tl;dr dude with time machine visited us from half-analogue past and complains that 40 years later "things aren't what they used to be" and "mac's way of doing things is the only proper". Would love to see this time traveller using modern macbook xD
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Why do people often seem to equal "new" with "good" and "old" with "bad"? My whole point here is that desktop environments seem to be getting worse, not better. Since you are asking: I stopped using macOS after 10.9 because things got worse and worse (it peaked around 10.4-10.6). Today's macOS is not Mac-like anymore. Too many user interface elements from iOS crept in, watering down the desktop experience.
@Beryesa.
2 ай бұрын
Want's to open an application The most natural thing: opens a file manager ok...
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Exactly. The most natural thing to do if you see, or open, what is on your computer, is to open the disk on your computer to see what is in it. Why would opening an application be any different from opening a folder or a document. No need for start menus, launchers, docks, "panels", and all of that. Not been there on the Lisa in 1980. Not been there on the Macintosh until Mac OS X 10 (which essentially came from NeXT).
@roccociccone597
2 ай бұрын
@@09427560 he’s being sarcastic lol
@thelonesomechicken5470
2 ай бұрын
@@09427560 i think he was being sarcastic
@_xX_me_Xx_
2 ай бұрын
I think what's going on here is purely subjective. Most of these complaints seem valid from a certain standpoint, while completely outlandish from others. You can use whatever suits you best, but calling a a desktop environment "unusable" just because it doesn't adhere to standards you are used to is a bit unfair. It's like those people who were complaining about Windows 11 moving the windows icon to the middle of the task bar. Both work perfectly fine, it's a matter of taste.
@_xX_me_Xx_
2 ай бұрын
And another critique you mention in the video is the new desktop being unintuitive. That might be a valid point for a 60 something year old using a computer for a first time, but most people are able to memorize how to open applications without looking at the screen. All the buttons and symbols end up doing is adding clutter and using unnecessary space.
@JacksonNick-j6i
2 ай бұрын
You are the exact type of person he mentioned in the video. A lazy person who is spoiled by mobile phone clean UI and doesn't understand how to use menus and features, so you call them clutter.
@lol51000
2 ай бұрын
You can't complain "it's slow" and run it from a live USB.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
I was running a Live ISO image from a very fast NVMe SSD. The bottleneck certainly wasn't the speed of the storage.
@lol51000
2 ай бұрын
@@09427560 ok, why not make a proper install and see?
@raccoons_stole_my_account
2 ай бұрын
It's a very well known fact that gnome software app is incredibly slow. It has maybe 100mb total data in the entirety of the catalogue yet loading screens always feel like I'm opening 4k video streams and not a paragraph of text and few 1000x500px images. This shit should be instanteneous on anything made after 2010.
@superflame36
2 ай бұрын
I'm 99% sure this is a troll
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
No, definitely not trolling. Been thinking about these issues for a long time. Search the web for "Make. It. Simple. Linux Desktop Usability" to find my 6-pat series on #LinuxUsability from 2017.
@roccociccone597
2 ай бұрын
@@09427560 to get more brain dead takes? No thanks
@KicksonAcapulco13-no5rd
2 ай бұрын
Unfortunately no - new is not equal to good. Today UI is minimalistic and simplified, but it not means more efficient. To be honest, it's not.
@comicsanz97
2 ай бұрын
Dude is making videos since before you were born, buddy.
@downey2294
2 ай бұрын
I don't understand. most of what you are saying is "i don't like this because I'm used to something else" it's not like i would be able to navigate classic mac like you do because I'm not used to that paradigm. I would never have opened my drive to launch my applications for example. that doesn't make sense to me.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Can you imagine that the reverse is true for me? The way on the right-hand side doesn't make sense to me because I am not used to it, but also because it is not logical. Your applications, folders, and documents are clearly somewhere on your computer (or a network drive, or a removable drive). So isn't it the most natural thing to open that drive and then, well, open whatever it is that you want to open?
@HANU8
2 ай бұрын
The difference is that the classical way has a PRINCIPLE OF INTEGRATION and that that is HUMANISTIC with OBJECTIVE criteria. You are used to an added complication, probono is used to a necessary complexity. Your new "paradigm" is a subjective cognitive disintegration, probono's way is an objective cognitive integration. Concepts are used for cognitive compression, and they aid it thinking. By destroying the integration (files, objects, etc.) you destroy concept formation and therefore compression, increasing the cognitive load and eventually leading to inability to think abstractly, you become quite literary: a concrete-bound moron.
@downey2294
2 ай бұрын
@@HANU8 sounds like a bunch of horse jockey to me. calling me a concrete bound moron for using a desktop environment that i enjoy using for my workflow. i doubt a desktop environment would inhibit me to "think abstractly". unless I'm completely misunderstanding you.
@HANU8
Ай бұрын
@@downey2294 I am NOT calling you a concrete bound moron. I am saying that you will be forced to act like one in a computing environment without a principle of integration. This video shows a trend towards disintegration, we are fully there yet. Please watch "AT&T Archives: The UNIX Operating System" here on KZitem. You will see that UNIX had the file as its principle of integration. Each program had a file as input and a file as an output. This way, you could have chained pipelines of programs that form a new program, which in turn has a file input and a file output (that could also be redirected on the teletype or later screen). Therefore, Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson tell us we can have a higher level of abstraction of: "programming with programs" which was more accessible to the user of that time. Later on we had Xerox PARC and Alan Kay, who envisioned a Personal Computer as a world, not of files, but of object, each one with each state and methods (messages). A different principle of integration. In the GUI you could see the methods of a visual object through menu items, a context menu, or even in a hamburger button if the window was too small and the items did not fit. The methods of the object, not any irrelevant option. The Xerox PARC systems were true object-oriented systems. Steve Jobs attempted to implement this partially, first by imitating its products (the GUI) and later on more fully with NEXT, Objective-C, Ethernet etc. which later became OS X. This is the stage, I believe, that probono wants us to return to and advance. By contrast, in 2007 we get to Steve Job's post PC era. Where all your data are no longer files, but are siloed off in different Apps or Web 2.0 apps. Editing artifacts or compiling lists is on an app-by-app bases, and everything that is is all that is available to you, no new integration or synthesis in new programs or products is possible within the iPhone computing system as was possible in the UNIX Shell. The iPhone computing environment forces you to act as a concrete bound moron. This is where the desktop computing has been degrading to. I believe that humans, including you, have almost unlimited potential, as did Douglas Engelbart who believed that bootstrapping human cognition with such technologies would boost Collective IQ by enhancing our capacity to think.
@Zinox_ex
2 ай бұрын
It's like a boomer spawned in current times. In past those icons didn't meant anything but now they do cause everyone is familiar with what a icon is and what is a app menu.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Icons are supposed to depict objects people know from the real world. The trash can icon looks like a trash can. But nine dots? I don't have anything that looks like nine dots.
@xmurisfurderx
2 ай бұрын
Nobody knows what dots mean
@lorenzo2621
2 ай бұрын
You say MacOS "doesn't even need [the notifications]". That's because you are comparing an ancient version of MacOS, built when people weren't as connected as now. I agree with you on some points. For example, the menu bar is great for discovering what a program can do. But you are conflating "easy" with "simple". You find the MacOS desktop "easy" and GNOME's "complicated". But arguably GNOME's desktop is even simpler, but just not familiar to you. "Easy" == "familiar"
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Disagree. Point in case: Me deleting Internet Explorer within a second vs. me not being able to figure out how to remove Firefox at all. Reason: Direct object manipulation on the Mac (take the file, move it to the trash) vs. something way more complicated that didn't even lead to the intended result for me.
@PhthaloJohnson
2 ай бұрын
The "applications" folder you opened on the mac was not where your applications are really, they're just put there as links to the actual binaries. When you have a 3rd party program, that may or may not show up in your "applications". Why would you expect that your files will have applications, unless you were told that to begin with? You ask, why do we need an a graphical interface to resemble a phone instead of a "desk"? I guess the answer is that most people today are more familiar with mobile designs then they are with the office desk metaphors. What is your issue with wasted space? What content are you having trouble displaying, the wallpaper?
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Only the files with text in italics are links (called Aliases). Files with upright text are the actual binaries. What I threw into the Trash was really the actual Internet Explorer, not just some links to it. 3rd party applications don't just "appear" on the Mac. They live where I copied them. For example, I might have copied them to the "Applications" folder - but that folder is in no means special, I might just as well have copied an applications to another folder, e.g., "Internet". I don't know what you mean by "expect that your files will have applications". This trend to water down desktop computers to mobile user interfaces is exactly what I am not fond of at all. In fact, I wrote an article on this four years ago called "The desktop metaphor must be saved. It’s under attack!". You'll find it on the web. It explains the reasons. Why I don't like wasted space? Obvious. So that I can see more icons in each window.
@APIAlchemist
2 ай бұрын
Gnome is simple and minimalistic. There is only a desktop where your windows go, and several workspaces for working on many things at the same time. Then there are 2 other layers: an overview to neatly view all apps and all workspaces at once and an app launcher/search. It is clean, simple and it does it's job very well. The menu you are talking about at the top is usually included in most GTK apps as Gnome has pretty strict design guidelines. Given the nature of open-source, no one can guarantee that every app will respect those guidelines. As for the file manager, Nautilus has it's reputation for being among the worst already.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
I think the video clearly shows that it is not "simple" at all. It layers abstractions over abstractions instead of providing direct manipulation on the objects in your filesystem.
@andrzejroskowicz245
2 ай бұрын
This is comedy gold
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
The "modern" stuff is comically bad, yes. Especially when compared side-by-side to the good stuff.
@evepreviouslyknownaslenenjoyer
2 ай бұрын
This video poses some good points. However, unless you intend to get your work done on Mac OS 8, Linux is likely still your best option, Windows 11 and MacOS 15 are AI focused garbage, and no one's forcing you to use GNOME, i dislike it too. Linux Mint's MATE, Cinnamon or XFCE editions are all worth trying, you might prefer them.
@chrimony
2 ай бұрын
There's nothing intuitive about going to a hard drive icon to open an application. Do you think kids growing up with cell phones, tablets, or even laptops even encounter hard drives? These days it's a chip. Of course you can still get spinning disk hard drives, but it's not 1997 anymore. Then you complain that the text editor is named TextEditor, even though that's exactly what you were looking for. Oh, the calendar, which you opened, is "too big" and has notifications, because nobody would actually use their computer to notify them of things on certain dates/times? I think Gnome is terrible, and they started down this path with Gnome 3. So I switched to an alternative desktop (currently using Xfce). But a lot of your complaints boil down to being stuck in 1997 Macland.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Well. Call it "SSD" or "Chip" if you like, but the fact is that a computer has one (or more than one) storage devices, and the stuff is somewhere on there. To me it is easily the most natural thing to open up that device to see what is in there. Regarding cell phones and tablets, one main reason why I despise them is that they hide from the user where stuff is. They do not allow me to do "direct manipulation" (it's a technical term!) of the objects in the filesystem. Where is that app on your phone? You have no clue. Want to move an app from one folder to another, or from the internal memory to a SD card? Make a back-up copy? Yes it may be doable somehow, but in very crude, indirect, "complicated" ways. I prefer "direct manipulation" in the filesystem, because it's much, much easier and gives you full control.
@CaseyD-mu5kl
2 ай бұрын
You’re looking for the MATE desktop experience, give it a shot. I hear you, working with gnome is tough these days. I basically should just jump to a tiling window manager and do everything via keyboard shortcut at this point, halfway there already. 😂
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Yes. MATE is staying relatively close to the desktop metaphor, but it, too, does not fulfill the job of a spatial file manager entirely. It does not save the sizes of windows. It does not persist the pixel coordinates of icons in the windows. It does not store icons, versions, copyright information etc. inside the applications themselves, but has to rely on desktop files and icon files stored somewhere in /usr/local/share (away from the application itself). This is because it follows the XDG (cross desktop) specifications, which limits its potential tremendously.
@RandomGeometryDashStuff
2 ай бұрын
06:05 are old mac os applications folders like modern mac os?
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
No, they are single files that embed resources like icons, texts, translations, etc. inside the Resource Fork. A really cool concept, look it up. ResEdit is an application that can edit the embedded resources.
@RandomGeometryDashStuff
2 ай бұрын
18:35 "I don't know where it's in the menu" proceeds to open menu with "Icon Size [-] [+]"
@QuestionTheTruth
2 ай бұрын
Maybe you shouldn't use GNOME as the basis for your trolling. Linux is very diverse and if you want the menu to look like a Machintosh or Amiga, then you can make is look and work just like them, if you want it to be like windows, then you can make a replica of that. It all has with your fantasy and willingness to replicate the look and feel. I didn't start liking GNOME up until the new looks came to be, and it's very intuitive. The only thing that suck is that you don't get a clear path to where things really are, but common. You have a problem with safety or something? Since you didn't like the idea of using your password in order to gain access to the root system.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Design is not about how something looks, it is about how something works. If an application is scattered around in the filesystem (with some parts of the same application in /usr/bin, in /usr/share/applications, /usr/bin, in /usr/share/icons, etc.), then you can't simply drag the application to the trash and be done with it. So to make something remotely as good as on the left, it is not sufficient to change a skin or theme. It requires profound thinking about the key concepts from the ground up.
@alpacamale2909
2 ай бұрын
22:05 I disagree with this. Alphabetical and symmetrical order is better than your way of organizing things. The problem I see with the file manager is that the default directory shows the same directories than the side panel. it is too redundant and also a waste of space. I think you can change it to redirect to another location tho, which is better. in windows you can change the windows explorer to redirect you to 'this pc' which shows you all the drives. Gnome doesn't even show you all the drives on the side panel, you have to go to other locations.
@lis6502
2 ай бұрын
8:35 fun fact: 9 dots or start menu or any kind of other launchers, they all are "made up". Again, thing about what we are used to.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Proper icons show something from the real world, so that you can know what it dies. Documents look like a piece of paper, folders look like folders, the Trash looks like a trash can, etc. But nine dots? I don't know anything that looks like nine dots. The same goes for the "hamburger menu", which to me is the virtual equivalent of a heap of unsorted leftovers.
@VolpeJosesk
2 ай бұрын
5:36 Dude, what you're looking at are system binaries, not even MacOS would have icons on their system binaries directory. The other one are shortcuts, both used to do the same until today, both supports icons, you're comparing shortcuts to binaries and that's just.... Stupid. Windows does stores icons on the binaries though, but Unix systems works in a different way here (Linux supports in-executable icons with AppImages). Linux uses .desktop files (since decades), you'll find them at /usr/share/applications, and each desktop environment will use them in their own ways. Gnome organizes these files in their full-screen app menu, the nearest one to what you're expecting for is XFCE with Thunar, it has an application directory which lists all files in /usr/share/applications and ~/.local/share/aplications, other file managers like Dolphin also makes it possible.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Trust me, I know exactly what I am talking about. And "Linux" desktop environments just can't compete with operating systems that do this properly, including the classic Macintosh, Mac OS X, Haiku, and even Windows. The icons and other information should be stored inside the files themselves, so that the files are pleasant to look at. The classic Macintosh does this by using Resource Forks (you can look at the resources by using ResEdit). In Mac OS X, applications are .app bundles (directories that are treated like files, not folders in the user interface).
@lis6502
2 ай бұрын
12:02 the open button forever has been on right hand side. In a Mac, on the Amiga where i "grew up" it was always on the bottom left. Expecting that something will be just as YOU are used it to be is at least naive.
@glowiak3430
2 ай бұрын
19:32 Dude! Mac OS is showing you an abstraction, while POSIX is showing the truth. Desktop - just as everything - IS JUST A FOLDER!
@JacksonNick-j6i
2 ай бұрын
Except Gnome doesn't follow that concept either. They keep the Desktop folder around for compatibility in some applications. But the desktop you see on the screen is not the same as the desktop folder in the file menu, you can't place any icons on the desktop, and whatever you put in the desktop folder does not make it any different than a normal folder.
@lis6502
2 ай бұрын
20:46 if you'd fill the gaps between icons with other icons... Wouldn't it look somewhat similar to the 9 dots? ;d
@RandomGeometryDashStuff
2 ай бұрын
05:28 note: applications installed with flatpak are not in in /usr/bin
@WashingtonStateStyleDoorDash
2 ай бұрын
Of course not, but he's going to pretend he doesn't know that to act like it's too hard.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
So, where do I find them? I mean, what if I want to copy such an application over to e.g., an external drive?
@ominoussage
2 ай бұрын
Fedora also supports other desktop environments like KDE and XFCE which would be more fitting of your criteria for usability, so don't fully blame Fedora on it (but I do understand why you would come to a conclusion like that). Blame GNOME for its defaults but you can customize GNOME to your liking using GNOME extensions that could allow you to put icons on the desktop if you want to. But I recommend you install Fedora's KDE since that will solve most of your complaints and aligns with the Classic Mac while being much more powerful. It resembles Windows by default but you can change the panels to look more like Classic Mac in the process.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Sadly, the XDG (cross desktop) specifications that all major desktop environments use are written in such a way that the various desktop environments may look a bit different on the surface, but more or less all work the same way. They all rely on application metadata and icons to be stored outside of the actual application file, and there isn't even a spec for how window sizes, positions, and icon coordinates shall be saved to persist them across sessions and desktop environments.
@JacksonNick-j6i
2 ай бұрын
Sometimes you need to be flexible and open minded bro. I enjoyed the video and I don't like Gnome, but some things have reasons to exist. Use KDE Plasma and don't overthink it.
@glowiak3430
2 ай бұрын
Linux doesn't need to be Mac. Linux shows you what really exists, while Mac shows you user-friendly abstractions that are actually crap.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
No, it doesn't to be Mac, but why should it stay so much worse than Mac forever? If you look at Haiku, it does many of those things much better.
@RandomGeometryDashStuff
2 ай бұрын
11:38 I think modern linux themes (right side) have too much padding in buttons and menu items (empty space between text and button edge)
@avenir799
2 ай бұрын
I don't think there's any need for a desktop UI to be organized like Classic Mac, but whatever the organization of commands is, it should be consistent. Commands like Open, New, Save, Cut, Copy, Undo, should be in the exact same place in every app, so users don't have to stop and think which app they are in and where each command is located in that app. Seems like a case for some UI guidelines to specify where standard commands should be located so that all apps can place the commands consistently.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Exactly. Consistency is essential for finding your way in applications quickly. This is something in which the Macintosh has excelled early on and Windows at least partially caught on (think File, Edit,...). You exactly know what commands to expect where. So sad that nowadays this consistency gets watered down.
@lis6502
2 ай бұрын
12:30 and i am using tiling window manager, for me there should be no "title bars" or buttons of any kind as they waste space for operation that can be UI-less driven by keyboard xD. Want to aruge whose grass is greener?
@luxemier
2 ай бұрын
basically, anything on linux that isnt dealing with the cli is garbage. i think for linux to take off we really need a big company that develops a fully usable distro. seamless app downloads, apps that work first try with no visual glitches caused by window server, seamless window management, fractional scaling that doesnt break a lot of things when using 2 or more monitors, fully functional hardware acceleration out of the box on all apps. linux is nowhere near being ready for the average user. we need a big company that can dedicate enough resources to make an actual operating system on top of the linux kernel and not just some run-of-the-mil 'distros' that pass off as operating systems. only then will it be able to compete against the garbage that is microsoft and its adware os
@lis6502
2 ай бұрын
@@luxemier most of us linuxers actually use linux BECAUSE no single big company tells us what is kosher and what is halaal. Lack of coherence is the price of freedom. Freedom where i can take KDE filemanager and run in in GNOME while listening to music from audacious (legacy GTK2 based winamp-alike). But i take your words with grain of salt, what you're expecting is rather "seamless desktop environment" where everything looks and acts like dude's macos from 80s. Yeah, this could make all of us happy, i would still use my abominations that i am so used to and you'd have your coherent desktop experience.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
@@lis6502 If the price for consistency is to abandon Gtk applications, I'd be willing to pay that price on my desktop.
@lis6502
2 ай бұрын
20:00 yeah, that important for usability to enable users to arrange their icons to form penis. I used to hold my Doom icon on left testicle :) If it comes to productivity you simply can't beat list view where icon is least significant characteristic to the object and name is the most; also arrangement by name or by date makes more sense than free placing small silly pictures.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Some people's brains work in a very visual, spatial way. Other people's brains work more like Excel tables. I guess this is why in addition to icon view there is also list view. I am fine with having both, as long as a proper icon view exists. Unfortunately, it doesn't exist on Linux yet.
@SnakePlissken25
2 ай бұрын
No, my friend, non-adherence to your personal UI habits and preferences is not a "problem". Or, rather, if it is a problem, it's a you problem.
@lol51000
2 ай бұрын
Who use copy/paste from the menubar... If you want to do it from your mouse, just select and middle-clic to past.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Real mice have only one button. More realistically, touchpads don't have a middle button.
@LiterateGoblin
2 ай бұрын
i cant tell if you're joking lol
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Why would I be joking? It's not like I am making this stuff up. I am comparing it side by side. So you don't have to trust me, but can see for yourself.
@lis6502
2 ай бұрын
18:25 by reading embedded help? i'd start here at least
@funnyberries4017
2 ай бұрын
hey, I half agree with you. I think the top bar on Gnome is stupid. It would be good to have the applications in a special folder. All my apps are in different spots because some are .deb, some are snap, some are appimage, some are flatpacks. But I do like buttons in the titlebar. I do like having bigger text and icons. I think if you refined your complaints by getting rid of your nitpicks, you might get somewhere.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
With AppImage, you can at least put your applications in any location on the filesystem you like. And to delete an application, you simply drag the AppImage to the trash. I specifically designed it that way. But for the rest... I'd need to write my own desktop environment. Oh snap, I guess I am already halfway into doing just that...
@funnyberries4017
2 ай бұрын
It's good to critque the way thigns are. Hopfully everything changes for the better
@WashingtonStateStyleDoorDash
2 ай бұрын
>chooses the worst tablet DE notorious for making terrible UX decisions and calls that "modern desktop linux" >uses a live CD and wonders why things load slow and the file manager doesn't show the disk it's not installed on nor mounted >"Why are the icons so big compared to the 1990s OS meant for a 800x600 monitor?!" (Just zoom out? Click the List View icon right there? No let's pretend to be dumb) >"Where is the way to open applications?!" (As he stares at the start menu right there, but no let's pretend that isn't so obvious) >"Why would they name the text editor 'Text Editor?!'" (Because if they put Gedit there instead you would have whined that's too confusing as well) You're a developer? You are worse at using a computer than the average 5 year old. Note to self: Avoid anything written by this guy 😂
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Just because I might be a developer myself doesn't mean I shouldn't design for "mere mortals".
@JacksonNick-j6i
2 ай бұрын
This is not Linux desktop, it's Gnome Desktop Environment, one of various desktop environments available on Linux. I'm eager to know your opinion on KDE Plasma. It has a Windows like UI/UX and much much more options and flexibility than Gnome. Unfortunately that makes KDE Plasma a little bit complicated too, but if you're a power user you can appreciate its advance features.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
While I generally prefer KDE, it still doesn't match the Classic Mac from the 80s. For example, there is no truly spatial file manager.
@frankhuurman3955
2 ай бұрын
As much as I agree with some of the points like wasted space, application paths or simple things taking too many clicks.. it's still a clean design that's fast when you mostly use the keyboard. I'd love to see your fork of Gnome though and modernize the UI/UX on the left.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Thing is, the original Mac was made for "mere mortals" (a.k.a. "the rest of us") who don't "mostly use the keyboard", back in a time when the main alternative was the MS-DOS command line. With helloDesktop (running on helloSystem), I've been working on a more recent (but not "modern" since I am not looking to go after recent trends) implementation inspired by the ideas on the left hand side.
@RafaelMartins-hh7ok
2 ай бұрын
speed run on how to look dumb
@bloomtom
2 ай бұрын
I say this as someone who agrees with you and thinks modern Gnome is unsalvageable: You're waffling too much and making incredulous noises too often. Write down your points then stick to them. Emphasize only once a minute or so. This was tiring to watch just for 15 minutes, where I stopped because I couldn't take it anymore.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Thanks for your suggestion. Doing these videos unscripted. It probably shows in the videos how I really, deeply feel about these things.
@lis6502
2 ай бұрын
14:45 i am not a fan of gnome or this gtk3* UI either, but you must've lived under the rock since these 80s to not know that copy cut and paste were always accessible from keyboard and i can only imagine how much time you've wasted by selecting text with mouse, moving cursor to Edit menu, clicking on it and selecting Copy out of all possible options. and yes, whatever is in hamburger menu is an unituitive mess but on the other hand it contains most useful options exposed.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
So you think people just have to know Command-X, Command-C, Command-V? Where are people supposed to know that from if it is not written in the menu? Yes I know them, but I know them because I have selected them thousands of times from the menu, until I just knew them. How are people supposed to learn these things if they are not visible in the menu?
@huhncares
2 ай бұрын
@@09427560in fact, there is a menu for copying. Just right click. Also has been like that for decades.
@9SMTM6
2 ай бұрын
I was wondering who could possibly be so backwards, then I looked at the channel name. Probono, you're that same guy that wants Wayland to copy every API from X11, because that's how things used to be. To make things better, sometimes you've got to break some eggs. Most certainly not all of these changes are good. But if you don't change things there is no way they can improve or accommodate other new things, which means that ultimately everything that touches the particular thing that you want to stay the same, will also atrophy. I'm sorry, but the rest of the world will not accommodate you.
@renascence239
2 ай бұрын
GNOME devs: "icons do not belong on desktop" Then what the f is the desktop for? Just to display a pretty picture?
@bhaveshsonar7558
2 ай бұрын
Yau can have them using extensions
@ominoussage
2 ай бұрын
I came from GNOME, now using KDE and removed all of my icons and applications in the desktop. I just think it looks way nicer. Less distractions and a clean wallpaper for the cost of a little accessibility loss (which can be compensated with keyboard shortcuts) is a huge win for me.
@lis6502
2 ай бұрын
floating windows concept is counter-productive at the very base and adding icons which will be covered anyways by the first app that will open its window is cherry on the top. Desktop is to show currently active app window and ~/Desktop is one of XDG directories which should become obsolesent, sooner the better.
@shaunpatrick8345
2 ай бұрын
Windows belong on the desktop, and they cover the icons. So you need something above the windows to put the icons in. That's a file manager and apps grid.
@HANU8
2 ай бұрын
@@bhaveshsonar7558 If I need to install an extension to have a desktop, I may very well install another desktop like "MATE Desktop Environment" which is the real continuation of GNOME.
@lazysorcerer
Ай бұрын
Hate to tell you this, but you just got old. Yes, you are right that developers are importing mobile UI conventions to desktop, but that's because most new users nowadays will have used a phone before they use a desktop for the first time, so things like opening an applications menu will be more intuitive to them when what you do on a classic Mac.
@lis6502
2 ай бұрын
9:30 xD i'd think it's provided by satellite link but i might be wrong. In all seriousness, from usability perspective all what matters is that given app is available.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Actually, on most systems it is populated from /usr/share/applications/. But that's not even where the applications really live. And that precisely is the core of why this interface is not simple: It separates the objects from their representation. The same application partially "lives" in /usr/bin, in /usr/share/applications, in /usr/share/icons, etc. - and in that "launcher" thing that doesn't even have a path. In a direct manipulation, spatial file manager, everything has exactly one location at one place. And every place has not only exactly one pixel location on the screen, but also one path. It's like if you have a glass on your table. That glass has one physical location. It cannot be in your cupboard, in your dishwasher, and on your table at the same time. (Compare this to the same app having some aspects of it in /usr/bin, in /usr/share/applications, /usr/bin, in /usr/share/icons, etc.) If you want to throw the glass away, you take it from your table and put it into the trash. You don't have to go back to the store where you bought the glass if you want to remove it from your table. (Compare this to having to use anything else than the file manager to get rid of an application.)
@DanielClear2
2 ай бұрын
As a GNOME disliker with passion, this is a load of crap. You don't know anything about UI nor UX. If you want to use a Mac, go use a Mac; although clearly you won't like it either, so just stop using computers, as we've been using command lines for decades, right? - Although I agree about your thoughts about the topbar middle area being wasted by just a clock, *the left top button is easily recognizable as a clickable button when hovered,* and it is the only button that you need. That was the point of the button. *You can't mix the other "buttons" as they clearly open a related menu.* - You complained about *Text Editor being called Text Editor?* Would you be fine if it was called _gedit?_ How would that be accessible by your definition? - The global menu bar is a Mac thing. *Windows* (or other OSes) *never had it.* Most apps and systems also dropped or deprecated menubars because they're inconvenient and *most users basically just avoid using it due to wall of text under every menu.* Context menus should be contextual, not global. - Gedit _(I hope you memorized the name!)_ is clearly more accesible by having the Open menu on an easier-to-see location, because that's what you use first and foremost. Also, *the rest of the "menus" are under the menu button next to the close button* anyway, so you lose absolutely nothing. - Titlebars contain buttons, on every OS, *including MacOS!* The concept of having extended titlebars with buttons and functions was popularized by Apple themselves.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Do you know what the icon on "the left top button" is supposed to be? In Windows 95, there was at least "the Start menu". It at least had a name. But "the left top button"? Yes, a name like Gedit would be good, because then I could easily distinguish it from Leafpad, Geany, etc. which all also are "text editors". They could also call it "GnomeText" or something like that. The global menu bar is also present on the Lisa, Amiga, Atari TOS, Digital Research GEM , ProDOS 16, etc. So while the Mac may have popularized the concept, it is by no means a Mac-only thing. It also has been scientifically proven to be superior. See Walker, N & Smelcer, JB 1990, A comparison of selection times from walking and pull-down menus. in JC Chew & J Whiteside (eds), Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 1990. Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 221-225, 1990 SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 1990, Seattle, United States, 4/1/90. Nothing against (also) having an Open icon in the icon bar. But why doesn't it give me the File Open dialog? Showing Search first just promotes lazy people to save their stuff "somewhere" without even knowing where. Regarding the rest of the "menus", I truly could not find the contents of the Edit menu (Cut, Copy, Paste, etc.). Window title bars imho should contain Close, minimize, maximize - but in a consistent way for every window that is not a modal dialog (those have no title bar at all). It should not be up to every application to put unrelated stuff there.
@RoboNuggie
2 ай бұрын
Hello! I enjoyed this video a lot.... and I agree 100% with your views.... although I didn't use Classic Mac back in the 80's, I did use Amiga OS, and that was years ahead of what's available now, with it's datatypes and menu system.....
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Interesting point. Interestingly, many of the desktop systems from the 80s (Lisa, Windows 2.0, Amiga, Atari TOS, Digital Research GEM, RISC OS, ProDOS 16,...) are relatively similar to each other, and are more "desktop-like" than many of today's systems. Even though I have never used most of these, I think I could quickly feel at home in them from just looking at their screenshots. What these systems have in common is that they were consistent, simple but did not hide how things work from the user.
@roccociccone597
2 ай бұрын
My man just hasn’t touched a computer since 1997 and his mind can’t comprehend the concept that things do change. Not being able to adapt to new things is a sign of being old.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Let's embrace change that makes things better, but not all change is for the better. Or do you really think that the user interface on the right hand side is actually better, not just "modern"?
@alpacamale2909
2 ай бұрын
not being able to accept that old thing and new things don't mean good or bad. Some things were done better back then and some things are done better right now.
@raccoons_stole_my_account
2 ай бұрын
You are aware of the fact that everyone, you including will get old?
@RandomGeometryDashStuff
2 ай бұрын
14:55 other mouse button?
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Real mice have only one button.
@yerenzter
2 ай бұрын
Just like you comparing a car to the truck.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Right. I want a normal car, but the world seems to be producing only trucks and SUVs.
@ruwee8105
2 ай бұрын
well i can agree with some things, like menu bar or deleting apps, but all modern file managers are almost the same starting from early 2000s. Yes, i still think finder is the most functional, but all of them are usable. and yeah, this is just trolling
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Define "trolling". I am thinking about these things deeply, or else I wouldn't have written a six-part article series called "Make. It. Simple. Linux Desktop Usability" on the subject. That all modern file managers are almost the same starting from early 2000s is a sad thing, because they are all more or less like Windows 95 rather than the more desktop-like ones (Lisa, Windows 2.0, Amiga, Atari TOS, Digital Research GEM, RISC OS, ProDOS 16,...).
@visrut7
2 ай бұрын
but it is open source customize it if you don't like the way it is. Why do you want to delete firefox if it is not even installed, I just don't get the idea, I mean why?
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Around 4:00 you can see that Firefox is there. I just want to delete it from the system, like I did with Internet Explorer on the Mac. Took me around one second there.
@roccociccone597
2 ай бұрын
Takes you a second to open a package manager and click uninstall too
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
@@roccociccone597 Except that it didn't work when I tried, as shown in the video. Opening the package manager alone took more than a second.
@shaunpatrick8345
2 ай бұрын
Using space is not the same as wasting space. Large windows on Gnome use space, whereas the small ones on Mac waste 90% of the available screen and you had to enlarge one of them to use it.
@JacksonNick-j6i
2 ай бұрын
I would rather have a small window that I can make bigger to see more of it, than having a big windows where if I need more space I can't make it small because its spacing and icon layout is so wide that making it smaller makes it unusable.
@JacksonNick-j6i
2 ай бұрын
I would rather have a small window that I can make bigger to see more of it, than having a big windows where if I need more space I can't make it small because its spacing and icon layout is so wide that making it smaller makes it unusable.
@shaunpatrick8345
2 ай бұрын
@@JacksonNick-j6i the space he complained about in Gnome was the notification panel, which takes no space away from anything else.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
I don't like it when technological advances get eaten up by wasteful use. For example, if I have 4 times as many pixels on my screen today, I want to be able to fit 4x the number of icons there. Not just the same amount of icons in a comically big size.
@Returnality
2 ай бұрын
You're complaint is more about Gnome than anything and Gnome is simultaneously the most and least popular DE for Linux.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Can you show me one (just one!) desktop environment on Linux that opens each folder in its own window, preserves the size and position of each window, and that preserves the pixel coordinates of each icon in each window? Just one. Please. Been looking for decades. Even started implementing it myself (and currently running into what seems to be weird Qt bugs). The "Linux Desktop" (XDG specifications) seem to be lacking a specification for how to even store window locations, sizes, and icon positions.
@profdroid5264
16 күн бұрын
Then use XFCE or Mate..
@lis6502
2 ай бұрын
8:52 would "NUMERIX" be a better calculator than Calculator? dude...
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Of course the name under an application icon should be the name of the application, not a description of what it does. So I'd definitely prefer "GEdit" (if that is what "Text Editor" refers to). When you hover over it with the mouse, there could be a tooltip showing a description. We should not design systems in such a way that users don't even know the names of the applications they are running anymore. If feels to me like the systems are intentionally designed so that users stay stupid. Showing a search field instead of a file open dialog is similar - people won't even remember where they store their stuff anymore, they'll just search for it every time...
@rhogal8310
2 ай бұрын
wow the comment section seems to be mostly negative, but I actually quite agree with you. I hate the direction the modern UI design seems to often go in, simplistic, mobile-like, fisher price laptop feeling. Maybe I'm old (I'm only 22 lol) but I grew up with windows 7 and that's basically the standard for me.
@raidev_
Ай бұрын
im pretty sure gnome opens on the overview screen when booting up, not the empty desktop. Also looking at the "hard disk" on linux would mean being in the root folder which is not where you would usually be in general use, the home folder makes a lot more sense. And applications are not files, they go in the application menu. You also complain about things not having proper label then a second later about how gnome app names describe exactly what they are, i don't think you'd know what a "nautilus" is. "How do you open a file?" when there is a big open button right there. And no the ui elements are small in macos because you're running it on way higher res than it's intended for. No, "forever" is just what you're used to, windows has always put the open button on the top. This video makes me want to yell at my screen
@lis6502
2 ай бұрын
8:01 come on xD. It's like you were arab, raised in arabia or whatever, came to europe and was trying to narrate how unintuitive things we have here xd i am not sure but for me this "nine dots" depict "menu" with very common nowadays grid layout where applications' icons are arranged like that on nowadays UIs.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Icons are supposed to be things from the real world. I have no object on my desk that looks like nine dots. The menu at my restaurant doesn't look like this, either.
@lol51000
2 ай бұрын
"the UI is too big", this part was painful to watch. Did you know that screen are bigger than in 1980?
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Yes. And I don't appreciate it that despite my screen being 4x as big as it used to be, it still feels like the same old tiny screen because everything is 4x times as big nowadays with lots of wasted whitespace. Who is this made for? Vision impaired users? People operating desktop computers on touchscreens with large fingers? I suspect it's like this because people mistake "smartphones" with "modern" with "better".
@oyohval
2 ай бұрын
This is the most "old man screams at a cloud" type video that i have seen in a long time.
@FloofyWolf1
2 ай бұрын
A true chad in the idea that UI design has a purpose and that it's needed to not only make the computer useful but also make it something to enjoy. Windows UI never truly looked good to me but it functioned perfectly. macOS today and before although I prefer the classic look always not only worked but looked great doing it. Simple, easy, does exactly what you need with 0 bloat and fuss.
@Sosisoos
2 ай бұрын
By the way, Haiku OS does a lot of the same things right. It actually works surprisingly well on modern hardware, too.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Indeed. I did an extensive review series a few years back ("My first day with Haiku - shockingly good!" and subsequent articles), and it is lightyears ahead of most "Linux" (which is just a kernel and these points are not actually about the kernel) desktop environments.
@therealdavros
2 ай бұрын
Is "helloSystem" dead?
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
No. In fact, it was born out of frustrations like those demonstrated in this video. But implementing everything properly takes time and effort, and the project could need some more capable Qt skilled developers.
@Sosisoos
2 ай бұрын
Tech boomer conservatism is my new favorite ideology =)
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
I'd prefer to call it "futuristic retrocomputing", but yes, the idea is to replace bad trends from today and replace them with good ideas from the past.
@Kokeshell
2 ай бұрын
try using a twm
@theinthanhlan2047
2 ай бұрын
I like seeing humans complaining which got free. 😂
@seafouronesea
2 ай бұрын
So many arch users in the comments entirely ignoring the point he's trying to get across and instead nitpicking each example. Modern UX is too dependant on cyclic design patterns that are not obvious or intuitive to new computer users. How is someone who has never used a computer before supposed to know that clicking on three stacked lines will show them an application's menu items? 20:00 I agree that the handling of userland applications on Linux isn't intuitive. AppImage improves things but without support from the FreeDesktop spec it won't be a nice experience. Linux puts package managers first at the expense of the user's ability to easily add and remove applications without using a dedicated piece of software. This approach makes sense for servers but not for the desktop.
@WashingtonStateStyleDoorDash
2 ай бұрын
Really? Because the entire time I was watching him whine where the Start button was it felt like a game of Dora the Explorer where it was pretty obvious where everything was placed, and I've barely used modern GNOME before. That's hilarious that you believe that dinosaur OS would somehow be easier to understand to someone who has never used a computer before. Like yeah GNOME is bad but everything was still 1000x easier to understand than that old thing
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
@@WashingtonStateStyleDoorDash Have you ever used "that old thing"?
@junialter
2 ай бұрын
Well Linux has some issues, no doubt about that. Yet it's still the best OS. Not because it's perfect, but because the other crap is way worse.
@xzosss
2 ай бұрын
as a Designer I agree 100% with what your saying. Idk it seems to me that people hire UX/UI (whatever they wanna call a graphic designer this days...), to try to reinvent the wheel or something but they keep coming up with weird ways to make it worse, missing the fundamentals of navigation and easy access. To me the most annoying "trend" wtv you wanna call it, it's the big ass title bars that take useless amount of space of the screen ex: (recent macOS, Ubuntu, Fedora, Gnome in general). Great video keep it up
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Thanks for your encouraging words. I suspect the wasted space comes from the wrong conclusion that since screens are bigger, the individual objects on the screen should be bigger too (in effect, neutralizing the increased real estate), and from the failed idea of "convergence" (that you would use a desktop computer with your fingers like a smartphone). Even Microsoft abandoned this idea largely after Windows 8. Somehow, these unfortunate trends became associated with "modern". And unfortunately many people seem to mistake "modern" for "better".
@JohnJohnson-dl8oq
2 ай бұрын
Things change in 30 years. In the time it took to shoot and edit this video, one can learn to use a modern operating system.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Well, "modern" != better. That's the point here.
@comicsanz97
2 ай бұрын
Lots of salty linux purists here 💀
@LydiaPuppy
2 ай бұрын
nice try fed
@rollo4127
2 ай бұрын
If you don't like it don't use it
@InfinityN
2 ай бұрын
A lot of the complaints here are just about GNOME and that's fair.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Sadly, many of the complaints apply to virtually all "modern" desktop environments on Linux.
@alpacamale2909
2 ай бұрын
9:40 I agree, linux is terrible at intuitiveness. it feels like you always need prior knowledge in order to understand things.
@Biotico
2 ай бұрын
Gnome IS terrible but Linux can be whatever you want it to be. You can change everything to suit your workflow.
@alpacamale2909
2 ай бұрын
@@Biotico except the filesystem
@tankermottind
2 ай бұрын
Personally I think "usability" is way overrated anyway, and excessive focus on it puts up a barrier between the user and any understanding of their computer. I think everyone who uses a personal computer should know how their OS' filesystem works, how to do basic things in the terminal, how to reduce one's risk of malware, how to do basic system administration like hardware upgrades, repairing damaged filesystems using tools like fsck or chkdsk, etc,. Your computer is not magic and you don't have to be a "wizard" to take care of it. If you learn some command line functions and RTFM instead of relying on "discoverability" or "smart" features, it could potentially save you hundreds if not thousands of dollars, not to mention saving you the risk of giving a stranger in a computer repair store access to all your files (I wouldn't trust Greek Squad any further than I could throw an adult male hippopotamus).
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Fully agree. A good user interface makes tasks easy, but not by hiding how stuff works. Take the filesystem, for example. On the left hand side, navigating around in the filesystem is pleasant. Application files have proper icons. You always know where each file is located in the filesystem (even though the user would say "in which folder"). Contrast this to "modern" paradigms: For a smartphone user, an application is "on the homescreen". They don't even have any concept of where the application file is actually stored, how to back it up, delete it, etc. - all this is somehow left to "the system" in ways the user doesn't have control over. Sad!
@LunaticEdit
2 ай бұрын
Full disclosure warning: I gave up on linux years ago after daily driving it for nearly a decade - now I use macOS. With that out of the way, the title should be "Classic Mac vs Gnome". So my working theory is that the gnome team saw Windows 8 and said "WE WANT THIS" and did everything they could to mimic Windows 8's tablet-centric UI. It's as simple as that. Gnome is a tablet OS. If you have a mouse, Gnome isn't for you. It's a shame too cause Gnome 2 was wonderful.
@shaunpatrick8345
2 ай бұрын
Gnome 3 is older than windows 8, does not mimic it, and is not tablet-centric.
@LunaticEdit
2 ай бұрын
@@shaunpatrick8345 So why, on my 4k screen, does it insist on hiding my entire desktop and all its windows in order to show 24 massive icons on the app launcher?
@shaunpatrick8345
2 ай бұрын
@@LunaticEdit windows 8 did not do that.
@LunaticEdit
2 ай бұрын
@@shaunpatrick8345 It removed the entire desktop to show "tiles" when you pressed the windows button, causing all active windows on the desktop to disappear. It literally did this.
@alpacamale2909
2 ай бұрын
That top bar in gnome is style over substance. Linux users are very silly people. you don't need so many pixels being taken by a top bar. you don't need a connectivity button or volume volume visible at all times. it's just silly. And to add insult to injury they do this taking vertical space which is the space you have less in your screen, not to mention when you have a web browser opened you need to be more precise when clicking on a tab (macOS also has this problem whereas windows allows you to move your cursor to the edge of the window and click the tab). as I was saying. Silly people. I don't think the problem is growing up with a mobile phone. I grew up with windows xp and 7 and still think the app drawer in phones is better than the start menu in windows and some linux desktop environments. As for macos I never liked a full screen window displaying all the programs in an oversized manner, it makes you change your eye focus. This is why I always use Arch Menu in gnome with the android drawer style.
@toprecorporation
2 ай бұрын
what an awful video
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
What a constructive comment. I will address your concern in my next videos.
@LuizBento
2 ай бұрын
I don't like it, so it's bad.
@jonizulo
Ай бұрын
ok boomer
@williambradfordclark3959
2 ай бұрын
You are doing it so completely wrong, and while I think you are definitely trolling to make (what you perceive to be) a point, in case you really aren't being disingenuous, I will help you out here: STOP. USING. THE. MOUSE. Press the 'windows' key on your keyboard. Start typing the name of the program you want to launch, for example, Firefox. It should come up after you type the first 2-3 letters. Press enter when it does. Congratulations, you just launched a program the proper way on Gnome, which skipped tons of pointless and inefficient steps, such as: 1. removing your hand from the keyboard at all 2. locating the mouse on your desk 3. locating the mouse pointer on your screen 4. targeting the icon with the mouse pointer and clicking on it 5. removing your hand from the mouse and placing it back on the keyboard WHY would you waste your time with any of this SLOW NONSENSE when you can bypass all of it and just use your keyboard?
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
How are "mere mortals" supposed to learn about this?
@williambradfordclark3959
2 ай бұрын
would you care to explain why you keep deleting my responses?
@williambradfordclark3959
2 ай бұрын
let's try this for the fourth time (fortunately, I saved a copy of this after I noticed my first 2-3 attempts at replying to you were deleted within minutes) how about you start by coming clean and being clear for everyone here about whether you are counting yourself among those "mere mortals", given that you've been using computers for 45+ years and have enough passion about the topic of Gnome's design to make a 30 minute video of yourself LARPing as a day 1 novice. then, we can drop all this pointless pretense and have a proper good-faith discussion about such actually interesting topics as 1. design tradeoffs between discoverability, minimalism, maintainability, etc; 2. whether all desktops are forever obligated to be windows 95 clones; 3. the ability of the linux ecosystem to support a wide range of user preferences by offering a range of GUI choices rather than a single one-size-fits-all solution; 4. whether or not Gnome is a sensible default desktop for various distros given the stated goals of those distros; 5. the freedom of the Gnome developers to develop for their own preferences; and 6. your freedom to fork it or go install something else if you don't like it.
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
@@williambradfordclark3959 I am not, must be KZitem doing it. The same happened to me when I commented on some other video recently. It's a shame.
@lol51000
2 ай бұрын
This is a worst review I've ever seen. If you want an apple computer, why not just buy one?
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
It is not even a review. It is a comparison to show that newer != better.
@Crux161
2 ай бұрын
Here’s the difference, the left side of the screen is burning my f’king eyes rn 😣
@09427560
2 ай бұрын
Why?
@ctmme
2 ай бұрын
based
@raccoons_stole_my_account
2 ай бұрын
Some of your points are personal taste matters but overall I fully agree, 30 years of "progress" in linux desktop space amounted to fuck all. I absolutely non-ironically use my Samsung phone default apps to do some tasks because desktop alternatives just suck. I mean hell we don't have a simple quick app to crop an image with! Image viewer still does not show files in the order they appear in file manager! File manager from the 90ies, midnight commander is far more advanced than Nautilus, or Thunar or Dolphin taken together. Last gnome update drove me over the line with file opration progress indicator moving. The only reason for it to be on the left bottom end of the page is mobile-first design. I am not on a mobile, I'm on a 27 inch screen ffs.
@HANU8
2 ай бұрын
Have you tried the "MATE Desktop Environment" or the "Trinity Desktop Environment"? They are up-to-date but maintain a lot of removed functionality. I wish there were more features like the ones you mention, there is double commander that is very configurable (the default setting is not too good, but you can re-configure it a lot).
Пікірлер: 197