Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 16th May 2007 09:40 UTC, submitted by Carl
Thread beginning with comment 240720
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.






Member since:
2006-12-05
"People only want icons on the desktop b/c they come from the Windows-land. If you really think about it - you have to minimize most of your current windows before you can get to the icons - that's really an interruption of workflow."
I admit, I've been a Windows user since '97 (started with Win95, of course), so I do like icons. In the past my desktop has become a usability nightmare, though in more recent years I only have the programs I most often use on it, and arranged in a certain way. With a high enough resolution (1600x1200 in my case) and well-placed icons, however, the icons rarely get covered. Each window normally saves its position on the screen, and tends to re-open where it last was.
Still, I've been using Linux (Zenwalk) almost exclusively for probably around a year or more, and tend to prefer an icon-free desktop now, preferring a simple right-click anywhere or the bottom icon panel. Icons on the desktop aren't exactly "bad," and sometimes can be useful (I still like them on some environments). One thing's for sure: I would never use a Windows machine without My Computer and the Recycle Bin on the desktop.
Windows' biggest problem with desktop icons is the fact that practically every program... even system maintenance tools like disk defragmenters and disk cleanup tools (like CCleaner) install an icon to the desktop by default. That, I hate.