##Introduction
This post is mostly inspired by @veggrower who has some remarkably strong opinions and concerns about software bloat I figured I would address, share some thoughtful takes about the subject and move that kind of discourse elsewhere so we can better focus discussions which already exist.
I am going to break this article down into things which was said in one of veg's posts, which will explain in depth what I think about the subjects presented. This isn't about me wanting to drag him through the mud and make him look bad; there are legitimate concerns about the subjects presented, and I will attempt to present views as somebody fairly knowledgeable about Linux, addressing people who may not be as well versed to know what they may have in their pocket might be a Linux system like Android or Tizen.
##The burden of choice
###Choosing v. Chosen
Unfortunately, in the Linux ecosystem there is already too many choices of systems. There are hundreds of thousands of choices for distributions, each of them using their bootloaders, shells, desktop managers, desktop environments, compositors, related configurations &c. Ubuntu MATE is one of those nearly-endless choices, inspired by a need to maintain the "Old standards" Canonical set forth with Ubuntu.
To understand why Ubuntu MATE exists is to understand what happened between 2011 and 2012, where GNOME team decided to discontinue their efforts to focus on GNOME 2, and eventually deprecate it from their development cycle in favour for GTK3 and GNOME-Shell in a bid to make an interface any system can use which would be more suited for tablets, phones and other portable devices. Since the Ubuntu team at the time didn't want to use GNOME-Shell and wanted their own convergence play, Unity was developed which relies exclusively on Compiz 0.9.
Here, we already see a troubling issue; One team decided they would discontinue a work everyone knew and loved for their own ambitions and nearly overnight tore asunder the Ubuntu userbase with their polarizing decision to pursue tablets, while Canonical did the same their own way. For anyone familiar with Ubuntu pre-Unity, the end was nigh for their beloved desktop with changes which would force users into a new workflow they might not enjoy. In this scenario, users already made their choice and had a new choice foisted upon them which some never saw coming.
###Wanting the past
Later, Microsoft would make a similar decision of interface design with Windows 8 which not only created camps of users who would rather stick with Windows 7 but also continue to not sway users away from Windows XP. issues of interface changes in both the open-source and commercial fields yielded long-standing security issues where people don't want to change and would rather remain behind, forgoing "Common sense" and security improvements for something they know and love.
For people who are more flexible and fluid with what interface their system uses, a lot of ex-GNOME 2 users' exodus to different desktops like LXDE, XFCE and custom solutions never quite fit like the desktop they know and love having; 1) the majority of users come from Windows or Mac, 2) wanted something which was theirs and 3) believed to never change thereafter. The problem with this is once a user makes up their mind on what they want, they don't want their minds made up for them but the unfortunate truth is no matter which you stick with change will come and it will suck.
##Too much stuff
[quote="veggrower, post:10, topic:14367"]
The menus are cluttered with stuff. Get rid of it. There are endless and seemingly overlapping configuration menu entries. Get rid of what you can (mate-tweak). [sic][/quote]
###A problematic legacy
This, as well the "Complications" mentioned previously is a side-effect of GNOME 2 and old styles of menu sorting. Every desktop encounters this to some degree; the worst offender of these being Microsoft Windows and how programs of yore would always populate the Start menu with no option to avoid it. This has become better with time as programs offer choices to add both the start menu entries and desktop icons, but you can't fix the past, and the past was more rigid with how a software installer performed.
However this is also similar behaviour in most open-source environments which add launchers to menus, but rarely does software add new categories, instead new software launchers are inserted into defined categories and allow other menu programs to sort the software as a user wishes.
###Guidance to solutions
Software like mate-tweak and ubuntu-mate-welcome, Manjaro's manjaro-hello, Ubuntu's Unity keyboard shortcut guide and such exist to do things for the user in the least number of steps possible, without needing to memorize a lot of stuff. Somebody fresh from Windows may not know any help exists, and most greeting software sets out to guide absolute newbies through a system to improve their understanding of basic components, establish where they can find assistance elsewhere and help engage with a community of more knowledgeable users. Where more experienced users see bloat, other users see salvation, especially when the software meant to greet and guide also performs what the zeitgeist in our userlands consider "The basics".
##Look-alikes
[quote="veggrower, post:10, topic:14367"]
Ubuntu-mate doesn't have to imitate every os in the world. It should be comfortable and confident in its own skin. That is why I hate the new wallpaper. It clearly is a knock off of the mac os x wallpaper. [sic][/quote]
###Where I agree
Users should be allowed to find their own style. To define the look of their system means to make it theirs, down to function and appearance. However many don't bother to do this and instead of personalizing their experience, they see it as a tool where looks don't matter, so long it works. For those people, a sound, solid default is necessary.
Where I don't agree
Users who want to personalize their systems will most likely had used a computer before and want to emulate their workflow on another system. For some that even means making it look like something else, and having it function like something else. For those people imitation isn't just a sincere form of flattery, it is also necessary for them to function with their system, so they can use it to the best of their ability (within limitations imposed by the DE).
###Knockoffs
Regarding the wallpaper being an OS X-alike, people have been doing that kind of stuff for ages. People go as far as create shell scripts for present versions of systems (when they were written) to make their system look like Windows, Mac or anywhere in between. And it will still continue because people want to create familiar interfaces for people to use so they a) don't think they are using something else (initially) or b) would be more inclined to use something different if it looks the same (despite how foolish that mentality is, it may be a good ice-breaker.)
#users are stupid
[quote="veggrower, post:10, topic:14367"]
Welcome is essentially a browser based on webkit. UM already has a browser -Firefox. All that is needed is a link on the desktop or whatever to any online instructions. Simple. [sic][/quote]
In comparison to having a bunch of desktop items that may never be read, or worse removed from the filesystem and believing that otherwise-capable users don't know where to begin, having an application like ubuntu-mate-welcome is beneficial for users to become acclimated with their system and perform the first steps necessary for an optimal use experience. As somebody else mentioned, the first hours matter; for some the first impression they have of the system really matters, and no matter how they work with it thereafter they'll remember how their first few hours sucked if their experience is less-than-stellar.
Welcome is not meant to be an end-all guide for the user but rather present options complete newbies may be unfamiliar with, and provide resources where they can continue to find things out online. Not everyone is of equal capability, even if they have the appendages and brains to use them like other people do; software provided to assist the slow and "Dumb" through initial setup and software installation is beneficial to have, even better than .desktop files since they cannot delete it without learning how to use apt or understanding the structure of the root filesystem.
##Anything else?
Feel free to confirm or rebut whatever is above. We're here to talk, not cast blame and jab fingers into one another.
