back

by lproven·9y ago·view on hn ↗
Thanks for that. JOOI, I was not notified of any such comment. I did get and unscreen a single comment, but it's a different (anonymous) one – visible there now.

You should be able to sign-in to LJ to comment using any OpenID. In fact OpenID itself actually originated as an LJ-affiliated project by one of LJ's developers.

I do learn to adapt to the provided UI on many devices and OSes /where I don't have a choice./ But on Linux, I do have a choice, so why should I spend the effort adapt to something that doesn't work the way I'm used to or in a way that I like, when I could just switch environments to something that I find more comfortable?

When I worked at Red Hat, I switched from GNOME 3 to Xfce. Yes, it's old fashioned, but I can, with some effort, set it up to work much like Windows with a vertical taskbar – a layout I find convenient and flexible.

As I said in the blogpost, on Windows I use a vertical taskbar on the left screen edge. On Mac OS X, I move the Dock there. On Unity, well, that's just where it is and it's hard to move, but I don't want to, so I'm fine with that. On GNOME 3, I get that too, but in a limited, rather inflexible and unhelpful, form.

The primary question is: is there a benefit to me in switching and re-adapting to working in a system that's significantly unlike any of the others that I use? And the answer, _for me_, is no. I don't get enough reward to justify it, so I don't adapt - I switch to a desktop that works in something approximating the way I like.

Although I've used Windows since v2.01 in 1989, I switched away from it at the turn of the century. Now, OS X and Unity give me a fairly consistent desktop. With tweaking, Windows and Xfce give something very broadly comparable. GNOME Shell is left as something of an odd-man-out.

But that's just me. I am very happy to see its increasing polish and that it's winning people back.