Will an iOS like interface for FOSS phones help with adoption?
Will an iOS like interface for FOSS phones help with adoption?
Long time iOS user with perception issues here. I went to iOS because it was very simple and intuitive to use. My daily life was too busy for me to tinker with my phone a lot.
Now I'm using pmos with phosh and I'm mostly loving it. But some of the linux specific decisions and directions it takes dont really work with me.
Thats why I started asking myself if a DE exists which is basically a clone of the proprietary apple phone OS. It should obviously still be FOSS and prioritize FOSS apps and so on. But I think it would help adoption by mainstream if iOS users (especially with need for accessibility features). Its basically the reason I was able to switch from minecraft to mineclone. It's basically the same (although I respect their decision to rename to Voxelibre, iirc and go their own way).
I know this is probably going to get a lot of hate because iOS bad and tinkering good and so on. But accessibility is important for many people, especially in their busy lives.
Feel free to point me in the right direction if something like this exists or lets try and make something.
Thanks for reading and have a good one.
You're viewing a single thread.
@haui_lemmy not more than any other interface. We need to have options. You would probably find less than 5% of people who will be selecting an iOS like interface, due to Apple being ferociously anti Foss ecosystem. But is good to have that option too.
I kind of see your point. But I think the likelyhood of an ios user coming over is probably 100 times higher if a familiar interface exists. So I think we‘re looking at it in very different ways. The current linux phone users are not the usecase I‘m aiming at.
I'd argue that what is holding the Linux GUI back is the amount of options, combined with the lack of proper interoperability testing (not for the lack of trying, but between the amount of options and the amount of versions, it is absolutely unfeasible), and the lack of strong design choice on the side of distributions: everyone wants to have and support everything under the sun, even if it means having 4 or 5 different flavours or editions of a particular distribution.
Don't get me wrong, I salute the intention and the initiative, but concretely, this almost always (and I put "almost" to be safe, I've never seen a counter example) means a clunky, unpolished experience in most cases.
I usually describe it as:
If GUIs were doors:
- Mac OS would be selling literally only one kind of door, that is super slick, brushed metal, glass and white, fancy, with a black glass and brushed metal handle, has a great feel to it, good heft, great handling, satisfying sound and feedback, etc, but then you need to buy everything else from them (including your lights, flooring, etc) or it just won't open. Of course they sell everything at a premium.
- Windows would be your standard wooden office door with the standard metal handle and the standard automatic door closer; but anyone can open it even when locked, it needs to be changed every other year, if you "customise" (i.e. adapt it in any way) it it will wear out 10x faster, and any adjustment you do (handle spring tension, automated closer strength and kickback, hinges adjustment, etc) will be reset at night randomly every other week, the door will get new "features" (like microphones, a search prompt, an assistant, etc) randomly, and you can use any kind of furniture you want, but during the "night resets" (aka "upgrades"), all the furniture in the office will be reset to be "Microsoft furniture", and you will need to exchange it all back in the next morning. And for various unpredictable reasons, once in a while, when going through the door, it will close unexpectedly and violently, slamming you in the face with full force.
- Linux and FOSS in general is a collection of community made IKEA inspired doors. You can mix and match anything. Any kind of door, any kind of hinge. Any kind of handle. Want a door that opens sideways? Go for it. Want a door that slides up? Do it. Want a butterfly door? Sure. A proximity sensor as a handle? Totally. A carbon fibres and ceramic door? Absolutely. All at once? Why not. In the end, no door is exactly the same, even across the same building, and you often need a few minutes to figure out how new doors work in new buildings. And of course, lots of doors are ill designed, with completely unnecessary features, and conflicting options, like both a sideways and butterfly hinge. Still works, but has caveats. But hey, if it breaks, or doesn't fit, you can change it any time, get parts anywhere, and there is an absolutely insane amount of community made documentation on most of it (except the internals, some of it is hard to understand, some of it is absolutely obscure, and most of it is documented by people who made it exclusively for people who made it)
IMHO what we would need is for distributions to "adopt" a given GUI (or DE), and stick to that. Do not even carry the packages for something else. If it is needed, another distribution will be made. That would simplify things a lot, and would greatly relieve the stress on maintainers.
And it would make for a much more approachable user experience.