Just installed my second Mint machine for desktop work yesterday. Really cannot complain. The difference in desktop responsiveness between this 7 year old Mint machine versus a brand new PC or Mac is night and day.
Every modern OS needs a major GUI refactoring, I swear. It takes a full minute for my Mac to open control panels. Mint can do it in microseconds... Silly that this is the case.
It's what I installed on my parents' computer. Cinnamon by default has the Windows look and feel; it comes with codecs available out of box, and it just works.
I think the article is over the top, but in terms of thoughtless lowest common denominator user experience I don't think there's a better choice. I use it on several machines accordingly.
That’s what I setup for my siblings whenever I can. I’m starting to get bored of doing full upgrades from scratch for them, but I only do them once or twice a year.
For Archlinux users like myself of course I could care less about Mint, but it cannot be denied that “normal” users appreciate intuitive and good-looking interfaces.
I don't know if "people" do. I have since about 2009, although not exclusively, and using Mate instead of Cinnamon.
I think it's funny that they mention running it on a "vintage" 2011 Lenovo. I've got it running on a 2009 Lenovo Netbook and a 2002 IBM R-series laptop too.
I don't know, and TBH I don't care, it just seems like the mint ui is more responsive, and it feels more intuitive to me (but that's likely a personal preference)
Every modern OS needs a major GUI refactoring, I swear. It takes a full minute for my Mac to open control panels. Mint can do it in microseconds... Silly that this is the case.