Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
GNOME GUI

Gnome 1.2.0 Released 181

Posted by Hemos from the from-the-dynamic-duo dept.
Well, those wacky Gnome boys have gone and done it again - you can grab Gnome 1.2.0 from the FTP site. Nat e-mailed me last night to say that it was coming out. As well as the above distro-friendly link, we've got a link for the stable sources ftp site.Update: 05/25 12:25 by H :Hey, I got e-mail from the Gnome folks again - they're going to update the mirrors and everything in half an hour (9 a.m. EDT), so hold off until then on downloading.Update: 05/25 02:12 by H : Check out HelixCode for an update on the release.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Helix Gnome 1.2.0 More

Helix Gnome 1.2.0

Comments Filter:

  • At Least ! (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Gnome 1.0 was unstable and unpolished. This one is a lot better and is usable as an everyday desktop. Perhaps this should have been 1.0. Xav

  • Re:Moronic moderator alert! (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I agree, moderators on Slashdot are completely stupid.

  • $25 ??? (Score:1)

    by henri ( 189 )
    $25 seems to be a bit much for a repackaging of GNOME....

    i didn't click enough to see if that included shipping, but i think that Helix should have worked something out with CheapBytes and sold the 2CD set for $5 or something...

    I hope this isn't part of their biz plan.
  • I'm just curious about users using CVS Enlightenment and current GNOME together. Both provide mechanisms to have toolbars, menus, filemanagers, etc.
    Exactly which components of each are you using?
    I'm very impressed (Ok, so maybe I'm easy to impress) with both of them. I haven't compiled an Enlightmentment since they started the FAM stuff in the CVStree, so I'm a bit out of date but I'm rather fascinated by Mandrake's use of no terminal windows for daily operations [mandrake.net]
    Comments ? (please)
  • .... except for it being slow as dog shit and getting internal server errors all over the place!

    Course, I'm quite sure that this is because they're being slashdotted ATM :)

  • "Without low-level compatibility like that, it becomes impossible for apps from one side, to run in the other's enviroment"

    Actually, the WM-SPEC is for window managers, not apps in general. The point of WM-SPEC is to kill two birds with one stone; instead of a separate set of window manager hints for KDE and a separate set for GNOME, one set of window manager hints--the WM-SPEC--covers *both* KDE- and GNOME-compliance.

    Most apps, though, don't care what the window manager hints are, so the WM-SPEC won't affect them one way or the other.
  • I think that CDE had its taskbar long before the release of windows 95. Also, as another poster suggested, FVWMButtons was around before then. And what about the Wharf in NeXT?

    I personally think that the Windows taskbar is the worst of all. That start button is just a huge waste of space, and there's nothing you can do about it. Just the windows icon would be better. GNOME gets it right: use that extra button anywhere on the bar.

    As for quantum leaps, I don't think that's what people are really looking for. Getting people to use windows 95 in the first place was not easy. Users resist change.
  • That's funny, I ran Helix-update almost immediately after I saw the story on Slashdot (before the update about helix was added), and I am running it on my laptop right now!
  • How is this unethical? Helix merely packages GNOME, the same way SuSE, Debian, and RedHat package Linux + tons of other software. This is analogous to having an update saying "RedHat has kernel 2.4 packages already available" appended to an announcement about 2.4.

    Sure, they also sell a CD with the packages on it, just like RedHat and SuSE, but you can also download for free (again, just like Debian and SuSE).
  • You thought that was wild, try loading raster's redesigned site [rasterman.com] on a regular modem. On the ISDN at work, it was a PITA, but I shudder to think about it on a modem. Looks cool on broadband, though....
  • >I HATE window shading. While the effect is cool and you can read all
    >of the window's title, it takes up too much fraggin screen space! Not
    >all of us have multiple monitors or HUGE 21 inch screens.
    >Iconification is better.

    ??? Window shading works just fine with a 15 inch monitor. Far less anoying than a bunch of icons.
  • That's because it's not out yet :)
  • Looking at Xlib header files, it appears the set of modifier keys they thought about, in numerical order, is Shift, Control, Meta, Alt, Super, Hyper.

    So it does look like Meta was invented before Alt, or was considered more basic. However the numbers are all assigned next to each other, with Alt in the middle, so I believe that keyboards existed at that time with both identifiers on the keys.

  • I know there will be lots of flames here saying that the taskbar is not revolutionary, but I agree with you.

    EVERY other system before W95 turned miniaturized/hidden windows into an "icon" that had to be placed on the desktop by the user. This "icon" also tended to put a lot of prominance on an image and very little (or none) on the text identifier. W95 realized that these "icons" could be arranged automatically, that a long horizontal shape is more efficient than a rectangle, and that the picture could be deleted (they actually shrank it so small as to be indecipherable, but it proves the idea).

    The "start" menu did have precedence with the Apple menu, but Apple did not put *all* programs on it, only "accessories".

    The NeXT "dock" was somewhat like a taskbar + start menu, but missed two innovations: it put way too much importance on the picture (there was NO text), and iconized windows were put into the dock only if they were launched from the dock. The NeXT did have the innovation MSoft seems to have missed: when the program is launched the entry can be reused as the icon.

    I also think a W95 innovation was the simplification of window borders. Until then everybody drew an "inner edge" on the windows borders and they were much thicker and wasted screen space. I like to think I came up with this first (see the ViewKit I wrote for NeXT in 1987) but I doubt they saw my stuff and copied it.

    Another innovation is the use of Alt+Tab to switch windows. This was somewhat stolen from CDE, but CDE only used Alt+Tab to switch between uniconized windows. W95 came up with the pop-up box to allow you to switch to any window.

  • It would be really nice if all X servers defaulted to using the "win" button as META! And it would be nice if we started calling the keystrokes "Meta-x" or "Meta-y", etc.

    My copy of XFree86 seems to make the "Menu" key send the X XK_Menu keysym. This seems like a reasonable standard, too.

    Also I would like to see some company make a "geek" keyboard not by replacing the windows logo with little penguins, but by printing "Meta" on the keys (and "Menu" on the menu key). That would be nice, we could finnally unambiguously communicate about key strokes.

  • Does anyone else think GNOME's versioning is a little... inflated? If "October GNOME" is any indication, GNOME should still be pre-1.0. I'm not trying to troll or flame here. Let's be realistic about GNOME. It's still slow. It's still big. The apps still spew numerous GTK+ warning messages (aren't you supposed to supress those in "stable" versions of software? Or at least FIX the problems?). When are they expecting GNOME 2.0? Not any time soon, right?
  • The only reason GNOME still exists is because it's shipping as the default environment in RedHat and Debian. The rest of the Linux industry has standardized on KDE. And rightly so; KDE doesn't require extensive training and hair-pulling like GNOME does. The one advantage Windows has over Linux is consistency: once you know how to use Windows, you can sit down in front of any Windows machine and already know how to use it. Ditto for KDE, which is why the smart distribution vendors have standardized on it. As long as GNOME continues the "window manager agnostic" approach, it'll always be a "weird" environment.

    I know this will get moderated down and/or start a flame war, but I don't care. This is Slashdot, the home of KDE/GNOME flamewars. Deal with it.

    --
  • Actually I was just trolling for the fun of it. Thanks for making it worthwhile.

    By the way, not that it matters, but I am an open source developer, but being more of a server hacker I don't work on either of the big DE projects. As a user, I go with KDE though.

    --
  • Our web site is a bit misleading regarding Debian Potato - I need to fix that. Our packages work fine with either the unstable (Woody) or frozen (Potato) distributions.

    You can just use our packages, if you want. :)

    Peter
  • We ran out of file descriptors on the main web server, and our scripts couldn't be opened. This is being fixed. Be gentle with us, Slashdot. :)

    Peter
  • The Helix installer delete all the downloaded
    files!
    Even if it can't do the instalation because
    of no space left.

    Is this just a Windows 98 updater.
    This is really sad.

    And there is not Official RPMs from gnome.org.
    So, it should be called gnome.com now?

    What happen to opensource? Why did
    Gnome started with .com in the first place?

    I am using Gnome since 0.99, and this
    new HelixCode installer really sucks!
    It sucks!
  • The best way to get people to jump ship is to move your ship closer to theirs.
  • One such idea could be the 'zoomable user interface'. Actuallly another desktop analogue, but it's not a desktop but a 3D space in front of you. Icons hang suspended in space, you can zoom into windows, or flip them away etc. It also uses the idea of presenting not too complex visual clues for your data. For instance, a filetree can be extremely complex, but there is a simple structure in it. So it zoomable user interface presents a simple tree, but if you zoom in on the branches, you see more complex structures.
    I don't know if the idea has been implemented. But it is something new, and worthy.
    Of course there are other ideas like MsBob, where you walk around in an office analogue, or the indigo machine from SGI, where you also walk around, but much nicer. I just do not think user interfaces that look like a 3D game are productive, though.
    A good user interface should visualize complex things, like filesystems or networks, or the devices/drivers/kernel of your system, in an as simple as possible way, without omitting essential information. This naturally leads to zooming and nested structures.
    Real AI in your interface would also be very nice, but an SF dream for now, I think. (at least my brother says so, who studies AI)
    --------------------------------------------- -----------
    UNIX isn't dead, it just smells funny...
  • Then don't buy it, some people don't live in their parents basement's and need to pay rent and buy food. :)
  • It's Gnome 1.2 [gnome.org] that's out now, and Helix Code, being the awesome guys that they are, have already packaged it into the "Helix" distribution, or whatever. I'm not knocking Helix or Red Hat, it's just strange to see the news that Gnome 1.2 is released under the heading of "Helix Gnome 1.2 Released." Even if Helix is Miguel's company...

    :)

    (Hey, www.gnome.org has a new look, too!)

    ---
  • Good point, have you ever compiled all of gnome though? You gota admit it is a major ordeal...

  • Well, you could use the GNOME development framework with WindowMaker and skip GNOME the desktop, that would give you a different type of desktop.

    Another alterntive is mixing GNOME and Englightenment also there skipping the panel.

    Of course they are all more or less the same. I think it will be hard to truly do something different until technology which makes a immersive 3D environmet possible.

  • Much of GNOME 1.0 was way ahead of KDE 1.1.2, with things like ORBit and the panel. themeing etc.
    So this is more like leaping further ahead when it comes to technology and catching up when it comes to maturity and width of applications.
  • be-fan is right when he says that for a desktop Linux is bloated.
    If you want to use all the cool apps you needs both Qt and GTK loaded at the same time.

    You obviously are running Linux as a server and you feel that Linux is good, but that's not the point. He was talking about the CLIENT so you are "off-topic".

    I feel also that Linux is quite poor on the client (too many unfinished apps), diversity is good but consistency and avoiding wasting memory by having to load n equivalent toolkit at the same time matters too.

  • Much as I hate to admit this, Microsoft revolutionised GUI with the "Start" button and taskbar...

    I believe that Macintosh's "Apple Menu" predates Windows' "Start" menu, does it not?

    Just being picky.

    --
    Wade in the water, children.

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • I said nothing about replacing a taskbar being wrong. I just said that replacing the app launcher, with one that's tucked in a slew of cascading menus, is wrong.

    And, as for your problem... Alt-Tab is handy. :-)
  • Does Sawmill attempt to follow the WM-SPEC in development?

    That's one of the few things that can't be different between KDE and GNOME. Without low-level compatibility like that, it becomes impossible for apps from one side, to run in the other's enviroment)
  • Comparing KDE 1.1.2 to GNOME 1.2.0 will probably show that GNOME has "caught up", because KDE 1 hasn't been updated since September.
  • This is one upgrade that is definitely worth the effort. GNOME is now really nice to use, and stable. I especially like being able to synchronise my Pilot with the GNOME apps just by putting it in the cradle and pressing the HotSync button. The whole thing is very polished.

    The new web site is also an amazing effort. The old one has been looking a bit icky for a while, but the new site looks beautiful. Actually, it reminds me of the Apple site a bit - is it the font?

    Anyway, congratulations to all the GNOME developers on a job well done.
  • Apparently you haven't run 1.2 yet. ;) Give it a try.
    ----
  • I start helix-update
    and I get

    temporarily offline for GNOME 1.2
  • Agreed. My download whizzed to package 57, and the last 5 have taken 20 minutes now, or more.... those bastards. Wait... I am one.
  • One word: Sawfish [sourceforge.net].

    --
    It's a fine line between trolling and karma-whoring... and I think I just crossed it.
    - Sean

  • TWS on Amiga 1987 (Score:2)

    by Anonymous Coward

    The Tiny Window Server on the Amiga, 1987.

  • This is what I mean. From the Orbit Beginners Documentation FAQ [u-strasbg.fr]

    Does ORBit work with other ORBs?

    Yes. This is one of the primary features of CORBA, and available through the Internet Inter-ORB Protocol (IIOP). There is one pitfall: ORBit has a proprietary security mechanism to authenticate clients. If interoperability is desired then you might have to figure out a work around for this.
  • This is a bug in your browser, triggered whenever it's looking at files in an FTP directory dated in the future, a relatively common occurrence when looking at fresh files in from a different timezone.
  • Maybe they are ignoring slackware because the mainstream of slackware users don't use pacakges much. I know I don't, and every one of my friends who use Slackware just get the source and compile everything.

    Seriously, have you ever installed a Slack package that wasn't part of the distribution?

  • 1. Yes you can: right click on a panel -> panel properties -> hiding -> auto.

    2. Alt-Tab traverses trough the various windows on the default setup

    Miguel
  • This release introduces gdkpixbuf witch add alpha-transparency to the panel, and there is other small panel fixes like the panel is now resizable.

    Gnome Print went into this release.

    And finally with GTk--1.2.x and Gnome-- 1.1.x GNOME finally has a good C++ toolkit.

    On the usability front the replacement of Enlightenment with Sawmill creates a more integrated non-duplicating environment.
  • It is simply amazing to me how this figure has spread. It was the largest reasonable figure that you could quote from the original report [zdnet.co.uk].

    63,000 is a figure based on an internal email which in turn looks to be based on output from an automated testing tool. The internal estimate for real problems detected is about 28,000 or so. Plus some unknown number of interface issues, interactions not detected, documentation mistakes, etc, etc, etc.

    But read the original report for yourself. Mary Joe Foley was careful in what she said, virtually nobody commenting on it has paid attention to that though.

    Again, Microsoft has a long internal list of potential known problems. They think that slightly under half of those are actually bugs. There are an unknown (and probably large) number of real bugs out there that their tools didn't know to look for. There are large numbers of potential issues which people can legitimately differ on whether or not it is a bug or user confusion.

    Given all that, the real figures are bad enough. There is no need to misquote them to make them look worse, then run the risk of running into Microsoft supporters who can demonstrate that you don't have a clue what you are talking about...

    Cheers,
    Ben
  • You are joking, right?

    Szo
  • I got my A3000 at its launch, running RISC OS 2, in 1988.

    It had the task bar and disk controls.


    --
  • In 1992, fvwm had the GoodStuff window, which is an application launcer. Is that what you're thinking of?

    FVWM 2.x and FVWM95 have that extra window that looks like a taskbar and has a Start-like menu on it. That was done in emulation of Microsoft AFAIK. (I'm probably wrong on that last point, so don't flame me if I am. cavet lector!)
  • Gnome is nice and everything, but does anyone else see an add for the best open source desktop: gnome 1.2 in the banner ad on top of this slashdot page?

    Yep, I saw it.

    Seeing as how I've never before seen a KDE add ( and correct me if I'm wrong KDE is more popular),

    I'm not going to say you're wrong, but it's certainly subject to opinion.

    I can only assume that the little gnome( gnomes? ) who left the footprint must be performing some sort of sexual favors for the slashdot gang.

    Or they could have *gasp* PAID FOR A BANNER AD.

    The ad is actually for "Helix Code", the company formed by several of the core GNOME developers, and whose current (but not only) product is "Helix GNOME", a Helix Code-branded version of GNOME.

    Jay (=

  • I'd rather have warning messages displayed than suppressed. I'd like to see when something is going even sort of wrong.

    Of course, I'd rather see the causes for the warnings fixed above all else.

  • Yeah, and when the directive came down to "Obey Fitts law," the team delegated that task to the lawyer.
  • Slackware has the simplest package format around: .tgz files!

    Somebody at Helix needs to get slack, and fast!

  • GNOME still feels to be very much emulating the look and feel of Windows 95,

    That's the whole point. Lots of people are used to having a CDE taskbar and an Apple Menu. GNOME/KDE aren't trying to make a new GUI; they're trying to make a GUI similar to what the mainstream uses.

    Don't hold your breath waiting for GNOME/KDE to "revolutionise the way we use our computer desktop" because that's not what they're trying to do. The purpose isn't to give Unix the best possible GUI, it's to give Unix a mainstream GUI.


    ---
  • > Does anyone else think GNOME's versioning is a little... inflated? If "October GNOME" is any indication, GNOME should still be pre-1.0.

    No. I do think the original 1.0 was inflated, but the 1.0.53 "October" release has been good to me. I've used it intensively at home and at work almost since day one, and have only found three bugs in it.

    Actually, by modern standards 1.0.53 is more like v 5.0 of what some companies release. We've just got to learn to look past the numbers and see what's really there.

    --
  • Just for once, why not hold off on announcements until the sodding mirrors have updated. Then *more* people can get at the stuff quicker rather than the core site and the mirrors that are attempting to update being pounded into oblivion.

    Responsible reporting doesn't mean first post.
  • I think that speech integration may go a long way to speeding up the interaction with the computer. For example, I want an application loaded, say Emacs (what else could I need? :-) ) and I simply ask for it to be loaded. I want to see the time, I ask for it and the computer tells me - this could be either spoken to me or shown on screen. I want to bold text while editing, I simply say "Bold"...

    And then the guy in the cubicle next to you freaks out starts screaming "@#$@ Biff! Shut up! If you want it bold hit Control-B! Do you realize how annoying your voice is? How hard do you think it is for me to listen to you talking at your computer for 8 hours a day!!! And about that letter you dictated to your doctor yesterday, yes of course you should have that rash looked at! No, it's not normal for ones privates to ooze green pus, and no, there is no cure for chronic anal leakage!"

  • Execpt a lot of those "bugs" fall into feature requests, bugs for versions years ago, or bugs for other things, like Redhat, or KDE, or even Microsoft.

    And there's even some "Why do you use Linux you stupid nerds, Microsoft Rulez!!!" flames there too.

    I'm not saying there's not bugs, but there's not as many as bugs.gnome.org says.

  • Wow. I agree. The new gnome site is impressive. I wonder who the designer is because they really must understand design! Which seems to be rather rare in our community. No offense.
  • ..that further standardization is a must?
    I'm not talking about ditching either KDE
    or Gnome, although I'm more in favor of Gnome.

    I'm talking about:
    1. Making KDE and GNOME work together, being
    able to drag and drop to eachother, and sharing
    objects.
    2. Making KDE-apps look like Gnome-apps when
    run under Gnome, and vica versa.
    Some sort of QT 2.0/GTK theming-schema, that contains information about what QT-theme corresponds to what GTK theme.
    This would make it possible to make the fact that
    they aren't really the same transparent to the
    user.
    Think about being able to mix and match KDE and
    Gnome apps as you want, without sacrificing much
    of the interoperability.

    This is truly necessary, IMHO, because both
    DE's have some great applications, that I want
    to use without loosing funcionality, and without
    switching DE.

    I have heard something about 1. at least. Which
    is good, but do you have any further information
    as a GNOME-developer?
  • Actually, you must be talking about EFM - not E. EFM and Enlightenment haven't actually merged together yet. If you don't know what EFM is, it is the Enlightenment File Manager, closely modeled after the Amiga Workbench and MacOS FM's.


    EFM is using SGI's fam mainly because it is an excellent library for file management type tasks. EFM's development is quite stunning, if you watch the E CVS mailing lists you know what I mean :)


    I've noticed some FUD floating around about EFM as of late, mainly by people who obviously haven't used it. There are no toolbars, html viewers, and other things like that. You have windows with icons and menus (translucent menus at that) and a typebuffer with glob matching and other fun stuff.
    If you would like to see several shots of EFM in action, please go to my site at http://saturn5.locnet.net/dphase [locnet.net]. There are several shots of EFM there showing exactly what it can do.

    --
    Joshua Deere (dphase@locnet.net)
    UNIX Systems Administrator, LOCNET Internet Services

  • "...Execpt a lot of those "bugs" fall into feature requests, bugs for versions years ago, or bugs for other things..."

    The same can probably be said about the famous 63k-bug-list MS had for W2K.

  • or probably earlier

  • Yes, "Helix" GNOME ... they customize GNOME somewhat, so they have reason to stick their name on it. You get some stuff in Helix's GNOME packages that don't come with standard GNOME of the form you find at ftp.gnome.org. To the best of my knowledge, what Helixcode adds is all under the GPL, though, so if the GNOME team decided to add those programs to the standard distributions, they could.

    If RedHat released a custom kernel that extended the capabilities of the kernel, then yeah, they could call it "RedHat kernel 2.4" Of course if they did, they'd have hell to pay. Or maybe not, since it would be GPL'd, and everybody could use it and we could thank them for contributing yet again to kernel development, and there'd be no point in calling it "RedHat kernel" any more.

  • I just thought this comment was right up my alley. You see, I did something that I thought I found absolutely wonderful. I did the following with my key bindings in Sawmill:
    1. Change the xmodmap file to recognize the "windows" button on the keyboard. Some distros, such as Mandrake, do this for you.
    2. Changed the binding for "move to next virtual desktop" to win-right, and "move to previous virtual desktop to win-left. That way, I hold down the button, and can move left or right through virtual desktops. Plus, since Sawmill can dynamically expand the number of desktops you have, you never run out!
    3. I made it even better by making win-l be the same as win-right and win-j the same as win-left. That way, when I am typing I never have to remove my fingers from their "home position" to move around desktops.
    Believe me, this setup is really fast, and you can't get used to anything else. I love Sawmill, er, Sawfish.
  • The Start button was truly revolutionary as was the task bar. It was these revolutions that made Win95 so popular, why would any of the other desktop programs not one to include their own version of these useful features?

    &

    It is not that they "are unable to think on a large enough scale", it is more like waiting for the next "quantum leap". These things don't happen everyday, someone will come up with the next thing eventually, that someone may work for GNOME, KDE, even Microsoft; it doesn't matter. Once that new thing is worked out and in the next release of code, the others will copy it (even/especially Microsoft).

    Devil Ducky
  • If you are planning on removing the rpms, I suggest getting all of the tarballs unpacked and ready, then remove a gnome application, install that application from tarball, remove the next rpm, install that tarball...

    remember to recompile everything once you get to compiling gtk+ and glib...

    I sugest these cautious steps because I don't trust RPMs very much and I just assume that they won't let everything work right.

    Devil Ducky

  • Oh, please. It is this diversity that makes us strong. I can't decide if this is a troll, or not. Choice is a GOOD THING. If the open source model works, then people work on what they like to - who cares if it's stable? If you don't like it, don't USE it! Or, even better, go write something that you like, then we can all benefit from your infinite wisdom and code grace. :)

    I have a 486 router running linux that fits on a floppy. No bloat there. Try THAT trick with windows 2000! The fact that linux is that modular and customizable dispite being in the millions of lines of code is a phenominal effort. Do you know how many people microsoft employs just managing builds of windows? Did you know that managing the development of the bloated mess windows is more of a hinderance to the development of the OS than bugs themselves?

    Linux absolutely floors me with the sheer volume and quality of the software available for it, all through the work of people that do it for the love of the art, not money or fame. Remember the 1.1.x days? When slackware was (the?) only distro? Ahh yeah. Remember ordering CDs of buggy software from Walnut Creek or the like to hack on it, for the fun? This is the result of all that effort. If you want stability, run a old version of X, with a window manager like IceWM, and enjoy!

    The french said it best: To each, his own. Use what you like, and hang on for the ride. It's going to get wild. It's barely been a year since gnome was stable enough to stay up for more than an hour or two!

    Kudos!

  • Windows 2000 have a 20-megabyte-heavy kernel. Not Linux.

    Not Windows 2000 either. The so-called "kernel" of Windows 2000 is more like "Linux Kernel + X windows + video drivers + very complete graphics library."

  • The Open Source Way: clone other software, take all the credit, keep all the bloat. I mean that seriously, not as a troll.

    In all honesty, both Gnome and KDE are turning into free Windows clones. They're not any slimmer, not any easier to use, not any more stable. 'twould be nice if we could say "Look at how we can do the same thing as Microsoft in 1/20 the resources!" or "Look at the bold ease of use changes we're making!"

  • And they do the same job. What a coincidence!
    >>>>>>>>>>
    Yes, quite a coincidence. Its incredible how Linux zealots complain about Window's bloat, UNTIL, Linux gets just as bloated. BeOS (and a number of other OSs) do the same job, yet are much slimmer.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    I guess by "crap" you mean "applications"? Seriously, Linux and Gnome could be a lot
    smaller if they ditched support for existing Unix/X applications and standards, but then
    nobody except you would use them. Unfortunately a lot of computer users want to do
    useful work with their computers rather than spending their time measuring each other's
    kernels.
    >>>>>>>
    No, I don't mean apps. I was talking about system size. The crap (crap in the sense of legacy code, not bad systems!) I mean isn't support for POSIX either. I am talking about the huge amount of redundancy present in a desktop Linux system. You have libraries crawling up the walls. Is there a reason I have to have curses on my system? Or if I don't have that, I have to have TK? Would it kill the kernel developers to make a X based config tool (Native, not dependant on TK)? Redundancy is the #1 problem in Linux. It isn't like Linux has that much legacy app support over BeOS, it's just that the BeOS ones are immature. Already, BeOS has a decent X server, nearly full POSIX complience, a nearly finished NATIVE GTK+ implementation, and a BeWine project that is progressing quite nicely. Yet, still, the average BeOS system (even loaded with these goodies) is hugly less memory intensive than a Linux system. I don't measure the kernel for no reason. I measure the amount of resident memory each takes, and I measure swap activity, and I measure system responsiveness. If these are trivial, well, we have different priorities.

    You said it. Why would anyone run KDE and Gnome when they do the same job? And
    by the way, it's CORBA, not COBRA.
    >>>>>>>>>
    Sorry, I've always thought it was COBRA. Sounds much less cooler now. Anway, I see that you are someone who doesn't like GNOME, yet love the KDE apps. Currently, I use GNOME with Sawmill because it looks so much nicer, and the environment is much better. I do, however, like KDevelop. Thus, I have to install both GNOME and KDE.

    It's CORBA you monkey!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    You settle for trivial responses, but think about it. Why NOT a system-wide CORBA implementation. What's there to lose? There is a lot to gain!

    Oh, it's just architecture differences? Well then, they're basically the same, aren't they?
    Just like Windows and Linux are basically just two operating systems that provide some
    services to applications. Monkey.
    >>>>>>>
    You are so shallow. Do you even think before you post? If you ever read the DirectX docs, you should realize that architecture is independant of interface IN A WELL DESIGNED SYSTEM. It is very possible (using a COM-like object system) to design a DE whose backend architecture can be seperated from the middle-ware, and still stay compatible with any GUI the user wishes to use. Take the CORBA implementaiton. CORBA has a set API, no? Why not make an object (or a library or whatever) to allow an app to access CORBA. Now, you can use whatever damn CORBA implementation you chose, as long as it responds in a given way to a given input. Thats why apps designed for DirectX 1.0 still work perfectly on DirectX 8.0 AND take advantage of the speed of the new implementation. As long as a higher level GUI uses only these objects to access services, the backend architecture can be changed without having to keep around two complete implementations. Think about it, no more keeping around two different widget sets that do the same thing, but only differ in HOW they do them.

    They did. It's calle Xlib.
    Xlib is good for what it is, but it is feature poor and NOT IMPLEMENTATION INDEPENDANT. It relys too heavily on X providing the backend services. Plus, it does none of the things the new DEs have set out to do.
  • Much as I hate to admit this, Microsoft revolutionised GUI with the "Start" button and taskbar.

    One the basic things about the usability of menus is that multilevel cascading menus have poor usability. They may work for beginners since they are possibly intuitive, but that's about it. The taskbar works, but there are probably better solutions.

    I'd like to see more apps that let the user work with the document and not fill the screen with all kinds of toolbars, wizards, dancing paperclips and whatnot. More visible tools does not mean better usability. Simple direct manipulation interfaces are often better. There's a distinction between usability for novices and usability for experienced users. Designing for the latter usually means that the former is not as good and viceversa, so making the most stupid and simple UI is not the best solution.

  • Oddly enough, it doesn't look like there are Java bindings for Orbit (Unless I was just looking in the wrong place.) That's a bit odd since there seem to be bindings for everything else. It might make an interesting project to add them in. Or ask IBM to -- They've got an interpreter and should be open to an idea that cool, if you can get it to the right people in the company...
  • Check on developer.gnome.org. They seem to have more comprehensive information there, though you have to dig around a bit to find everything.
  • October GNOME hasn't got KDE quite beat yet. With KDE's panel you can easily chinge the hieght and such. With the current stable, you're pretty much stuck.

    With Helix Gnome (and CVS Gnome) you get a little more control of panel sizes and placement. I just finished compiling Helix Gnome yesterday, and I'm pleased. I like the small panels (24 pixel height) so much better that being stuck at 48 pixel panels.

    The next stable release will probally have KDE2 beat (my opinion, never was a KDE fan) The KDE browser might be the only good reason to add some KDE suppot packages. =)

    For interested Potato users, I threw up the Helix Gnome packages I compiled under potato here:

    ringworld.org [ringworld.org]
    ringworld.net [ringworld.net]
    g33ks.net [g33ks.net]

  • The Win9x GUI is one of two things Microsoft managed to get right (Word97 being the second), and at the time it was revolutionary.

    But, it's still based on the work done by Xerox in the 70's, as are all desktop systems. Obviously coming up with a new way to interact with a computer isn't such an easy task.

    Maybe with technology such as voice recognition (Who needs a GUI when there's no mouse?), or even 3D Graphics & VR (How about a 3D desktop that you can navigate on the Z axis as well? A wheelmouse could do that...). Direct nueral interfaces (Hitch Hikers GTT Galaxy has an interesting concept)...the list goes on.

    As long as we are stuck with archaic typing and pointing devices to interact with our computers, we'll be stuck with the desktop IMHO.
  • i succeded at using java with Oracle, (i needed to use gnome-db from an application I wrote for my thesis). The big problem was the authentication scheme: the only solution was to use the Visibroker for Java ORB, which supports Principals. The build-in sun ORB does not support it, so i can't use the ORBit cookie file for the authentication...
  • It takes a heck of a lot longer for someone to navigate even two(2) menu sub-trees than it takes for me to type in a 56-char command line.

    huh - you must type in really speedy. Of course it depends how you use those menus: with some jumpy dirty mouse or good mouse w/ keyboard.

    For example say I want to start netscape (or new netscape window if it's already running). I press following keys: ctrl-esc (root menu) n(etscape). On the other hand to start it by typing ctrl-alt-t (for terminal window) and after that "n e t s c a p e" and pressing enter would be slower (but again for my typing speed) or even ctrl-alt-t n e t s c tab enter.

    And image doesn't change even if application that I need to start is not in the root menu because I can open each one of the submenus with one keypress. For example ctrl-esc a(pplications) w(ww-browsers) l(ynx) would start lynx with with equal number of keypresses as using cli and you could do that even if you wouldn't remember program's name in the beginning (because you see possible choices in the menu in each step).

    Of course if I want to do something like "replace all references to your old email user@domain1.com to user2@domain2.org in text files under your home directory" I would do it with perl from command line. But trying to explain/teach that to Average Joe would be pain in a butt and he would probably do it faster by opening one file at time and fixing it.

    I'm aware that I'm not average user and that some people use more mouse in GUI but if you are going to teach average people to use CLI I would consider other choices also.

    Now go spend some quality time here [dilbert.com].
    _________________________

  • I've also been annoyed that Linux GUIs tend to either copy the Win95 look'n'feel or neXt. There just isn't much else, except maybe plain old Motif.

    I enjoyed using the OS/2 Workplace Shell for years, while that was viable. The WPS was the only GUI that was sufficiently functional that I didn't always feel the need to have a command prompt open. Of course it had a command prompt, and I used it, but I just felt less compelled to than with any other GUI.

    The true strength of the WPS was in consistently applying an object model to everything visible from the desktop. There was no 'extension hiding' shortcuts like in Win95, and file-association-type-things were much better and more consistently handled.

    There was a partial attempt called DFM a while back. It wasn't really deep enough to do the whole job, but it was an interesting start. Unfortunately it was hosted on MassLinux, and never came back.

  • Basically it works, but there are two pitfalls:

    The easiest is the name service (CosNaming). Orbit doesn't yet implement the bootstrap protocol for finding the name service, so your Java ORB will probably not find it. The workaround is to run the name service of your Java ORB, and let Gnome components register themselves there. You have to start the name service before Gnome, somehow obtain its stringified IOR, and tell the Gnome apps about the IOR. OK - I'm handwaving a little here.

    Second, there's authentication. ORBit does nothing nonstandard here, but Gnome apps use ORBit through the Gnorba library. Gnorba embeds a magic cookie in the principal field of IIOP. If your Java ORB lets you manipulate the principal field, you can configure it with the cookie, which you can find in a property of the root window of your X display. See gnome-libs/libgnorba/orbitgtk.c for the gory details.

    If you can't tell your Java ORB what principal to use, you can disable authentication in libgnorba. This is only safe in a secure environment - everybody on your network will be able to do what they want with your Gnome components. But what you do is patch the function gnome_ORBit_request_validate in orbitgtk.c to always return ORBIT_MESSAGE_ALLOW_ALL. Build libgnorba and install it in place of the version you've got. You don't have to reinstall anything else.

    But remember, this is unsafe on an open network.
  • I think that your comment was uncalled for and inaccurate.

    KDE is no more a standard than GNOME.

    My guess is that you are:
    1. Not a developer, or at least not a very productive developer for either GNOME *or* KDE
    (Why do I say that? Because if you were a contributer to either of those 2 projects you would not have made such a comment. You are free to prefer either one over the other, but a true contributor would not put down someone elses efforts. Both KDE and GNOME are a LOT of work and should both be highly respected.)

    2. Out to start a flame war because you are either a complete a$$ or you feel you have to bash GNOME in order to justify running KDE (which you shouldn't have to do if you felt it was so much better)

    3. Disrespectful (relating back to point #1) and I am thus VERY glad you aren't a GNOME developer because I for one would NOT want someone like you representing GNOME. And if I were a KDE developer, I wouldn't want you either.


    I am very proud to be a GNOME developer and I respect KDE for it's accomplishments and believe it is very good. I would *never* direct such negative comments toward KDE like what you just directed toward GNOME.

    I think it's silly to have flamewars, this is NOT what Linux/Open Source is all about. It should be about choices, working together for a common good and respect - something which you apparently do not have.

    If you cannot respect others, then you cannot respect yourself.

    fejj

  • Hardly revolutionary (Score:3)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 25, 2000 @02:16AM (#1049485)
    While I'm pleased that the GNOME project is coming along well, I must admit that I still find it truly underwhelming. GNOME still feels to be very much emulating the look and feel of Windows 95, although GNOME's superior stability is the major difference. Much as I hate to admit this, Microsoft revolutionised GUI with the "Start" button and taskbar, which provides an easy and efficient way to get things done. The other GUIs (CDE, KDE, GNOME) have all followed suit with similar taskbars, and have been sucessful in their attempts.

    My point is, surely there must be another quantum leap which can be made, which will again revolutionise the way we use our computer desktops? I just hope GNOME has the vision to try to discover the way forward, rather than living in the shadow of Microsoft. Despite the Open Source development model allowing humanity's greatest thinkers to collaborate on GNOME, it seems that these developers are unable to (or are afraid to) think on a large enough scale to surpass Microsoft.

  • Re:Not Helix Gnome 1.2 (Score:3)

    by Peter Teichman ( 4503 ) <peter@ximian.com> on Thursday May 25, 2000 @05:03AM (#1049486) Homepage
    Yes, that title is leading to some confusion. There are actually two things being released at the same time. One is GNOME 1.2, the other is Preview 2 of the Helix GNOME Desktop. This release of the Helix GNOME Desktop includes GNOME 1.2.

    As you said, we just re-package GNOME in an easily installable and updatable form.

    Peter

  • Re:State of ORBit (Score:3)

    by miguel ( 7116 ) on Thursday May 25, 2000 @01:53PM (#1049487) Homepage
    Yes, ORBit can be used independently of GNOME.

    Miguel.

  • Furthermore (Score:3)

    by FascDot Killed My Pr ( 24021 ) on Thursday May 25, 2000 @02:48AM (#1049488)
    "Oh yes, and don't credit Microsoft for the "start" menu. Apple had the "apple" menu a while before that, providing the same functionality."

    Right. And the rest of the taskbar is isomorphic to that "other" menu on MacOS (on the right side, I don't know what it's called). Furthermore, does anyone remember Dashboard (?) for Windows? It provided a "taskbar" and virtual desktops (much like many Linux window managers do today) for Windows 3.x back in the early 90's. The extent to which Win95 is revolutionary it is useless and the extent to which it is useful it is conventional.

    Microsoft's UI research team must consist of:

    1) A guy named Joe who reminisces about UIs he used to use.
    2) A woman named Kathy who periodically downloads/buys other operating systems, has her son install them, and then picks three random features from each.
    3) A lawyer (no name)
    4) A program to generate marketing text: "Revolutionarily easy to use!", "Next Generation Innovation", "As easy as a prom date!"
    --
    Have Exchange users? Want to run Linux? Can't afford OpenMail?

  • GNOME 1.2 "Bongo" =) (Score:3)

    by Menthos ( 25332 ) <.gro.ung. .ta. .sohtnem.> on Thursday May 25, 2000 @04:28AM (#1049489) Homepage
    The official gnome.org release announcement is out now. =)

    And, just for the sake of it, you might want to check out the new look [gnome.org] on www.gnome.org... ;)

  • Another bloated DE. (Score:3)

    by be-fan ( 61476 ) on Thursday May 25, 2000 @01:04PM (#1049490)
    It's true. Linux is becoming increasingly more bloated. In terms of memory use, its true. GNOME +X +Linux take as much memory as Windows. I find it incredible how much bloat is left in Linux in general. Sure, it is much better at managing it than most other OSs, but a clean kernel does not a clean system make. The Linux kernel has around 2 million lines of code and takes 10 minutes to compile (on my PII300.) It takes 90 minutes to compile X, so lets be conservative and say that X is 10 million lines of code. That is 12 million lines right there. GNOME takes almost as long as X to compile, so lets estimate another 8 million lines there. (I'm hugely low balling it.) That is around 20 million lines of code. With QT/KDE (which is almost required for the GNOME-faithfull to run cool apps like KDevelop), that climbs to 25-30 million lines. That is nearly as much as Windows 2K (only 3-5 million lines less). In comparison, BeOS is a sevelte 1.5 million lines for the entire OS. Don't belive me, root around the /boot/beos/system directory some time. The kernel is about 700K, the servers about 3.5 meg, the drivers are less than 500K(it loads drivers dynamically) and deskbar and tracker are about 2.5 meg. In total, the entire /boot/beos/system directory is 36 meg which incluldes all libraries, codecs, kernel add ones, unused drivers, etc. It is easy to see why. BeOS doesn't have nearly as much crap in it as Linux does. Take the whole KDE/GNOME/X thing. If someone runs KDE 2 and GNOME 2, they will have a total of two large cobra implementations, three drag and drop protocols, three print servers, three+ widget sets, dozons of critical libraries, and an ass-load of duplicated functionality. Choice is good, bloat is bad. This is why Linux cries out for standardization. Why cannot a Linux-wide COBRA implementation be used? Is the one time loss of a little bit of programming flexibility (face it, GNOME and KDE do the same thing. For the programmer, it is just an API preference.) worth the extra 30 meg loss in memory? Is it really necessary to have a seperate GNOME print architecture, or for Qt and GTK+ not to be binary compatible? How exactly is GNOME different from KDE aside from ascthetics(namely that until 2.0 the KDE people had none)? Sure there are some architecture differences, but to the app, they provide basically the same services with the same features. I don't begrudge people flexibility. I just think that Linux is becoming increasingly bloated, and people aren't taking any steps to curb it. It would be really nice if someone would define a standard set system of objects, (or function calls, no-one cares) that could be implemented by and DE and widget set of the users choice. Now THERE is smart flexibility.

    PS: I know flamers won't read this far before responding, but I'll try anyway. Don't say that Linux is so flexible you can leave these things out. If you want a modern feature-rich desktop OS, at the moment, KDE and GNOME are the only players. Until KDE 2.0 becomes stable, the situation is even worse, because GNOME has a better environment, while KDE has better apps.

  • Not Helix Gnome 1.2 (Score:3)

    by cehf2 ( 101100 ) on Thursday May 25, 2000 @02:12AM (#1049491)
    This is actually Gnome 1.2. As Helix code often point out, they simply re-package Gnome. Having said that, this is a great leap forward for gnome, now if only they went through the bug reports and fixed them all. In the current state, Microsoft could say, look at all these bugs [gnome.org], they have thousands to fix as well.

  • Re:195.92.249.252? (Score:3)

    by homoted ( 137532 ) on Thursday May 25, 2000 @02:18AM (#1049492) Homepage
    Name: parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk Address: 195.92.249.252

  • "Helix Gnome" 1.2? (Score:4)

    by Booker ( 6173 ) on Thursday May 25, 2000 @03:42AM (#1049493) Homepage
    Hey, great! I hear that Red Hat Linux Kernel 2.4 will be out soon, too. ;)

    ---

  • Re:Hardly revolutionary (Score:4)

    by GypC ( 7592 ) on Thursday May 25, 2000 @02:46AM (#1049494) Homepage Journal

    "Computer, move that window to the left. No not that window. Computer, move the Netscape window to the left. A little more. Computer, a little more. Ah-Ah-Choo!!! Damn! Computer, where is my Netscape window?"

    "Computer, find all files starting with a capital letter and ending with dot empeg that were modified after January third, two thousand eight. What the hell? Computer, find all files starting with a capital letter and ending with dot em pee ee jee, that were modified after January third, two thousand eight. What the hell? Where's my goddamn keyboard? I can type eighty words per minute for Pete's sake..."

    "What? No sir, I'm not looking at movies. Did I say empeg? I meant ex el ess... Yes, sir, I'll keep it down."

    Whisper, "Computer..."

    "Free your mind and your ass will follow"

  • People are not computers (Score:4)

    by JamesKPolk ( 13313 ) on Thursday May 25, 2000 @02:37AM (#1049495) Homepage
    Just because computer technology evolves and improves rapidly, it doesn't mean that user interfaces need to change so quickly.

    People are not like computers; they can't switch their behaviors with a simple configure; make; make install Habits are learned, and hard to break. Why go to all that trouble, to make change for its own sake?

    Take the "revolution" you mention: Microsoft's start menu. The whole idea of replacing the big, easy-to-use Program Manager, with a little menu hidden in the corner, is absurd.

    You'll notice that GNOME and KDE provide far more functionality in their panels, than Microsoft ever provided in Win95..98.. NT 4.. 2000. The ability to place buttons on there, to run frequently-used apps, is a nice way to workaround the usability nightmare of the tiny start button.

    Oh yes, and don't credit Microsoft for the "start" menu. Apple had the "apple" menu a while before that, providing the same functionality.

  • Re:Hardly revolutionary (Score:4)

    by G27 Radio ( 78394 ) on Thursday May 25, 2000 @02:44AM (#1049496)
    My point is, surely there must be another quantum leap which can be made, which will again revolutionise the way we use our computer desktops? I just hope GNOME has the vision to try to discover the way forward, rather than living in the shadow of Microsoft. Despite the Open Source development model allowing humanity's greatest thinkers to collaborate on GNOME, it seems that these developers are unable to (or are afraid to) think on a large enough scale to surpass Microsoft.

    I thought the point behind making it similar was that new users wouldn't have to make a quantum leap to switch from one platform to another. It makes sense to me that the default Gnome configuration operates in a similar manner to the Windows taskbar. Once you learn how to use it you will find it much more configurable than the Windows taskbar...so configurable in fact that you can make it operate completely different than the Windows task bar. As far as configurability goes, it's already a quantum leap ahead.

    Of course, I think you're correct that we can revolutionize the way we use our desktops. Highly configurable interfaces (something that the Windows desktop is not) give us the tools we need to find it. The Gnome/E/X combo give us a starting point similar to what we've experienced with Windows, but give us the option to change it to just about anything we can dream up. Gnome does this especially at the level that the average user can handle.

    numb

  • While I'm pleased that the GNOME project is coming along well, I must admit that I still find it truly underwhelming. GNOME still feels to be very much emulating the look and feel of Windows 95, although GNOME's superior stability is the major difference.

    From where I'm sitting, I'd say you can just about configure a window manager running Gnome applications to look like almost any windowing system currently available. Because the majority of people who use computers these days are used to the GUI paradigms of Windows and Mac OS, it's hardly surprising that much of the Gnome functionality is familiar too. If they had produced something a long way away from the current User Interfaces they would have faced accusations of being out of touch with current GUI thinking.

    Much as I hate to admit this, Microsoft revolutionised GUI with the "Start" button and taskbar, which provides an easy and efficient way to get things done.

    B*&^^%#@!!!

    Sorry. I get so mad when somebody gets this idea that MS came up with the taskbar first for Windows 95, especially since I'd been using a system with a taskbar and application launcher for about 7 years in 1995 (Acorn Risc OS, preceeded by Acorn Arthur for those with long memories). And I'm fairly certain Risc OS was not the only GUI using a taskbar before Windows 95.

    The other GUIs (CDE, KDE, GNOME) have all followed suit with similar taskbars, and have been sucessful in their attempts.

    The taskbar is a useful guide which should, at it's most basic level, provide two things:

    • a list of currently running applications;
    • a means to launch programs.

    Anything else is window dressing or convenience, but these two seem to be the core requirement. Since most of the window managers, such as Sawfish, Afterstep, E, etc., all provide copious mechanisms for customizing or doing away with the taskbar altogether, it's not surprising that they have been successful in their efforts. It is also rewarding to see that they have not blindly followed the "Windows Way" of doing things and have left the choice of how to optimize the available tools as a customizable feature.

    My point is, surely there must be another quantum leap which can be made, which will again revolutionise the way we use our computer desktops?

    There may be. But first, we need to see some serious standardization in the way that the window elements are arranged so that the elusive goal of a consistent user interface across many applications is acheived. Nothing slows a GUI user down more than discovering that orders of buttons like 'Continue Editing', 'Save', 'Cancel' keep switching around so that Cancel is sometimes on the left and sometimes on the right, or ridiculously small toolbar buttons on an application which bear no resemblence to their function, or other nasties like 40+ small icons on a toolbar to distract the eye when looking for one little used function.

    Once there is a degree of uniformity in the way that applications are laid out, then maybe we can step onto the next level of user friendliness. Quite where this will lead is another matter. I, for one, do not want the GUI interfering with my work or making inane suggestions - I have Vigor for that. I think that speech integration may go a long way to speeding up the interaction with the computer. For example, I want an application loaded, say Emacs (what else could I need? :-) ) and I simply ask for it to be loaded. I want to see the time, I ask for it and the computer tells me - this could be either spoken to me or shown on screen. I want to bold text while editing, I simply say "Bold" and keep typing. In fact, speech recognition should allow a user to keep their hands on the keyboard for most of the time and leave that mouse gathering cobwebs at the side. Finally all those modal windows could be dismissed with a quick word. I'd say that would make a huge step forward in productivity with a UI - effectively making use of another channel of input to supplement the accurate input channel of the keyboard.

    Cheers,

    Toby Haynes

  • DON'T DOWNLOAD - wait a few hours (Score:4)

    by nullity ( 115966 ) on Thursday May 25, 2000 @03:01AM (#1049498) Homepage
    Do not download GNOME until the mirrors have had a chance to sync. This will be about 0.5-1 day. Just wait. If you do not, *nobody* will be able to get their GNOME. We'll all be fscked ala FreeBe. Its not on the GNOME web site because the download is not ready - it'll be synced soon enough, but only if you wait.

    HelixCode has enough mirrors to stand a slashdotting, but only if those mirrors have the code. Every person who doesn't try to pound on the mirrors is 30 more that will be able to download GNOME soon.

    Please be responsible members of the community!

    (and BTW, gnome people are VERY mad at slashdot right now)

    -Seth Nickell

  • State of ORBit (Score:4)

    by duplex ( 142954 ) on Thursday May 25, 2000 @02:31AM (#1049499)
    On this occasion I thought I'd ask someone knowledgeable what the current state of ORBit is. There is little to be found on RedHat's homepage. In particular are any of the following implemented:
    • Portable Object Adapter + all policies
    • Naming Service
    • Event Service
    • Objects by Value
    • Implementation Repository
    Last time I saw a posting about Orbit on comp.object.corba it did not get a great review. Does anyone know if things have improved since? Only people having a clue need reply.

  • Integrating Java with Gnome and Orbit (Score:5)

    by smartin ( 942 ) on Thursday May 25, 2000 @02:22AM (#1049500)
    As a Java programmer, I would like to play with the Orbit, the Gnome ORB, from a Java program. So far I have not seen any information as to how to do this. I've asked the gnome list and no one there could help me. From what I understand Orbit more or less a standard Corba ORB but it uses some sort of different authentication scheme. Does this make it incompatable with other ORBs, or does it still work? Can anyone provide pointers or information on this?

  • Re:State of ORBit (Score:5)

    by miguel ( 7116 ) on Thursday May 25, 2000 @06:53AM (#1049501) Homepage
    We do have a POA, and most policies are used.


    The naming service is implemented. Indeed, it is implemented as a reusable library, so you can implement different naming systems. For instance, we have a Desktop naming system running in GNOME in the gnome-name-service process.


    The implementation repository has never been part of the CORBA specification, it is only talked about, but no details exist. It is left to the implementation.


    In the case of GNOME/ORBit, our gnome-name-server plus the GOAD provide the equivalent of the Implementation Repository.


    Further, in GNOME 2.0, we have a more extensible facility called the Object Activation Framework (OAF).


    There is no event service available now, nor interface repository (although there are protypes for both of them).


    Miguel.

Slashdot Top Deals

The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much.

Close