The NeXT-Best Thing: GNUSTEP 0.9.4 Live CD 444
roard writes "Following the NeXT tradition with mixed case, GNUSTEP is a live CD/distribution while GNUstep is an implementation of the OpenStep API. GNUSTEP is based on Morphix, and uses the GNUstep libraries and GNUstep-based applications to provide a NeXTSTEP-like environment that people can easily test and use. This new 0.9.4 release comes 8 months since the precedent 0.5 release, and brings a lot of new GNUstep applications with it, as well as an upgrade of the GNUstep libraries and the development tools. In other news, a small demonstration of GNUstep development tools is available in Flash or divx. The old dream of having a GNU OS with Hurd and an OpenStep implementation doesn't seems that far now ;)"
Re:This Should Be THE Desktop Environment for Linu (Score:2, Insightful)
If you want an evironment where The Voice Of God comes down and tells everyone stop their C/C++ crap and go write Objective C programs, use OS X. It's never going to happen with Linux.
Too much! (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm waiting for the MP/M [z80.de] LiveCD!
yeah... but it looks like its from the 80s (Score:4, Insightful)
really, it looks terrible.
it is a good framework, and brilliantly implemented in OS X... but this GNU look is really awful! they need artists... LOTS of artists.
i could barely even follow the demo as the IDE and general look of the thing was so confusing and horrible that i wasn't able to even see where the obvious buttons were to press.
they may be doing wonders with implementing the whole framework... but it needs polish.
Re:Plus it isn't open source. (Score:3, Insightful)
Looks neat, but... (Score:4, Insightful)
I do, however, have two minor criticisms.
Firstly, please, please update the look-and-feel. If you want to be taken seriously, don't look like a reject from the 80s. Given GNUsteps modularity, this should be easy enough to do. So, do it. (Tip: application icons should always have labels, because since they're supposed to be unique you can pretty much guarantee they're going to be unfamiliar to someone.)
Secondly, I didn't see any support for layout management in Gorm --- that application was constructed by just placing absolute-sized objects at absolute positions in a window. Please tell me this isn't how you design all applications... because that way leads to inflexible, unscalable, uncustomisable applications, and there's no excuse for that any more. Fixed layouts mean you can't let the user change fonts, because different fonts are different shapes (you can't just scale linearly). Fixed layouts mean wasted screen estate (remember the old Mac file browser dialogues that would float a tiny, eight-line scrollable list in the middle of a 21" monitor?). Fixed layouts are just wrong.
Seeing the trees, but missing the forest... (Score:5, Insightful)
Writing a complete framework with rich, well thought-out object libraries? Now that is a feat. GNUStep is a lurker project that is getting close to hitting critical mass. They've got the hard stuff done that others are still swinging at but not quite hitting.
No, the GNUStep people have been much more concerned with laying sewer lines, roadways, electrical grids, water, gas, etc. When they get around to picking the color for their street signs, it'll be good.
Some work is already going into theming. [roard.com]
Now that GNUStep is getting really close to being complete, I hope they look at Cairo as a base for doing something similar to Quartz.
-Peter
Re:This Should Be THE Desktop Environment for Linu (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Plus it isn't open source. (Score:3, Insightful)
You sure 'bout that? [slashdot.org]
And as far as viruses, if you think that something that requires active user input and a password to run, then all UNIX-type systems are vulnerable thusly:
sudo rm -rf
Save that with executable permission and send it to your Linux-using buddies, see what happens when they run it. But it ain't a virus.
(tig)
Gee, who'd have figured another distro? (Score:1, Insightful)
Keep it up, we'll have nothing left but crumbs! We'll have hundreds of distributions, and 1 or 2 users running each flavor. Open source will be terribly important cuz you'll NEVER get a working piece of software without spending a decade writing it yourself, or recompile, troubleshoot, recompile, troubleshoot, repeat, repeat, etc on someone's port for GNUStep, GNUSTEP, OpenStep, or NeXT.
This is getting out of hand.
Hellooo? (Score:4, Insightful)
This is developed (apparently) by folks from Intel. It's just that nobody can't be bothered to include it into the kernel.
ACPI spec is publicly available, but nobody can be bothered to fully implement it.
Finally, nice examples of UI are available even within OSS community, yet every distro out there ships with UI that was, it seems, put together by a teenager.
Re:yeah... but it looks like its from the 80s (Score:3, Insightful)
Agreed (Score:4, Insightful)
In fact, even Gnome is too much like Windows; even tho it does incorporate some OS X like features as well. But it also seems too fragile and it seems to be going more along the lines of C# dev, which I'm definitely not partial to (it's a mistake guys!).
Obviously, I feel that NeXT/OpenStep got a lot of things goin in the right direction. Turning away from the copy-all-Windows-features mindset seems to be the more logical choice. Will Gnome and KDE still exist? Absolutely. But Windowmaker - regardless of its sometimes slow development pace - is much more of a joy to use than whatever the current default Gnome window mananger is.
I spent many years developing in a Windowmaker environment and they were quite productive. That time changed the way I looked at using my desktop and even though I've switched to OS X, I can still tweak it to work like Windowmaker. So I'll have to second it as the official desktop env for Linux, hands down.
Re:yeah... but it looks like its from the 80s (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Plus it isn't open source. (Score:1, Insightful)
The SCO case is currently against IBM, and only IBM, for contract violation.
While SCO has attempted to spread FUD about Linux, no case disputing Linux intellectual property is currently in litigation.
The only way you could possibly think otherwise is if you read Slashdot headlines but never RTFA.
You are a fanboy.
Re:Hellooo? (Score:1, Insightful)
Plus even if ACPI support was perfect, the rest of the software support for suspend/resume probably needs work.
Re:Plus it isn't open source. (Score:1, Insightful)
I'm being pedantic, but : Quartz is the basically the whole windowing system, and has existed since NeXTStep (with a different name), Quartz Exteme is just a marketing name for a particular type of hardware accelleration of Quartz functions. (And *NO*, Windows does not have an equivalent feature -- GDI is not the same thing -- Longhorn's Unified Compositing Engine *IS*)
(if i can educate ONE person with this...)
Damnit... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Come on! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:This Should Be THE Desktop Environment for Linu (Score:2, Insightful)
"If you want an evironment where The Voice Of God comes down and tells everyone stop their C/C++ crap and go write Objective C programs, use OS X. It's never going to happen with Linux."
This comes off a lot like, "who cares if it's better, we're all used to something worse and we plan on sticking with it." Which is very much the same argument made by Windows advocates against Linux.
And this does not sum up the attitude of a lot of Linux users? What if it was stated like this:
"Who cares if it's better, we're all used to the same tools we had 30 years ago and we plan on sticking with them."
[[Non-troll disclaimer:]]
Yes, this is a broad generalization. No, it doesn't describe every Linux/Unix user. Yes, there is still a lot of truth in it.
The OP has it right. It's impossible to enforce a development environment or methodology (or pretty much any standard) unless either you control the platform (like Apple does), or there's already a de facto standard in place (C programming, for instance).
It's like flatland. (Score:1, Insightful)
GNUStep is GNUstep is GNUstep, whether on Windows, OS X, Linux, or the friggin HURD.. You don't have problems compiling against someone's build of GTK/GTK2.
Re:Seeing the trees, but missing the forest... (Score:1, Insightful)
Writing a framework with object libraries? That's easy, get some programmers together with a team leader.
Creating a cohesive visual style that not only looks good, but is also functional, consistent and intuitive? Now that is a feat.
Now watch while I don't end a mild observation with a sweeping generalisation!
Re:yeah... but it looks like its from the 80s (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:yeah... but it looks like its from the 80s (Score:2, Insightful)
NeXTStep always was, and remains, *the* single most refined, elegant and attractive computer user interface there has *ever* been and nothing else in the world comes close apart from its own descendant, OS X - and Aqua has an excess of eyecandy and textures and needless crap, just because they could. If I could disable it all and go back to the NeXT interface, I would, in a second. For my Windows boxes, one of the first things I do on installation is define a custom colourscheme of NeXT's muted greys and get rid of all the shaded title bars and other needless crap that just pollutes the GUI.
Windows XP's Luna is lairy and Teletubbies-like but not actually garish. SuSE's default KDE theme is so loud it almost makes my eyes bleed and the same goes for most Linux GUIs. Only Redhat's Bluecurve is *remotely* professional-looking and it's too fussy with its irritating and distracting textures and stripe effects. [Shudders in delicate disgust]
Most of the themes I've ever seen for xNix GUIs look like they were designed by colourblind teenage heavy metal freaks. I have yet to see
Please $DEITY may GNUstep never lose its NeXTish elegance in favour of the tasteless crud that pervades the rest of the desktop world.
Save us from GUIs designed by the sort of kid who'd buy a Porsche and paint it in orange and green flames with a few skulls and chrome highlights. Or the sort of person who thinks that a PC is somehow improved by putting a window in the side, filling it with dayglo neon plastic and a few striplights. I mean,
Re:Plus it isn't open source. (Score:3, Insightful)
With Mac OS X, simply looking at how many units Apple shipped will tell you how many people are adopting Mac OS X. It's quite an accurate indicator and it can be trusted.
With Linux, there are many commercial distributions (Red Hat, SuSE, etc) as well a number of wildly popular free ones (Debian, Slackware). You can buy servers with these pre-installed, but I would be surprised if most Linux deployments were obtained this way. As there are no restrictions on redistribution of GPL'd code (unless changes have been made, obviously, in which case those changes must be made available), how many instances of say, Red Hat Linux sold will tell you nothing whatever about how many systems actually run the OS.
Even with Windows, it's difficult to say; Windows comes pre-installed on most systems whether you want it or not. While I wouldn't expect that a startlingly large percentage of Windows machines have their OS replaced immediately after being bought, it is undeniable that a number of them do (my laptop, for example, came with Windows XP, but now runs Debian). Again, I'm not saying we're a huge percentage -- but we are a percentage.
Really, Mac OS X is pretty much the only OS on the market today whose deployment can be accurately measured with unit shipments (although I don't doubt that there are some people out there that would buy PPC hardware and run Linux or *BSD -- I would, no offense to OS X).
So basically, Apple being the world's largest vendor of UNIX means only that Apple sells more UNIX than any other company -- which means nothing with respect to Linux, and IIRC, at least currently, there are more Linux boxes than there are Mac OS X boxes, by a long shot (although I wouldn't be surprised, given Apple's rising popularity, if this were to change in the near future).
Anyway, I'm not disparaging the Macintosh, or your facts, just pointing out that your argument is pretty much non sequitur in this context. If you were comparing Apple to say, Sun, you'd be much more on the mark.
Re:Hurd? (Score:3, Insightful)
The Power of Lisp lies in that messy syntax is the problem. Without it the macro system wouldn't be possible.
The syntax is actually really easy to use, even without a text editor to balance parenthesis for you. The problem is that it isn't easy to use at first, especially if you have prior programming knowledge with one of the many Algol-like languages. It also takes a bit of knowledge of functional programming because it is often easier to do things functionally than imperatively (especially when you have a compiler that ensures tail call optimization).
Of course, there is room for many different programming languages and there are enough users of Lisp to keep it alive and that's all that really matters. The rest of the world can suffer with C and C++ :)
SML is cool, I know a guy who did some work on the SML/NJ compiler (I think it was SML/NJ, it might have been another one but it was at CMU that he did it). I prefer Lisp even though I probably should prefer SML :)