Sujet : Re: Do Microsofts Copilot+ PCs Require Linux?
De : OFeem1987 (at) *nospam* teleworm.us (Chris Ahlstrom)
Groupes : comp.os.linux.advocacyDate : 30. May 2024, 17:26:01
Autres entêtes
Organisation : None
Message-ID : <v3a5qb$1oc32$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
User-Agent : slrn/1.0.3 (Linux)
Andrzej Matuch wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On 2024-05-30 7:27 a.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
<brevsnip>
>
I'm glad you agree with my assessment of Windows :-).
>
I agree only that while being a lot more functional than Windows for
much of its existence, Linux still looks like a Pontiac Sunfire.
"Linux" has all kinds of looks:
- Plain text-only terminal screen with multiple virtual consoles.
Can also run tmux or GNU screen to get multiple consoles and
panes.
- Generic old-style GUI with something like TWM.
- Manual and dynamic tiling window managers like i3 or Sway, DWM or
AwesomeWM.
- Simple-looking overlapping window managers like OpenBox or FluxBox.
They can be customized with other components for the taskbar, slot,
etc.
- Desktop built for kids: Sugar (started with the OLPC, has
a GTK+ theme engine as well)
- The whole gamut of desktops: Lxde, Xfce, GNOME, Cinnamon, Mate,
KDE.
Not to mention all the theming engines available, along with icon sets, mouse
cursors, stand-alone menus and taskbars.
So no, there's no single look to "Linux".
-- Cold hands, no gloves.