Linux Mint 13 Maya Released

[Knife Party]

It was a comment on the distribution as far as I can tell, given the large screenshot presented in the OP.

I don't have anything against Linux per se, I use it on all my servers. It's great, actually. Having sub-par graphical interfaces is "typically Linux" though. I mean, yeah, it's a matter of taste, but I think many would agree that shiny graphics isn't its strong point.

And really, a fanboy ego? No reason to throw insults. I use Windows, OS X, iOS, Windows Phone and Linux daily. I suppose the reason for that is that I like certain aspects of each system.

i was specifically referring to Neo, he clogs threads with his constant OSX rubbish comments.

[.Neo]

i was specifically referring to Neo, he clogs threads with his constant OSX rubbish comments.

I'll stop with my comments if these distros stop blatantly copying entire parts of the Aqua user-experience. I promise. ;)

LOL, oh cmon! What isn't an Apple rip off to you?

I'd say Microsoft's Metro interface and apart from the window controls the Ubuntu team does a pretty good job at creating their own distinctive look.

PS Wanna compare for yourself, btw? Here you go:

[Scorbing]

That's MATE, the Cinnamon version of Mint is far superior:

I don't see the superiority other than the theme looks different. Also, according to their own web site, the Cinnamon interface is more unstable.

[Knife Party]

I'll stop with my comments if these distros stop blatantly copying entire parts of the Aqua user-experience. I promise. ;)

I'd say Microsoft's Metro interface and apart from the window controls the Ubuntu team does a pretty good job at creating their own distinctive look.

PS Wanna compare for yourself, btw? Here you go:

i'm sorry but i see little similarity between the cinnammon menu and one obscure OSX GUI element..... I think you need to stop trolling about constant OSX comparisons, Mint is a different thing by itself. And anyways, who cares really?? if you want to argue that OSX elements are ripped to Mint for its interface, the arguement goes both ways, i'm sure Apple have 'stolen' a considerable number of ideas/concepts from others according to you're mentality offcourse.... so either way the argument is null. Because on a more serious note, you don't see me trolling OSX threads about what I think they've 'stolen' from X, Y and Z person/company. It's non contributing, it stop people from trying the product and it fuels false informed perceptions.

[redvamp128]

I'll stop with my comments if these distros stop blatantly copying entire parts of the Aqua user-experience. I promise. ;)

Please read the following:

Linux is not copying for the reason of GPL1....

Example 1:

You do realize that "finder" was originally a Unix tool Named "Find" that Apple started using and made improvements to it under GPL , but let me guess because it is under GPL1 it is not copied right? Version 1 AT&T UNIX- What that means is that any improvements must be shared back into the trunk which is how it got into linux so really No copy there.

Example 2:

Same is true about the menu system- Which is part of GPL1.... Which is why it looks like OSX... Apple had to give that back to the trunk or risk not being able to use it. (even the brushed metal- because it is part of the themes for menus which is GPL1)

(when I say trunk I mean back to the community)

Notice the Word RISK NOT BEING ABLE TO USE IT.

Go ahead Flame Me on this one-- But this is the facts only and if you want to argue ... I will ignore...

Please read about GPL before you say Copy--

Because of what OSX is built on- they had to share a lot of it back into the trunk.

Which makes it free and available for use (which is in compliance with GPL).

What makes OSX unique is the fact that APPLE supports and develops it and charges for it plus they have to give back what they improve in order to keep using it.

What you see in Linux has to be shared back due to restrictions or Apple will have to take it out.

What would OSX be without FInder or the Menu?? Just imagine how non-fancy it would be or even the ability to use simple things like the system bus?

-But then again -- If it was not for the original sharing of programs under GPL your OSX would not be the way it is-- (Let me guess not calling it copying)

So when Apple shares the programs back and Linux starts using it it is Copying.

Even though Apple used it before with those restrictions that things used under GPL1 must be shared back in for use by others.

These others are Linux users using it under GPL1 just like Apple did.

So it is not copying something that is meant to be shared.

Something else to note- It may look similar to it and it may only use parts of it,but remember what is not shared is completed with original code to make it work and thus is still not a copy.

I mean for example two red cars will both have engines just some outperform others, but still both still cars still are red which is the only thing in common.(and by your example- one car is copying the other one even though one outperforms the other)

Sorry to the others for the rant, but mint is looking great.

[redvamp128]

.Neo

The above was not a personal attack, so please do not be offended.

A lot of people think just like you do that it is copying; however, Unix is about sharing and improving the end product.

Now granted OSX is polished, because people get paid to work on it.

Apple is fulfilling their agreement by sharing back to the community.

The reason it looks like distro's copy it simply put is that they are built off the same base.

Just like the analogy about the cars... yes they may look same shade of red, but it is different parts under the hood.

Sometimes people need to look beyond the obvious.

Of-course they are going to look the same.... but it is only because they have a similar base...

Just recently some have chosen to use what was already freely provided by Apple in order to share back.

thanks,

[.Neo]

I don't see it as such, so no worries. ;) However what you wrote down has absolutely nothing to do with the appearance of interface elements, i.e. artwork and such. The base doesn't contain any traces Aqua nor the Brushed aluminum interface. These distros look alike because the designers intentially copy parts of the OS X user experience. Again, this has absolutely nothing to do with both OS X and Linux sharing a UNIX base. Let's not pretend otherwise. You bring up the Finder as an example, yet the file manager today looks completely different from what it used to back in the OS X Cheetah-Jaguar days. Where does that leave your story? The way it seems you're mixing up two different things.

i'm sorry but i see little similarity between the cinnammon menu and one obscure OSX GUI element.....

If you don't see how both menus share the exact same border design you're blind. There's also nothing obscure about a menu design that takes up a central role within the OS X desktop experience. These distros will never get off the ground or be taken seriously if they're little more than a poor popular OS rip-off. The most extreme example one can give is ElementaryOS. Probably one of the reasons why Ubuntu is doing so well it because it looks like its own product: it doesn't try to be something it's not. Maybe others should do the same.

[redvamp128]

I don't see it as such, so no worries. ;) However what you wrote down has absolutely nothing to do with the appearance of interface elements, i.e. artwork and such. The base doesn't contain any traces Aqua nor the Brushed aluminum interface. These distros look alike because the designers intentially copy parts of the OS X user experience. Again, this has absolutely nothing to do with both OS X and Linux sharing a UNIX base. Let's not pretend otherwise. You bring up the Finder as an example, yet the file manager today looks completely different from what it used to back in the OS X Cheetah-Jaguar days. Where does that leave your story? The way it seems you're mixing up two different things.

I was just using Finder as one example that a lot of people think/feel that Linux copied OSX ;however,people seem to forget that it evolved from Find which because of GPL it must be shared back and thus can be used in linux/unix/bsd.

You say-The base doesn't contain any traces Aqua nor the Brushed aluminum interface.

The way it affects the looks is that the a "Menu ,Themes, and File manager" engine itself falls under GPL which includes any themes.

Which would also include the brushed metal/ aqua is because it is a theme and all themes fall under that GPL.

[Colin McGregor]

i use cinnamon in gentoo. Like it way better then gnomeshell

[.Neo]

I was just using Finder as one example that a lot of people think/feel that Linux copied OSX ;however,people seem to forget that it evolved from Find which because of GPL it must be shared back and thus can be used in linux/unix/bsd.

You say-The base doesn't contain any traces Aqua nor the Brushed aluminum interface.

The way it affects the looks is that the a "Menu ,Themes, and File manager" engine itself falls under GPL which includes any themes.

Which would also include the brushed metal/ aqua is because it is a theme and all themes fall under that GPL.

You seem to be confused about what parts of OS X are open source and which aren't. Furthermore Aqua isn't just a theme, it's the entire OS X user experience which most definitely isn't open source and quite a few aspects have been patented. You act as if pretty much the entire OS is open source and everything has to be shared back to the community which also isn't the case, not by a long shot. The original OS X Finder was based off the NeXTSTEP File Viewer but since underwent multiple rewrites, arguably the biggest during OS X Snow Leopard's development when it was completely rewritten in Cocoa. The Finder is proprietary software (EULA) and isn't licensed under GNU GPL. No idea where you're getting that from.

Here's an overview of what's open source in OS X: http://www.apple.com/opensource/

Anyway, this is completely off-topic.