get out of my lawn attitude . installed my first red hat in ~1999, so that would make me 27 year user, kiddo.

I have used Linux for 21 years, on and off on the desktop, and all the time on the server. In the last 10 years I've had basically not time to catch up with what's new in terms of desktop environments and other tools (e.g. neovim, terminal emulators), much less have the time to tinker with any of them.

Omarchy (first it was Omakub) changed that by serving it all up to me in less than five minutes. There are, perhaps, other similar projects, but this one got to me first. For me, it's an improvement. Someone else's defaults aren't a constraint as long as I find them useful. I only wish M4 Pro was supported, because macOS (even though I'm still running 15.x) has gone downhill.

It's, of course, less useful if you have 20 years' worth of dotfiles and custom workflows that you aren't keen to replace and I fully respect that.

There's nothing to catch up on. It's a kernel. It's systemd. And then pick a desktop manager. Every distro installs in 5 minutes. Because on Linux you literally just copy/paste. It's just a sloppy fork of Arch.

You're missing the point. The sloppy fork gets all I need installed in under 5 minutes so I don't even need to copy/paste. And there's a lot to catch up on, I had no idea hyprland existed, for example, and I happen to like it. To each his own, I guess. I find it useful and so do others.

If you didn't know it existed before and you didn't try anything new and you didn't catch up on anything then how can you judge if it's actually good? What if KDE is actually better for your use case?

Slight misunderstanding? I am a long time user of KDE, Xfce and Gnome. Even Unity, which kinda sucked. I find the components omarchy glued together a better fit for my needs now.