Comment by seec

Well I understand what you mean. At an individual developer level, it may look like it's not worth the trouble and just go with a simple terminal-based interface and a simple text file configuration.

But that's basically giving up because things look too hard. And this is why, even when there is a GUI, it tends to be pretty bad on Linux. There is an incentive problem.

As for the various competing standard and other nonsense (how many goddam distros are there in the first place?) its just inherent to the Marxist type of organisation, where there is no process to decide who has power and everyone is given equal weight in decision power regardless of their qualities (or lack thereof).

Linux as a thing just works because there is a benevolent dictator for the core part (paid by the "nasty" corporation the Linux zealots keep complaining about) and they get a lots or "second-hand" use of tools that were developed for other reasons.

The GUI problems just highlight the inherent weakness of this type of organisation/way of working, and makes you appreciate capitalism/meritocracy and commercial OS a lot more.

To be fair, the situation has improved for some specific distros but the only way to significantly change things would be to make it a commercial operation. This is what was tried with Ubuntu, and all the zealots are fighting everything tooth and nail; complaining about any meaningful improvement (recently, "snaps").

So, yes, I realize, but in my opinion it's still not a valid reason to not make a GUI. There are options. Or you can just forget Linux and make the tool with a GUI for an OS where it will be appreciated.