Is there a linux distro that doesn't look like ass
Are there FLOSS devs out there who can spell "usability" "consistency" "aesthetics"
no?
>>51285956
Yes, there are. They are also the kind of people that instead of creating a GTK theme and icon pack decide to spin-off a whole new DE + distro. See elementary.
>>51286100
meh. those projects usually fail due to too little support / devs. sux
>>51285956
anything but unity
/thread
>>51285956
https://numixproject.org/
>>51285956
Have you tried Gnome?
>>51285956
i'll recommend openSUSE leap with KDE
They're programmers, not designers. They may know to create dank code but they barely know about usability, even work in groups. That's why the Linux scene is so shitty with "me too!" failures, why we have 20 fucking DEs and 300 distros. Everybody wants to be the boss, and everyone wants to make the rules. This destroys the little consistency and integration that we have in our Linux system, and causes a lot of problems, more than just design issues. Installing a fucking DE core packages just to use X program because you're using a different DE, or developers having to reinvent the wheel every 3-4 years because is easier to start again and make a fork than to fix what it is broken.
What is worse is that this affects why 3rd parties doesn't make shit for Linux too. Every fucking distro places his files whenever they want and use elements without any fucking standard.
Linux sucks, anon. Get used to it and enjoy your freedoms. Terminal emulators never change and look dank, check a Desktop thread and copy any silly post you see, you may make your desktop look pretty... Until you open your file explorer and realize Linux still looks shit on the inside.
>>51286465
>>51286338
devs are indians, kek yourself
________________________________________
/ GNU/Linux will never have a standard \
| and nice DE/distro that everyone wants |
| to use But instead, we get over 9000 |
| crap distros and over 72 WM/DEs shit |
| instead |
| |
| :( |
| |
| "Desktop year of Linux: Never" - Linus |
\ Torvolds /
----------------------------------------
\ ^__^
\ (oo)\_______
(__)\ )\/\
||----w |
|| ||
elementary OS is quite pretty, it's just a shame that it's nearly unusable / made by retards
>>51285956
Linux distros try to look like Windows 10 so they're going to have the same consistency issues.
>>51286465
Gnome is pretty good.
>muh aesthetics
Windows and OS X look like shit by default as well.
This is one of the reasons people who know their shit usually don't use linux outside their work. A certain wannabe hacker internet club will tell you otherwise though.
>>51286781
>osx looks like shit by default
lol no
>>51286823
Enjoy your traffic lights.
>>51285956
you can literally do whatever the fuck you want with a freedom respecting system. why are you whining?
it is even remotely meaningless with distro you use. if you chose a distro for its looks, damn nigger, i have bad news for you.
fuck off nigger cunt
>>51286837
whatever you think of the aesthetic details there's consistency amongst the interface of all the programs on OSX and more recently even on windows with the exception of that metro crap
linux has ten thousand toolkits one of them looking more cancerous than the next
>>51286848
> i want a fully functioning car
> "here's an open source tricycle you can literally do whatever the fuck you want with it why are you whining"
>>51286921
>linux has ten thousand toolkits
GTK and QT are 99% of applications and can be configured easily to mimic each other.
>>51286940
sorry i forgot window managers, docks, toolbars, shells, ...
>>51286967
>choice is bad
Just pick what you like; it's not that hard.
you could just use redmond or raleigh, instead of flapping your hands and shitting everywhere when the UI suffers one of the many defects brought on by fancy flat shit and rounded corners
>>51285956
Is numix seriously the best people can do for linux icons? If i made a better icon set would you guys use it?
>>51286338
>pay for themes
Fuck these indians!
>>51287025
the problem is that no one distro has actually developed their own toolkit, wm, etc so it's inevitably clusterfuck
>>51287086
you dont understand what i said.
>>51287290
I use evopop icon pack. I dont wanna pay indians for a fucking icon theme. Furthermore gtk-theme-arc is far superior than its numix counterparts.
>>51287349
What if I made a better icon pack than that? You have to admit they're all lacking somewhat
>>51287298
>no one distro has actually developed their own toolkit, wm, etc
Why the fuck would you want that? Yes, any DE is bits and pieces of separate projects. That doesn't make it anymore of a clusterfuck than Windows.
>>51285956
>>51287429
yes it does. think a little for fucks sake
>>51287391
Krishna, pls go
>>51286938
>my whole OS is literally how it looks
>because fuck functionality
/wdg/ called, wanted its faggot frontend dev back. Said also to bring its macbook for the ultimate cúckery
>>51286465
3.18 is looking really great out of the box. I finally feel like I don't have to mess around with themes for my system to look nice.
>>51287687
>discussion about UI
>gets salty when people talk about UI
"how it looks" directly translates to how usable it is
retard
>>51287661
>implying windows isn't just a bunch of pieces developed separately stuck together
The difference is that there's a microsoft logo over all of it.
Also, it doesn't really matter.
>>51287738
Linux is not about the UI, it's about having control and making choices. If you don't like it, - feel free to fuck off to the apple ecosystem. The open source community has so much whiners about literally everything it hurts. If only 1% of them actually contributed, then MAYBE there were less to whine about in first place.
>>51287751
>>51287799
>it's about having control and making choices.
>it's okay if all the choices are basically complete shit
>noone is allowed to say anything about it
>it may be shit but it's our shit
>i feel so in control when i sudobash into my diddely homefolder
autism
>>51287876
How are the UI choices any worse than OS X or windows?
>>51287914
i explained multiple times. inconsistency everywhere.
one example..., completely different context menus in different programs. not just different options but a different look, structure, logic to the order
>>51287971
Windows has way more inconsistency than GNU/Linux.
>>51287989
i dont like windows, but no it doesnt.
ITT: Linux apologists
>>51288008
Nonsense. The UIs on Windows look like whatever the hell developers want. That's fine, but programs look radically different. On GNU/Linux, most applications are either GTK or QT and they can be configured to look the same. This is far more consistency than what is achievable on windows.
>>51287989
kek yeah ok
Kubuntu looks nice out of the box
>>51288030
no it doesn't. you're probably blind, that's okay.
>>51287876
Nigga if you don't like an UI contribute to it. Man up and solve your own problems.
I did not like the whole idea of stacking windows around the whole fucking screen, so I installed i3 and I'm happy now. I did not like startpage's colors, so I went to userstyles and downloaded a custom one.
Considering that you spend so much time in front of your UI, at least make it usable. No one is going to do that for you.
>>51288056
Windows is a clusterfuck of 2000 UIs and whatever their modern interface is now. It's extremely inconsistent.
>>51288065
>Nigga if you don't like an UI contribute to it.
i posted so many mockups that never even got looked at. noone really seems to care. that's the problem. a company like canonical or redhat could afford a UI guy, they just dont give a crap
>>51288079
it's the windows 7 interface and metro and that's it
on linux you have gtk, qt and some others and there's not even a logic to when they're used (at least metro has a purpose, in theory)
>>51288100
you have no idea what does "solving your own problems" mean, don't you?
WRITE
A
FUKKEN
PIECE
OF
CODE
A mockup is not a contribution.
And, please, do not tell me that you can't program, - that's not allowed on /g/.
>>51288100
No, applications can look like anything. Windows can have gtk, qt, windows 7, legacy interfaces, metro, etc. That's why you can have foobar, firefox, and some modern app all on the same system. That's highly inconsistent in terms of looks.
And again, gtk and qt can be configured to look the same and that's like 90% of linux applications. That's actually reasonable consistency.
>>51288140
>A design is not a contribution.
you are aware that normal tech companies have designers to do the UI and interface shit and they're actually well compensated
there's a reason this is a thing
i'm not gonna rewrite my whole fucking OS
>>51288100
>>51288175
>Windows can have gtk, qt, windows 7, legacy interfaces, metro, etc.
yes, in theory, yet in practice you can open 10 programs that come pre-installed or are sold / distributed freely by windows and there'll be a level of consistency
try doing that on a vanilla ubuntu / redhat / suse / whatever install
elementary OS is getting there, but they lack resources
>>51288207
fair enough, that is a clusterfuck ... i stand corrected. mostly using OSX these days
>>51287296
no need to pay. download them from antergos.
>>51288233
>try doing that on a vanilla ubuntu / redhat / suse / whatever install
I don't know what you're talking about. The DEs for these distros are all plenty consistent by default. Certainly more so than >>51288207
>>51288189
you don't need to. The other day I didn't like the fact that my qt4/qt5 applications were really ugly compared to my gtk2/3 ones, - after some googling around I emerged qtcurve and made necessary adjustments by myself. All of this in 2 fucking hours of my free time, because I had nothing to do.
What's that thing that you don't like in your gtk interface? I'm pretty sure that you can pick an already existing theme and edit something in it so you can get the result you want.
>>51288049
>KDE looks nice
It never did. I remember cringing in 1998 or something and it still has the same outdated look.
>>51285956
Distros that don't look like anus and could pass as a main OS for a regular user:
http://kaosx.us/
https://solus-project.com/
http://antergos.com/
https://elementary.io/
https://apricityos.com/
http://zorinos.com/
>>51288908
>antergos
>elementary
>apricity
:^)
>>51288233
a vanilla Ubuntu install generally just has GTK2 and GTK3 differences and settings pages look relatively consistent
if you're using a QT based desktop, you may have more or less consistency (loads of shit uses GTK2/3 instead of QT, but QT is pretty damn good about matching GTK styles to look right)
even a vanilla Xubuntu install isn't too bad about that, even if it spreads its settings around for no reason and has a mild lack of polish in places
a vanilla Windows install has a selection of dialogs that feature the full spectrum of Windows UI styles, there's dialogs that go all the way back to NT3.5 and maybe 3.1 in Windows 8 (a very small handful are left in 8, there were a fair few more in 7) next to Windows 2000/XP-style webby settings and Vista/7 style settings and then Metro-style full screen settings pages
as for programs, most things look similar, based on age -- you'll get a handful of programs that use Win95 era 3D buttons and then some programs with normal XP-onward themed buttons and then .NET applications look slightly different (for no reason other than odd default metrics).
>>51285956
Out of the box, I somewhat like what Xubuntu looks like.
a lot of devs definitely seem to totally ignore usability, consistency, and aesthetics though (loads of GTK software is big and ugly with dialogs that take up a shit-ton of space for no reason)
that's an issue with free as in beer software in general, not just FLOSS stuff -- pro software tends towards having consistent UI because that shit went through actual UI testing (I say tends, Windows 8 has a stupid amount of spots where it's like they didn't do any UI testing at all)
>>51286823
Look like shit? Wouldn't go quite that far.
but it doesn't look terribly nice
I still think 10.4 is the nicest OSX has ever looked, even if it looks a bit dated now. 10.5-10.9's more flat metallic look turned me off. 10.10/10.11's iOS-style UI is kind of bleh -- not unappealing, but really fucking boring.
>>51287626
>AC chargers
Phones are now almost entirely standardised USB.
>character encodings
If you don't use UTF8 you are a cluck.
>etc
I'm sure there is more where people actually have adopted a universal standard.
Linux would be popular overnight if it could run Android apps.
>>51289434
Linux runs android applications literally every day.
>>51287296
>>51286590
>devs are indians
>literally only one is indian
>the others are white
>one of them seems to be 12
Apricity OS looks bretty gud out of the box.
It has the widely used Numix icons, along with the widely used Arc GTK theme.
Yeah. Every single distro in existence. It doesn't matter. Get XFCE or a standalone WM, configure it to your liking and there you go.
>>51288908
I'm also digging this new distro still in development: http://papyros.io/
>Linux is bad because my subjective opinion which I'm pretending is objective
Faggots, women, niggers and Mac users literally have a problem with aesthetic relativism. They literally have trouble realising that their opinion is just that.
BTW senpai you can make Linux look however the fuck you like
>>51285956
>Complaining about aesthtics as if that is objective rather then subjective nonsense.
I don't understand this world. Why does the out of the box experience matter in OS that allows you to make your OS work the way that you want it to.
It's like complaining about touchwiz on your Samsung phone when you can flash it.
>>51286799
>people who "know their shit"
>caring about muhhh autismal inconsistencies
yeah ok anon.
only 4chan autists care about this shit, look at how inconsistent Windows and OS X are, do people care?
>>51285956
>Is there a linux distro that doesn't look like ass
Like, 90% of the popular ones?
Ricing isn't hard though, senpai. Learn to fucking use your brain, shithead.
>>51286823
I bet you like how shit looks in your hands?
>>51288233
>>Windows can have gtk, qt, windows 7, legacy interfaces, metro, etc.
Two of those aren't even different applications, anon. You're talking out of your ass, you retared winfag.
Go to the rice thread and see some linux desktops that actually do have consistency.
Why the fuck would I care if my icons are glossy or not is beyond me
Besides, funny thing is that macfag hipsters love all retro shit like nes and old casio watches, but they seem to have problenms with old school guis like mate or whatnot
As if a fucking gui made you better or something
>>51285956
What's wrong with OP pic? Looks fine to me.
Also in the Linux world it is mostly left to the user to design his desktop by using different themes, iconsets etc. So if you don't like an aspect of your desktop you just change it instead of whining like a bitch.
Distros that are tailored around a certain look should always seen as an offer or proposal by the developers never as a standard one has to stick to at all cost.
>>51285956
>unity isn't fucking gorgeous
>>51285956
gnome+arc+not-shit-icon-pack
Lel no. Loonix is for autists and poorfags kek. Those losers dont need (or want) aesthetics or usability lol.
>>51286610
Thats true
Just install El Capitan
>>51285956
Search for arc theme, it's beautiful
Why do these bait threads get so many replies? You autists really can't control yourselves?
>>51285956
Yes.
Yes.
/thread
The problem itself right now on the linux world is that the main players are already stablished and there's absolutely NOTHING you can contribute with spining out yet another distro that cannot be done by distributing packages for the current popular ones.
Anything but the main distros (Debian, RH/Fedora, Arch, Slack) and their user-friendly(er) derivatives (Ubuntu family, Mint, Open SuSe, Antergos...) plus some actually legit specialized stuff should be nuked from orbit and fags claiming "hey look at my oh-so-new-and-pretty minimalist distro which is nothing more than a Debian netinstall + i3" should be publicly shamed and ridiculed.
>>51293734
Some random examples from distrowatch
>Stella is a CentOS-based Linux distribution with focus on user-friendly desktop computing with GNOME 2 and out-of-the-box support for many popular multimedia formats. Besides standard upstream software, the project also maintains its own repository containing LibreOffice and a variety of useful desktop applications.
>The OpenMandriva distribution is a full-featured Linux desktop and server, sponsored by the OpenMandriva Association. It is based on ROSA, a Russian Linux distribution project which forked Mandriva Linux in 2012, incorporating many of Mandriva's original tools and utilities and adding in-house enhancements. The goal of OpenMandriva is to facilitate the creation, improvement, promotion and distribution of free and open-source software in general, and OpenMandriva projects in particular.
>Frugalware Linux is an independently developed general purpose desktop Linux distribution designed for intermediate users. It follows simple Slackware-like design concepts and includes the "pacman" package management utility from Arch Linux.
>The siduction distribution is a desktop-oriented operating system and live medium based on the "unstable" branch of Debian GNU/Linux. Forked from aptosid in late 2011, siduction offers three separate live media with KDE, LXDE and Xfce desktops. The project also promises regular releases, an open development model, and friendly relationship with its developer and user community.
Are you really shitting me?
>>51287876
>it's okay if all the choices are basically complete shit
This isn't true but okay anon.
