I wanted to take a moment and talk about Linux UX because, let’s face it… it sucks.

Actually, it’s worse than that. Much of Linux’s UX is technically correct and that makes it objectively wrong.

No. I don’t want Linux to be more Windows-like. But I do want the most common Linux desktops to behave in a way that PC-literate folks can wrap their mind around — and do so from minute zero.

  • AndrewZabar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    21 hours ago

    This drivel - okay not entirely, but I’m making a point - is all the wrong attitudes. “People like Windows, let’s make Linux more like Windows so people will accept it.”

    We are not in a popularity contest. Linux is great - nay, extraordinary, phenomenal - because it has most of its shit together. Priorities, functionality, efficiency. If most people are not up to the task of learning something, that’s their problem. And yeah, that’s most people. In case the author of this article hadn’t noticed, the vast majority of people are, unfortunately, lazy and stupid. I’m not saying it’s always their faults but that’s not the issue. We don’t lower ourselves down to meet them where they are. If Linux remains only a tiny portion of the ecosystem, and needs to keep being the thing for only geeks (translation, got good grades in school, enjoy learning things, challenge themselves, etc.) then why does there seem to be this perception that that needs to change? Quite the opposite; the small bit of mainstream corporate elements that have become involved have only demonstrated they’ll immediately enshittify it, because that’s what they do.

    Let Linux continue to be the fringe ecosystem for geeks. Why do we need morons to enjoy using it? Why is this a problem?

    • dev_null@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      I don’t think “correctly label FAT32 as FAT32 instead of a versionless FAT” is “lowering ourselves down”. In fact I’d say it’s the opposite, let’s be technically precise and correct, instead of a simplified label that confuses everyone.

      And on the other issue, what do you have against file managers being able to mount a network drive? Yeah I can do it in fstab but if I could do it faster right from the file manager I would.

      Why is making things better a problem? If Gnome add the mounting feature to their file manager in the future, you will be against it, talking about the good old days where real men edited fstab uphill both ways? Whom does that help?