blog entry: "Installation Face Off: Linux or Windows"

[John]

Peter Garrett wrote:

> 
> Making a desktop that pleases both the eye and the mind is a difficult
> undertaking. Everyone seems to think , for example , that Mac-OS-X has a
> beautiful desktop with Acqua. I think it's really no more pleasing to look

I think that the OS X gui is very pretty, has much to recommend it, but 
it drives me crazy because I'm used to having dozens of windows open at 
once, and I cannot do that on the Mac.

> at than a nicely configured GNOME desktop. In fact I get bored with it.
> It's so... well ... *blue* !  Windows desktops are revolting, in my
> not-so-humble-opinion <grin>
> 
> Linus has a point in my view, though, regarding functionality. There
> seems to be a trend for the Gnome developers to remove things which are
> actually useful. An example would be "right click on the desktop to get a
> terminal", which is no longer there by default. (Yes, I know you can
> reinstall it, but this looks like a "Users shouldn't need to use the
> commandline" decision - which really doesn't make much sense. After all ,

Interesting, I was at an optometrist's in Midland Gate recently, and saw 
they were using what looked like a DOS program in a Windows window. Much 
like I was today, using edit on Windows SBS.

A Text-based applications demand so little of the computer for 
presentation! Most of the 512 Mbytes on this peecee are required to 
present the windows I want to see.