Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Elementary OS 0.3.2 "Freya" Released

Posted by samzenpus on from the in-time-for-christmas dept.

linuxscreenshot writes: Just in time for the holidays, it's a new release of elementary OS. Freya 0.3.2 is a minor release, mostly focused around solving some issues folks have had with UEFI & SecureBoot, but we've also managed to sneak in some internationalization updates and a couple new features. Screenshots are available.

86 comments

  1. Now THIS is more like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    elementary OS with the dark theme is probably the most aesthetically beautiful operating system I have ever seen.

    This is the OS I'm going to dump Windows for. Great job elementary LLC! Keep it up.

    1. Re:Now THIS is more like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I guess some people care how it looks: I forgot that was something to consider when picking a desktop environment (I'm not going to call it an OS).

      Wow, I guess I'm a bit disconnected to actually not realize people might care about the aesthetics: that should have been obvious. I'm one of those wacky people with javascript turned off who is used to broken web UI everywhere, and happy in a terminal. I Pick my theme based on how annoying it is in a dark room. For most stuff for me its first priority is transparency, then security / privacy, then reliability and functionally. Usability is a product of transparency and functionality, and it just needs to look good enough to be possible to use and easy to understand (transparency).

    2. Re:Now THIS is more like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Indeed. This is a true contender, like Ubuntu in 2006. I dropped windows for Ubuntu then, but was sad to go back around 2010 when Ubuntu and Gnome went off the UI deep-end. This could bring Linux back to the nerd desktop.

      It's also a sad state of affairs that this really cool attempt at a usable Linux gets downvoted on /. nowadays. How I long for the slashdot where four or five actual users and maybe a core developer would be here...

    3. Re:Now THIS is more like it. by greenfruitsalad · · Score: 1

      if i was sure they wouldn't abandon it in 6 months, i'd install this on my sister's laptop. she's been on ubuntu or derivatives for about 7 years but keeps quietly coveting her colleagues' osx's looks. this really is a rather presentable UI.

      Pear OS before it had the looks but closed up shop after a year or so. Pear OS looked TOO MUCH like osx. i felt it would make people think one actually wanted to have osx but couldn't afford it.

    4. Re:Now THIS is more like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need your eyes checked or you need to leave the basement more often. It looks pretty much the same as every other theme. Dated and dull.

    5. Re:Now THIS is more like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For most stuff for me its first priority is transparency, then security / privacy, then reliability and functionally.

      It's Linux, those are all givens. What isn't a given is whether the UI is any good or not. A bunch of windows just displaying commandline shells is not intuitive, efficient or pretty.

      With that in mind, my choices for desktop Linux OSes are Mint and elementary.

    6. Re:Now THIS is more like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what looks better? Windows 10's PlaySkool 16-colour retro GUI?

      I guess you just lack any sense of taste or refinement.

    7. Re:Now THIS is more like it. by Desler · · Score: 1

      You're way more than "a bit"' disconnected.

    8. Re:Now THIS is more like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      You're way more than "a bit"' disconnected.

      a byte ?

    9. Re:Now THIS is more like it. by bondsbw · · Score: 1

      You are disparaging an OS that allows you to choose between a palette of colors, while appearing to promote in its stead an OS that only allows one color option.

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    10. Re:Now THIS is more like it. by timothy · · Score: 1

      Well, not that this means it will necessarily be around at any given time in the future, but I've been using Elementary on my most-used desktop system (well, OK, a perma-docked laptop) for at least 6 months, so there's at least some track record ...

      I have some minor quibbles with it (have had the occasional strangeness with printing, and my 2d monitor gets a bit wonky sometimes), but overall am very pleased with Elementary; it does a better job of "it just works" than most systems I've used before of any kind.

      --
      jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
    11. Re:Now THIS is more like it. by Tallfeather · · Score: 3, Funny

      Word.

    12. Re:Now THIS is more like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it's really nice looking OS! But i got issues running it as a KVM guest though.

    13. Re:Now THIS is more like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's great and all if you only like 16 colours as if it were 1985 again.

      Meanwhile, Linux allows you to completely change the UI to anything you desire without hacks or third party software.

    14. Re:Now THIS is more like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you even have a computer? I don't get people like you. You get a computer and then try to make it as much of a pain in the ass to use as possible.

      I have my computer to make my life easier. I sure as hell will never go back to the dark ages of command lines and shitty UIs.

    15. Re:Now THIS is more like it. by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

      my 2d monitor gets a bit wonky sometimes

      That's a bummer, I don't have any other kind.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  2. Heh, "OS" by readingprofile · · Score: 1, Insightful

    It's a fucking Linux distro, not a distinct operating system. Nothing wrong with posting articles about distro releases (Mint had one recently) but it's pretentious to think it's anything but a nicely-wrapped Linux distribution that I'd imagine still guilt-trips the user if they try to download an ISO without paying for it.

    1. Re:Heh, "OS" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      A Linux distribution is an operating system, dumbass.

    2. Re:Heh, "OS" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      YALD - Yet Another Linux Distro. yawn. Distrowatch lists a couple of them per day, often more - and that barely touches the seething haystack of distro overchoice. I have to wonder what some of these distros offer in terms of actual usability and applications for doing real work, beyond just the skins, themes and icon candy. Hmm, that would reduce the list of viable distros from a couple of thousand to I guess 5 or 6.

    3. Re:Heh, "OS" by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Yet Another Ubuntu Derivative.

      --
      http://michaelsmith.id.au
    4. Re:Heh, "OS" by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1
      Full marks for nit-picking, Null Points for common sense.

      Anyone who has not heard of it (clearly at least 90% of the /. users, never mind the rest of the universe), would assume from the article this is actually a new OS - in the sense that it is not Plan 9, Windows, Unix, VMS, or WindRiver (OK, I do admin others exist, but you get the point), not in the sense "Linux with a slightly different theme on top", or "yet another BSD".

      Linuxscreenshot fully deserves any tongue-lashing he/she/it gets.

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    5. Re:Heh, "OS" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Full marks for nit-picking, Null Points for common sense.

      Stop projecting.

      Anyone who has not heard of it (clearly at least 90% of the /. users, never mind the rest of the universe), would assume from the article this is actually a new OS - in the sense that it is not Plan 9, Windows, Unix, VMS, or WindRiver (OK, I do admin others exist, but you get the point), not in the sense "Linux with a slightly different theme on top", or "yet another BSD".

      elementary OS has been around since 2011, so it's not a new OS. It is however a distinct OS of its own. Just because it shares some parts with other operating systems doesn't change that fact. Would you say that [insert random Windows version] is just a Windows distro and not a distinct operating system or that Mac OS is just a BSD distro and not a distinct OS?

      Linuxscreenshot fully deserves any tongue-lashing he/she/it gets.

      From who? You and your single sockpuppet or crony? You are an idiot.

    6. Re:Heh, "OS" by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

      > A Linux distribution is an operating system, dumbass.

      But is a distro, not a distinct distribution. Which is exactly what was claimed by the post you rudely replied to.

    7. Re:Heh, "OS" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have to agree with the GP. A GNU/Linux distro is not really "a distinct OS of its own". Mac OS is a Unix 03 compliant OS since 2007, so it is a Unix by now, but it is still distinct enough from the BSD variants to count as an OS on its own. And yes, most Windows X.X versions are variants of the same operating system "Windows", as the name indicates. (Not all of them, because there were significant changes under the hood at some time.)

    8. Re:Heh, "OS" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hint: The term "distro" is short for "distribution".

      It's sad that I have to educate you on that.

    9. Re:Heh, "OS" by hey! · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well, I played around with it a bit and it's, in a word "nice". It's really nice. It's Oh-my-God-this-thing-is-nice nice. It's probably the distro now I'd demo to someone who was curious about Linux.

      Linux enthusiasts are all about power. To us power equals simplicity; it really is so much easier to open a terminal and type "sudo apt-get install blech" than it is to slash our way through some kind of stupid app-store GUI. So we tolerate a lot of crap in GUIs; ugly, bad layout, lousy typography, idiotically convoluted design, because we implicitly expect GUIs to be badly designed crap. Nice isn't even on our punch list, but don't knock it until you've tried it.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    10. Re:Heh, "OS" by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

      > distro" is short for "distribution".

      I know. I meant to post: But it is a distro, not a distinct operating system.

      My bad for not proof reading.

    11. Re:Heh, "OS" by barbariccow · · Score: 1

      The OS is the kernel. This is not a new kernel, it came from kernel.org like all the others. move along.

    12. Re:Heh, "OS" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A kernel by itself is about as useful as an engine with no car.

  3. Does it include systemd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    Is this a traditional GNU/Linux distribution, or is it a systemd/Linux distribution?

    1. Re:Does it include systemd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It depends if Ubuntu includes it.

      Except for the root distributions like RedHat, SUSE, and Debian, the rest are just different glosses and colors of lipstick.

    2. Re:Does it include systemd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhh, you missed Slackware, which SUSE was based off of and is the oldest Linux distro in existence. You also missed Gentoo, which is the only distro that is designed to allow the user to fully and easily customise everything (Chrome OS is based on Gentoo). You also missed Alpine, which isn't even based on GNU like all of the others. You also missed Arch Linux, which is essentially what Windows 10 copied with the perpetual, unstable, untested updates.

      Seems like you don't know much about Linux at all.

    3. Re:Does it include systemd? by Nutria · · Score: 1

      Uhh, you missed Slackware, which blah blah blah

      He said like Red Hat, SUSE & Debian. That means that these three are examples, not the canonical list.

      Seems like you don't know much about reading comprehension at all.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    4. Re: Does it include systemd? by Stormwatch · · Score: 4, Funny

      That almost sounded like that old Apple ad...

      "Here’s to the crazy ones. The nerds. The malfaisants. The socially inept. The pedophiles and terrorist sympathizers. The ones who see things differently."

      --
      Circumcision is child abuse.
    5. Re: Does it include systemd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure. If you really didn't care, you wouldn't have read the story, let alone posted a reply to it.

      I can read you like a two page brochure, son. You aren't fooling anyone.

    6. Re:Does it include systemd? by deviated_prevert · · Score: 1

      Uhh, you missed Slackware, which blah blah blah

      He said like Red Hat, SUSE & Debian. That means that these three are examples, not the canonical list.

      Seems like you don't know much about reading comprehension at all.

      Spoken as a dedicated Nazi supporter of Systemd no doubt. ALL hail the new and mighty conqueror of common sense and sysv. Rather difficult putting the boots to Patrick though he seems to be able to keep Slackware very mean, lean, reliable, smokin' fast and rock solid security wise without the sysd Nazi's telling him how to set up a distro. I still love being able to tweek my os and you guys are dumbing down linux just so it can become mainstream. Give Patrick credit his creation has been around since the one series of kernels and Slackware is still used by a butt tonne of admins who don' t want to pay RedHat Suse or Oracle and know how to set up a real server. Different tools for different jobs. Ubuntu and all the derivatives are for newbees who can't even edit simple config files and that is just fine.

      --
      This message was not sent from an iPhone because Peter Sellers really was a deviated prevert without a dime for the call
    7. Re: Does it include systemd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      get farged

    8. Re: Does it include systemd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, we can all see that you really aren't interested in this nerdy topic. That's why you keep replying.

    9. Re:Does it include systemd? by Nutria · · Score: 1

      Spoken as a dedicated Nazi supporter of Systemd no doubt.

      WOW! Talk about leaping to wholly unwarranted conclusions on zero fucking evidence!!!

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    10. Re:Does it include systemd? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      I see Old Greybeard Sys Admin who can't evolve with the times. The old "Get off my lawn" and "Walked up hill in the snow ... both directions" type. People ranting about this or that changing and how it SUCKS DONKEY BALLS is nothing more than this.

      I swore when I was younger (in the 90s) I wouldn't become one of those old fart Greybeards I was making fun of. Now that my beard is greying more each passing day, I still refuse to become irrelevant by grasping to my dying death the very things I grew up with, simply because of an opinion.

      I mean, I love OS/2 and REXX. Still to this day, it can do things that other OS simply can't do. But those things are irrelevant because nobody else liked them. I could be irrelevant by staying there. Or Novell, or PDP11/70 or HP3000 or .... each having something I thought was special (but learned to live without or with a lesser version)

      My point is, the world changes, adapt and move on. I've worked with Slackware, Debian, Redhat, SuSE, Ubuntu .... and even Gentoo. You know what they all have in common? They are Linux, and I can configure them to get the job done. Some are easier than others to configure, but I can configure them all in the end. A linux admin who says "I only work with ______" is just an Old Greybeard Sys Admin becoming irrelevant and soon to be tossed on the trash heap of history. Just like COBOL programmers. ;)

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    11. Re:Does it include systemd? by Nutria · · Score: 1

      My point is, the world changes, adapt and move on.

      Are you sure that you're replying to the correct comments? Maybe OP is who you really want to vent your spleen at?

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    12. Re:Does it include systemd? by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

      Spoken like a true systemd shill.

      Never mind whether systemd is a good idea, or not. Just launch a series of ad hominem attacks against systemd critic.

      Forget logic, just call names.

      Can you give me a good reason that the UNIX philosophy, and POSIX, have become bad ideas?

  4. About Elementary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Since I couldn't find it on their site (I had to head over to Wikipedia to find out) I figured I should post it here:
    Elementary is a Linux distribution (Its based on Ubuntu). I was looking around for an FAQ, or their source code, or the license, what ABIs it supports (aka what runs on it) and couldn't find anything on their site other than stuff about how to make good UIs. I think they suck at their main goal.

    ProTip: that icon in the top left of your pages: I had no idea it was a link. The web has standard styles for links, use them! Also, have an about page that says what the project is and why it exists. Your developer page should mention its Linux based, and some info about porting stuff to it, how you manage packages, what licences you like to use, and link to some source, it appears to do none of those things.

    So far I believe Elementary is all about making UIs where I can't tell whats a link, does not fit on my 1440 pixels of vertical space without pages of scrolling, and does not give me any of the things I want. Is there anything good about it, or is it just the Windows 8 style take on linux: new UI because shiny is shiny?

    I only looked into it because I'm interested in OS design. I was wondering it it was a microkernel or not, what licence its under, what security models it has etc. Instead I get a nearly useless pretty looking web site and another Ubuntu mod claiming to be the future. Not interested. It would be nice of the summery made it clear what this linux distro claiming to an OS was, especially since the site is trying to hide it.

    1. Re:About Elementary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. Looks clean, site seems legit - then you start trying to use it and discover it's just a linux distro and hopelessly poorly thought out UI. And that's just the site. Heaven only knows what swanky new paradigms they're trying out in the OS. All that's needed is a fast, functional, uncluttered OS that does what you expect and doesn't try 'teach' you stuff. Still looking, Mint's not bad. The most important programs I use for work only run on windows, so it's all really pretty moot anyhow...

    2. Re:About Elementary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Mint is the bomb. Having used Linux on the desktop for about 10 years now (since the original ubuntu release) I'm very impressed with it. It... just works. always. Never had an update break something unexpectedly, which is a Linux first for me.
      Never had to manually (re)configure X after installing or updating whatever, which is a first, too.
      Never had to fiddle with boot settings after updates.
      I upgraded major versions with only the smallest of issues. Usually on other distributions that leads to all the things above.
      In fact, the biggest problem I have with it, is the default green/silver color scheme.

    3. Re:About Elementary by Damnshock · · Score: 1
      Extracted from their webpage ( front page)

      Our code is available for review, scrutiny, modification, and redistribution by anyone. Learn More

      And:

      "We're built on Linux: the same software powering the U.S Department of Defense, the Bank of China, and more."

    4. Re:About Elementary by KGIII · · Score: 0

      Lubuntu is your friend. LXDE is lightweight but easily customizable. If you have older hardware it's plenty fast and it is blisteringly fast on new hardware. It's pretty tightly put together. The default software choices aren't bad but they're trivial to change. The UI is intuitive and you get access to the vast Ubuntu ecosystem by default. It's dead simple to install, repair, and maintain. It's as secure as you're likely to get with the effort you put into it. With repositories and the likes, updating is trivial and as close to automated as can be (and can be disabled if you should really want to do that). It's an official flavor so you get a high likelihood of the OS being their in perpetuity.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    5. Re:About Elementary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably because while ugly, Mac OS still looks a lot better than any version of Windows ever has (not counting custom visual styles) and better than any Linux-based OS aside from Mint and elementary.

      Personally I really liked the looks of BeOS. Clean, elegant and functional. I still wish a modern OS would adopt the brilliant tab style titlebars that it had.

    6. Re:About Elementary by sanf780 · · Score: 1

      As the AC told, this is an Ubuntu reskin (desktop compositing is different). But it is not just that, it tries to be a MacOsX wannabe. Another one out there. I just dislike how everybody tries to try things for the dumb masses...

    7. Re:About Elementary by LichtSpektren · · Score: 2

      Try Ubuntu MATE.

    8. Re:About Elementary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Mint is the bomb. Having used Linux on the desktop for about 10 years now (since the original ubuntu release) I'm very impressed with it. It... just works. always. Never had an update break something unexpectedly, which is a Linux first for me.
      Never had to manually (re)configure X after installing or updating whatever, which is a first, too.
      Never had to fiddle with boot settings after updates.
      I upgraded major versions with only the smallest of issues. Usually on other distributions that leads to all the things above.
      In fact, the biggest problem I have with it, is the default green/silver color scheme.

      Mageia also provides these same features for an RPM-based distro. Stable. Just works. Looks good. Broad hardware support. Easy upgrades.
      https://www.mageia.org/en/5/

    9. Re:About Elementary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably because while ugly, Mac OS still looks a lot better than any version of Windows ever has (not counting custom visual styles) and better than any Linux-based OS aside from Mint and elementary.

      Fuck you, hot-dog stand still reigns supreme.

    10. Re:About Elementary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They use Linux operating system (Linux is Monolithic kernel so it is full operating system by itself, unlike what microkernels are that requires the servers) but you can't find that information easily from these "hobbyist" distribution creators as they want to pretend that they did everything by themselves.

        It would better if even Canonical would openly and straightforwardly admit that they use Linux operating system and they are the one of the biggest distributions for it.

  5. Good luck by dwywit · · Score: 1

    trying to run it under Virtual Box.

    --
    They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
    1. Re:Good luck by Banana+Slamma · · Score: 1

      I didn't seem to have any trouble in VirtualBox 5.0.10 running on Windows 8.1 (x64) to get this working. The only trouble I had was the Live CD didn't power off when I finished the install so I had to do that manually.

  6. what's the point? by NostalgiaForInfinity · · Score: 2

    It seems like another lightweight Ubuntu variant. Doesn't Xubuntu have that area covered adequately? I mean, if people have fun doing this, good for them, but from the point of view of Ubuntu distributions, it just seems a bit redundant.

    1. Re:what's the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looking at peoples desktrop screenshots it's clear that most people are unable to put together a beautiful desktop. I guess an effort like Elementary is for those intelligent enought to both recognise good design and that they themselves are unable to put it together.

    2. Re:what's the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      On the list of requirements for a desktop, "beautiful" is fairly low for most people.

      And instead of making a new "OS" or even messing with the desktop infrastructure, why not just come up with better themes and theme engines for one of the existing desktops? XFCE, for example, could benefit from such contributions but is technically already established and widely used.

    3. Re:what's the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the list of requirements for a desktop, "beautiful" is fairly low for most people.

      You are so very wrong about that. One of the main appeal of Apple products, cars, houses, clothes and even tools are their appearance. I'd say it's one of the main requirements despite all of the above being basically utility objects. Of course if it doesn't work it's ugly, but that's another matter.

  7. Sherlock Holmes response by nerdyalien · · Score: 1

    "Elementary, My Dear Watson!"

    1. Re:Sherlock Holmes response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and? Does Sherlock continue?

      "Elementary, My Dear Watson! Here is the obvious upgrade choice to your little problem... a Linux Mint disc."

    2. Re: Sherlock Holmes response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      stick mint and win 10 up your un pretty little bum! you must like a dirty toilet. ui of this interface is heavenly!. I understand your dissatisfaction with lack of core information but dear retardo linux elite nerd you wear a poo hat with a feather ontop because you are so bright. Get over it and enjoy it! by far one of the best UIs for linux out there! Elementary all the way. Go follow back to using your terminal commands and bashing away you turd muncher. peAce

  8. No Screenshots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just a image "Denied".

    They should fix their broken website, i even disabled adblock and noscript and it still does not work.

  9. GNOME Skinjob? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Is it just me or are those screenshots incredibly close to GNOME with some new design slapped on top?

  10. Yes, it includes systemd? by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    Not sure why people are so reluctant to simply answer the question.

    Practically all Linux distros include system. Only a few small, obscure, distros do not include systemd.

    1. Re:Yes, it includes systemd? by dAzED1 · · Score: 1

      the word you're looking for is "force," not "include." I started using Linux in 94, and I stopped when it was too much of a hassle to stay away from systemd.

    2. Re:Yes, it includes systemd? by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

      You are correct.

      FWIW: I am replying to you from my ex-Debian, now FreeBSD, box.

  11. Beauty = copy Apple aesthetics? by LichtSpektren · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Sorry, I don't particularly think elementaryOS is beautiful. It basically is just a knock-off of OS X's aesthetics. Midori is not a bad browser, but it doesn't have the same power as Chromium or Firefox; the creators only included it as the default because its UI is the same as Safari's. Same for its music player, control panel, and file manager. Plus there's a lot of annoyances abound in this distro, such as no preinstalled office suite (from what I can tell).

    Basically, it might be a good OS for the specific niche goal of needing Linux to wear the flesh of OS X, but beyond that, it's nothing special.

    1. Re:Beauty = copy Apple aesthetics? by Desler · · Score: 1

      It's not even a convincing clone of OS X. It has a passing similarity but beyond that the two aren't even remotely the same. There's far more to how OS X looks and feels beyond a dock and left-hand window buttons. This distro epitomizes cargo cult programming.

    2. Re:Beauty = copy Apple aesthetics? by hey! · · Score: 1

      I don't find it very mac-like either, but that's not necessarily a flaw. There's a lot of things I don't like about the Mac OSX GUI, starting with the stupid dock, which violates all the pre-MacOS X apple design guidelines; it's just shiny crap as far as I'm concerned; sure it works but it functions less well than the things it replaced.

      The essential, most important element of the Mac interface, pretty much since the original Mac 128K, is the way menus are handled, and ElementaryOS does not copy that. Sticking menus to the top of the screen make them much easier to hit, because you don't have to finely target the cursor in the Y axis to hit them; also unlike the dock they have horizontal positional stability.

      I wish they'd copied the OSX menus and and the Mac OS9 task/window menu and left the dock out.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    3. Re:Beauty = copy Apple aesthetics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't find it very mac-like either, but that's not necessarily a flaw.

      Sure, it's not. I just find bemusement at people trying to claim that Distro X, Y, Z are a like OS X when the similarities are only superficial at best. The distros think that making something work like OS X means you copy the dock and put the window buttons on the left. As if that's the sum total of how OS X window/program management differs.

      Canonical made the same mistake when they tried to copy features of OS X in Unity. It was then laughable that people then tried to say that Unity acted like OS X when it really didn't. Sure they aped the aesthetic but then didn't bring along all the secondary features that OS X has that makes the global menus actually usable.

    4. Re:Beauty = copy Apple aesthetics? by hey! · · Score: 2

      Er... copying the aesthetics is more likely to yield a beautiful result than copying the mechanics of the user interface -- not that they went very far on this other than the dock. I've been messing around with elementaryOS on parallels on my MacBook Pro and in fact I think the basic shell looks nicer than the Mac.

      As far as the office suite, well, it's an Ubuntu derived Linux; it has all the usual Linux office suite offerings: LibreOffice, Gnumeric, Abiword, Calligra, etc., plus the usual geeky oddballs like Lyx and Retext. You must "sudo apt-get install libreoffice", or if you prefer search in the software center. It doesn't include an office suite in the default installation, but from my point of view that's the way it should be done.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  12. Poser OS by jofas · · Score: 1

    Anyone fool enough to stick with Elementary will soon realize it's biggest drawback: you're locked out of everything. Want to hide all windows? Nope, but they suggest switching to another virtual desktop. How moronic. Any other questions on functions solved elegantly in nearly all other distros? "We're working on a fix." Elementary is garbage designed by fools. So don't even worry about the UI, cause you don't have a choice anyway; they choose the aesthetic and that's that.

    1. Re:Poser OS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would give my right arm (okay, maybe only my left non-mouse arm) for a modern GUI that respects the principle that the User Is In Control!

      This includes OS X too.

  13. This makes me furious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This flood of discussion about stuff I only have a passing curiosity about means I miss things that are actually really cool. Why am I just now learning about Alpine?!

    Alpine looks like exactly what I've wanted dozens of times over the years and my favorite minimal hardened distros all seemed to disappear so I've been falling back to minimal RHEL/CentOS systems when I could have been using something designed to be secure and minimal, like I want, for five years!

    Thanks other AC for mentioning it. Better late than never for me.

  14. Re:Grey text, icons without buttons... by Desler · · Score: 1

    No they don't. They're cargo cult programmers.

  15. Dump windows? WTF? by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    > This is the OS I'm going to dump Windows for.

    I hate MS. I am using FreeBSD.

    But to dump windows because you like the look of the interface of a Linux distro makes no sense at all.

    When I run Windows, it is because Windows runs the apps that FreeBSD won't. Or, in rare cases, because windows works with the hardware that FreeBSD won't.

    1. Re:Dump windows? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But to dump windows because you like the look of the interface of a Linux distro makes no sense at all.

      It makes complete sense. Up until now, Linux was superior to Windows in every single way. Now even the UI is vastly superior.

      Have fun with your Windows BSODs and viruses, tool.