Operating Systems > Linux and UNIX

One Quick Question about GNU/Linux and its Users

(1/3) > >>

billy_gates:
Now you guys would agree that most of you and other linux users do not like Microsoft.  You say that their software is bloated and has a bad interface.  Along with the other Monopoly antitrust stuff.  This question focuses on the interface part.

Now I know I hate MS's interfaces.  They all seem counterintuitive and difficult.  Just wondering then, why are most Open Source equivilants of Brand Name software not only blatant copies of that software, but also even more difficult and inconsistant?

Examples:

Open Office and Office look almost the same.  If I wanted to make something better than Office I wouldn't start by copying the shitty office UI, I can tell u that.

Almost every Desktop Manager, Gnome, KDE, etc... Have the basic, toolbar at the bottom that holds windows and has a start menu'ish type launcher.

I don't use Linux much.... but have been working on getting the parts together on a comp so I can use it as a PVR with SuSE 7.3 (Only Linux that worked with my PCTV card without installing drivers)  But this general I hate Windows opinion, then the copy of windows software on Linux seems kind of hypocritical.

I am also not advertising the Mac interface, although I like it better than the WIndows one, which means I also like it better than the Linux one.  I'm sure you linux people can come up with your own tell tale interface... "Whoa, that is definitely linux," just like when people see OSX they just know its OSX.

I am not trolling. ... this is a genuine question.  Is there a reason why the original gnu/linux people started making their interfaces like Windows insteađ

flap:
It's not exactly difficult to work out why they emulate the look & feel of windows or windows software. It's to get users to migrate from Windows.

Also, window managers that look like Windows are definitely in the minority. KDE and GNOME are specifically designed to act like the windows interface, for the reason I've given, but other WMs like Enlightenment, Window Maker, Blackbox etc. are very different.

[ August 25, 2003: Message edited by: flap ]

preacher:
Simply put my computer does exactly what I want it to do and no less. Therefore I am happy. It just so happens it uses linux. All the bullshit about copying interfaces means nothing to me.

Laukev7:
The only X interface I might consider original is Enlightenment. Windowmaker is based on the OpenStep GUI. Blackbox is good for a minimalist interface, but not exactly original.

Laukev7:
The only X interface I might consider different is Enlightenment. Windowmaker is based on the OpenStep GUI. Blackbox is good for a minimalist interface, but not exactly original. Many do not emulate the Windows GUI, but instead imitate interfaces like Workbench (AWM), CDE (FVWM and XFCE), OpenStep (Afterstep and Windowmaker) and RiscOS (ROX).

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page