I think that a Marxist society should allow for 0 proprietary software, and instead support for everything in free and open source decentralized technology.

  • @redtea@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
    2•1 year ago

    Thanks for explaining.

    If you just want an OS to use for things like web browsing, programming or writing documents then any up-to-date Linux distro will be your best bet. They all use the same software, with some minor exceptions. The difference is in the design.

    This is the kind of insider knowledge I was hoping for! Front-end design-wise, I’m probably happy with something that looks like an early OSX or Windows 95. Newer OS’s have become at once very simple and yet so complicated that no files or settings can be found.

    • @FuckBigTech347@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
      3•1 year ago

      On Linux you aren’t just limited to a specific set of utilities, or a specific UI or Desktop. You can mix and match software to varying degrees. A desktop environment like MATE or XFCE comes to mind for something that resembles a Windows 9x-XP era desktop. Cinnamon and KDE Plasma are similar to Windows Vista-7. GNOME is like current macOS. All of them vary in terms of customization and theming. Most distros have all of these (and more) available in their software repositories and some distros offer multiple ISOs with different software and desktops pre-bundled. For example the Debian installer lets you pick which Desktop(s) you want and then downloads and installs all the required packages. But Linux Mint has 3 different editions each with a different Desktop environment (MATE, XFCE, Cinnamon).

    • Łumało [he/him]MEnglish
      2•1 year ago

      If you’d like to have something that looks identical to a Windows 9x setup, check out Chicago95. It’s a project that aims (and succeeds!) at making the XFCE4 desktop environment look as close to as possible to Win9x! I use it personally because that is my preference, and I have to say it looks amazing! Here’s screenshots!