sexy look. Well, there a lot of disagreement about what "looks sexy", or even good. No two people are likely to have the same view of what makes a perfect desktop. That said, how many Linux distros have professional artists working on them? If you want something that looks good; you get someone who's job it is to make things look good to work on it. |
| jezuch Apr 23, 2008 4:27 AM EDT |
Quoting:jdixon: Well, there a lot of disagreement about what "looks sexy", or even good. You don't need computers for that. It's enough trouble with humans ;) Quoting:TC: I'm convinced most fashion designers hate women and die laughing at getting rich off overpriced junky crud. I always thought they were gay... No straight guy would take a skeleton, put some random rags on it and call it a "pretty woman"... Quoting:bigg: And it drives me crazy when someone complains about Linux fonts. This puzzles me too. There was a nice article some time ago explaining the differences between font handling on Windows, Linux (KDE, actually) and Mac. This was something like: Windows -- totally brain-dead and ugly; Linux/KDE -- merely uninformed, but otherwise good; Mac -- WTF? [Mac developers "solved" the font aliasing problem by simply blurring the text... Get it?] |
| theboomboomcars Apr 23, 2008 5:46 AM EDT |
Steven- I agree that it can be useful, but when I go in to help someone speed up their Mac and it is still running all of the programs in the task bar... A useful feature yes. Intuitive no. |
| tuxchick Apr 23, 2008 7:16 AM EDT |
Quoting: No straight guy would take a skeleton, put some random rags on it and call it a "pretty woman" I really need to start collecting on all the keyboards and monitors you folks owe me. |
| dinotrac Apr 23, 2008 7:55 AM EDT |
Quoting: No straight guy would take a skeleton, put some random rags on it and call it a "pretty woman" I don't know. They got guys using vinyl dolls and calling them "pretty women" -- in the Julia Roberts movie sense. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!