Nowadays Windows is filled with adware and is fairly slow, but it wasn’t always like this. Was there a particular time where a change occurred?
Nowadays Windows is filled with adware and is fairly slow, but it wasn’t always like this. Was there a particular time where a change occurred?
Like the other user said, KDE is more windows-like and my preference. Regardless, you’re using a different operating system and desktop environment. It’s going to want to do things in a different way that you’re used to. You can wrestle whatever Linux distro you choose to behave more like Windows, but you’re better off learning what it does differently and using it how it was intended. That’s the biggest issue I see with people switching. They want a Windows copy, but it isn’t Windows and shouldn’t be expected to be. You had to learn Windows at some point. You’ll have to learn Linux and whatever DE you choose.
The point is not that it’s different to what I’m used to. The point is this design decision takes what is fundamentally just adding shortcuts into a folder structure and completely rewrites the interface for no reason. And then it didn’t even work. I did all that work just to hit a brick wall.
You told me it’s likely easier than I expect. Well, I am telling you that I know exactly what to expect because I am currently doing it, and it’s not just hard. It is perverse.
Like honestly I wouldn’t be surprised if groups like Microsoft are deliberately sabotaging the user experience by adding shit like this. Not putting in deliberate security flaws, but deliberate design flaws. There certainly seems to be no sense of quality assurance when accepting one or another system as the way things are done.
How do you know that’s what it is fundamentally? For Windows that’s true, but probably not for Gnome. For KDE I can just install a package with the package manager and it’s automatically in the search system. I don’t know how it’s doing it fundamentally, but it isn’t the way Windows does it for sure because it doesn’t require me touching it like Windows does.
Again, I have no idea what you’re doing or interacting with, so I can’t comment directly. For me personally, it works very well without much messing with it, while Windows required a bunch of registry edits and other things to make it work how I wanted. You just have to accept it for what it is and learn how to use it. It will take time to learn how it wants to work, not how you want it to work. It is literally perverse to try to force it to work like Windows instead of learning the new system.
If you’ve only driven a car, you’re probably going to find it rough driving a motercycle like a car. You’re best off learning how to drive the motercycle the way it was designed to work.
KDE is almost certainly more your style though. I know I didn’t like gnome when I tried it a long time ago. Hopefully KDE fixes your issues, but it’s still not Windows and you have to remember that. It will take time to learn how it wants you to use it.
The metaphor is exactly the same as files and folders. That part is transparent, you don’t need access to internal implementation details to understand it. The Main Menu program allows you to make “groups” which are no different than folders and “items” which are just shortcuts. For reasons completely lost on me, the files that represent these groups and folders exist flat in a single folder on the drive.
So they reimplemented a folder structure using a markup language and then implemented an entirely bespoke interface to manipulate them. Then you have to search for what it’s called and install it, and then it crashes anyway. It’s just strange.
And you’re the second person telling me it should just be automatic with installation even though I specifically said I was making custom changes to the menu. I want to add things that aren’t part of a standard installer. This should be a simple operation for a power user.