If not for security implications, I'd almost rather use a 2010 version of a linux desktop and add on the one or two components (like Rofi) that would make it perfect, than constantly have to scale back the stupid design ideas on modern desktops.

Even my beloved #KDE #Plasma requires tweaking, particularly restoring the scroll bar buttons (yes, they're occasionally useful, no I don't use a trackpad or trackpoint most of the time), and especially restoring proper contrast between active and inactive window titlebars.

Go look at Apple Lisa and Macintosh titlebars from 1983/4 before you try to tell me that light gray vs dark gray is the way to go for that. Yes, I know those were monochrome systems, the point is that they made the difference very glaring, even when screens were so much smaller.

The modern design choice of having active and inactive window titlebars look almost identical is freaking braindead and I will absolutely die on this hill.

P.S. I've literally compared modern Ubuntu Mate and Ubuntu 2010.something in VMs side-by-side, and I actually liked old Gnome 2.x over modern Mate. Other than the clunky application launcher menu, everything was just more visually clear, contrasty, easier to use and easier to read.