GORM 1.0 Release to Take on GNOME/KDE? 451
qa'lth writes "Today marks the occasion of the release of Gorm 1.0, the Interface Builder for the GNUstep project, and with its release, comes the obsolesence of the GNOME and KDE projects. Finally, today, Free Software users can enjoy the power of a well-designed, powerful object-oriented system derived from OpenStep, legacy to the acclaimed MacOSX, through GNUstep, our loving reimplementation of the OpenStep standard."
Riiight. (Score:5, Insightful)
Riiight. 'Nuff Said.
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!!! (Score:2, Insightful)
WTF??? Not even Microsoft would dare make such blatant and patently false claims. I'm all for marketing but this is unadulterated bullshit and I don't even want to look at something that starts with BS like this!
who cares (Score:4, Insightful)
everyone is busy with eye candy and other useless add-ons and ignore basic operability and useability.
Thats one ugly interface (Score:1, Insightful)
-1 Flamebait (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Graphical Object Relationship Modeller (Score:2, Insightful)
I know Objective-C (I do my modelling in Cocoa), and I know how the dynamic bit works, but to say that it cannot be done in C++ is BS in principle. It cannot be done in the same way, but it surely can be done.
Re:Riiight. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Graphical Object Relationship Modeller (Score:2, Insightful)
That's crap, and if I had a blogger account I'd tell him where to go.
4) Dynamic binding: so you make a baseclass with all the common interfaces you'll need. If that's not good enough, C++ does support dynamic downcasting with run-time typing information.
1) Categories: I'm not 100% sure what he means but these sound like C#'s attributes. So build this kind of mechanism into your baseclass.
3) Protocols - WTF? If that means 'interface', well, yeah C++ does those well.
Re:Desktop wars. (Score:3, Insightful)
Hopefully never! As long as it lasts, there is competition, meaning rapid pace of development, choice, etc..
Re:Lighten up (Score:4, Insightful)
Because, incidentally, this is also a good way to create publicity for your pet project. Some would argue that this is page hit "whoring". Not that it is not a legitimate way of creating interest, but I understand those who have issues with this kind of "humor". In all honesty, you have to attribute a very good sense of irony (self-parody?) to the author to take the "joke" - and I don't know him enough to do just that. I don't exclude the possibility that what he said was in jest, but I understand those who get "riled up".
Re:You're close (Score:1, Insightful)
There are a few apps that are really great on OS X, but that is all I use it for. Linux is my primary OS. Just because all the pussy, wannabe users fled to OS X, doesn't mean that OS X is better. It's better than Windows, but that's about all that can be said for OS X.
Re:who cares (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Graphical Object Relationship Modeller (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Riiight. (Score:4, Insightful)
That said, the OPENSTEP/NEXTSTEP UI has largely been considered one of the most elegant and usable interfaces to have been created. It's extremely intuitive, and while the GNUSTEP work isn't there yet, the "completion" of Gorm.app is a very good sign, as the interface builder is the foundation to creating the wonderful UI of classic NeXT applications. NeXT spent a ton of money hiring some of the best UI designers in the world, and the UI shows it. People laud over OS X's ability to hide the Unix from the newbie user, but I don't think many of them know that this had existed since the '90s beginning with NEXTSTEP.
Apple broke alot of the inherent intuitiveness of the NeXT UI when they moved to OS X, which isn't necessarly bad though, as intuitiveness != familiarity and their changes were mainly to make existing Mac OS users comfortable.
I'm impressed that the GNUStep project is still able to have milestones like this.
Um, (Score:3, Insightful)
It used to be a simple thing. If something is presented in a fairly straightforward, just the facts manner it was probably serious. If it makes ridiculous claims about how it will make all of its competitors obsolete, cure seventeen fatal diseases and then get you a beer while walking your dog then you could be pretty certain that it was meant to be a joke.
I used to even be able to laugh at the joke press releases, knowing that they were nothing more than way-over-the-top satire of the dumbest PR pieces in the world. Now... I have to look carefully to make sure that I'm not actually reading the object of that satire instead.
Thank you, PR flacks of the Internet, for lowering the bar so far that we need a shovel just to see the dent that it left.
Re:who cares (Score:5, Insightful)
I use drag and drop a lot when using Mac OS X simply because it works so well. Dragging files to the trash, dragging files to applications to open them, dragging images off web pages to save them etc.. it just comes naturally after a while (whereas digging through menus to find features like that has to be learnt every time). And with Exposé, you never need to rearrange windows.
Just because Windows (and therefore Linux, as sadly the linux desktops have heavily copied windows as opposed to OS X) can't do drag and drop effectively doesn't mean it's inviable. It just means that it's been made inviable through poor design.
Re:In other news ... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Riiight. (Score:5, Insightful)
As we all know, how pretty your user interface looks is the best barometer of how easy it is to use, how simple it is to program for, how much leverage applications get from the underlying API, and how powerful applications written using the underlying toolkit will be.
American readers should append the word "NOT" onto the end of the last paragraph.
Gorm and GNUstep are mostly about the underlying API. It's possible to rapidly build incredibly powerful applications using Gorm - significantly faster than you can with the KDE or GNOME toolkits.
Re:Graphical Object Relationship Modeller (Score:3, Insightful)
Reminds me of the days when I used WindowMaker. WindowMaker was also a GNUStep project, and a damn good window manager at the time.
I welcome a more "UNIXy" desktop environment vs KDE or Gnome. To me, those are way too much like the Microsoft Windows interface. Personally, I don't like any of them. Honestly, all GUIs nowadays seem really dated when compared to OS X. Yeah, yeah, call me a fanboy or zealot, but for the look and feel, OS X is pretty slick.
Now that I mentioned OS X, what does it take to come up with a good interface like that? Its pretty much completely different than other GUIs I have used. Things like the way each application has all of their windows grouped together. An application can only be launched once, and doing something like launching an application that is already running, but has no windows in it will open up a new window. Working drag and drop. A working clipboard. A common look and feel between applicatons. The list goes on.
GUI land on UNIX has always been a little lacking. I've been writing and talking about this for many years now. There are many issues, but here are some that I can think of:
Fragmented GUI widget sets. This is big. You have KDE and Gnome. Motif. Xlib. Xaw. Xaw3d, XawWindows95wannabe. You name it. This has to stop.
The whole X server thing. Its a great idea, and has lasted for a long time, but I think its done. The only saving grace I think it has is the ability to remotely run an application and display it and interface it locally. The downside is that local applications are pretty much like remote applications. The graphics are not smooth and jerky at times. They flicker, and just are not as good as graphics on MS Windows or OS X or even a console game. I think X should die. Keep around a compatible way to run X apps like you have for Windows or OS X (hopefully, much better than the OS X way), but there needs to be a new and better integrated and featurefull GUI environment. Kinda like the KDE or Gnome "desktop environment", but a little more low level, and better. It should only have X ability for backwards compatibility, but ditch it from there.
Gotta work...
Re:Graphical Object Relationship Modeller (Score:2, Insightful)
Just because everything can be programmed in *insert language here*, that doesn't mean that it has or even should be. The fact that an OS (or any other specific program for that matter) hasn't been written in a certain language says nothing to if it can or can not to done.
Yes, it would have been easier for me to simply mod you down (since I do have the points to do so today), but I thought a little exposition and explanation would provide more value to the /. community in the long run.
Re:Riiight. (Score:3, Insightful)
I beg to differ (Score:3, Insightful)
If the default desktop is an eyesore, keeps its menus and options in strange places, and has a lot of confusing buttons that don't explain what they do or what they're for, it doesn't matter how powerful the environment is.
Let me say it again: It doesn't matter how powerful the environment is.
Because most users will balk at the environment I've just described. Heck, *I'd* balk at it. I want a usable and intuitive interface as much as the next user. I would no more use this desktop than I would drive a car with strange and cryptic controls, no matter how powerful and efficient the engine is.
Re:You're close (Score:3, Insightful)
Good - don't use it then. Sell your Mac on ebay and buy a new Linux box. However, while you are trolling - go take a long look at modern Linux desktops, then go look at OS X. You'll probably be supprised to notice that alot of the "good" functionality in KDE and GNOME was swiped directly from OS X.
It doesn't even have a working native terminal program (one which allows PGUP/PGDN), and Fink's repository is very poorly maintained. Running X apps doesn't work all that great (why don't they show up in the Dock?). Maybe with a huge amount of effort (and buying a few shareware apps), I could get OS X to work how I want it.
That argument is the EXACT argument used by Windows users against Linux in the early days. Why would you do it? To perhaps show your support to a commerical company that IS actually innovating. Oh, and they don't show up in the dock because they were written using a different API and are connecting to a different window SERVER!
But why would I bother when I can have Linux working out-of-box the way I want it? Why would a want a non-free OS when a free one works just as good if not better?
Again - show some support for a company that is innovating.
There are a few apps that are really great on OS X, but that is all I use it for. Linux is my primary OS. Just because all the pussy, wannabe users fled to OS X, doesn't mean that OS X is better. It's better than Windows, but that's about all that can be said for OS X.
I'll call it like I see it here. You must be an l33t h@x0r right??? Go back to high school and do your homework. OS X has a unique and interesting background in NextStep - which is what both AfterStep and Windowmaker (two of my favorite window managers) are open source clones of. I find it ammusing that someone with your mentality is extolling the virtues of Linux and in the same breath praising KDE and Gnome rather than a more lightweight window manager. Your views are an uninformed mishmash of "popular" thoughts without ONE of your own.
This is special. I WISH I had modpoints today. Can someone tell me why my post (see above) is modded as flamebait while this parent is modded as insightful? PLEASE - read the two posts and tell me why. I'd love to know.
Re:Graphical Object Relationship Modeller (Score:3, Insightful)
Doing this in C++ would be possible. Doing this using the C++ class model, would not. I would have to write a set of introspection methods into C++. The most important thing, however, is that my Objective-C code worked without my having to modify anything else in my class hierarchy. This ensures that when I use this feature of the language, I am compatible with other people's code (important, in my case, since it was a system which was designed to be extensible, and I didn't want people adding new classes to have to register them with the UI or anything to make their lives harder).
Systems like Qt and COM add some Objective-C-like features to C++, but these features are not accessible to code is based on a different framework.