Attempts at standardizing userlands is long forgotten, now a mess...

Oops, I got those first two post links reversed, that part was in response to the other guy.

TL;DR

Mac UI being good pre-OS X was a meme. Other than the technical issues of it freezing all the time due to having no pre-emption, quacking at you for unknown reasons, merging things into the title bar in ways no one understood, buckshot windows, etc. it had just straight up on another fucking planet ideas like having to drag your disk to the trash to eject it. I don't think I ever saw that explained to someone where they didn't treat it like they were having their leg pulled.

What are buckshot windows? The quacking or error sound is easy to understand in that you can't use that area of the screen. I don't know what you are talking about with title bar or freezing issues. You didn't have to drag it to the trash to eject. You could go to the Special menu, like a normal person, and select Eject. Since you have to use Special menu to empty the Trash anyways.

...

What's going on here, Zig Forums?
We have this thread shitting about Uriel, this shitting about cat-v and countless posts about how C and Unix is shitty despite the fact that the poster is using a Unix like programmed with C OS and a web browser with at least some component written in C.

Here this red herring again, people blaming programmer laziness to Unix. The Unix philosophy states: develop small, specialized programs that work together, use text interfaces because text is universal (but is possible to use binary). There's nothing there saying produce buggy unreliable programs whenever possible.
If you are talking about the Worse is Better paper, even the author admits he is attacking a strawman.

The "you use it so you must like it" mentality is patently false -- some of the employed people here use Windows; do you think they like it? The problem with C and UNIX culture is that it takes millions of lines of code for little effect (the browsers and operating systems you're talking about). Forget lambda as a hardware primitive, Eunuch lovers cannot even imagine that CPU architectures with built-in array bounds and type checking (which obsolete the entire computer security field as it now exists, in just the same way modern medicine obsoletes bloodletting) COULD have existed, let alone DID exist. On a Lisp Machine, these checks are always performed — because on a genuine LispM they cost nothing. C and UNIX are not simple - rather, they make you do boilerplate nonsense that was already trivialized years before they were engendered. This is a quote from the inventor of Forth:
"Complexity is the problem. Moving it from hardware to software, or vice versa, doesn’t help. Simplicity is the only answer. There was a product many years ago called the Canon Cat. It was a simple, dedicated word processor; done very nicely in Forth. Didn’t succeed commercially. But then, most products don’t. I despair. Technology, and our very civilization, will get more and more complex until it collapses. There is no opposing pressure to limit this growth. No environmental group saying: Count the parts in a hybrid car to judge its efficiency or reliability or maintainability. All I can do is provide existence proofs: Forth is a simple language; OKAD is a simple design tool; GreenArrays offers simple computer chips. No one is paying any attention.” You have been brainwashed into thinking only UNIX can be simple. To the now denigrated Lispers we owe garbage collection, all the roots of the modern GUI, dynamic typing, lexical scope, the very idea of a single-user computer workstation, and countless other innovations which so many people believe to have simply dropped from the sky. As an addendum, please read these:
xach.com/naggum/articles/3141310154691952@naggum.no.html

xach.com/naggum/articles/3088289335876823@naggum.no.html

Prove it.

Prove what? Greenspun's tenth rule? Look around you at what modern computing is. Now, rivet your eyes onto the world of 1979: dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/5731

You haven't proved anything.