. The race of a voice actor doesn’t matter

. It is possible to wear yoga pants because there comfy

. You don’t need to shower everyday

. It is possible to crossdress/be gender non-conforming without being trans

. Monty Python is very overrated

  • dblsaiko@discuss.tchncs.de
    15·
    11 hours ago

    My three operating system hills:

    • Windows peaked with 2000 (design-wise) and XP (functionality-wise)
    • macOS’ separation of the application vs window concepts — i.e. an app has exactly one menu bar and dock icon, and is expected to be able to stay open without any windows (without needing nonsense like tray icons) — is much better than anything else and it sucks nobody is copying it
    • Flatpak and everything related is atrocious architecture-wise in every single way and it’s a massive condemnation of Linux (desktop)’s compatibility state that it actually solves a real problem
    • Trimatrix@lemmy.world
      13·
      11 hours ago

      I declare war on this hill!

      • Peak windows was Windows 7 in both design and Function. It was pinnacle User Experience of a traditional OS before Microsoft started chasing fads, (Touchscreens in Windows 8, Cloud integration in Windows 10, and now AI bullshit in Windows 11)
      • No opinion on macOS. My only complaint is that its not linux.
      • Instead of Flatpak I would replace that with AppImages. At least with Flatpak I get some semblance of the SW Integrating with my DE and a semblance of a package manager. AppImages I feel like are like rolling the dice on how much effort the dev put into it.
      • dblsaiko@discuss.tchncs.de
        2·
        1 hour ago

        I might give you Windows 7 on functionality, it has been forever since I used either. But definitely not design. 2000 has a UI that is consistent throughout, clear, and professional. It’s a masterclass in UI usability engineering. Plus it’s also heavily customizable if you want to do so. A lot of that was lost with Vista and some with XP.

        AppImages are precompiled archives with extra steps. Meh. No, some of my problems with Flatpak are:

        • it conflates app sandboxing with app distribution
        • it mandates using bespoke APIs to work in sandbox mode instead of the established APIs (to the point where I’ve heard “we can’t implement X, it needs to work in Flatpak”)
        • these APIs are often very Flatpak-focused but regardless become the standard for non-Flatpak because there is no existing alternative
        • it ships its own builds of code that should be part of the system (for example, UI toolkits which would otherwise load global plugins, breaking stuff such as IME or themes)

        Some of that (and why it’s necessary in the first place) is due to Linux’s incredible fragmentation and lack of an extensive backwards-compatible system API (such as macOS’s Cocoa), which causes a lot of other problems everywhere – but a lot of it is also self-inflicted. In fact, the massive focus on Flatpak and looking like that is the direction the Linux desktop is going was partly what drove me to try out a Mac.

      • SoulWager@lemmy.ml
        1·
        4 hours ago

        No opinion on macOS. My only complaint is that its not linux.

        Peak MacOS was 10.4. Before they started compromising on desktop UX to make it more familiar to mobile users. You could put a folder in the dock, right click it and navigate the file hierarchy right there in the context menus. Same for dragging files into a subfolder there.

        • dblsaiko@discuss.tchncs.de
          1·
          1 hour ago

          I’m partially very sad but also kinda glad that I never got to use 10.4 or other previous versions (first one I used was Ventura). The more I hear about it, the more it sounds like I would have absolutely loved it and would be incredibly mad right now at the changes they made since.

      • ulterno@programming.devEnglish
        2·
        5 hours ago
        AppImages I feel like are like rolling the dice on how much effort the dev put into it.

        I like AppImages, because I only have to put as much effort into it as the receiver needs me to.