I find the UX quirky and akward to use. I hate how the window management works. I hate how annoying it is to get two windows to show side by side. I hate how there end up so many icons in the menu bar which are entirely unhelpful. I hate how space inefficient the dock is, but when you auto hide it, you can no longer see the notification counts at a glance.
I would honest to God rate macOS UX a 2/5 for design and a 5/5 for QA.
If I were ever to go back I’d run Gentoo or some other rolling release distro; at least then I get changes a little bit at a time.
There are addons and tricks to do window management in Mac OS - but the big one I do is throw that dock on the right hand side of the screen and leave it. Wide screens have space there, might as well use it.
Mac OS still has a bit of that “upgrade changes everything” going on but it seems more gradual and less painful - and in my experience pretty polished.
With Linux it feels I can keep doing the things how I want them to do. True, there are some distributions and window managers that throw the baby out with the bathwater for every update, looking at Ubuntu and Gnome, but sticking to something more conservative and you are set for live. Also, every time this happens, somebody will always fork of the old code, like with Mate and Trinity.
With a Mac or Windows you are sort of stuck with wills and whims of some company. If Windows could still look and function like 2000, but just be better, I might still use it to this day.
It's true, but I'd also say macOS as it is today looks pretty damn similar to screenshots of the first OSX version shown off 20+ years ago. Other than updated icons (which are still mostly based off the original icons) and an overall flatter aesthetic compared to the flashy, novel 3D of those days, it mostly functions the same. They only updated the Preferences app to System Settings in the last version with a design overhaul, and it was a pretty big deal because they don't do that much.
I've used a couple of different desktop environments or window managers over the past few decades, but these days I either stick with the default (which is so often Gnome) or use Sway, where I can just copy in my config file and everything works exactly as I'm used to.
That has not been my experience. If you are using something like Arch (rolling release distro) maybe, but Ubuntu and Debian stable have been pretty much that.
I also find it a little funny that a complaint about Linux is in the thread of a post showing how Apple will change things that break their users without apology.
If it weren’t for the fact that such a thing would progress glacially if worked on only in my spare time I’d write my own DE and maintain enough forks that my GitHub profile would look like a fork factory.
At this very moment, I'm still going through the "play" phase. If you pick a distro and then never change anything about it, then maybe it will work out for you out of the box. But as soon as you try to "make it yours", suddenly you'll find yourself with a second day job with no pay, you'll wonder where all your free time went, and your muscle tone will be gone. Inevitably, you'll have some weird issue like a particular program acting slow and causing the mouse to lag, or maybe your Wayland compositor has the wrong cursor position, and nobody on the internet knows why, except for some guy with a script as long as the declaration of independence that you can run in your terminal to fix all your problems (um, no). Eventually you give up and run the built-in compositor within another compositor, and somehow that fixes the original issue. But now your keyboard/mouse configuration no longer works! Holy shit, it's almost Christmas? Screw this, let's install Debian stable. Wait, what? The installer can't find the installation media? You ARE the installation media! Fuuuuuuuuu...
I love Linux as a tool, but the desktop experience will never get its act together. Whether it works for you or not seems to be based on luck. I don't even want a complicated desktop experience; I just want something basic like Openbox and a web browser, but these days you can barely even do that without a bunch of tinkering (unless you want to stick entirely to X11).
> If you pick a distro and then never change anything about it, then maybe it will work out for you out of the box.
Yes, exactly. Use a stable distro, don't touch things, and they won't change. It will continue to run exactly the same for years and years. This is in contrast to OSX and Windows. Windows is completely unrecognizable to me since stopped using it 7-8 years ago (the last version I used being Windows 7). My Linux desktop works exactly the same (with Firefox as an outlier that randomly removes/hides functionality). Apple is notorious for not caring about backwards compatibility, and just expecting everyone to accommodate whatever changes they want to make.
> unless you want to stick entirely to X11
Right, don't change things, and it will keep working. Wayland sounds like its benefits are all nerd stuff that I don't care about (a "better" architecture or whatever). Meanwhile, X works just fine. At some point, if people stop complaining about Wayland, and if it has some benefit to me, maybe I'll try it. Currently it seems that neither of those criteria are met. When I do try it, if it doesn't work, I'll just roll it back.
It's true for every OS. I went Windows -> Linux -> MacOS and I had to get used to every time.
Plenty of window management apps and tools available. Rectangle, for example.
> I hate how there end up so many icons in the menu bar which are entirely unhelpful.
The only ones I cannot seem to be able to remove trivially are the clock and the Control Center. Solved in mere seconds by typing "menu bar" into the System Settings search. You could literally even just hold cmd and drag almost any icon out of the bar. Not to mention any of the more involved menu bar customization apps and tools.
Why does it seem like such "macOS bad Linux good" comments always compare the default macOS experience to a personalized Linux environment?
Why does an out-of-the-box Mac have to fulfill the same requirements we spent hours configuring for on a Linux machine?
Where does the capability or mindset to install a tool disappear when we move from Linux to macOS?
I think part of the problem is due to Mac and Apple have traditionally sold itself as intuitive and easy-to-use out of the box. People buy a Mac because they've been told that they don't have to spend hours configuring it. Hell Apple built a whole ad campaign around how the Mac is so much easier and more intuitive to use than Windows computers. However truth is that if you're coming from Linux or Windows, a lot of MacOS is incredibly unintuitive and weird out of the box.
I am just curious where all the willingness to tinker and solve problems appears to disappear when we move to macOS.
Windows spying on you? Oh, let's install this tool X and change a whole bunch of registry settings to prevent that.
App windows behaving annoyingly on Linux? Oh, let's just switch to a completely different desktop environment/window manager or what have you.
Too many icons in the menu bar on macOS? Yeah, I'm returning this machine. :)
Pretty much all of their complaints are addressed out of the box by most of the major desktop environments. Install whatever popular distro of your choice and you can trivially put two windows side-by-side like you can on Windows.
I'm not, I'm comparing to an unmodified, standard config Gnome or Plasma.
I also use Sway, and I'm pretty sure I've spent less time customizing/configuring it than my Mac.
Because the "Linux bad macOS good" comments say things like the parent:
> Linux may be fine if you like tinkering
Are you now saying macOS requires tinkering too?
The "windows should be grouped in terms of the applications" does not make sense to me AT ALL.
Most work is done on a project basis, which crosses application boundaries quite readily. E.g., one project might involve having an open Android Studio project, a PDF with documentation, a browser window and a note pad. "Cmd-tabbing", though, brings up the next window of the same application that I am currently on. Viewing a PDF with preview, this will bring up some random image most of the time? (Luckily this is fixed by AltTab)
No solutions for the dock from me though. Personally I hate how the dock can randomly move between two monitors if you just happen to drag a file through the area where the dock COULD go on your second screen.
Additionally, things I hate and have not been able to fix: how if you close a window of a specific application in MacOS, it moves another window of that same application forward (similar to the Cmd+Tab behaviour) and if you click on an application in the Dock, it brings forward ALL windows of that application (whereas I would expect only the most recently used one).
There is Rectangle which is free and open source.
Also there is Touch-Tab (disclaimer: I'm the developer) to switch apps with 3-finger swipe left/right.
