rHXN - Kumander Linux – A Linux Distro with a Windows 7 Desktop

Tiberium - 5 hours ago

I'm surprised that this distro's headline is "The Windows 7 experience on Linux" even though it's using a vague Windows-style XFCE theme.

If someone's interested in a real Windows 7 lookalike, take a look at https://gitgud.io/aeroshell/atp/aerothemeplasma, it's extremely close.

See for yourself:

- Kumander: https://www.kumander.org/img/images/kumander.png

- AeroShell: https://gitgud.io/aeroshell/atp/aerothemeplasma/-/raw/Plasma...

n3storm - 30 minutes ago

Never seen a long term used windows pc with transparency enabled, just when people asking "how to disable this? Is confusing.."

OsrsNeedsf2P - 4 hours ago

AeroShell seems to only have full support on X11. Didn't expect this argument to come up again

cantrememberpw8 - 3 hours ago

X11 is stable, mature, multiplatform, excellent software - wayland is not cross platform nor stable.

mixedCase - 42 minutes ago

Wayland is stable. What it's not is stagnant, like X11, which lacks fractional/mixed-DPI scaling, per-window HDR/color management, explicit GPU synchronization, and a security model ready for the modern challenges of the mid 90s.

It's also technically cross-platform, as evidenced by FreeBSD's support for Wayland compositors. But it's not its goal either, the goal is an excellent Linux desktop, not something that serves the 17 people in the world that routinely run the same exact desktop config on Linux and non-Linux PCs.

kombine - 1 hour ago

> wayland is not cross platform nor stable.

I've been using Wayland for two and a half years and it's been more stable than X11 that I've been using prior for years.

pseudony - 44 minutes ago

And I could say the opposite. Anecdata, it isn’t really helpful.

Fact is still that wayland does some things better, and a bunch og other things worse.

cosmic_cheese - 2 hours ago

AeroThemePlasma is by far the closest that exists now, but I think there’s still a space for DE dedicated to being as close of a Windows analogue as possible while remaining legally distinct with a fixed feature set to prevent feature and resource creep. Think a desktop close enough to the user’s choice between 2K, XP, 7, 10 or 11 that they could transition from Windows to Linux and barely even notice that there was a change.

I believe that “my favorite OS, frozen in time” has substantial demand (which will only increase as the big commercial OSes continue to enshittify) and it’s surprising that there aren’t more attempts to capitalize on that.

alexaholic - 19 minutes ago

Anyone remember Xandros? https://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=xandros

Iirc it was a bit wonky and it eventually convinced me that, if I wanted to ever use Linux, I didn't need a Windows UI — I needed to learn to use Linux.

chasil - 4 hours ago

As Microsoft has expressed, Aero is "cheesy."

Despite nostalgia, it was stripped in pursuit of a mobile-friendly UI (at the time).

'...calling the UI that debuted in Vista and continued in Windows 7, “cheesy” and “dated.”'

https://www.computerworld.com/article/1437474/microsoft-dump...

All Windows UIs will die, on Microsoft's time, not the user community.

pndy - 2 hours ago

Yes "cheesy" and "dated" because new Windows version was about to be released in 3 months from publication of that article. So marketing machine portraying everything old as bad and everything new as better was running full speed.

In the end we all know how "well" W8 was received due to Metro components. Slightly modified Aero theme was still there, all resource files like icons, graphics were largely carried in. Aesthetically and visually that version of Windows was like 5-year old would made a papier mache operating system of two different products.

pharos92 - 2 hours ago

I've always found Zorin to be windows-like enough to transition people to. It has it's own visual identity, and isn't trying to be a simulacrum of windows - making it much more enjoyable to use.

pharos92 - 2 hours ago

https://zorin.com/os/

userbinator - 4 hours ago

Is Windows 7 "retro" now? I personally still prefer the Windows Classic theme.

The logo looks like Firefox, Thunderbird, and a Charmander mixed together.

edoceo - 3 hours ago

Which classic? 3.0? 3.5.1? 4.0/95? Win2k? I think 2k was top-tier.

mook - 1 hour ago

Up to Win2k, I don't recall new releases of Windows leading to people lamenting the UI changes; I do remember people not liking the initial look of XP, though. Maybe it's just because complaints got more visible after the Internet became popular, though. But even now few people seem to have strong preferences for, say, Windows 1.0 (… which was pretty much a TUI, IIRC)

userbinator - 10 minutes ago

I believe Win9x all had basically the same UI appearance, and 2k just changed the default colours slightly (and they were always fully customisable, so no difficulty in changing them either.)

Windows 1.x/2.x were noted for being rather primitive, and similar to the "flat design" trend hated by many when Win8 came out. 3.x is when the UI elements became 3D, and then they retained nearly the same appearance until XP introduced the bitmap-based theme.

cyberax - 1 hour ago

WinXP with the "classic" theme was the best. Its default theme was goofy, but changing it took all of 10 seconds. Compared to Win2k, there were some minor improvements.

OuterVale - 2 hours ago

It is Windows 7 reminiscent, but it lacks the glassy appearance of Aero which is the defining characteristic of the OS' visual identity.

bdcravens - 3 hours ago

Looks more like a cross between XP and 7 to me.

wetpaws - 1 hour ago

[dead]