Agreed, mostly. To me the effectiveness of window managers is a bellwether of the control aspect. So, IMO, if you compare them on control or on the quality of window managers, you'll get the same result. Linux has ended up with many window managers (effectively catering to various styles and needs), while macos, for example, has a one-size-fits-all approach with no REAL multiple-desktops (Spaces is a joke and a toy). As a result, I can easily manage 50-100 open terminal windows on my linux box, but on macos 5 is too many (and if I use Spaces to fit a few more, I can't get to the terminal I need in less than a second. In linux, even with 100 xterms, I can). So, a macos product manager might probably ask me why I would want 100 terminal windows, to find me some alternative. In linux no one asks me that question, and hence I can have what I want.
Comments
Agreed, mostly. To me the effectiveness of window managers is a bellwether of the control aspect. So, IMO, if you compare them on control or on the quality of window managers, you'll get the same result. Linux has ended up with many window managers (effectively catering to various styles and needs), while macos, for example, has a one-size-fits-all approach with no REAL multiple-desktops (Spaces is a joke and a toy). As a result, I can easily manage 50-100 open terminal windows on my linux box, but on macos 5 is too many (and if I use Spaces to fit a few more, I can't get to the terminal I need in less than a second. In linux, even with 100 xterms, I can). So, a macos product manager might probably ask me why I would want 100 terminal windows, to find me some alternative. In linux no one asks me that question, and hence I can have what I want.