OP has a habit of bumping their own threads after long periods, even when it's obvious that nothing good can ever come out of it anymore.

FWIW, the thing they keep harping on about seems to have existed, I think they posted a screenshot somewhere in this abomination of a thread.
It basically means that you can have multiple application windows in one window, like browser tabs. Fluxbox also has this feature I believe. Combined with some other features like hotkeys, manual tiling, workspaces?

Everything else, about the non-existent IISC and some "legal" standards borders on Q-anon FUD.

I invite everyone to start at post #1, doesn't take long to see where this is going.

Particularly funny:

Oh yeah, I remember. Horrible UI design if you ask me. But UI designs can be subjective. Agree - borders on Q-Anon FUD and is in my opinion, rambling nonsense. I remember the last Microsoft dictator stating that Linux was illegal, or some such nonsense, but he was also constantly spreading FUD.

Possible - assuming the OP is not just trolling (while possibly under the influence of some mind altering substance(s)).

I don't see how anyone could be that misinformed. The whole premise of the thread is based on the existence of an "IISC", who don't exist, who have supposedly passed "legal standards" which are only accessible by members, etc...

What should remove all doubt is the following statement:
A load of old bollocks posted by a troll is just that and nothing more - I don't see how this can be the result of ignorance / misunderstanding on the OP's part. Essentially this part says that there are "laws" to counter "hackers", but if those laws were published, the "hackers" would circumvent those laws...... but the "hackers" could just pay $300 and then...?

Has anyone looked at the OP's user profile...? Well out of morbid curiosity, I did, and it's pretty funny just like the OP's "claims"...

...and exactly what "Cyber Security Authority" ?? Not the CSA...

:wetting myself laughing:

I have done some research beyond the profile and yeah, same conclusion...all of these posts are utter nonsense and gibberish.

+1

Just did a quick search... found some buttock clenching stuff...

This one made me laugh.

I'm hesitant to link to his sites, but our fellow LQ'ers can search if they wish and "remove all doubt" for themselves...

^ yeah, I did some research at some point (through TOR) and it seems TBotNik is using all this to actively scam people. Funny, but not so funny.

Interesting and indeed not funny. From the content I have seen, my thoughts were more along the lines of a mental illness but I suppose people could fall for the gibberish and hire him/her thinking he/she is the best thing since sliced bread...

Seems it's both.

So "super windows"...

Mystery solved. KDE 4.x had the option to group Windows, arranged in tabs ("tabbed windows") - you can clearly see this in screenshots in posts #66, #67 and #69.

This was removed from plasma 5 and I'm not sure if it there are plans to reintroduce it or if it already has been reintroduced. The option exists in system settings in plasma 510 installed in Debian buster, but enabling/disabling it doesn't seem to change anything - Windows are not grouped in tabs.

Perhaps we need to send some "IISC" lawyers over to KDE to get this resolved.....

//edit: plasma 5.19 in FreeBSD 12.1-release ports doesn't have that checkbox in system settings at all. Must have been a relic from 4.x ...

Agree, we wouldn't want all KDE users to be in violation, risking their very freedom! ROFL...

You can do that in Fluxbox too. I can't remember exactly how, but if you drag a window to cover another one with a specific mouse button, they will coalesce. So you don't even need a full DE.

Yes Fluxbox definitely supports tabbed windows, I believe i3 does as well, though I've never used it, and there are likely a few more as well.

KDE and gnome projects are notorious for ditching features which some users might have relied on, so nothing new there - but with regards to KDE it's usually because when there is a new "major release" the whole thing is generally rebuilt from scratch on the newer Qt libraries rather than being based on earlier code - this was the case with 3.x to 4.x (similarly many users hated 4.x, and 3.x was forked) and I believe it has been the same with 5.x.