Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

Linux and Desktop Environments: Change is uncomfortable

Filed under
Linux
Software

Operating Systems tend to live and die by the dedication of their users.

People, like you and me, grow accustomed to using computers in a particular way. How our file system is laid out, what the desktop looks like, what applications we use to get work done - over time we become used to every nuance of our systems.

When that system changes dramatically, we start thinking “hey, this annoys me... I wonder if the grass is greener over in that pasture over there.”

Windows 8 is a great example of this. As Microsoft changed the core user experience, folks (at least some folks) began to look elsewhere. Or when Apple first released MacOS X 10.0 and changed just about everything about MacOS (new apps, new look and feel, new file system layout, broken backwards compatibility). At that moment, many Mac users considered jumping ship.

This same phenomenon applies to Linux desktops as well, which is perhaps a bit counter to common thinking – many use Linux because of how astoundingly customizable it is compared to most other Operating Systems. But it applies, just the same.

rest here




More in Tux Machines

Android Leftovers

Leftovers: OSS

Ubuntu 16.04 Review: What’s New for Desktop Users

Ubuntu is a tricky distribution. As much as I love it on my home server, my desktop is a different ballgame. In my experience, releases between LTS versions have many new technologies that may or may not survive in the next LTS. There were many technologies or features that Canonical thought were ambitious -- HUD, experimenting with menus, online dash search, Ubuntu Software Center, etc. -- but they were abandoned. So, if I were to use Ubuntu on my desktop, I would still choose LTS. Read more

Workflow and efficiency geek talks Drush and Drupal

I started using Drupal because I needed an open source content management system (CMS) to use in several community projects. One of the projects I was involved with was just getting started and had narrowed its CMS selection down to either Drupal or Joomla. At the time I was using a different framework, but I had considered Drupal in the past and knew that I liked it a lot better than Joomla. I convinced them to go with the new Drupal 6 release and converted all of my other projects for consistency. I started working with Drush because I wanted a unified mechanism to work with local and remote sites. My first major contribution to Drush was site aliases and sql-sync in Drush 3. Read more