What if I have made my KDE look and behave just like Windows 2000?
Those are nice themes, but Aero isn't really my thing and I think its really overrated, especially as Zoomers are beginning to praise it online, for some reason only recently (not sure why).
Do you think Red Hat and the others would be in favor of it if it was made under the MIT license?
India started pumping out software graduates en masse about 15 years earlier and major companies began outsourcing to Indian shitshops around the same time. It took the jeets that long to work their way up to positions where they could actively shit over entire codebases.
Trinity is kino. Once I'm done with my current contract and can afford to tinker for a bit, I'm going to try it out again.
Oh shit, Trinity is actually super nostalgic to me. You just reminded me how I really need to daily drive it one of these days. - All my school computers ran KDE 3.x and they all looked exactly like this:
Slackware is an absolute joy to to use and a close #2 to Gentoo. I have it running on an X230. Zero complaints, really good distro all around. In other news, FreeBSD is getting its 15.0 release later this year. Barring the cuck license and all that, how feasible do you guys think daily driving it would be? Definitely been hearing a lot more good things about it than bad so I'm strongly considering giving it a spin.
These are like 99.9% faithful to how Vista/7 actually used to look like, it's impressive.
This shit I hate with a passion. Looks nothing like Win2k. The scaling is all off, the fonts are all off, everything is mismatched, a lot of elements aren't even themed and I'd rather use whatever stock theme the DE has instead of trying to pull off shit like this.Its not really Windows Classic by default but with a Windows Classic colour theme and Windows 2000 icon set, it looks really good:
My taskbar is set up just like Windows 2000 too with a Quick Launch bar like setup, I do honestly prefer it to the way introduced in Windows 7.
We're in perfect configuration for a "year of the desktop BSD" any time now. Linux is becoming a playground for corporate horseshit.
Resolve can't do H264 on Linux, even if you use the paid version. Resolve can't do H265 on Windows without buying a $10 codec from the Windows store. Kdenlive can do both out of the box, or offer to auto-transcode clips as needed. It's come a long way. With some of the recent UI changes to Resolve, I actually prefer Kdenlive now. It doesn't crash constantly and corrupt your saves anymore. I recently worked on two hours of footage with it varying from 4k to 1024x768 and it handled it all really well.
This is another tool that's come so far. Anyone remember the StarOffice days, when the whole project was run by Sun? A lot of the devs left due to Sun's involvement, created Libreoffice, and Sun gave over OpenOffice to Apache. Compared to the 2000s, LibreOffice is an amazingly good office suite replacement.
Yep and it works fairly well too. I once had my laptop die and someone lent me a replacement ancient Centrino laptop that was dogshit slow. I had a talk to give the next week and didn't want to reformat/setup the laptop, so I ended up doing all of it in the web version of Powerpoint. That was ~10 years ago and even back then, it worked pretty well.
I've been using FreeBSD for about 2 weeks as a test on my second desktop and I'm having a great time. Everything works. And it's far better than the last time I used Linux, back in 2012. The only issue so far is that if you want to use Proton and not just Wine, it gets a bit complicated, 'cause you need to use Linuxulator. Other than that, it's been great.
A lot less feasible than Linux.
Linux has come a LONG way in the last 13 years.
Regardless of the plausibility of FreeBSD being suddenly and widely adopted in the Desktop space and its viability for many, I will always prefer FreeBSD's development and deployment over Linux. It delivers a kernel, device drivers, the userland utilities, and documentation, as opposed to Linux only delivering a kernel and drivers. It's genuinely a better method of development IMO, as FreeBSD delivers a complete operating system on one stable base that can easily be developed & packaged for and so effectively reduces fragmentation issues, and to top it all off it's all done with simple instructions on how to download & install for new users.
The kernel might have. After reading this thread, I'm not so sure about the rest.
Not even their worst one Nicco made.
You know freebsd just uses things ported over from Linux for the most part? Uses desktops, and applications built around Linux, basically except the kernel itself, the the things tied into it, and the userland.
I don't know if you meant it but great post. GNOME is an exercise in total fucking stupidity. The GNOME devs always choose the worst outcome in every decision they make. They're either evil and/or stupid, but they have to be at least one.
