I did it because my computer was a POS. But then it turns out I have a minimalism kink, so I've been doing that ever since.

I use XFCE btw

> I use XFCE btw

No offense, but I cannot possibly trust your judgement when you use a DE that, by default, is the classic example of no window borders for the mouse to grab onto.

This must depend on how you configure it.

I do not remember how I have configured it, perhaps the window border width is determined by the window theme (I use Chicago95), but I have also been using XFCE for many years and I have decent-sized window borders on my 4k monitors and my mouse theme (Hackneyed 48x48) has extremely obvious mouse cursor shape changes whenever you touch the window borders, so they are easy to grab.

It is defined by the theme.

The default theme that XFCE ships with has a 1px grabbing area set. So it's not that the cursor doesn't change, it's just you have to be very precise.

There are "fixes" where people hack the theme to increase the size of some transparent images to force a larger grabble area or telling people that they are holding it wrong.

On many Linux DEs you have “Alt-drag” and “Alt-resize”. It is absolutely amazing, and luckily there are hacks to get that on Windows too.

Alt + click-and-drag solves that problem.

Also I use i3 so my windows are tiled most of the time.

Having boarders that are bigger than 1px would solve that problem.

Anything else is a work around poor UX.

The fact that decades later it is still an issue is really disappointing.

Agree to disagree I guess. I don't need a window border when I can drag/resize the window from anywhere in that window.

I do need window borders. A good interface would allow enough configuration that we both could have what we want.

> A good interface would allow enough configuration that we both could have what we want.

Like Windows, from at least 3.1 (ca 1987?) to at least mid-life of Windows 7 (ca 2012-14?). The item under discussion, window border width, used to be settable from 0 up to... Pretty much all of your screen. (But from some update somewhere halfway through W7, it defaulted to at least one pixel however hard you tried to set it to zero.)

Agreed.

I don't "agree to disagree", they offer a function that's unusable.

It would be the equivalent of MacOS breaking the ability to double click on an app.

But it's okay because you could use Spotlight.

That's great and all, but if everything else allows double clicking and MacOS allowed double clicking but only on the absolute centre pixel, we would all consider it broken.

For me it's more like being disappointed that there's no way to start the engine in my car with a hand crank, instead of using the key.

Some older (pre 21st century ) motorcycles have a kick starter in addition to the electric one, and it does actually come in handy.

On newer bikes if the starter fails or the battery dies you need to unceremoniously push the bike to speed, jump on and put it on first.

> Some older (pre 21st century ) motorcycles have a kick starter in addition to the electric one, and it does actually come in handy.

AFAIK quite a lot of 21st-century motorbikes still have that. (Some of them probably still only have that.)

>Having boarders that are bigger than 1px would solve that problem.

In a world without borders, there would be no problem of Gates.

Yep I got into the habit of doing that because I run XP in a virtual machine for legacy junk. I actually had opportunity to run classic MacOS recently and realize that I largely prefer the 10.x UI especially once they started toning down the decorations. Classic MacOS got a lot of things right that are missing in current operating systems, but man is it ugly.