I realize this is impressionistic but for the sake of the conceit:
“Mac” flavored (PopOS, ZorinOS?)
“Windows” flavored (Mint?)
“Linux” flavored (Fedora?)
Edit: was not aware 1) Distro & 2) Desktop Environment are seperate/distinct. Good to learn
I understand your aesthetically question who take care of the history of user interface design: many DE you’ll find on Linux are inspired by Windows and Mac OSs, and so typically Gnome is more near to mac while KDE to windows; keep in mind both are completely customizable. There are also other original Linux interfaces who brings something more exotic (old Ubuntu Unity or window managers like i3-wm) but most of these are used by few since UI’s comfort tend to unify everything.
You can also make gnome look like windows or kde look like Mac OSX.
There really isn’t a limit to customization for Linux.
F.e. I use kde but have it look like/close to osx, because I prefer how kde manages multiple displays. I do like gnome, but I cannot stand it’s stubbornes (or maybe my stubbornes?) with multi screen setups.
There’s many ways and you can choose the one you like most, that’s the beauty of Linux :).
The problem with visual similarities is that eventually the user will have to interface with, at least; the file system, download and install protocol, and deeper hardware tools (drivers, etc).
It’s one thing to do it for nostalgia, or “because it’s there”, quite another because you’re looking for a familiar interface.
If it’s the latter; I recommend buckling down, allowing yourself to become a noob again, and get familiar with the new thing. It’s not harder, it’s just different.
If it’s the former; KDE seems to provide the greatest flexibility in changing how the environment looks.
Isn’t this more of a DE thing? Like Mac -> Gnome, Windows -> KDE, Linux -> ??? (XFCE maybe?)
I wasnt aware of the distinction prior between desktop environment and distro so its good you guys are bring me up to speed
This is a question about desktop environments not distros. Many distros ship a default desktop environment but you can always change it. Among the desktop environments it’s typically said:
Gnome ~ Mac KDE ~ Windows
As for a Linux flavored one I think the most distinctly linux desktops are the tiling and scrolling compositors (hyprland, niri etc)
-
So Gnome is the distro?
-
what do you mean by ~ Mac ~ Windows (both? They’re both the desktop environment?)
Commercial OS tend to unify everything in a single name, Windows is the OS and - for example - the DE may be considered “metrostyle”. The distribution is Linux + selected packages (also DEs)
Like a super theme. Makes the entire interface entirely different, even comes with different default apps, like the default calculator is different too.
If you’ve ever used Android phones, you might’ve seen launcher apps on the play store. Something like that.
I feel like I never grasped or encountered the concept of a launcher, I know Apple things dont really have the same concept AFAIK
What is the interplay between the ~Mac ~ Windows
Well yeah. Just imagine linux being just the command line, then you gotta build a whole graphics layer on top of it. Windows and Mac built them as one combined unit. Linux being Linux, obviously different people have made their own versions for people to download for free.
So everything visually above is mostly down to the choice of DE, while the technical command line stuff underneath like the drivers and stuff are the distro.
People usually just refer to each DE by their main stylistic inspiration. E.g. KDE is more windows inspired with the start button at the bottom, while GNOME is more mac-ish looking. Neither are copies of course, and there are tons of DEs that are uniquely designed by random people with crazy ideas.
-
??????
deleted by creator
After your edit, it is slightly clearer what you are asking. But this is still a matter of desktop environment more than distro.
desktop environment
distro
Those arent analagous/synonamous?
Edit: sorry absolutely didnt mean to sound patronizing, this is all new to me so its beginners mind haha
No, not at all.
Some distributions do however come with a default desktop environment, which may be what OP is thinking in terms of the relationship.
Very much no. Your distro provides your package manager and repositories. Many distros ship with a default desktop environment, many let you choose on install. Either way the user can always manually switch very easily
My workstations are Debian, my laptops are a mix of Debian and Arch, same with test hardware.
They all look the same - KDE as my desktop environment, no generic software added at install, just adding what I want. If you were to use any one of them purely from the GUI (KDE), I doubt you’d know which was which without checking version info.
Linux is a kernel. A desktop environment is the GUI. The distro is packaging.
The difference between distributions is predominantly what is packaged up, the tool used to install/update, and an overarching philosophy on those tools.
Debian is about being stable. This means more dated packages, but running into issues from an update is (mostly) not even a question when running the stable branch. Amazing for workstations and older hardware IMO.
Arch updates constantly. Updates can introduce breaking changes, even minor ones, which can interrupt workflow. It also means the latest and greatest features are right there and ready quickly. I like arch for testing and making use of recent hardware that may not have support elsewhere yet.
You could also build entirely from source, use a downstream from Debian like Mint (Debian Edition) or Kubuntu, or downstream of Arch like SteamOS or EndeavourOS. Downstream distributions add more opinion under a more particular approach to their upstream counterparts. For some its to make the system easier to install (EndeavourOS vs Arch), add more recent features (Kubuntu vs Debian), or to make something incredibly specialized (SteamOS, formerly based on Debian and now based in Arch, highly focused on gaming).
The only thing thats “pure” Linux is the kernel. Everything else comes down to purpose and preference.
This is very informative, thanks for taking the time to help me get up to speed :)
