Is there a reason why Linux distros are 15+ years behind design-wise?

Is there a reason why Linux distros are 15+ years behind design-wise?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluxbox
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Is there a reason why Windows is 30 years behind, design-wise?

Progress can go backwards.
The barbarians that destroyed rome were hundreds of years ahead of the romans they tore down.

forgot the img

oops, sry, wrong img

thanks for your contribution to our humble board

taht fucking recyclye bin icon

some people like it that way. modern interfaces use lots of resources and look terrible.

Take the average programmer who has taste for shit. Now degenerate him, because that's what bistro maintainers are, failed programmers or even worse, failed admins.
/explaination

What looks terrible are linux's heavily shaded and fat buttons and bars. Look at fucking code::blocks

>Is there a reason why Linux distros are 15+ years behind design-wise?
yes a very good reason
Linux has no design. Linux is simply a layer of programming between the hardware and any software that utilises linuxd. Linux is a kernel. What you think of as a Linux desktop is actually merely the creation of programmers that sort of nail some graphical components to the brickwork of Linux.
KDE, Gnome, etc etc etc etc these are not linux, these are graphical environments which merely call functions within linux.

If you are really asking, why is "name of Desktop environment" so behind the times, it is because the programmers largely work for nothing as a hobby, and that usually means they care more about functionality.

Windows 10 uses paid programmers and they must continually have ideas that manifest themselves in a commercially viable product for business users

Hey what's up - are you afraid that if you took a laptop or tablet to your regular gay club that you attend then the other gays would laugh at you?

It's not like that, Bro. Gay people dont have a monopoly on taste and good design. Flamboyant people usually make good news stories but just as many heterosexuals would find that recycle bin garish too

because everything done in the past 15 years is shit. prove me wrong

A kernel can have shaded and fat buttons and bars? interesting

Fucking sperg

I don't know man, distros like Arch or Ubuntu with a desktop suite like GNOME or KDE are pretty ahead of the curve, even more so than Windows. KDE has more features than Windows 10, and looks pretty similar, except you can tweak its appearance however you want in a theme manager without dicking around with config files or regedits.

>the programmers largely work for nothing as a hobby
>what is redhat, canonical, etc
>what is KDE

yeah, because this screenshot is from damn small linux, an OS supposed to actually run on (at least) 15 years old hardware.

Because 15 years before it was 15 years ahead of any design.

The thing that usually gets me is when gui elements have no padding or margins whatsoever. Just why? Unless your running a piece of shit on 1366x768 (whoever made that a standard needs to drown in magma) there's no fucking reason to have shit crammed up together like that.

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

>RAM usage 37MB

that shit is supposed to run on 486 PCs what do you expect op?

What is modern design to you?

KDE 5
/thread

t. i3 user, design is for clueless normies.

Still better than winblows 10.

Why not to make one icon DB, as they do it in GNU?

Poor imitation of KDE 5

What DE they had used in DSL?

>what is redhat, canonical, etc
>what is KDE
GAY compared to windows

Mirin' those forearms

probably an old version of lxde

my bad it's fluxbox, that's ancient
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluxbox

Windows took a break from copying KDE with windows 8, for which they seemed to want to copy Gnome3.

A few years ago I met a KDE programmer and he happened to be with a developer. They were on a flight from London UK to New York. So I got talking to them, bought them a couple of drinks and we were having a bit of a laugh, when I said "So why do Linux gui's suck compared to windows". They both went a bit quiet and then, as I never spoke either, they felt compelled to answer. This is the answer I got. "We just dont know but if we did, we would be working for Microsoft" we all laughed like it was a joke, but deep down I knew it was true.
Pic related it is KDE developers stealing a bike from microsoft

Actually they kept a lot of things the same. They kept the same legal system and government for example.

whats this? desktop thread?

The fact that they're not cucked entirely yet, so they can choose to be functional instead of broken-by-design.

There are also some things that use UI elements and icons left over from Windows 95 if you dig deep enough. And at least two different conflicting sets of Windows 10 design guidelines in use at one point due to MS wanting to redesign the fucking OS with every "fall update".

Because linux users are 15

It would be extremely helpful to the argument you're trying to make if you didn't post a screenshot of a Linux distribution trimmed for size which has been out of active development for about a decade now.

Because most Linux users have bad taste.

Wow old KDE looks cool

naw honestly that flat ms paint looking style is not too bad. it reminds me of a cartoon

pic related.

So, why is it that Mac OS copied Gnome 3, and Wangdows 10 copied KDE Plasma?

disgusting

...

It's funny using Damn Small Linux as an example. Show us how Windows able to fit at 50mb flash disk would look like :D

Actually, I'm personally using i3 which isn't very complex looking or fancy per se but it has increased my productivity somewhat.

Apart from that, I would not say modern distros with modern DEs are behind 15+ years behind...

Windows 8 is also pretty funny system.

Is there a reason why your distro is 12+ years behind design-wise?

...

What DE is this?

A buggy DE.

read the neofetch result

But the barbarians were the good guys.

Windows 10

Lol, didn't notice it's KDE. How stupid of me...

Show me, what do you think,modern design, should look, OP.

GUI =/= linux distro you fucking retard

>4.9.0.6
Why would you do this to yourself?

>54 posts in a so obviously troll/bait thread it hurts
Literally pick up a knife and slice your throats faggots. how fucking dumb you have to be to SERIOUSLY reply worthless shit like this?

What's wrong with 4.9 if it supports your hardware?
It's not like you can't install a backported kernel or compile it yourself but why risk breakage if 4.9 works?

Because to Linux users, it doesn't matter.

I haven't seen an icon in months. All windows are solid colours.

Because UIs peaked in 2002.

Since then it's literally been nothing but Windows Metro touchscreen style horseshit and iOS style giant icons and transparency.

Also lol if you care about the UI on Linux. Why you giving a shit about a UI on a router/server OS?

...

>he installs a DE on his server
total pleb

The question is: Why did Windows break the command line if it worked perfectly?

The GUI is, in most cases (OSX and Linux systems) a wrapper on top of a terminal. Effects are nice, windows are nice, but let me ask you this:

Why do your windows overlap?
Why do your windows use only a percentage of the screen?
Why do you use a toolbar if all your programs are visible on the desktop?

Tiling window managers are the future. It's versatile, practical, it just makes sense to use all the desktop space.

I teach elementary school IT (5th graders) and I find that while menus and names of menus change, keyboard shortcuts are mostly the same. Ctrl+C,V,X,Z, Shift keys, everything is the same. Why then shouldn't the rest of the OS be the same? Once you leave the mouse and learn the keyboard shortcuts, your keyboard has everything you need.

i3 will always be better, objectively. Once Windows implements an i3-like environment (even optionally), it'll be infinitely more useful.

>new is better!

>Design
Thats some faggot shit.