An uncle that uses a disk platter on his head and calls himself “member of the Church of Emacs”.

I don’t know if I’m doing something wrong, but I have a secondary SSD in my laptop that I mount on /mnt/elyssa and in every DE and distro I tried it appeared as a removable drive with the “eject” button. Right now I use Fedora with Gnome and if I install this extension or enable the removable drives option in Dash to Dock, it shows me that drive. Maybe some mount option in Gnome Disks, but since it’s not that big of a problem, I haven’t looked too much into it.

Some weeks ago I tried to install Arch on an old laptop, and since it have been many years since I’ve installed Arch for the last time, and I’ve heard good things about archinstall, I decided to try it. Nothing fancy: single drive, LXQt, no encryption, auto partitioning…

I tried maybe 4 or 5 times, configuring different settings in the script, and every single time it gave me a broken installation: no GRUB, or no display manager, or incorrect video driver (Intel, no Nvidia here). I supposedly configured all the options correctly, but I never got a working system. In the end I snapped and searched for some video tutorial and installed Arch the old way. I have no desire to use that script again, at least for a long time.

But people in the 90s were doing their work just fine, with that same UX paradigm. What’s the difference now?

Just to be clear, I’m not saying that software’s UI and UX doesn’t need to evolve. But it bothers me that a perfectly usable UI gets criticized only because it’s “old” and doesn’t look “modern” (tf is a “modern UI”, btw?).

So, the problem is that people doesn’t have a working memory anymore, is that so?

What’s wrong with the 90s UX? It lets you do your work without being intrusive or annoying, so what’s wrong with it?