Typical Linux distro at least doesn't come with fucked up GUI out-of-box. Jumping through all these hoops, what's the point? Windows was supposed to be user friendly OS.
I guess your comment kind of confuses me.
Mainly because
I AGREE WITH IT.
Vista's default green and blue whatever it's supposed to be desktop.
XP's green grass and blue sky.
10's "window", 11's "rose".
In my view, WINDOWS
NINETY FIVE was the LAST version of Windows to have a GREAT default wallpaper.
ie, THERE WAS NONE, just a BLANK desktop with icons in the upper left corner. THE WAY I STILL USE A DESKTOP TO THIS DAY!
Windows started "F-ing Up" when they REMOVED the IE desktop icon (because of the context menu it provides).
Soon after that, they thought they should also remove the "My Computer" desktop icon.
Have to scroll through four or five settings boxes just to get it back (because I don't want the pinned icon next to Start).
So yeah, the default GUI needs to jump through hoops to get it to where one likes it.
But, um, SO DOES LINUX.
This "Type A" has no issue with admitting he is "Type A".
And no default Linux GUI exists that doesn't require me to jump through a few hoops.
But sure, Windows is WORSE in that regard (for the most part).
One of my biggest "beefs" with various OS Distributions like X-Lite or Nexus or you-name-it is how they **F UP** the ICONS.
Adding "icon themes" is great for a FIFTH GRADER. But I am no longer in the fifth grade.
But hey, again, "Linux does it also". **F-d Up GUI**
