|
|
|
|
|
|
by tom9729
4184 days ago
|
|
|
You clearly haven't used Unity; it's basically a clone of the OS X 10.6 interface (before they changed spaces) built on top of GTK3. It's got a useful set of standard key bindings (hold SUPER for a cheat sheet). It would actually be pretty awkward to use on a tablet. Gnome 3 OTOH is as you describe: giant touch-friendly menus, swipe to unlock (with a mouse), etc. Your position seems a little alarmist. How does systemd mean you need to stop using Linux? I'm sure XFCE will continue to work. |
|
|
"In July 2012, at OSCON, Shuttleworth explained some of the historical reasoning behind Unity's development. The initial decision to develop a new interface in 2008 was driven by a desire to innovate and to pass Microsoft and Apple in user experience. This meant a family of unified interfaces that could be used across many device form factors, including desktop, laptop, tablet, smart phones and TV. Shuttleworth said "‘The old desktop would force your tablet or your phone into all kinds of crazy of funny postures. So we said: Screw it. We’re going to move the desktop to where it needs to be for the future. [This] turned out to be a deeply unpopular process.”"
In answer to your question, systemd is in an excellent position to inject non-determinism into the functioning of the OS at all kinds of levels. I've got a hair-trigger response to things breaking and fixing themselves randomly, courtesy of a couple of years working with Windows. systemd has already demonstrated this behaviour, and I feel fairly safe in predicting that this will increase as systemd gains in complexity. Never to the point of being a major problem, just enough to be a persistent annoyance.
Major point being, however, that if it does turn out as I expect, there's going to be no avoiding it while still using the mainstream Linux distros.