Hold on a sec, are we talking about design or just bashing on poor choice of colors? I guess you could put that under "design" (and infuriate people who actually design the interface, in terms of behaviour, placement, dimensions, etc..), the ease of customization of KDE/Gnome makes the default theme/colors a moot point as far as I'm concerned.
KDE4 just Mac OS X round style buttons copied, with some ugly gray sprayed over it, just because they can.
Please... buy some glasses...
Plastik (the theme I use in KDE4, very similar to Clearlooks/Windows "classic" and XP themes): (by default) three buttons (minimize, maximize and close, which highlight/glow red on mouse-over, in the top-right corner of the window, customizable button placement;
Aero: same as above, minus the customizable buttons, plus close button slightly wider, blurred translucent decoration and small details that are necessary as a result (window title text outlining)
I ask again: what's the great design difference I should be seeing here (apart from the translucency, which I'm getting to below)?
Up there I was talking about window management, not the default theme/colors. Edit: Come to think of it where did I claim that either was superior?? All I said was that I don't find Aero as superior and Clearlooks/Plastik/XP/classic are roughly equal (even you just said they are a copy; go figure).You just said that you thought it was superior! You're nothing but a fanboy.Uhh, I'm referring to linux here ^_^' (yes, I actually said that linux graphics drivers suck - which is why I can't have the translucent blurred window decorations, the main difference from Windows) Windows drivers aren't exactly perfect but at least one can update/downgrade them easily at will and all the hardware features are actually supported.
Once again; what does this have to do with the Windows 7 look? PS: Windows 7 does have stable drivers...
What I was saying is that the default theme looks nothing like a "real" window - you just gave a reason why it's not even worth trying - so what exactly was the following quote supposed to mean?>And your window also has a firefox sticker on it with an 'X' on it too? Puh-lease...While we're at bad analogies, real windows have shades. Windows doesn't do window shading and while KDE/Gnome do, it's not really analogous to real-world shades.And the Window decoration is not just transparent, because that way you'd be annoyed by the content underneath it, but blurred to make it even more look like a Window.
I said I don't find them useful but this apparently not a common opinion. And since I don't use them that much, I can't compare the quality of implementation/integration of Windows/KDE/Gnome.Yeah they are not useful but let's bash Windows for not having them. Well Windows DOES have multiple desktops with a free-of-charge Powertoys package from Microsoft itself: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/D...powertoys.mspx
Edit: I should've added this in the first post but just to be clear, this is all my opinion. I'm not a designer, I just voice what each interface feels like when I use it. I have yet to hear anyone bash the window decoration design of Gnome/KDE and favor Windows. A lot of apps do suck and integrate poorly but decorations are on-par, and management features are superior to that of WIndows. They're certainly not the reason I'd switch to windows (and there are plenty of reasons I'd do that).