Hacker News Reader

> Worse, there are no operating systems other than OS X that fulfill my needs of a pleasant-to-use Unix/Linux system--certainly no Linux distribution comes close on the "pleasant-to-use" part; I'd rather use Windows 7 and Cygwin than any Linux desktop I've been subjected to in the last five years.

Sounds to me like this is just a matter of what you're used to. From my experience, OS X's UI is the last thing anyone would want if they weren't used to it. The window management is pretty damn horrible. OTOH, Linux has a variety of window managers with many innovative paradigms.

> I like Lenovo's build quality and aesthetic, for example, but their laptops are universally underspecced for what I want (if your only GPU is Intel, you are not getting my money) and I can't get a Retina display, which I now consider mandatory, anywhere else.

I don't know what you're doing with your machine that makes Lenovo machines underspecced, but for web and Android development, the ThinkPad X1 Carbon fits the bill. I wrote about it here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4848375

If you want discrete graphics, that is available in other models, such as the T series, IIRC. However, for anything other than gaming or video editing, integrated graphics really is enough. I personally prefer not having discrete graphics, as it keeps me from playing games.

The only thing missing is retina support, but you have the advantage of a lighter and thinner laptop than the MBP. It's no different from the MBA in that respect, with the added advantage of a 14" screen in the same body size as the 13" Air.

> Sounds to me like this is just a matter of what you're used to. From my experience, OS X's UI is the last thing anyone would want if they weren't used to it. The window management is pretty damn horrible. OTOH, Linux has a variety of window managers with many innovative paradigms.

No, sounds like you are the one that's held back by what you're used to.

Just like the OP, I'd rather use OS X over Linux and Windows; it's a toss up for 2nd place between some of the great modern Linux distros and Windows 7.

I use OS X, Linux, and Windows almost daily.

I have used OS X extensively as well, so I have absolutely no idea on what basis you're making that statement. I've used OS X on a variety of devices, from laptops to high powered Mac Pros, and the window management has always felt sluggish to me in comparison to Windows and Linux. Having the menu for all the windows at the top of one monitor is quite simply infuriating, especially when using 2 or 3 monitors.

At least Apple finally fixed not being able to resize windows from any side last year. That still doesn't match Linux window managers though, which let you resize windows with Alt+right click and move them with Alt+left click from anywhere within a window. And nothing comes even close to the control possible with tiling window managers like Xmonad.

The cursor in OS X has also always felt very off - I think it's an issue with the mouse acceleration curve. I have repeatedly tried to fix this with 3rd party utilities, but nothing ever worked.

One of the somewhat frustrating assumptions running through your posts is that everyone materially gives a damn about the "control" of your window managers--as if the window manager is of more bracing importance than the applications running within. For you it may be, but to post as if this is a universal case is a little much.

Personally, I've sampled Xmonad. I don't like it. I found it actively tiring and demanding of micromanagement to work with it. This is in contrast to how, on OS X, I literally don't think about windows at all. I do everything with cmd-tab and swipe gestures on the touchpad. I also don't find resizing windows to be overly difficult and I only rarely resize anything at all. (On Windows, I just use Aero Snap across four monitors, which works pretty nicely for what it is.)

But the applications within, and the general lack of user focus and attention to detail, are really the core of what keep me off of the Linux and BSD desktop.

> One of the somewhat frustrating assumptions running through your posts is that everyone materially gives a damn about the "control" of your window managers--as if the window manager is of more bracing importance than the applications running within. For you it may be, but to post as if this is a universal case is a little much.

Well, we're specifically discussing window management, not the software running within. A comparison of Linux and OS X software is a completely different conversation.

> I found it actively tiring and demanding of micromanagement to work with it.

This is a common complaint, and all I can say to you, in the spirit of Steve Jobs, is that you're "doing it wrong". If you're actively managing windows with a tiling window manager, then that defeats the whole point of using the software. The idea is to have predetermined rules for how your windows will be arranged, and then not rearrange them at all (or rarely).

The whole reason for Xmonad having its config file in Haskell, an actual programming language, and not just a flat file with some settings, is so that you are not limited in the logic by which your windows are managed. Granted, this does require you to learn Haskell, which is probably Xmonad's biggest practical weakness. A similar window manager written in a more popular and approachable language, such as Python, would probably have a lot more users while only sacrificing a few things.

> the general lack of user focus

That's quite ironic, given that this entire thread is the result of Apple ignoring user interests.

> Well, we're specifically discussing window management, not the software running within.

We are? I wasn't intending to. Throughout this thread I've attempted to be clear that I was talking about the desktop environment, rather than the window manager; I apologize if I slipped somewhere. Window managers aren't even really on my radar unless it sucks. Like, GNOME's WM--sure, whatever, it's there. I don't even really think about it. It's what I'm trying to do with it that drives me batshit. I don't even think about OS X's window manager except on the (fairly rare) occasion that I swipe up for Mission Control and throw a couple windows into another desktop. It's just not a thing to me.

The applications inside, on the other hand...welp.

> The idea is to have predetermined rules for how your windows will be arranged, and then not rearrange them at all (or rarely).

That's not how my brain works. I didn't say Xmonad was wrong, I said it doesn't map to how I think and work.

> That's quite ironic, given that this entire thread is the result of Apple ignoring user interests.

I did say I don't use iDevices anymore. =)

As far as I can tell, tiling window managers are the ultimate antithesis of micromanagement. What could you possibly be spending your time doing with it? It's like saying an automatic transmission makes you micromanage.

"This looks horrible. I'm going to move it to better show what I want to see and how I want it to look."

I will sacrifice some sheer productive efficiency to have an environment that looks and feels right. Tiling window managers don't get me there, which is why I found myself endlessly screwing with what it was doing with my desktop until I came to the conclusion that I could just not use it and be happier about it (which I did).

I guess you used a wildly different from what I use. "Moving things around to better show things" is exactly what you don't have to do with a tiling window manager.

But you do. "I want this to be wider." "I want this to be taller." It's not just layers and visibility.

No... that's what I do in a traditional window manager.

Sounds to me like this is just a matter of what you're used to. From my experience, OS X's UI is the last thing anyone would want if they weren't used to it. The window management is pretty damn horrible. OTOH, Linux has a variety of window managers with many innovative paradigms.

Your experience does not match mine but thank you for trivializing mine by assuming that it's just what I'm used to. Never mind that I come from a Windows and Linux background, to OS X about three years ago, right?

I find the OS X window model appealing (though not without its warts) and its gesture support fantastic. Mission Control maps far better to the way that I think about multiple desktops than GNOME's or KDE's--and I compare to those and not your "innovative window managers" because I've been there, I've done that, and I have determined that they're not for me. I have been down the tiling window manager road and I find it demanding of micromanagement; it does not map to how I think or work and I have no interest in contorting to fit it. Likewise, I have no interest in putting up with sharp bits and pointy edges in Unity or GNOME 3 or KDE 4 (I've been there, too, and reject the T-shirt).

If you want discrete graphics, that is available in other models, such as the T series, IIRC. However, for anything other than gaming or video editing, integrated graphics really is enough.

The rMBP is not my only computer, but, yes, I want to be able to play games on it when I'm traveling. The rMBP is really good at it (I generally just play through Parallels, I don't bother to reboot). The T-series Lenovos are massive, heavy, lack Retina displays, and aren't nearly as aesthetically pleasing as the Carbon X1 is. Would never buy.

The only thing missing is retina support, but you have the advantage of a lighter and thinner laptop than the MBP.

"Except for the most important thing, you get some of the things." Sure, I'm being flip there, but it's not unserious: for my money, retina support is just not optional anymore. People say they can't go back after using a retina display because it's true. For me, the difference is that stark. The 3x 21" 1080p panels on my desktop feel distractingly blurry and they make me irritable to work on for long periods of time. (Most disappointing thing to me is that the DisplayPort outputs on the rMBP can't output 4K, but 2560x1600 displays look okay when put far enough back on my desk.)

> Never mind that I come from a Windows and Linux background, to OS X about three years ago, right?

I think that a lot of people are willing to put up with the transition to OS X because of the RDF and the iPod/iPhone halo effect, but the transition away has no such phenomenon to motivate people to use a platform long enough to get used to the differences. However, this is just a general observation.

> I have no interest in putting up with sharp bits and pointy edges in Unity or GNOME 3 or KDE 4

Meh, I find that the "sharp bits" are no more sharp than those in OS X. No platform can be perfect for any given user, since we all have different preferences. The closest you can get is with a highly-customizable tiling window manager, but anything like OS X, Windows or KDE wouldn't work like this.

> The T-series Lenovos are massive, heavy, lack Retina displays, and aren't nearly as aesthetically pleasing as the Carbon X1 is. Would never buy.

You clearly are not up-to-date on this. Have you seen the T430u? It weighs less than the rMBP 15", has discrete graphics, and has similar aesthetic stylings to the X1 Carbon. The optical drive has been omitted, for example.

> for my money, retina support is just not optional anymore

FWIW, I've found it to be half-baked when a lot of software and most websites don't support it yet. Browsing the web on a retina display is rather jarring. Moreover, when I regularly use external displays at my desk, switching back and forth would be quite jarring as well.

Have you seen the T430u?

I had not, actually, and thank you for pointing me at it--I'd seen the T430, but not the u variant. That's much more like it. I dig that. If it could run OS X I'd be all over that. =)

The T430u has the worst screen of any T series.

(And now my hopes are dashed...)

What about people who transitioned to OS X before any iOS devices? Are they sadists? That's empty rhetoric. You're just projecting your ideas. OSX is way more pleasant to use than any linux distro. The design-by-committee that happens on most distros doesn't give the best results.

There are plenty of TWMs for OSX if you want it: divvy, sizeup, tyler wm, etc.

> Browsing the web on a retina display is rather jarring

It's exactly the same as browsing on a non-retina display. As in physically exactly.

> What about people who transitioned to OS X before any iOS devices? Are they sadists? That's empty rhetoric. You're just projecting your ideas.

Next time, take a second to restrain yourself from hastily typing out a polemic and hitting reply, so that you can reread the post you're replying to. I also mentioned the iPod, which has been around since 2001 and has also played a significant role in the increase in popularity of Macs.

> OSX is way more pleasant to use than any linux distro. The design-by-committee that happens on most distros doesn't give the best results.

From this, it sounds like you're the one projecting your ideas, actually.

> There are plenty of TWMs for OSX if you want it: divvy, sizeup, tyler wm, etc.

Most tiling window managers for OS X don't give you the level of control necessary to make them actually worth it. Sure, some keyboard shortcuts are nice, but that's not the real point.

> It's exactly the same as browsing on a non-retina display. As in physically exactly.

Uh, if it were "physically exactly" the same, then what would be the point of getting a retina display?

Trackpads on "other" laptops are also pretty bad. I wish there was a non-apple laptop with a trackpad at least as good as the ones on the macbooks.

It's like comparing iphone's touchscreen with any android phone. All phones pre-jellybean had a touchscreen that just didn't compare to the iphone.

The ThinkPad X1 Carbon has a trackpad of quality equivalent to the MacBooks, just look at reviews online. Plus you get the TrackPoint, which is much more efficient once you get past the learning curve.

and then comes the amusing lack of proper configuration on the OS side. I am not an Apple person, but I have yet to see a trackpad- configuration that works even remotely as well as the MBP ones. The speed and acceleration multipliers in there have always been off.

EDIT: +1 on the NavPoint. I disable the trackpad on all my thinkpads and just use the NavPoint whenever I can.

I meant moving to OSX before owning any iOS device. Every developer I can remember right now that uses a Mac bought it because of the nice hardware and software, not because it's cool (they cost 3x+ as much as a PC over here, so it has to be worth it).

On retina: you were saying that a lot of software and websites don't support it; in that case, the image on the screen is exactly the same as a non-retina display, four pixels make one 'standard' pixel.

Comparing the 1366x768 T430u to the rMBP is pretty hysterical. But hey, screens are screens, right?

> Browsing the web on a retina display is rather jarring.

I would like to preface this by saying that I couldn't give a rat's ass about the rest of the arguments but in this case I just have to chime in since the quoted bit is just bullshit. The only difference between browsing the web on a retina display and browsing it on a normal screen is that, on a retina display, the font rendering is a million times better. That's it. But that is enough to make me not want to look at any other type of display again.

It is true that some applications do not have retina support (I'm looking at you, Firefox) but that support will come with time and all of the applications that I use on a daily basis look great.

Firefox 18 beta supports retina finally. Think its January release date or so.

Also 1000% this, high dpi, retina, whatever you want to call it rendering is so much better than non I've asked my bosses if I can buy a macbook pro to use for work. I work with text all day, this screen is so markedly better for text its not funny. Jarring? Not in the least, Jarring is using other displays after this.

Call me a fanboy if you want, but when my eyes don't fatigue from extended reading sessions, I think I'll take the fanboy label.

> I would like to preface this by saying that I couldn't give a rat's ass about the rest of the arguments but in this case I just have to chime in since the quoted bit is just bullshit. The only difference between browsing the web on a retina display and browsing it on a normal screen is that, on a retina display, the font rendering is a million times better.

Actually, this is what's bullshit. Having used a retina MBP, viewing websites without retina images looks very jarring, especially when the browser itself has retina assets.

> but it's not unserious: for my money, retina support is just not optional anymore.

It's interesting how one thing makes or breaks the deal. I'm the same :-), however my top feature is keyboard (I type a lot). That's why I'm always sticking with thinkpads. Sadly, I'm screwed for my next upgrade, because Lenovo have announced that they're ditching the traditional keyboard in favor of chiclet version. That goes for their complete thinkpad line.

> From my experience, OS X's UI is the last thing anyone would want if they weren't used to it.

I switched away from Linux/Windows XP dual booting to a Macbook with OSX after 5+ years. I much prefer OSX to either alternative. I still love Linux for server or embedded applications but the Linux desktop experience continues to frustrate me. Unity has only made it worse.

  > OS X's UI is the last thing anyone would want if they
  > weren't used to it

I was very used to MS world, living in it (DOS and Windows, from 3.11 to XP) 1990-2006. I got my first iBook G4 in 2006 and never looked back to Win. In 2006-2007 I was using OS X, Win and Linux in parallel. I know pretty well why did I stick with OS X and it has nothing to do with being used to it.

> Worse, there are no operating systems other than OS X that fulfill my needs of a pleasant-to-use Unix/Linux system--certainly no Linux distribution comes close on the "pleasant-to-use" part

There is one. It's currently in beta, but it's a Linux distribution that wrote its own Human Interface Guidelines, wrote its own suite of default applications that conform to that HIG, and is firmly devoted to the desktop/laptop paradigm instead of the touchscreen/tablet up-and-comers. It's elementary. http://elementaryos.org/

I've looked at Elementary before and I applaud them for what they're doing. I like it a hell of a lot more than I like Unity, that's ferdamnsure. That said, it's not there and I tend to think it never will be for reasons that aren't their fault. Yeah, Elementary has written some appealing default applications, and the lessons they're putting down are ones I'm good with picking up. I like the way they're looking at applications like their calendaring app; they show some of what I have referred to in other comments as "give-a-shit". I appreciate that. The problem is that they aren't sufficiently weighty to change the rest of the stuff out there. They don't have the clout to tell the developers of applications like GIMP or Inkscape to conform to a sane HIG. So you're bouncing in and out of the land of decent applications all day. That sucks. It's not really their fault, to be sure, but it still sucks. Apple's control of their environment has done a lot to encourage/browbeat/force developers to act consistently with the platform, and that's a big reason that the ecosystem around OS X is so fantastic to work in.

Also, and this is just sort of a general thing, I don't think I can put up with a GTK+ environment again. It's fugly and gross and the spacing is always so wrong and...ew. Can't do it. Wouldn't be prudent. ;)

If they continue on their current track, I believe the clout will come with time.

I'm sticking with OSX for now, but I believe I will give ElementaryOS a try in a VM at least.

I hope you're right. =) I like what they're doing. I think they have good sense. It would be great if others follow their lead.

Unity may be a sub-par desktop environment at the moment, but at least they tried to do something new and innovative. Elementary just looks like an even more Apple like version of an Apple product.

"Stuck with Apple" has been the story of my computing life.

If another company can come along and provide a similar experience, I'll move over, but at this point no one is even close.

I have lots of CS friends who say the same thing. However, they never seem to be that aware of the options that are out there. Getting a PC doesn't mean you have to get a Dell or an HP, there are lots of options out there. Lenovo makes some great stuff, but so does Sager/Clevo, MSI, Asus, etc. For what Macs cost you are not very good hardware (with the exception of the new screens).

While we are at it, why do people try and find devices that are as close to a Mac in appearance as they can get? Personally I don't mind having a 3mm thicker laptop if it means I can have a more powerful graphics card, be able to work on it, or have multiple HDDs. Most people who really use their laptop for coding are sitting at a desk using it 90% of the time anyway. And for god sake am I sick of brushed aluminum. I find it ironic that a platform that so many artists use has the most boring appliance like look possible.

Also, what is the obsession with OSX? It's just a more limited version of Linux with a bad window manager. I have a Sager laptop and multiple major Linux distros I have tried all work flawlessly out of the box, even with discreet graphics. I still use Windows 7 most of the time though, but that's just because its the best OS available (at least for me).

Wow that came off a lot more ranty than reply-like than I wanted.

And for god sake am I sick of brushed aluminum. I find it ironic that a platform that so many artists use has the most boring appliance like look possible.

That's not irony. That's misapplication of personal preferences.

Also, what is the obsession with OSX? It's just a more limited version of Linux with a bad window manager.

With actual software support. And developers who show attention to detail in the presentation of their software. Some people, and I am among them, find that gratifying, and it makes me happy. Even if I could get Photoshop on a Linux machine (and, FWIW, if you suggest WINE you'll be demonstrating exactly what I mean), I would still gravitate to OS X. Because using it makes me happy and using even modern Linux distributions frustrates me.

>certainly no Linux distribution comes close on the "pleasant-to-use" part;

What have you tried recently? I spent an hour installing Ubuntu and running a script to get the power management tweaks on my MBA and it's far better than OS X was.

Since Leopard I've been fighting OS X more and more. It gets in my way, it makes things unnecessarily hard, I'm tired of having to fuck (sorry, but it's an accurate expression of how much time I've wasted) with homebrew and macports.

On the other hand, I installed Elementary OS Beta and tweaked the fonts and was perfectly happy with the out-of-box experience.

If you were perfectly happy with the out-of-the-box experience for Linux, why did you need homebrew/macports on OSX?

I've never had any issues with homebrew whatsoever. It's just a thin wrapper for build scripts, it's pretty easy to dig in and see what's going wrong.

I'm not that crazy of a dev and there were at least 4-5 things that straight up wouldn't build in homebrew or lacked scripts. Basic GNU tools shipping with Mac OS X are vastly out of date (and in some cases buggy) due to GPL issues. I finally gave up after an afternoon of fighting getting GDB signed to be able to debug my Golang app and wound up installing a VM, adding a new SSH key to Github, setting up my dev environment and debugging it in linux in less time.

I used OS X because I had a MBA. When classes were over I decided to see how much work Linux would be on it given that Mac hardware and linux don't always get along. Basically everything worked out of the box though, minus a powersave script I ran.

Well, let's just say a lot of things don't work in linux either. Depending what you're building, sometimes it's reliant on a certain gcc version, or distro. Generally speaking, compile from source is usually the last resort if the package can't be found via apt-get, and occasionally you'll have to tweak the makefile or the ./configure script settings. Any time you're building something that isn't extremely popular, you're likely to get build problems.

So far, the ratio of build issues I've run into in OS X to the build issues from version mismatching in linux is approaching infinity.

egrep, gdb, and the few other things I fought last month in brew were not uncommon things. They were all things that were preinstalled in Ubuntu. Furthermore, I haven't had to build anything from source other than the projects I collab on in years.

I don't know why we're quibbling about this, it's generally accepted among Mac devs... it's a small price to pay if you like the OS X user experience. I haven't for some time now so the developer tools lacking and the competition of better linux DEs have tipped that scale. Trust me, I still love my MBA.

In the last six months I've tried Elementary (closest), Ubuntu (Unity and Kubuntu), Mint (MATE and Cinnamon), and Fedora. None stuck. And it's not really the distributions' fault, but rather the applications and all the little things. Ricardobeat put it nicely elsewhere in the thread: design-by-committee. There isn't a feeling of focus from one end to the other and there is a sense of welcoming to applications with crap UX that do something important. I don't like that, and I don't feel like that's common on OS X (like, even their weird Calendar skin doesn't get in the way of a good application).

It's an OS built by a lot of different people doing lots of parts in different ways. I'm not saying that I was told anything different, that's what it says right on the tin. But I find that doesn't make for a great user experience. (To Elementary's credit, activities where you can stay within the Elementary suite of applications are really pretty nice! But that makes being thrown outside at the likes of GIMP even more jarring.)

> There isn't a feeling of focus from one end to the other

Like what? I hear this repeatedly but it's with a helping dose of handwaving and a lack of specifics. I guess I just don't see that. I use VLC, Gnome-terminal, Sublime Text, Pantheon-Files, Chrome, Firefox and that's basically it. They all act the same as I expect in any desktop environment and I've literally never had a meta-moment of worry or thought about something being "off".

Gimp is awkward on every platform, what does that have to do with Linux DEs?

Off the top of my head, talking about the Ubuntu 12.04.1 I use daily on two different Thinkpads:

I have to log in and out or reboot pretty much every day to solve X or window manager problems. There are a variety of focus and window ordering issues. Coming back from sleep each one has different display twitches; nothing worse than the usual Linux user contempt, but definitely unpolished. The Unity stuff is going in a good direction but I don't think they've been doing a ton of user testing; it also frequently feels clunky to me. Network Manager is slow to find networks and regularly crashes. Device support is so-so: the Android tethering that is support to magically work never does; plugging in a phone or a tablet frequently requires command-line incantations and is often buggy. One of my devices has a touch-screen; a minor kernel upgrade broke this a couple months back, and it is still broken.

I think they're right to go for a better UI experience, but right now I think they're in a valley between the solid but ugly Linux experience I was used to and the solid but friendly experience that Apple has inspired them to pursue. Right now I think it's flaky both in a usability sense and in a technical sense, which I find thoroughly disappointing.

>I have to log in and out or reboot pretty much every day to solve X or window manager problems. There are a variety of focus and window ordering issues.

These aren't specific. I honestly don't know what you're talking about here. I've logged out of X to solve a problem once - that was checking "Use the NVIDIA driver" and then rebooting. The only time I've ever rebooted to "fix" an "X problem". That having been said, I won't defend compiz for a second. That was a mistake and they're sinking more and more money into it to my disappointment.

>Device support is so-so: the Android tethering that is support to magically work never does

My Galaxy Nexus, Droid 1, Nexus 4 and Nexus 7 3g - I tap USB tether and about 5 seconds later Ubuntu tells me it's connected. (Unless this has regressed in 12.10, I haven't had reason to use it lately.)

>Network Manager is slow to find networks and regularly crashes.

You can get NM to crash? I hope you've filed a bug report because that is a major issue.

X is pretty weird sometimes, you switch displays, or suddenly connect a third display, the only way to fix it is to reboot X. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn't. I honestly don't know X well enough to debug the problem, so restarting X is just the faster solution. I'm guessing you probably don't us X on the road as much, I feel like this is a normal thing for me -- restart X to solve problem with weird display.

Ah, if "on the road" means plugging and unplugging external monitors, you've caught me in my "oh I should have thought of that" spot.

I haven't had to do that in a long while. I have a permanent desktop machine so my laptop is only for at coffee shops or working at a friend's place. I can certainly understand how hotplugging can be a disaster. Thankfully, I have noticed an improvement with that with Nvidia's more recent driver releases, even possibly as late as the ones resulting from their work with Steam.

Anyway, I've been running Wayland builds on and off for a month now, let's hope that paves the way for minimizing these problems even further.

You never have to plug in your laptop to do presentations or anything? I feel like I do that all the time... plus you never know what type of lcd projector they are using. Sometimes a guy comes and tries to help you, but when they notice you're running linux they sort of back off.

Are you using a proprietary graphics driver? With Intel graphics, none of these problems seem to pop up.

As long as we're talking about things that make me crazy about Linux, here's another fine example.

You asked a question. I took some time to give you an answer. Did you thank me? Did you acknowledge the information as relevant? Did you ask follow-up questions to better understand the situation? No, no, and no.

Instead, you seize upon the parts you can most easily argue with. You use scare quotes to imply that I must be an idiot. And you tell me what work you think I should be doing.

It's not my job to educate you. It's not my job to convince you of things you don't want to believe. It's not my job to file the particular bug reports you think best.

Your behavior here exemplifies the arrogant, self-centered, argumentative idiocy that has repeatedly driven me away from participating in open-source projects. I've got better things to do than to fight with people on the internet. Especially anonymous ones.

You should take a look at Xfce, by far the most consistent and not-in-your-way DE among the popular ones since Gnome2. And with some themes that actually look good (like Greybird, default in Xubuntu).

> Ricardobeat put it nicely elsewhere in the thread: design-by-committee.

I feel there is a common misunderstanding what this term actually means. I'm a Linux user and I don't like most DEs and most themes, but I wouldn't imply there is no leadership among their creators or that the decision process is completely flawed. Actually I think they know exactly what they are doing, the fact that you and I don't like it it's another thing.

you tried but doesn't sound like you gave them a real chance.

I gave them as much of a chance as they deserved. I already own a Mac with an OS I very much like. If you don't impress immediately, you're not going to get traction.

And it's not like I'm new to any of them. I ran Linux nearly exclusively from 2005 to 2009.