> Windows XP got it right.

I'd say Windows 95 in this context. XP was the first stable version of Windows (yes, the first one deserved to be called Windows 1.0), but the Start menu was working well in Windows 95/98/ME, too.

I'd say the label of stable goes to Win2k. XP was in many ways Win2k with new theme and a more aggressive license verification scheme.

XP would also boot / run quickly compared to NT. It was more desktop focused instead of desktop as an afterthought.

>Let me launch the program I need and get the F out of my way.

That is a philosophy DEs should have, but (if you'd like suggestions) which XFCE most cleanly follows.

I love it for this. I got burned by both KDE4 and Gnome... 3? (starting as actually usable WM, then getting drunk on success and thinking they can and should reinvent the modern desktop). I would love Xfce even more if they fixed some small UX shortcomings (like being able to sort opened apps the way you want to, being unable to set anything in Indicator plugin and similar), but even so it's at least stable and useful. Kudos to developers!

You can enable drag-and-drop in the Window Buttons panel Item. As for Indicator, yeah, it's a bit of a mystery. But I don't think much is missing there.

Other examples of missing stuff: - Complex shortcuts: you can't set keyA and also keyA+keyB as shortcuts work on keyPress rather than keyRelease. So no SuperKey and also SuperKey+L/D/R and such. - Easy window resize: the dragging thing is exactly 1 pixel wide. Gotta use Alt+Right-click to resize.

But you get used to XFCE's tiny quirks, it really gets like heaven after some work.

That's my favorite mint flavour.

What's wrong with Windows key->type "email"->Enter? That's how GNOME works.

Yes but that doesn't fit the accepted narrative that Gnome has sucked since V3 and the devs hate the users so much they go out of their way to make them less productive.

Incidentally, I'm part of the silent majority that enjoys Gnome and loves the emphasis on clean simplicity. No, it's not perfect, but it's moving in the right direction.

will it open another instance if one is already open, or switch over to it?

Seconded. Also I have the impression that everyone in the UI design space forgot that the software is means to an end, not an experience, and it's supposed to help users achieve their goals in maximally efficient way.

(Oh wait, but actually companies make money by making software into experience, so I guess that's where the overall trend comes from.)

We need the equivalent of CSS user stylesheets for UX, where user preferences can contextually override publisher/designer preferences. The relationship between the user and other sources of “design input” can be adversarial. Open-source rule engines can help users to negotiate this adversarial space.

> CSS user stylesheets for UX

Isn’t this, quite literally, what Gnome Shell Extensions are?

https://extensions.gnome.org/

Gnome extensions are weird because the UX around them very much feels like an attempt to actively discourage their use.

-using the website to install extensions requires both a browser extension and installing chrome-gnome-shell, not installed by default by most distros

-UI to configure extensions is in Tweak Tool, again not installed by default in most distros and full of the things GNOME people don't really want you to touch but will begrudgingly allow

-the second most popular extension is an improved UI for managing extensions

-the API is poorly documented and new releases always break tons of extensions

Extensions are a fig leaf towards power users in the hopes that they will be distracted long enough that they forget to complain between releases.

Thanks for the pointer. Looks like the docs are scattered: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/13107743/documentation-f...