Qubes OS XFCE looks like it came out of 2010. This is easy to improve and there a ton of examples for how it can be done. All modern operating systems come with good ricing by default. Qubes os cannot be compared to macos, windows, nevermind some of the newer Linux distros that took off like Omarchy, Cachyos and many more! We already have different themes, so this is not something that would worsen the default security. Except that all the themes we have barely change anything except for dark/light and they look horrible and outdated! All the icons look like they came from 2010. The tray looks the same. Omarchy has proved how important aesthetics are for an operating system! It is just stupid arch linux with a bunch of scripts yet it managed to raise $18 million in a year whereas Qubesos which is an original and clever idea has only raised $200k in 15 years! The aesthetics need serious improvement because this is horribly outdated and when someone sees the default XFCE settings they probably think i’m using something retro and junky when that is not the case at all! I await your counterarguments on this subject.
Gaming on qubes
Gaming on qubes can be made easier for those who are willing to sacrifice their security for more functionality. It can be done in two ways which don’t have to be exclusive! One way: a script that sets up a gaming qube with gpu passtrhough with GUI. It does not need to be enabled by default and there can be multiple warnings for the person who wants to run the script. We already have a bunch of templates that can be installed easily like the minimal ones. Another approach is cloud gaming. There can be partnerships with cloud gaming companies, and this is great from a security perspective too! Why? Because you will not run any of the games on your own hardware and you don’t have to setup gpu passthrough. What can be done? A qube that’s setup with all the necessary packages and that can be instaleld with a GUI script like all the other templates we can opt in for! I await your counterarguments on this subject.
Agentic workflows
It is unthinkable that Omarchy is becoming the standard for agentic workflows instead of Qubes! Qubes architecture is perfect for agentic workflows! Why? Because you can have specific qubes only for that purpose and have multiple of them, so that if an agent ruins your system by downloading something shadey or deletes your /home/ folder you don’t have to care! What can be done? We can have qubes that are opt in and that are installed with a GUI script and setup with everything needed for agentic workflows like omarchy does! Omarchy is a stupid arch with stupid scripts and yet it got so much money. It has serious security issues even besides the fact that the agentic workflows get desktop use permissions, browser permissions and code execution permissions! This is why Qubes os is great for this! It can give all of those permissions in isolated qubes! I await your counterarguments on this subject.
Marketing
Qubes os marketing is horrible! It is unthinkable that qubes os could only raise $200k while Omarchy raised $18 million. There are a ton of influencers who would make a video on qubes os just because it is unique and interesting and it would give them views! NetworkChuck was one of them and LinusTechTips can be another. There are hundreds of them. All of them could promote the operating system. Qubes os can also reach out to organizations like GrapheneOS does! GrapheneOS also got millions in public and private grants! I await your counterarguments on this subject.
How do all of these improve security of qubes and why “it is not our goal” is not a valid argument.
All of these indirectly improve the security of qubes! How? By increasing the amount of users, resources and potentially even becoming the standard for new purposes of computing like agentic workflows! All that money could then be used on improving the security of Qubes OS! It is not unthinkable to think that one day qubes os could even move on from the insecure linux kernel if it gets enough money. I await your counterarguments on this subject.
More templates!
Why isn’t kicksecure by default an option for a template that we can install? And that includes many others like Kali Linux, TorVM and many others! Why do we have to import them from a developer @uman instead of having the option to do so in a gui. This is how we reach more users! I await your counterarguments on this subject.
Qubes OS have magnificent potential in this area.
I’m doing simple automation with bash scripting to run 2 AI environments and I have to admit that maintaining it is kinda time consuming.
The biggest obstacle is my lack of knowledge of how to orchestrate qubes.
The second will be limited amount of resources/tools to make an orchestrator inside dom0 not even talking about shire complexity of work that have to be done. It have to be some kind of
̶K̶ Qubernetes for VM.
As AI working environment would require some locally runnig file sharing and general communication among AI VM’s and user ‘editor’, ‘browser’ and ‘management’ VM’s.
For various reasons I personally have no interest in Ricing, and it
seems to add nothing to security. Users who reject Qubes on the grounds
of absence of ricing are probably not the target audience.
I do not know where you gathered the figure of 200k. From published
information Qubes has raised over 3.5m, as well as donations, early
funding from ITL, etc.
You are wrong about the funding raised, and seem to have no idea of what
marketing efforts there are, or what coverage of Qubes there has been.
Is Kicksecure out of alpha? In any case, Kicksecure is available as a
template that you can install using exactly the same tools as any
other template. (So are the templates I produce with one minor
configuration change.) How do you not know this? How did you feel confident
enough to comment without checking such basic facts?
I never presume to speak for the Qubes team.
When I comment in the Forum I speak for myself.
Qubes OS XFCE looks like it came out of 2010. This is easy to improve and there a ton of examples for how it can be done. All modern operating systems come with good ricing by default. Qubes os cannot be compared to macos, windows, nevermind some of the newer Linux distros that took off like Omarchy, Cachyos and many more! We already have different themes, so this is not something that would worsen the default security. Except that all the themes we have barely change anything except for dark/light and they look horrible and outdated! All the icons look like they came from 2010. The tray looks the same. Omarchy has proved how important aesthetics are for an operating system! It is just stupid arch linux with a bunch of scripts yet it managed to raise $18 million in a year whereas Qubesos which is an original and clever idea has only raised $200k in 15 years! The aesthetics need serious improvement because this is horribly outdated and when someone sees the default XFCE settings they probably think i’m using something retro and junky when that is not the case at all! I await your counterarguments on this subject.
The look of the menus or how outdated they look is irrelevant when compared to how users feel when they use the UI. The Qubes UI is far from being slick functionally. There is friction everywhere. To me it makes no sense trying to polish it with a new look. Did GNOME actually benefit from modernization and all the anti-patterns removed or has KDE grown in market share? My personal bias shows there, of course. Maybe scientific user data proves my thoughts wrong.
I thought Omarchy’s success was based on how they made it easy to get functional tiling window manager with great slick usability for keyboard. I thought the success happened because they removed friction instead of creating it with a new look.
I do not know what went wrong. But I want to see what Qubes OS can do.
Subject related with security are source of needs of Qubes OS.
We use web-browsers more often in business than before. This is means we cannot disable java-script for “the computer account of business”. We work for several companies. (Full-time employment is not so regular even in excellent companies. The worker must protect one company form the other by using different qubes.
Game is bad for security. I know it. But, programming language form of computer algebra system damages the PC more. It makes PC hotter and makes the durability low. Unfortunately, the PC crashes at an unexpected time. PC run under 90% of capacity break many things. I am not surprised if weakening of security is also involved.
Despite that we use PC for regular works and computer algebra system or simulation tools. Scientific simulation is one of the area companies want to protect.
Some people decide to use the same PC for work and game. They do not want to use two PC at the same period.
I see business chance in game.
I confess I do not use the same PC for triple purposes of the game, computer algebra system and development of Giga-size software.
I am focusing on my business which requires some specific settings. I cannot join heavy arguments but it is my obligation to say that I use Qubes OS after I found insecure use is growing in my business.
Funny. My AI assistant always keeps exploring the “cool” idea of making use of Qubes for agentic workflows to improve security and isolation. So far it did not come with any sensible design, so I discard it as usual “AI noise” which it makes of general knowledge of some of my areas of research. I would admit its autonomous explorations never were really productive.
Ugh! Your answers on any suggestions are unbearable! It does add to security in the way I explained, by attracting more users and funds! No one will buy a house that’s built according to the highest standards if it has no facades and it looks awful! No one will purchase a bus that is safe and drives fast if it looks like a brick! Aesthetics matter, and this is EASY TO FIX!!! Users may not reject qubes on the grounds of absense of ricing, but you will lose a lot of potential new users who would see an OS that LOOKS EXTREMELY GOOD on top of being secure! Because it doesn’t detract anything from security and because it’s an easy fix, this is a MUST DO! Your target audience are users of all backgrounds who want to have security. That includes people who care about aesthetics. There is no rational reason not to do it besides “I personally have no interest” which can be interpreted as “I’m too lazy to do it and can make the excuse that is not our goal”.
Great! But many popular youtubers are YET to make a video on Qubes OS!!!
They are not! They are not available in the Qubes Template Manager!!!
GNOME modernization was AWFUL!!! If you want to look how modern OS should look, look at macos, cachyos and omarchy!! This is also what the linux community likes too so it makes sense!!
Completely irrelevant because this is NOT my preference!! It is objective which is why all modern operating systems look the same and why the linux distros that take off all have great aesthetics! But even if that wasn’t the case I am asking for MORE THEMES that add an actual difference and not asking for my preference (and everyone else’s) to be made default. I think it is reasonable that there is an option for them at all in the system instead of a bunch of themes that look the same!!!
Well, if aesthetics are not your thing, why are you posting about them? If you think about the word itself, there is nothing more subjective than aesthetics.
By the way, some of your ‘modern’ examples are far from ethical and/or secure.
You don’t know what my examples are! I am not suggesting a switch from XFCE nor is that necessary! XFCE can be tweaked to look modern without compromising any security or switching to Hyprland! You are ignorant!
Completely wrong! Anyone who studied architecture can attest! There are tastes but there are various examples of beauty that hold true regardless of the style, symmetry being one of them! My mother is an architect and she could write you an entire essay about it! Operating systems’ aesthetics are not any different, and the proof for that is the direction in which every operating system besides Qubes os is heading and how similar macos is to riced hyprland configs! Enough said about that!
I wrote about the ancient Greek word, not some arbitrary principles derived from the Renaissance. Please read it again.
Alas… Even though quantity is no guarantee of quality, you do have some empirical evidence here: Unman doesn’t care about aesthetics. Neither do I (if something bothers me, I change it myself). Otherwise, I get used to it. But it would never occur to me to demand that others adapt it to suit me.
That is not what I’m doing! I am giving examples backed with tons of proof about how people care about the aesthetics of the OS and how by not doing anything about it for 15 years Qubes os is losing out on a lot of potential users!! This is not a matter of me asking for something to adapt to me, but for something to adapt to modern UI design like every other operating system has!!!
Qubes is open source. why not contribute the change you want to see instead of insulting the hard work of others, like Nina and Marta. I think their contributions to the Qubes aesthetic were great and of course their work could be improved. All it takes is one motivated person willing to do the actual work.
