That's fine, but Linux is never going to achieve any significant marketshare (and thus get support from hardware and software makers) as long as it tries to standardize on weird UIs. Having some weird options for those who want to mess with them is great, just don't make them the standard. That's the problem with Linux: for some stupid reason, the distros have mostly standardized on Gnome3, which is a resource hog and horrible to use, and not an easy transition for a non-technical Windows user. If they adopted KDE instead, Linux would probably get a lot more popularity.
Individual distro's will pick whatever they want. Several have tried to copy Windows to various extent (with Lindows, later Linspire, being the most extreme example as they tried for binary compatibility via Wine).
> If they adopted KDE instead, Linux would probably get a lot more popularity.
I they adopted KDE instead to the exclusion of Gnome it'd alienate a huge amount of Linux users. They're not doing this randomly. But as it stands, Gnome and KDE are both viable alternatives on most of the major distros, with varying levels of support.
That's the entire problem! We have ONE standard kernel, granted with a few modifications on Android. We have one standard C library (several implementations for edge use cases). We have one standard C++ runtime (and the clang libc++ is completely compatible). On every layer of the stack we have one standard, with one standard implementation, except when you reach the top when it becomes and ungodly mess. Nothing really interoperates in a standard way. Hell, it took until 2006 IIRC to settle on one standard audio API - pulse. Before we run off to reimplement everything yet again, there should be standards of interoperability in place.
For example, why does Firefox not use the KDE open file dialog? I run KDE, I expect to get the KDE open file dialog not the GNOME one. Oh, it's because there's no standard "open a file" API call. Because every time someone reinvents the desktop, they reinvent it from the ground up without trying to interoperate. This is probably why Firefox also doesn't always obey my file associations set via Dolphin, the KDE file browser.
Yes, let's have unlimited customizability, but we need standardized interfaces for basic desktop functionality. A forest, rather than a dozen walled gardens.
This is completely wrong. It's like saying there's no standard init system. Except for a few weird exceptions like Slackware, there is: systemd, because all the mainstream distros have adopted it now. Similarly, there is a standard DE, and that's Gnome, because all the mainstream distros have adopted it (Debian, Fedora, OpenSuse, Ubuntu now).
As for alienation, they're alienating everyone who wants something that works like Windows, and they're alienating tons of Linux users who hate Gnome3, which is why we now have the ridiculous mess of not one, but TWO Gnome forks: MATE and Cinnamon, in addition to KDE, LXDE, and Xfce. KDE is not a "viable alternative" on most distros, as it's very poorly supported, if at all. It's not a first-class DE on any mainstream distro that I know of; within Ubuntu-land it's a separate "Kubuntu" spin that's not well supported, and within Mint-land it's the "Mint KDE Edition" which always lags behind the Cinnamon and MATE versions. I hear you can get it to work on Fedora, sorta. Sorry, but that does not make it equivalent to the support that Gnome enjoys. And as the other poster points out, many applications assume you're using Gnome, such as Firefox with its crappy Gnome file dialog.
>They're not doing this randomly.
No, they're doing it because Red Hat is pushing Gnome hard, and because there's a lot of trend-following in Linux without thinking about what's really good for the community and Linux adoption overall.
On the other hand I switch away from every distro or at least desktop that does "change" for the sake of "change". I prefer a stable system with optional changes to a mess that breaks functionality with every other update. Sadly some of the programs I use were written for GNOME or at least with GTK, so I am still affected every time GNOME is "improved".
If you want to avoid change, see if the GNOME/GTK apps you use are available in forks for Mate or Cinnamon - if they are, chances are they'll change far less.
And that's why Linux will never stop the experimentation: Lots of the people actually writing the code wants to experiment and don't want to copy Windows. You will never get unity (pardon the pun) out of a group whose only unifying characteristic is that we don't want to use Windows or OS X.
> Please stop innovation for innovation's sake and just make Windows 98 again.
That's been tried. Remember Lindows? It even tried for Windows compatibility via Wine.