Partially I agree with you, ayleid96, and I partially disagree with you.
Which software (OS, GUI, DE, IDE, editors, games,.... under what OS (Windows [I fully and unconditionally agree ? ], Linux [which distri?], FreeBSD...?) do you mean particulary?
One cannot simply say software gets worse, generally.
One point you have to see is:
Is the software to be sold to computermorons, or is it for pros?
In the first case all what matters is the very first impression.
When the software is sold nobody gives a damn about how satisfied you are with it (games are the most best example.)
And of course nobody spent money, sometimes thousands of $ for some license, and then agrees he bought cr#p ?
Especially when they don't know better, people tend to stay with the cr#p they know, and compare anything with it.
For pros software has to be above all one thing:
Efficient in usage - get the most output at the highest quality for the least effort.
Sadly it's a law of nature that this means learning effort.
Of course there are always still unsolved problems.
Like in any other project there are schedules to meet, which mean sometimes things stay uncorrected, sometimes forever.
Most of the times salesmen are in charge. When a thing is sold, in their eyes the job is done. Don't come a salesmen with such things as maintenance or even "we agreed to publish knee-jerked, but there are still issues unsolved that will come back badly if do nothing about it.
They don't even know what you're talking about. Your job is to do the next cr#p on the hoof.
Thus: Opensource, where experts are (shall be) in charge. There are also issues here, of course, like to solve one single, very individual prob only, or drop the sh1t unfinished, e.g. becasue if being p1ssed off, or overestimated of the amount of work, and the disagreement within a team about which things to do how.
And another not really solved issue with software since the dawn of computers is (nearly) no programmer neither want to do proper documentions (many misbelieve if the code runs their job is done), so that also 'lazy, incompetent morons' would understand it, too, nor are willing to accept that if the documentation is insuffiecient so is their software - worst case unusable at all.
Because if software is not made for personal private use only, nobody else can use it if the doc is incomplete, lags behind or is just bad.
And no annoying tooltips spam can fix that.
I think, it's not the software per se, which annoys you, and me, and many others,
it's the concept.
I fully agree with mer
"You've moved your mousepointer! If you move your mousepointer, the mousepointer will not be on the same spot as it was before. If you don't to save the current position of your mousepointer, the current postion is lost forever?"
?
Nobody not having already lost all his marbles has any use for such cr#p.
...but who knows what future software come up with...
App. 90% of all computerusers would say:"Why? What are you so p1553d about it? This is great!"
No. It's not. It's pure uselesses cattle fieces, that's what it is.
And modern -
turn key - systems and browsers drown in such shit.
(I sometimes get the feeling, instead off to lay off the programmers not used anymore (or put them on some other project), they to make up useless features because for most customers the pure number of features is all what counts, thus trashing up formerly exemplary stuff.)
What do I mean with 'concept':
I've worked on many Windows machines on nearly all version until 7.
Then I turned my back on this sh1t and use FreeBSD only.
The things that p155ed me under Windows were many:
- I do not need a 'waste paper basket'. If I want to delete a file I want to delete it, not having an argument with my computer. In the last 40 years I'm using computers I presumbly had three or four occasions when I was actually glad to have that 'waste paper bin'. But It would be no catastrophy either, because I had backups. But to serve this sh1t I had several hundreds thousands of times to click:'no, delete ist, but since there is only the bin, so yes, into the basket,' 'yes, empty it,' 'yes, I know, that's exactly what I want to do, so yes do it for f*§&$( sake!!'
- I do not need several places where to start a program from (Start-Menu, Quickstart Bar, desktop icon, favorites, most often used, recently used, recently installed..).
- I need one. And one only.
- I do not need any menus trashed up with functions I do not need nor use, and always searching the function I want to use in them overloaded cr#p.
- And I want to get rid off all this superfluid rubbish I do not need, I do not want.
- I do not find the Windows environment intiutively usable. I find it unlogically structured, and it's trashed up.
- I wnat to configure it to my needs.
- But with Windows, you can't. You still have to think into something other defined for to suit everbody which does not.
- I do not find most of Window's errors messages helpful at all. In many case they do net help me to solve the problem. Most often they only make me feel the system mocks me.
- With every new version the cr#p is new structured, other look and feel, named otherwise, organized otherwise, more unlogical, and more trashed up, and you gaian need some effort to get into it (learning Windows new again and again. That's per se bs!)
- And you cannot change it, really. You have to stay with it is as it were.
- What you can do is change the optics. Great! There are zillions of options, how the sh1t looks like, colorsets, window decorations, wallpapers, and most view pioint of Windows is, that those a easily and quickly changed. (I need want and use a monocolor background, only, I have no need for 'artistic wallpapers', particulary no movies running in the background, and especially not the need to dowlonad more of this rubbish. I have to work with my machine, not look at it, or belive some kiddies would be impressed bay some gothic-metal-fantasy pic used to be the backgriund) I have no use for this. I need one single setup, and one setup only - my setup, and I hope the way I configured it stays unchanged for as long as possible (decades, at best forever. [what is another reason for to not judge 'old' software as to bad because it's 'old', but see it to be mature, so reliable, proven to be useful, stays at it is, no need to care about already solved problems again and again, but focus on other, new probs - getting forward, not being held behind becuase you have to learn the same sh1t over and over again.])
- I don't need all this. And I do not want this. I must not have it.
- But you cannot edit all this, drop out all the useless crap:"don't need that, don't want that, useless redundant, superfluid,..." and especially not change the concept of Windows at all.
This the concept of Windows - in my eyes (one my lengthen this list far more, but I do not want to talk about Windows, I want to talk concept, especially unix.
And since Windows is used on app. 90% of all computers, and app. 80% of all users never saw anything else and don't care,
sadly this became the gold standard.
So trying to copy this, even with the intension to make it better, in my eys is a bad fault.
You must not pimp up crep.
Crep is something you must get rid off, and focus on something else.
When KDE started in the late 90s the officially claimed intention for it was to create a DE (first under Linux), that feels more like Windows,
to make newbs coming from Windows feel more at home directly, not to scare them of.
And that's what you all still recognize when you do a default installation of KDE:
It's like Windows - the same sh1t.
A bloated, overloaded, unlogical, trashed up mess with waste basket, and menus, and start-menus containg serveral reduntend entries for anything and lots of verbiage.
I do not need twelve texteditors, I need one, only.
I do no need seven calculators, I need one, only.
....
At least with KDE you can throw out anything, you don't want, and add other stuff.
But it stays KDE.
Well, KDE has many satisfied users, but not me.
Way too much stuff I know hate about Windows.
Gnome - at least the 'older versions' I knew came up with another concept:
It has its own logical structure, differ from Windows, and it's trying to be a complete DE in a consistent gush: one editor, one calculator, one mediaplayer etc. all gnome.
At leat also with gnome you can configurate a lot, but it still stays Gnome.
Gnome has many satisfied users, but nor me.
So, one day I figured out:
- There is (a lot) more than Windows, KDE and Gnome, only.
- And one has to distinguish between a windowmanager and a DE. (To be complete you als have to distinguish between X and Wayland.)
I then worked with LXDE and xfce for a while, played a bit with Mate, and others (already all under FreeBSD, of course.)
And none of those really satisfied me:
- There are still things I don't need/want, but cannot get rid off.
- There still is a limitation how I may configure it to my taste.
- I cannot change the structure - the concept.
- Many of those DEs real configurations are often done within convoluted trees of XML-files. To me XML is a knock-out criteria. You must not use XML for anything but officefiles-cr#p (if even)!
One day I realized:
I do not want/need a DE at all.
A windowsmanager would be fully sufficient.
Advantage: Not so much of a concept at all, but a great many choices to create one yourself.
- I just need a GUI for some programs (e.g. firefox)
- I appreciate the possibility to have well readable terminals, freely arrangable
- I only get what I installed - bottom up: you start with a (nearly) blank sheet of paper, and add what you need, only. In the contrary top-down: you get a bunchload of cr#p installed, trashing up your desktop in the first place, and then need to cleam up the mess, get rid off all you don't need, and still needs to add, what you really want.
So I ended up with fvwm2.
There are many others, more or less complex, more or less easy to configurate (some had already mentioned in this thread.)
Give the one or the other a try!
If your primary issue is not that it looks most colorful ('exploded candy-shop'), but to be efficient in usage, and tailorable to the max. for your needs, those are your friend!
The disadvantage is, it's not autoconfigured, you need to dig into it.
But in most cases it's no rocketscience neither.
(And it's worth to dig into, because they stay.)
The advantages are:
- You may get exactly what want, tailored the way you wants it to the point exactly.
- You can end the endless, and unsatisfying quest of your search of the holy grail - the automatically preconfigured turnkey environment/system that exactly fits your individual needs exactly. Because having something that fits many but also perfectly you is quasi impossible.
So,
bottom line:
My advice would be to
rethink the concept first:
- Define what you (really) need
- What you don't need, not want to have
And then look for alternatives - bottom-up.
FreeBSD for me is the best platform I know to do exactly that. Because it's very nature it is bottom-up, modular, highly configurable, and tailorable to the point precisely.
But it does not come automatically, as I just explained. You have to dig into it.
With FreeBSD especially considering VMs you have nearly all possibilities to do anything with your computer a today's machine is capable of. You have a wide, at least absolutely sufficient choices of software you may pick from (even cr#p), (I daresay for open source nearly quite complete.[yeah, I know - don't start a discussion about that here, but there are way than enough choices.)
But
you have to define your concept.
And put a bit effort to it.
Last examples:
I was nearly unsatisfied with nearly any filemanager.
Then I realized, it's not there are no good filemanagers, the concept of a filemanagers per se sucks.
I do have a shell.
If you learned to use the shell (and I am far away from calling meself an expert, for sure not!)
you'll learn you don't need no fm at all.
For small tasks like copying, removing, renaming a single file - which is (at least for me) the most often task, I've already done the job, before the fm has even got up.
And for complex tasks, e.g. renaming twohundred files within a dir, you'll better use the shell anyway, with a fm you'll go nuts in no time ?
So after testing out several fm I have none installed anymore.
Two weeks ago I got rid off my desktop calculators.
I now use wcalc (It's not that professionell mathematicians one like calc, but I simply don't need more. It calulates angles by default in degrees and not radiant [I did not figure out where in calc I could change that, if even] and it quits by just pressing 'q', not by typing 'exit'.)
But since most of the time I just need only two or three numbers quickly calculated, I am way quicker using a shell's calculater than driving mousekilometers within a GUI...)
For programming I often just need to quickly translate a hex-value to decimal, or vice versa.
I did not found any (me) satisfying tool (GUI Calculator, Web page... it's all very slow compared to a shell.
So I 'programmed' me two very small nano-scripts:
#!/bin/sh
printf "%d\n" 0x$1
exit 0
hex2dez.sh
and
#!/bin/sh
printf "%x\n" $1
exit 0
dez2hex.sh
and for each put an alias in my .cshrc
So now I just call that small command in the shell with a value and I get my translation quicker than consulting a calculator or even any webpage.
Of course, this is not to be ment 'great programming, dude...', nor to be usable for anybody.
The reason why I put this here is as for to be antoher example to think unix:
Grasp the concept of unix!
Don't you look for everything always for the finished available, turnkey solution (That's Windows' style.)
Become aware you are sitting on front of a system which origin concept is make the user capable of helping himself, tailor his own solutions, and offering lot of tools to do so.
This may not look always very well - if I want to know what's the sum of two values are, I don't care if the calculator looks like some retro-LED-display, I just need the value.
Often enough it's quicker to build your own solution than to search, install, deinstall.....
So again, grasp the concept of unix:
Learn those tools rather than search for software only.
My experience is, in the long term you will be more satisfied, and get a more powerful machine.
Grasp and define you concept first.
Be ready for to experiment and learn a bit (man pages are a goldmine!)
Test out some software, which suits.
Don't prejudge too quickly.
Do an proper evaluation process befor you install something.
Always consider:
Maybe the quicker and better solutions lies within you write a small script.
Else:
Give the software a chance - dig a bit into it, before you finally decide.
Be ready to let go learned concepts and be open for other concepts.
Do not challenge the software only, impeach yourself's concept.
Redefine your concept(s), again and again.
Impeach what you've learned, what stays, what new to be learned would be worth at least a try.
You'll find out quickly,
there is no all bad cr#p getting worse, only.
There is a great many choices of really good programs, smart and clever.
And under FreeBSD you have the best starting conditions for that in the first place.
Sorry for that long answer, but I'm always thinking of other people with similar questions reading a thread on their quest for answers.
And some things (e.g. general statements) are not be answered shortly ?
So, peace out!
