#1 Posted by kurkosdr on Feb 19, 2012 11:07 AM

Theoretically, “Linux” has everything and done everything before any other OS. If some distro has something that looks like the thing you want in pre-alpha stage in the repositories, “Linux” had it first. Also “Linux” never copies. Sure, there are projects like KDE, Unity and Songbird that are straight knockoffs, but if a distro doesn’t have them, “Linux” doesn’t copy. This is the beauty of distros. For every argument, you can pick the distro that allows you to win the argument. You can even pretend that all those distros are one OS, call it “Linux” or “GNU/Linux” and count them as if they were one OS in the statistics. Binary compatibility between the distros is not required. Binary compatibility between versions is not required.

#2 Posted by administrator on Feb 19, 2012 3:46 PM

One thing I will say is that given the low numbers of users on Linux desktop, it’s the perfect platform to be testing new design ideas. The constant churn isn’t going to attract a lot of users, but it allow for experimentation when you have fewer users to worry about.

Apple gets away with this on the desktop for the same reasons. Though they tend to put a little more thought into their overall design.

#3 Posted by ChrisTX on Feb 19, 2012 8:23 PM

What I really, really hate about GNOME 3 is that there’s only one window being displayed and working on two windows is just inefficient. It’s optimized for fullscreen applications – just as they say there – but with windows. If it’s fullscreen, why do I need GNOME’s stupid bar + the window chrome?! That alone wastes so much screen space.

You must be signed in to leave comments.