Reasons to Love and Hate elementary OS

Quoting:"focus on functionality and stability"

Let me finish the sentence from the article...

Most Linux teams focus on functionality and stability, but don't want to refine the interface, which almost always has low priority. The elementary OS makers are some of the few that consider the visual aspect to be just as important as the rest of the distro.

I HATE elementary OS! They want to make it AS visually appealing as it (Ubuntu) is functional! (more sarcasm)

Do you really think most users don't care how their OS looks and wouldn't prefer one that is also good looking?

What gives you the idea that elementary OS doesn't focus on stability?

Pass the beer and perhaps brew your own.

Go get 'em Elementary. Although, I think I'll be hanging out at the Arch or Debian dive down the road.

> Do you really think most users don't care how their OS looks.....

First, let me say my post was not any reflection on you or your website.

Secondly, I truly do wonder why anyone would care how cool their "OS looks". As I've stated several times in this forum, I never see how my "OS looks". I have all my program windows maximized, so rarely see my DE/WM environment. I usta add some wallpaper, but stopped when I realized I never see it.

I imagine some folks who use linux care about such things. Cool wallpaper, transparent editors, etc. Ooo-eee! Lookie all my my windows tiled against my super cool wallpaper. Really? Take a snapshot! I prefer to actually USE my OS for something rather than jes ogle it.

Besides, anyone who actually knows how to use their OS (Linux) can put any cosmetics they want on it. This particular distro sounds like nothing more than an appealing eye candy come-on for Linux wannabes.

I remember how people looked at (ie. down on) my original Debian Icewm desktop -- they said it was "so Windows '95". But it worked great, and did more -- and faster -- than their 2 years newer computers with XP. And my CDs didn't come out as coasters if I so much as sneezed while burning them. Extra bonus -- I wasn't worrying about viruses and other malware (nor paying for nor wrestling with Norton, either).

The irony is that when all that cool, gee-wiz compiz stuff with the spinning cube and all came out, they were indeed impressed -- but still weren't going to leave Windows because of it.

There is no magic formulae for winning over the masses (unless you have $millions to spend on marketing and an associated, commercial-scale sales infrastructure) so don't worry about it; it could be as twice as stylish as OS X -- without an Apple class marketing Juggernaut and mercantile partners network, it won't "win" in the "marketplace".

I find myself not caring one way or the other as long as it is opt in rather than rammed down my throat.

Concepts like a desktop only mirror the real-life equivalent. It's a place where I temporarily store all the items I need for a specific task. Once I'm finished; I put everything back in place (in ~/Documents, ~/Pictures, etc.) or else I'll leave the place a mess, like my real desktop. Working without a desktop is a major PITA for many people, and their workflow depends on it.

The Elementary OS developers decided that a desktop was an uncool thing to have, so their system doesn't include one. Nor even the possibility to configure one. This was one of the reasons my stint with Elementary OS has only been very brief.

I would always use the Desktop space like my permanent storage locations. It was a bad idea... For me, removing the ability to easily over-populate the Desktop area is a really good thing. Besides, it's extremely poor OpSec to locate items on your Desktop space.

However, one person's detrimental enabler is another's convenient and always temporary work area.

KDE 4 gets the Desktop concept best in my opinion. It offers couple widgets. Folder View, which can mirror any folder you want and be restricted to its own box on the desktop with all bells & whistles to configure. The other is Quick Access, which also mirrors any folder but allows only read access. Those two widgets will give users all they need to manage a clean desktop but store quite a bit on it. Activities is also another widgets option but I haven't really dug deep into it yet, it is mostly useful to manage and access projects.

Quoting:I have all my program windows maximized, so rarely see my DE/WM environment.

I never understand how Mac users get any work done. All the Youtube demos of how to do something have a million little windows and panels in the way that they're always moving around to get to the one underneath it.

Virtual desktops. Alt-Fn to task-switch. The way God intended. There is no other way. ;-)

/me ducks and runs

Add another layer for Activities (pick your favorite keyboard shortcut) and I'm with you 100%. After using them for about a year now, I can't imagine using anything else.

Thanks Gus. That's a full swallow of ShockTop ale through the nose. =:^))

As much as I hated on KDE for all this time, it turns out that KDE Mint, respun for our educational stuff, gets put upon 70 percent of the Reglue computers leaving our shop and into the homes of kids that need them. We've been doing that for two years now. And yeah, I am a shallow, shallow man when it comes to aesthetics on my display. I like the bazillion ways I can make my work space look. QtCurve and all the tweaks in and around that tool can take 2 hours of my evening away without a sweat. Of course, beauty, beholder and all of that. One comment will tell me how ugly my display is and the next is asking me for my QTCurve mods and color schemes.

Personally I cannot stand the migration to "flat" icons and graphics. Georgi Karavasilev and the others that put tons of work into flat icon sets like Numix and MoKa. I'm just not seein' the attraction, but again, to each our own. And I'm not detracting from the artist(s) They have erased more talent from their draft pages than I will ever have on purpose.

That being said, I am patiently waiting for the 5.0 stable release of KDE. It looks like it's going to live up to the hype I've been reading.

I've borrowed some of the looks of ElementaryOS for the Slackware+Xfce-based desktop that I use for my clients and for myself: wallpapers, icon themes, GTK themes. But as far as functionality is concerned, plain Xfce 4.12 is a winner.

http://www.microlinux.fr/mled.php

To be honest I have found myself back using GNOME again nowadays. It is functionally the most pleasing especially when you learn the keyboard shortcuts and there are so many applications that work well with GNOME that it really works for me.

I'm now of the opinion that Unity, GNOME and even Windows 8 have gone in the right direction by utilising keyboard shortcuts and dash style interfaces.

Seriously GNOME 2 and MATE feel old and lifeless in comparison nowadays. I can see the appeal of Cinnamon but desktop integration of applications and the ease of navigation makes GNOME and Unity more appealing.

Elementary and their desktop is ok but not for me.

Quoting:when you learn the keyboard shortcuts

"We've got to go back. Back, to the future!"

I prefer my own shortcut combinations, but ultimately what matters is, "Does it work for you?"

Flexibility and the ability to customize your environment is the name of the game.

GNOME 4.0 will only have one single configuration option. "Use GNOME with default settings [X] yes [x] OK."

:o)

GNOME 4.1 will have no user configuration settings at all! It will simply 'smart collect' all settings from the user as the user attempts various tasks.

You know... a user can't be allowed to actually explore the filesystem... they might mess up something.

Actually: There is a need for a GNU/Linux desktop that is sort of 'unbreakable' -- if the GNU/Linux desktop is going to be widely distributed to random computer users, as most computer users I know truly have no idea how to do most tasks beyond open the default word processor and the default web browser.

Yes, all developers know that it is important to keep users from disturbing your program. Hide the unimportant details from them, after all, you the developer know best.

</sarcasm>

P.S. -- I consider myself a developer, so this is not an uninformed blast against my fellow colleagues.

Every new user for Gnome 4.x will have to read this first, the operating manual.