Linked by David Adams on Mon 24th Aug 2009 09:21 UTC
Linux A reader asks: Why is Linux still not as user friendly as the two other main OSes with all the people developing for Linux? Is it because it is mainly developed by geeks? My initial feeling when reading this question was that it was kind of a throwaway, kind of a slam in disguise as a genuine question. But the more I thought about it, the more intrigued I felt. There truly are a large amount of resources being dedicated to the development of Linux and its operating system halo (DEs, drivers, apps, etc). Some of these resources are from large companies (IBM, Red Hat, Novell). Why isn't Linux more user-friendly? Is this an inherent limitation with open source software?
Thread beginning with comment 380267
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Please rephrase the question.
by vivainio on Mon 24th Aug 2009 14:25 UTC in reply to "Please rephrase the question."
Member since:

Some time ago a Windows user friend asked me how to use ITunes(Version 6 i think, or maybe 7) to rip the audio cd that was in his cd-rom drive. Well after having spendt 15 minutes, looking around in the entire interface, I simply had to give up, and said he should use some other software, because I could not find that function in iTunes.

I also tried the windows version of iTunes to see what all the noise is about, and thought that if this is where the "state of the art" for UI design is at, Linux has absolutely nothing to worry about. It was a slow pig with unexciting UI.

For slick UI's, Qt Creator is the one to learn from:

Reply Parent Score: 2

Wrawrat Member since:

Well, it looks good at the first glance... but its UI doesn't match the theme of your OS and "slick" becomes "cumbersome" when you use the window designer. It's not a bad IDE, but it lacks maturity. Sometimes, SDI/floating windows are more functional/easier to use than MDI.

Reply Parent Score: 2