>>1736>Very few features, the features it has are shell utilities written in CThis is by design. You might say that bash has
too many features.
See: Unix Philosophy ("Do one thing and do it well" and "work with strings, because they're all like, awesome and shit" [that second part may have been paraphrased…]); in other words, the purpose of the shell is to run other programs.
>There are many ways to do things and yest there is no standardizationThere are actually a few standards and common conventions for Unix-like operating systems, and I've yet to see a case where having more than one way to do things is bad. Also, making a new shell will really only add to the chaos.
See: POSIX (a widely-accepted standard for modern Unix-like systems, including a specification for a shell, which bash extends)
>There are no types, everything is a string that needs to be parsed (why can't numbers be numbers and objects be a thing?)See: Windows PowerShell (a massive, intricate shell framework built on top of .NET which embodies this concept), Unix Philosophy
>and bash is not a real language.It has arrays, conditional statements, loops, functions, variables, support for arithmetic, and basic file I/O.
What more could you want?
No arguments on any of your other points, though.
>>1734>why do you hate desktop environments1.) xbox huge, and then there are dependencies
2.) "extensible" means "look at all these extra checkboxes we added!"
3.) "customizable" means "you can set your desktop wallpaper to a slideshow!"
4.) Only rarely can you remove unused features without building a modified version yourself, or outright forking it
5.) Almost universally mouse-driven
Every time someone opens a "Preferences" dialog, a kitten gets hit by a truck6.) muh tiles, where are they?
7.) Pretty graphics are considered an important feature rather than icing on the cake
8.) Often hilarious results in multihead setups
Though admittedly, this is a bit better now.
9.) Either an application is written
for the DE, or it sticks out like a sore thumb
Case in point: The GTK+ "double window border" debacle