This is why I think it’s insane that Windows and OS X don’t let you choose your own desktop environment. How can one design paradigm possibly apply to all users?
A really cool story about free and open source values. And about choosing the right laptop. But mostly about the values.
It’s pretty fantastic to see this question in the Times’ weekly Personal Tech Q&A section. Although I imagine the ones published on Christmas are probably the least read of the year…
Linux is obviously a trickier one to tackle. There isn’t one Linux—a RedHat user is assumed to be someone completely different from an Ubuntu user. The other problem is that many of the creative-dependent things missing from Linux are frequently missing due to licensing, take TrueType kerning for example. Apple and Microsoft license many technologies that simply can’t exist in Linux without a complete change of direction from strictly open source technologies. That’s not going to happen, and it shouldn’t.
An exhaustively thorough examination on the challenge of using Linux for “creative” pursuits, with creative defined as “photographers, video editors, compositors, Web designers, architects, graphic designers, art directors, 3D animators, audio engineers, etc.”
An update to this. Major decided to go back to OS X, mostly due to email client, calendar, and Microsoft Office issues.
I’m a huge Linux fan (obviously), but it doesn’t always work for people in environments where they can’t control all of the variables. But every year, those variables, like Office, become less and less of an issue for more and more people.
It wouldn’t shock me to see Major eventually wind up on Linux full-time.
So far, the switch has caused me to think about my software in a more minimalistic way.
I have no idea when I started using Clementine. I thought it’s something I picked up from Xubuntu, but going through my notes, I was thinking of Exaile. But at some point, I decided I like Clementine as my music player.
I don’t play much music on my computer, so day-to-day, having a preferred music player didn’t have much impact on my life. However, a few weeks ago my wife got very sick of iTunes and wanted to find a replacement. I sent her this article and then started wondering which Linux music players had Windows ports. I discovered Banshee, Amarok, and Clementine all had Windows ports, so I recommended those to my wife (I just now realized Exaile has a Windows port, too).
Around the same time, I realized I needed a music player on a Windows machine, so I decided to try Clementine, which is when I discovered (or possibly rediscovered) it’s a very impressive piece of software.
For most people, the issue with iTunes is how big it is. Opening it can often feel like a huge, resource-intensive commitment (that and it always seems to require an update — even after you’ve just updated it). The beauty of Clementine is that it’s light and responsive. You open it and can play music right away. It does one thing well.
Clementine’s simplicity is what I love. It plays music. It’s easy to change songs. It does some nice, little things, too. It doesn’t just stop playing, but fades in and out of songs, which is kind of classy. On Windows, if you mouse over it on the taskbar, you get the play/pause/control buttons, so you don’t even need to click into the interface to do things.
It also has some built-in integration with some web-based services, like Last.FM. My OpenSUSE version is running 0.7.1, so I don’t have Google Drive, Spotify or GrooveShark integration, which is available in 1.1. I have those features available within Windows, but it doesn’t interest me, so I don’t miss it (or try and find a more recent version than lives in the OpenSUSE repos).
People seem a bit excited about the new GNOME default music player. I’ll definitely look at that, but I really like to just have a list of artists in one pane, and the songs in another. What’s even nicer about Clementine is you can drill down through individual songs on the left pane, with the main pane acting as a playlist. Playlists are retained across sessions, so you can pick up where you left off.
Most user interfaces favor complexity and customization. Too many tools are afraid to go simple. Clementine isn’t. It’s not robust, but that lack of robustness is a feature. Just point it to your music folder and let it go. It doesn’t matter if you’re on Linux, Windows or OS X. Or all three. Clementine lets you listen to music easily, without slowing your computer down. Sad to say, it’s a rare trait in many desktop music players.
A very thoughtful post about why a Linux user decided to go Mac. The Air is a fantastic piece of hardware. I’m hoping the new ThinkPad Ultrabooks can eventually compete.
Every OS has its own accompanying culture. Even if we don’t buy into it, I think everyone can conjure a mental image of the so-called Mac fanboys, the so-called Linux geeks, and the rest of the world, ie, Windows users. And if you can’t construct a mental picture, this chart does a fair enough job of identifying the stereotypes.
Sometimes I forget how different the cultures are.
Mac OS X Lion came out this week. There were some pretty significant changes made to the user interface, mostly with the stated goal of making Macs more iOSy.
I was expecting a massive backlash from the Mac community. But instead, as near as I can tell as someone who doesn’t spend a ton of time within the Mac community, people seem very open to the changes.
Ars Technica’s notoriously thorough Lion review ultimately came down liking Lion (for the most part).
Apple Insider’s review roundup reported most mainstream outlets like Lion, too.
As a Linux user, it’s kind of hard for me to wrap my head around. Because reading about the changes made in Lion, I thought users would be upset that they had lost some functionality (and, to be fair, some people are upset about that) and that some UI choices had been made without their input.
But Mac people just roll with it, trusting that Apple’s changes are improvements.
Compare that to the response to Unity, which was mostly negative. I would argue the negative response was driven by the fact that Canonical forced the change on users, rather than letting them opt-in to a dramatically new UI.
Part of me wishes the Linux community were more open to change, the way the Mac community is. And part of me is proud to be a part of a community that has so much choice, resisting change isn’t too hard to do.
Sure, it would have been great for Canonical had everyone rallied around Unity, flaws and all (and I say this as someone running Xubuntu 10.04. I’ve only seen Unity screenshots although I did run a netbook with Ubuntu Netbook Remix, which, at the time, had a vaguely Unity-esque interface). But that would have only empowered Canonical to make more changes. Maybe the changes would have been vast improvements for the desktop concept and maybe they wouldn’t have. But as a community, we seem unwilling to sacrifice current functionality for the possibility of future improvements. For the most part, we’re very much a bird-in-the-hand group of people.
This isn’t to pick on Canonical. GNOME also seems to be having a hard time with GNOME 3, another dramatic UI change.
Interestingly, KDE faced a pretty severe backlash for KDE 4. The KDE team kept their heads down, kept improving the UI, and now KDE is both loved and respected.
When I think about software, I tend to think in terms of usability and interfaces, but watching the Lion response, I’m starting to think a lot about the idea of trust, also.
Most Mac users trust Apple and that changes how the community receives change. Linux users tend to want to be the architects of their own changes, making wholesale changes across distributions difficult to implement, although, as KDE showed us, hardly impossible. But in general, it feels like a lot of us only trust ourselves to make UI choices.
In general, I think we as a community could stand to be a little more open-minded to change. If a distribution makes a change we don’t like, it’s usually not hard to either revert to an earlier version of the distribution or find a new one that behaves the way we want it to. With that kind of freedom, why not let some distributions and desktop environments experiment more freely without a constant barrage of criticism? Why not sit back a little bit and see how things go before we declare a change a failure?
Mac users who don’t like the Lion changes don’t have that same kind of latitude. There aren’t really any alternative Mac distributions they can turn to.
Linux users are better positioned to embrace change, since it’s usually not too hard to walk away from changes we don’t agree with. So why not be a little open to changes? Why not give more UI changes an extended look before we walk away in anger or disgust?
Maybe the change isn’t as bad as we thought it would be.
Interesting comparison between Ubuntu and OS X. I’m linking not just because it ultimately comes down in favor of Linux, but because it’s a very well-reasoned comparison. It could almost be a benchmark for comparing operating systems.