Quote:
Originally Posted by ninjatux
Why does a desktop have to be "beautiful"?
|
You may be reading the word
"beautiful" too literally.
Quote:
What constitutes "beautiful"? How does anyone define "functionality"?
|
These are two good questions, & unfortunately, different camps will focus on different aspects. Personally, I don't believe that Apple is the epitome of usability. They aren't always consistent, & the morphing, bouncing, & spinning UI pyrotechnics used do little more than chew up CPU cycles, & play into Apple's branding. Now if these cutesy little gimmicks did something like take out the trash, then I may reconsider...
Nevertheless, certain segments of society will be entertained by these contrivances, & more importantly, they may give newbies the sense of interaction & accomplishment with their computer while displacing apprehension with enjoyment. This is important to them, & there isn't any reason that I should take it away from them.
...but it isn't so important to me. My needs are different & I hope that there will always be some solution which is more in alignment with the way I work.
Sometimes small is beautiful as is stability, flexibility, & simplicity -- all things that many people off the street will not readily identify. Because of all these factors, I don't believe that one universal operating system will be the answer to all problems. Diversity is just as good for the marketplace as it is to genetics.
Quote:
Sometimes, I think the statement that "Linux is for people who hate Windows..." is quite true, especially when you see Linux leaders embarrassing themselves.
|
Maybe it is true
all of the time...