Liste des Groupes | Revenir à ol advocacy |
On 2024-05-29 11:37 a.m., RonB wrote:On 2024-05-29, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:>On 2024-05-28 7:36 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:On Tue, 28 May 2024 09:04:39 -0400, Joel wrote:>
>Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:>
>On Tue, 28 May 2024 01:55:04 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:>
>Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 01:32 this Tuesday>
(GMT):>>
On Mon, 27 May 2024 23:10:05 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>I thought some people still use XP..>
But for what? Would you entrust mission-critical business operations
to obsolete, unsupported software?
No, because it's a good UI and some stuff still works..from what I
heard.
Really?? That Fisher-Price toy-style UI was a “good UI”?
You could switch it to look mostly like Win2000.
You’re admitting that an even older UI out of the 1990s was nicer-looking
than XP?
Yep, you're dense. You're purposefully jumping from one topic to another
in a vain effort to make Linux look good. For your information, _most_
Linux distributions still look no better than Windows 2000 did. KDE
imitates the 2000 look but adds amateur-looking effects and clunky
widgets, Cinnamon imitates the 2000 look, XFCE poorly imitates the 2000
look, LXDE/LXQT poorly imitate the 2000 look, and Gnome imitated the
2000 look until they decided to switch to 3.
>
The point here is that if you don't like the Fisher Price look, you
could use a more familiar one. Moreover, the familiar one in 2000
released in 1999 _still_ looks better than what you'll get from a Linux
distribution if aesthetics are that important to you. Lie to yourself as
much as you wish if you insist on disagreeing.
Basically the Windows interface hasn't changed since the XP (except for the
disaster of Windows 8). Cinnamon, Mate and Xfce may look like Windows (which
is fine with me) but the underlying Linux OS is superior (and so are these
desktops, in my opinion — I use all three of them, but mostly Cinnamon).
Except that Lawrence was focusing on the way it looked, not the way it
ran. Linux, even then, was a lot more functional than Windows was. You
could do a lot more with any Linux distribution than you could with
Windows, and for free. However, the desktop environments only recently
starting looking like something other than an amateur programmer's wet
dream. I would say that Ubuntu is the group most responsible for
improving the look of the Linux desktop.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.