I’m not sure what that statistic is supposed to be telling me, except that with the amount of participants, the amount of Linux users is within margin of error of the general desktop market share.

My experience is with whatever Gnome-centered desktop ships with Ubuntu. It’s on a headless box that I shut off today for ¤reasons, so I have no clue what it’s called.

I have no idea what Canonical calls it either. It’s basically just a skin that makes Gnome look a bit more shit as far as I can tell.

Her daily experience with the shit webdev/mobdev pumps out daily is not good

I thought this was about C-niles, but apparently all mobile and web devs are shit as well. I’m sure that random mobile and web apps are somehow very relevant to Linux DEs being accessible or not, but since you already “know better”, there’s no need to discuss this further really.

Yes, your Windows user experience is super relevant to the point about Linux desktop environments being accessible or not.

And this whole thread started when I was expressing fear that AI-mania was overwhelming all of Microsoft’s prior first order concerns.

This discussion was started by me after someone called the Linux desktop accessibility a “fucking embrassment” and I responded very clearly to that specific point. I’m not interested in scoring imaginary points in some misguided attempt to treat comment sections like a team fight for/against the linked article or whatever.

That’s why I’m asking, because if we’re being honest, all desktop OSes kind of suck at accessibility, leaving the heavy lifting to third parties, so I’m confused why the billion dollar product with the largest market share is praised for being the most accessible and “Linux” is apparently a fucking embarassment for not emphasizing accessibility.

Explaining why it’s bad doesn’t really excuse it.

No, but it does explain it. There’s nothing to excuse in the complete abscence of any promises.

I also explained why it’s not all bad, so unless you have semi-recently used a desktop environment that tries to be accessible instead of catering to power users, then maybe you wouldn’t dismiss my comment with an unrelated rant about Darktable’s UI and C-nile Unix greybeards reordering their modules every couple minutes. Believe me, I understand the frustration of nearly every app UI being a thoughtless mess, but you’re acting like big-FOSS sold you Linux™ - the Desktop OS under the pretense of it being an accessible interface for even the most casual computer user.

I can rant all day too about Windows UI design inconsistencies if you want, like the most basic settings being split across 2-3 different generations of UI design in 2-3 separate levels of “basic” to “advanced” which you navigate to by clicking really inconspicuous blue lines of text, which are randomly placed on the bottom of a dialog page or in a sidebar to the right.

it’s fucking embarrassing how bad Linux is with accessibility

It’s not. It’s entirely to be expected, because the focus of the vast majority of kernel development was not desktop usage. Gnome honestly has become quite good at implementing accessibility concerns and they take advantage of the desktop environment philosophy to do that, which seems to be what you expect distro developers to do.

Of course, if by “accessible” you mean “like Windows” since that is the most popular desktop by far, then everything that’s not Windows is going to suck for your usecase.

I used a zyxel mini wifi router once. It would soft-brick when changing the subnet range. There was another cool feature that would effectively prevent a new admin password from taking effect until you entered a second one (basically creating a queue of passwords). That was fun to figure out.

Honestly, I have not. That might be because I haven’t clicked on that notifications button since I bought the thing. I’d be way more worried about a smartphone.