‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

Ideas on modernizing the open-source desktop

407 points · 545 comments · signa11

  1. Telaneo · · focus · HN ↗
    We could do well with change on the desktop, but very little of the change I've seen during the past 10+ years is actually benefiting the user. Even on Linux, the changes happening are stuff like bugfixes and reducing jank; small incremental improvements that have already been done, but are just getting their final round of polish.

    All the other changes I see are just shuffling around the UI, which doesn't really help anyone. And even newer features are either so marginal as to not matter, or can't be trusted to stick around. Why bother to learn a new UI, when all that does is get you back to square 1, and it might not even stick around? I'd be much more interested in tweaking my DE if I could be confident in knowing that those tweaks will persist and not cause other problems down the line, but I have no such assurance.

    I don't blame the casuals for hating UI updates. I myself went to Linux to get a more cohesive and stable experience. If we're going to make changes, we need to not break workflows that already exist. New features and workflows need to either not be in the way for established users, or opt-in until they're established and known good. Doing anything else is user hostile, and by this time, given how much we know users don't like changing UI, dare I say, evil.

    1. bryanlarsen · · focus · HN ↗
      I disagree. KDE 6 is really good, and each point upgrade to 6 delivers an improvement.
      1. Telaneo · · focus · HN ↗
        Care to point out what improvements KDE 6 has got that isn't something that's already been done in some other DE or OS, and isn't a bugfix or polish?

        I haven't daily driven KDE to see what it's truly like, but from a distance it doesn't seem to be doing anything revolutionary or truly new, but I'd love to be proven wrong.

        1. bluGill · · focus · HN ↗
          You should not be doing anything revolutionary. UX design is a well understood field with a lot of research into it. Doing something revolutionary or new is a bad idea. I'm sure there are new things in KDE, but nobody will be able to think of them for a long time because the new things are minor things that nobody is going to notice or care about.
          1. Telaneo · · focus · HN ↗
            You sound like you're disagreeing with me, yet what you write is inline with my opinion, but I might just be misreading your comment.

            I wrote in my OP that 'even on Linux, the changes happening are stuff like bugfixes and reducing jank; small incremental improvements that have already been done, but are just getting their final round of polish'. The comment I was responding to claimed disagree, and said that KDE does get improvements. I wanted to clarify what improvements those are, since I can't see why they would disagree with my original comment in the only improvements in KDE are 'stuff like bugfixes and reducing jank; small incremental improvements that have already been done, but are just getting their final round of polish'.

            1. bryanlarsen · · focus · HN ↗
              I don't think he misread your comment, I think you miswrote it. Your first sentence is:

              > We could do well with change on the desktop,

              1. Telaneo · · focus · HN ↗
                Ah, in that case I've misread their comment. If their opinion is that the desktop doesn't need change because KDE is good and only delivers small incremental improvements, then I can definitely see their point.
Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.