I find the top bar menus well done on Unity compared to what we have on macOS. Take the sound menu, for example: on macOS you have a small slider to control the volume, and that’s all. You can’t even control iTunes from macOS’ topbar; you have to install a third party. On Unity I can control the sound not only with a slider but also by scrolling on the sound icon—no need to open the menu. Players like Spotify are nicely integrated by default and I have basic controls like play/pause/backward/forward as well as album artworks. That’s sounds like a simple menu but it doesn’t even exist on macOS nor (IIRC) on Windows.
I completely agree. I like it much better then the stupid uniform menu of macOS. I use Manjaro XFCE as my only desktop OS and I like the UI for the most part. I just really dislike the inconsistencies.
Most people who see me using my computer thinks it looks "cool" and are wowed that my Thinkpad x220 runs that smoothly. They'd love to use it but I know that most people wouldn't put up with the 50 different ways to interract with very basic menues. Even file picking is a pain (no icons) and using arrow keys to navigate are broken, and the "recent" files don't actually work.
Edit: In general my issue is cohesion. Linux's Desktop enviroment is Good Enough (TM) for people and already looks fantastic. It just needs polish which it isn't going to get for a while in my opinion. I'd happily pay a good 10 bucks to someone whos willing to do it and it looks like Elemntry OS are the only people who are willing to. Sadly it's Debian based and I prefer Arch based distros.
base is arch, for sure.
This happens sometimes on my Mac.
Along with the computer freezing or giving a black screen when I remove an HDMI cable or other external screen, random keychain messages asking for passwords on boot, somehow losing access to my Apple account which prevented updates and required a phone call to Apple, crashes...
I use Ubuntu at home and don't notice any obvious deficiencies .
EDIT
Not sure why all the down votes. Ignoring the problems is how they never get fixed. Go read all the recent threads on trying to replace a MBP with Linux that highlight the issues with desktop Linux. Power management, HiDPI, drivers, UI consistencies, etc...
OS update? Sweet, let's apply that and see those new features... "Please login to your account to continue..."
OK, this is my wife's Mac so I think the password for that is... No, that wasn't it. Alright it must be... Nope. Then it's definitely... Damnit. Now the account is locked!
I'll take UI inconsistency over that garbage any day. The password is for a cloud service and not the password for the host itself. So to apply updates in Mac land you not only need the password for an account with administrative access you need the password for the 3rd party Apple account. It's an OS update! Why does it require logging in to a 3rd party service just to upgrade?
Then if the account gets locked it gets locked everywhere so suddenly my wife's iPod can't install stuff or apply updates either until the account is unlocked which requires a password change which requires reentering that password on n Apple devices.
I'll just deal with the minor annoyance of having to use GIMP's interface alongside Dolphin's (KDE's file manager).
With that said, I'm still confused about this 'fiasco'. There is signing into the computer, and signing into various services. One of those services happens to be iCloud/apple account. I'm sure you are having some issues, but most do not.
Everything else you're ranting about is called good security.
The styling and even UI elements of Office vs everything else are wildly different.
There is no cohesion there, and there never needed to be any. On Android practically every corporate app is a completely custom styled atrocity with no common behavior, but Android took over the world.
What matters is that what the developer gives you out of the box is uniform and consistent. Anything you yourself install after that can always, and often will, break that common theming. And that is by necessity a product of an unrestricted development platform - if developers can change everything, they will.
However, unlike others, MS is in the process of gradually cleaning things up and updating their UI to to comply their new UI standard. Change is a slow and delicate process when high levels of backwards compatibility is a must.
How is that any different from Windows?
Full screen will take up the entirety of the current monitor with no menu bar. If the resolution of the app doesn't match the monitor, it will either skew the content (common) or add a black border (uncommon) to fill the unmatched window space. Removing focus from a full screen app will minimize it to the tray. Games and some video players are typically the only apps that use full screen.
Borderless is the same as full screen, except the content will not be minimized if the app loses focuses. Text editors/IDEs in "distraction free" mode, full screen mode for browsers and games set to borderless are typical use cases for this mode.
Windowed has three icons in the top right with minimize, restore/maximize, and exit always on the menu bar in that order. The menu bar is draggable. Double clicking the menu bar will maximize or restore down the application.
The notable exception to inconsistent behavior is the exit button. It used to be that the exit button would cleanly shutdown the responsible process. Devs now sometimes input a menu option that makes the exit button close the window while leaving the process running in the background. The app still resides in the system tray. Apps with this behavior are usually communication software (Skype, Slack, ICQ) or something that processes data in the background where a main GUI isn't always needed.
But I agree with the general sentiment. Linux distros often have this problem of "not getting" what a typical regular user might need, because the distro developers and their core users still prefer doing most things by the command line, which they say is "easier" (and virtually impossible for a regular OS user, but that aspect often seems to escape them).
And Ubuntu is one of the more user-friendly distros out there, but even it can't get many things right. Hopefully this will improve with the arrival of flatpaks/snaps, and with a bigger focus on "apps" (rather than packages).
http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2013/08/unity-8-ubuntu-13-10-arri...
https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Specifications/startup-noti...
"This document specifies a mechanism allowing a desktop environment to track application startup, to provide user feedback and other features."
As used by KDE, GNOME, others.
Unity 8 is a desktop environment, but if something is lacking in Unity this doesn't mean it is lacking in all.
Also, another issue is that there are thousands of different ways across all of the apps for how to interact with them. Some have "Quit" options, some have top bars, some have icons everywhere. There isn't cohesion. I wish there was a "Linux-Desktop Standard" like OSX and Windows have but no one would ever agree on anything so it would go nowhere unfortunatly.