Why does linux/unix lacks in UI? [closed]

Question

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.

---

Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.

Closed 9 years ago.

Improve this question

I have worked with many linux or unix os? Why is the user interface (UI) not so rich in its look compared to other windows or mac?

Answer 1

If we can back up and talk about the Linux and open source world for a minute, as opposed to the specific kernel and core operating system:

Open source communities organize and manage projects differently than for-profit companies. Different groups have different priorities and can produce really cutting-edge 3d desktop effects and incredibly lean minimalist interfaces. The cool part is that the underlying operating system, core toolset and software management systems are largely the same either way.

Anyway this isn't really a programming question and is probably off-topic. I think you're going to strike a nerve, though, because it's almost like saying open-source OSs are inferior in some way to Windows/Mac.

Answer 2

I'm going to just use Unix for Unix and Linux systems, as I'm not concerned about any of the hair-splitting distinctions between the two.

Unix has traditionally been a "programmer's" O/S. It was meant to be powerful, flexible and simple. This has often run contrary to the principles behind GUIs -- at least as many people see them.

While Unix has extended its reach and of course gotten GUIs long ago, it still has a reputation as a "programmer" system, and this shows. Additionally, being able to swap out components (including the UI) is a pretty big deal in their culture, and this explains a lot of what you see.

So if something seems awkward or primitive, chances are that its main design criteria were flexibility and programmability, rather than ease of use (which may have been a criterion, but would have been trumped by the other two).