GNU Window Maker 0.60.0 Released 118
papason with the news that
Windowmaker is out, and alternative downloading can be found
here " From the site itself, it talks about the major changes include more Theme related configuarability in WPrefs, better international support, and more-check the ChangeLog.
Window Maker Stability (Score:1)
Did WM drop me to a command line? Did it dump me out of my running apps (including some coding)? Did it freeze the keyboard, leaving me high and dry?
NO it did not! Instead, WM actually trapped SIGSEGV and popped up a dialog asking me what I wanted to do (drop to the CLI, or restart WM)!!
THIS is how window managers should behave when there's a problem. There's nothing more galling than losing some work or time to a window manager crash. I suppose there are things that Window Maker can't catch, but I was duly impressed that it caught this. I'm a Window Maker fan for sure.
Problem with WindowMaker crashing (Score:1)
Any ideas?
Kyle
--
Kyle R. Rose, MIT LCS
...which is caused by... (Score:1)
Alternative download link (Score:1)
but next time point to my Full ftp.windowmaker.org mirror [utwente.nl] instead of my own little personal WindowMaker-section
Re:Here's a good one for you... (Score:1)
#include "WUtil.h"
as well as the raster one to in quotes as well... after that it worked fine (i am using rh6)
Re:Window Maker distribution (Score:1)
kde is the default WM and has lots of themes, but you can also do gnome.
It would be pretty smooth for someone who does not want to fool with setting these up individually.
http://www.linux-mandrake.com
Cheers,
-karma
Re:Window Maker distribution (Score:1)
I've found Window Maker to be very well maintained in Debian [debian.org]. (I use the not-quite-released version 2.2, potato.) The core wmaker package works excellently, as does the add-on wmaker-gnome package (to make wmaker more respectful of panel and gmc). I would assume that the wmaker-kde package works just as well. Various dock-apps and wmakerconf are all available as packages, and all kept up to the minute. With apt (debian's advanced front-end to the packaging system), you can easily keep yourself current, as well. With menu, debian's unified root-menu system, packages register (and unregister, if you remove them) entries in the Debian section of the wmaker application menu. Several themes are included, but I believe these are just the ones that are distributed by windowmaker.org in the wmaker-data tarball. For a real theme selection, get wm.themes.org [themes.org] and wmakerconf talking together.
Re:Window Maker Stability (Score:2)
Nevertheless, a crash per week isn't what I'd call 'stable.' I've been running Window Maker for *months* and never had a crash till this week.
I'm not bad-mouthing E, and I know you said that this was an unstable version. I'm just pointing out that a crash/week ain't anything to write home about.
Re:"Desktop Environments" vs. Window Managers (Score:1)
Re:Why Window Maker? (Score:1)
no dock (to my knowledge) or customizable panel
clucky config (and I hand edit E configs...)
Eh? Are you knocking on E or on Windowmaker? WM certainly has a dock and a control panel for changing the config. There isn't a "customizeable panel" per say, but that's what dockapps are for. I don't think the config is that clunky either, even when you do it by hand with vi.
E isn't bad either, but it just isn't my style. (P.S. E is faster?!?)
Window Maker 1.0 (Score:1)
You're scaring away the users who don't like to use beta software (a rare thing in Linux, beta? Right?)
Alfredo, just call it 1.0 for god's sake. and through in a few token bugs for the 1.0 release. It's just too damn stable
Re:"Desktop Environments" vs. Window Managers (Score:1)
Well KOM will allow linking and embedding for one thing, see the Openpart docs available at the KDE website for more info.
How is a desktop environment necessary for the use of CORBA?
It isn't with KDE.
Everyone grumps about the M$ interface,
The ocassional non-resizable dialog with a list box in it pisses me off, but I would say that comparatively MS's interfaces are good, indeed MSs main strength.
it appears to my poor vision that KDE and GNOME are striving to be nothing more than better implementations of what M$ has already done
I don't agree with that at all. KDE isn't any more like windows than it is the Mac GUI, or NextStep or OS/2. A lot of effort goes into not copying the bad features of other GUIs.
I just don't know what benefit *I* am supposed to obtain from them[DEs].
I don't know enough about you to say for sure, but you might find a web browser, e-mail client and word processor easier to use if they interoperate well and have consistent UIs. Also look for Matthias Ettrich's original e-mail on the motivation for the KDE it's worth reading.
Perhaps this isn't revolutionary enough for your tastes, but some of us just want to focus on making useful free apps with GUIs rather than creating a revolution in GUI design. (At least for the moment anyway, one thing at a time).
Sorry I couldn't provide links I'm just taking a short break from coding.
Re:transparent dock/root menus? (Score:1)
i have been thinking about trying windowmaker, but am wondering if they have or are planning to add more transparency support. anyone have any news? thanks
transparent == cool (Score:1)
I tried eterm too, but it seemed bloated and unstable. That was a while back, so maybe it's improved, but aterm does everthing I want so I haven't bothered to re-evaluate eterm.
I noticed in your screenshot that you aren't using the transparent scrollbars. I know they are in aterm 0.3.6, as I use them myself, and they look much nicer than the plain gray ones. Stick this in your ~/.Xdefaults file:
Aterm*transpscrollbar: true
Transparent dock and menus sounds cool. If titlebars were also transparent you would never need to pick a theme, just a background.
Now if I could just get every other X application to do transparency... :)
Re:transparent == cool (Score:1)
0.60 (Score:1)
X logo? (Score:1)
-herb
using kfm or gmc for desktops (Score:1)
Re:seeing double (Score:1)
Can you turn off that "Workspace X" thing? (Score:1)
I tried running WM inside KDE but it was too resource-hungry. I've settled on kfm running inside WindowMaker as my preferred desktop.
Re:Desktop (Score:1)
While I haven't read the "Interface hall of shame", I would have if you had provided a link. However, what is one man's obnoxious quirk is another's ideal behavior. Interface is a matter of taste, despite whatever Microsoft trys to say with their "Research."
Here is a person who finds a desktop, and a bunch of panels and taskbars, on the bottom of the screen handy. I say that not from my first impression aesthetically (I remember blanching when switching from win 3.1 to win 95), but from months of heavy use.
If I want to lookup a signal from, say, class QTimer (in the course of KDE app coding), I click on my desktop icon "Qt Class List", then click QTimer, and boom! I have just what I want.
If I want to install the #$%#^ old egcs from the RH CD becasue the #$%#$% new egcs is giving me errors, I pop in the CD, click on the desktop icon "cd", and boom! The window pops up, and I can find and directly type the rpm --install with one CLI command. (So I only have to take my hand off of the mouse once, rather than switching several times.)
I find the desktop also a convenient place to store reminders (who needs a separate app? I plop an aptly named text file on the desktop, and save a detailed reminder in the file.
Oh, and while KDE (I know too little of GNOME to speak of it) may draw on ideas from Windows (as well as others), it doesn't blindly copy every little thing. I personally find myself FAR more efficient with KDE than I ever was with d:\winnt\explorer.exe
Like PIPE´s on steroids (Score:1)
I think OS/2 is the best example of this being actually done, and it might be its not absolutly necessary having a DE for this to happen. But then again, what do I know?
Re:GNU ? (Score:1)
WindowMaker's got class! (Score:1)
WindowMaker just plain rocks!
Re:transparent rxvt? (Score:1)
Also note that the changes Alfredo did have been rolled back into the standard rxvt from http://www.rxvt.org/
Re:Window Maker distribution (Score:1)
I know for sure that I don't want a preconfigured WM cause this would take half the fun. And regarding how mindboggling easy it is to setup and accustomize that wouldn't really be an issue for distributors.
"We ship WM preconfigured!"
"(yawn). Uhu. Impressive. (shrug)"
belbo. I support zero score posting
OT: What impressed me most... (Score:1)
It was that the source compiled without any warning messages . Can't remember to have seen this before. I already knew then: this is it.
And I compared tops with people who are running KDE or GNOME: that's 2 MB vs. 12 MB... (Better stop here before I start drooling :-)
belbo I support zero score posting.
Re:"Desktop Environments" vs. Window Managers (Score:1)
about a taskbar/panel? Or "Start" menu? Trash can? Auto-start folder? Shortcuts?
Yes the display properties is similar to windows. The panel is more like CDE than anything windows. The taskbar is like windows, I don't use it much though but don't know how to turn it off, also note a MacOs like alternative the Windowlist in the panel is provided. Auto-start folder, sure I remember the mac having something like this. Shortcuts ditto.
I can't really justify my original statement though, I guess I meant KDE isn't a windows clone it's a blend of the best parts of CDE, Windows, the Mac GUI, OS/2 and NeXtStep. My first impression was, heck that looks a lot like CDE, then I discovered it was similar to Windows/Mac, then a found it has its own distinctive flavor, YMMV.
to say that the two aren't very similar seems silly
Except for the very I agree
A consistent UI is dependent upon the toolkit, not a "desktop environment."
No. In the case of KDE the consistent feel depends on the kdelibs as well as QT, but not on (kdebase). kdelibs is basically replacements and extensions to QT. KDE = development libraries + desktop shell + apps.
Not everyone needs to be able to edit spreadsheets from within a word processor. Why should those who don't need such "features" be expected to suffer the overhead associated with them in their UI?
Hey this is free software. That means a much more level playing field. If the apps with interoperability features are so bloated that demand for slimmer apps is strong then someone will code those slimmer apps. (Kruiser the alternative KDE file manger is one example). You've got the source code so the developer should be able to choose the level of interoperability.
Look at the plans for E, its going to be a competitor in the desktop shell arena, but you will still be able to use KDE apps from it. There is a fair bit of choice there.
Note there are limits, the choice of toolkits should benefit the developer but not make much of a difference to the user. I mean from the users point of view I don't want different types of scrollbars in different apps (themeing allows some flexibility and power here), and I don't want to find out my app doesn't support voice control as there aren't enough developers available to implement it.
It's basically depends on the supply of able programmers and the level of demand from users as to what gets done.
One of the *major* things I love about Linux is how fast it is. But it's *not* as fast at all running these big GUIs. It's manifestly slower.
Hmm, KDE doesn't slow down Linux much for me, I mean the kernel going at the same speed as always. I use bash to do most of my file management, KDE doesn't seem to have slowed down that at all, I still have the "choice".
I really would like to try to put more time into this reply but I still haven't finished that coding...
Re:Here's a good one for you... (Score:1)
This didn't work for me.. I kept getting the same error. Funny thing is, util/wmsetbg.c, which is what was giving the error, actually does have an
#include "../WINGs/WUtil.h"
in it. Oh well, back to 0.53 for me.
seeing double (Score:1)
Not that it's a big deal I guess, just seems like
some extra fluff.
Re:OT: What impressed me most... (Score:1)
Re:Here's a good one for you... (Score:1)
Hi
I've had the same problem and I've just found a solution.
In WINGs.h you can replace the line :
# include
by
# include "WUtil.h"
Re:Why Window Maker? (Score:1)
This is not necessarily true. Well, it is in the case you gave but not in his: you said a 'faster' machine but he said a 'nicer' one. It is well known that in programming you can often trade memory space for computational time; eg, precompute the results of a drawing operation and rubber-stamp it lots of times. In other words--a program that uses more memory may be making good use of its memory to improve speed.
In addition, most memory-intensive WM functions that I can think of offhand (eg storing pixmaps) aren't actually that computationally intensive [if coded well!!] -- modern PCs can redraw the whole screen at a rate limited only by the monitor's vertical refresh. With an X server of course this requires shared memory or server-side pixmaps to reach a reasonable level of efficiency. Which E does.
I assume that when the previous poster said 'nicer' he meant not only 'faster' but 'has more memory'. The above use of memory would actually be counterproductive on a RAM-limited system since you'd go into swap. However a 'nicer' system will likely have >32 MB of RAM and therefore be able to make use of whatever clever memory-eating (but CPU-sparing) algorithm the programmers can come up with.
All of this said, I can still believe that fvwm might be faster on my machine
Daniel
Compile error, and fix (Score:1)
Re:transparent rxvt? (Score:1)
http://rpmfind.net/linux/RPM/contrib/libc6/i386
Works (for me) on RH5.2 and RH6.
Geek without purpose. (Score:1)
But if you want me to use a window manager that only wraps the top and bottom of a window, and won't let me resize unless i grab the bottom, you have GOT to be kidding yourself.
and WHY is that the way it does it? because it's "more correct". Correct my hiney, it's counter-intuitive.
Not too long ago, a member of the WindowMaker dev team wrote an article wherein he pointed out that instead of having menu bars with a list of menus and then sub menus with tearoffs, that we should have just one menu, with several tearoffs, as that would be "More correct". He admitted it would make a lot of people angry, but insisted that that's the way it should be done.
Personally, I gauge the quality of a software product according to two rules. It has to basically work, and it can't piss me off.
This is why i use icewm. Because FEEL is more important than LOOK.
Re:Window Maker distribution (Score:1)
But for some reason I thought you COUDL use WindowMaker in RH6. I think it's an install option....but maybe I'm wrong.
Re:Window Maker in RH 6.0 (Score:1)
The program menu only shows basic applications. None of the KDE apps were listed. Some of the Gnome apps were listed, but they were poorly organized. Since it used the wmconf program to generate the menu, it was almost impossible to adjust the default setup.
I tried running the Gnome panel with it, and I just could not get it to work. It either would cause X to crash, crash Window Maker, or both. It would not remember its configuration, and using session management with Window Maker was a horrible experience.
Overall, I looked at it and realized that I had to spend needless hours of configuration to make it work correctly. It really just pissed me off that they couldn't have taken the time to make sure that Window Maker was configured correctly, and ready for Gnome or KDE before shipping.
Windowmaker with Gnome (Score:1)
Re:"Desktop Environments" vs. Window Managers (Score:1)
Now, what benefits are generally available from having applications that can communicate via CORBA? I know certainly that there are specific circumstances when this can be useful, but what particular benefit is there on a day-to-day basis that I'd want to suffer the overhead of running CORBA and a desktop environment in order to have it?
How is a desktop environment necessary for the use of CORBA? Can't I use CORBA without a "DE", thereby saving the resources?
Again, I'm not trying to be a butthead about this. I just wonder about the rather Microsoft-esque goods that we're all starting to swallow, and wondering about the benefits I'm supposed to realize from them. Everyone grumps about the M$ interface, but it appears to my poor vision that KDE and GNOME are striving to be nothing more than better implementations of what M$ has already done. Is that really the best course? How am I *really* going to benefit from giving up a load of RAM and CPU time to GNOME and KDE? I'm not saying that there aren't folk out there who really need that sort of stuff for their work -- so I'm by no means saying that GNOME/KDE are a waste of time. I just don't know what benefit *I* am supposed to obtain from them.
So: Why should I use either one? What are the benefits?
GNU ? (Score:1)
Why ?
Re:Window Maker Stability (Score:2)
Of course, it needed a while back, but now it's quite stable - I've been using it for about a week or so, and it's only crashed on me once (and I didn't lose any work either).
This was also the unstable CVS version - which is quite impressive.
So if you want a window manager that actually has pagers, check out Enlightenment CVS 0.16.
I didn't mean to make this an ad for E, but I just thought I'd point out that WindowMaker isn't the only one that does that... however, I definitely agree that all window managers SHOULD, or at the very least start an XTerm if they crash (so you can at least start up another WM or close all of your running programs).
Re:WMaker vs Afterstep (Score:1)
Translation: You don't care about transparent AS stuff. I, on the other hand, do care. I have three Linux boxes within a seven foot radius beside me. I use red and blue tinted transparent aterms to tell me at a glance which buried window corner is telneted to the box I need at the moment. Is that a trivial use? Not to me. And that transparent stuff that no one cares about has already been ported to WM via Alfredo's modified rxvt.
Re:GNOME gmc patch? (Score:1)
Window Maker distribution (Score:2)
So, why isn't there a distribution that comes with Window Maker preconfigured, setup, and ready to go with Gnome or KDE support working already (Unlike, Red Hat 6.0)? It could come with lots of great themes already installed, along with plenty of dockapps.
Now, THAT'S a distribution that would be worthy of my time installing it.
Re:Here's a good one for you... (Score:1)
#include "./WUtil.h"
That fixes it.
Re:Problem with WindowMaker crashing (Score:1)
Might try unchecking `UseSaveUnders' in wmakerconf, that fixed the x11amp skin crashes I was having.
Maybe try the latest potato netscape 4.6 packages?
Ooops typo (Score:2)
[utwente.nl]
ftp://shadowmere.student.utwente.nl/Mirrors/ftp
Re:Window Maker 1.0 stable? (Score:1)
parse error before `else' (Score:1)
gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I. -I../wrlib -I../WINGs -I/opt/include -I/usr/X11R6/include -DLOCALEDIR=\"/opt/lib/locale\" -g -O2 -c dock.c
dock.c:3551: parse error before `else'
make[1]: *** [dock.o] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory
`/mnt/disk/opt/src/WindowMaker-0.60.0/src'
make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
Re:transparent == cool (Score:1)
It used to be fun to count how long it would take him/her/it after a new wterm was released to change all the credits again and release a new aterm, also you could appear like an oracle to newbies by predicting an aterm release and what it's new features would be.
Um, Are you sure about that? I'm not familiar with the history of the two, but the reason I picked aterm over wterm is that aterm has features wterm lacked/lacks. Specifically, shading rather than just tinting with primary colours. I tried aterm and wterm at the same time to compare, and aterm could shade arbitrary colours without turning the background into a four-bit mess. How could aterm "rip off" from wterm what wterm didn't/doesn't have?
In fact the whole afterstep camp seem to suffer from the same problem - following in the footsteps of Window Maker.
Once all you can do is rip off everyone else, your project and community is dead.
As I understand it, Afterstep was thriving before Window Maker came along. I don't claim to know what happened after Window Maker appeared or what code has been "ripped off", but the fact that Afterstep has some features (transparent title dock and menus, as pointed out by the previous poster) suggests that they have been doing some interesting stuff and not just "following in the footsteps of Window Maker".
Afterstep is dead.
Can't we all just get along?
Admiral Burrito - a happy Window Maker user.
Debian has good wmaker support (Score:1)
I think the default wm is still twm though!
Re:"Desktop Environments" vs. Window Managers (Score:1)
Hunh? Have you ever compared (for instance) the display properties applets of KDE and Windows? You don't think these two are a lot alike? How about a taskbar/panel? Or "Start" menu? Trash can? Auto-start folder? Shortcuts?
In fact, when I first tried KDE (during Beta 1), I read a FAQ from them where they said something to this effect: "We don't view this as copying Windows; we view this as taking the best from it and beating Microsoft over the head with it." Yes, there are differences (and there are definite improvements in KDE, too -- like editable *.kdelnk files, for instance). But to say that the two aren't very similar seems silly. Even the key bindings are extremely similar!
but you might find a web browser, e-mail client and word processor easier to use if they interoperate well and have consistent UIs.
A consistent UI is dependent upon the toolkit, not a "desktop environment." It is dependent upon developers working together to use that toolkit to make things work consistently. Certainly this has benefits, and you're right about that. But as to the integration -- isn't this something that is really NOT of benefit to everyone? Not everyone needs to be able to edit spreadsheets from within a word processor. Why should those who don't need such "features" be expected to suffer the overhead associated with them in their UI? Of course with Linux one has choice -- but that's beside the point. I am being told that GNOME and/or KDE represent the wave of the future for Linux GUIs. What if Joe User wants to use GNOME because he thinks it's cool but doesn't need all the "integration" junk? He's stuck with it. He can't turn it off, either -- just like Windows. No choice.
I'm not trying to be revolutionary. One of the *major* things I love about Linux is how fast it is. But it's *not* as fast at all running these big GUIs. It's manifestly slower. Why should I give up that speed for the sake of "integration"?
Re:Why Window Maker? (Score:1)
I suppose that position is understandable. FVWM may be the most stable window manager for all UNIX-type platforms, but even I must admit it is not as feature laden and gee-whiz looking as Window Maker or Enlightenment.
Realistically, most people on slashdot don't consider stability the highest priority in their software. This is as it should be in the open source world. People should try out the bleeding edge stuff. Sure, when you're on the bleeding edge you bleed a little, but that's how the snags are discovered and fixed.
Therefore, FVWM doesn't get much (if any) airplay on
Re:Window Maker 1.0 (Score:1)
Re:WMaker vs Afterstep (Score:1)
The bottom line, wmaker is much easier to configure, forget text editor and no one cares about transparent AS stuff.
That's not a bug... (Score:2)
If you start a x session at tty1 you're x display will go to tty7. Whenever you try to start a command line tool in the Run applet it will prompt you for stuff on tty1. I started a "ssh -l my_name
My_Host" in the run applet. On tty1 a command line
prompt was started asking me for a password. To my stunning suprise the password *was* echoed on the screen. I did file report.
Ummm... That's not a bug, that's the way X always works. If you run a command line program, it will appear on the current controlling terminal. You were on tty1, so WM's controlling terminal is tty1, and since these things are inherited so is the run applet's, and therefore so is ssh's. There's not a whole lot you could do about it; you'd have to modify the Run applet to be smart enough to know whether what it's being asked to run is an X app in order to get around this, and to start the app in an xterm if it's not. That's not the kind of stuff that the Run app is supposed to do.
The real solution is to type "xterm -e ssh -l my_name my_host" in the Run... box.
Re:Windowmaker with Gnome (Score:1)
"*" = {DontSaveSession = Yes;};
which shuts off session management for every program. However, you'd think they would have thought to make this the default under gnome.
I don't know if this has been fixed recently, as the Netscape problems I have been encountering have forced me to move to E until I have a resolution.
Kyle
--
Kyle R. Rose, MIT LCS
Re:Geek without purpose. (Score:1)
Re:Window Maker 1.0 (Score:1)
Mandrake (Score:1)
As soon as I resolve the weird file system problems that I'm having, I'll probably keep Mandrake.
Here's a good one for you... (Score:1)
make[1]: Entering directory `/home/sgunders/WindowMaker-0.60.0/util'
gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../src -I../wrlib -I/usr/local/include -I/usr/X11R6/include -g -O2 -c wmsetbg.c
In file included from wmsetbg.c:49:
../WINGs/WINGs.h:7: WUtil.h: No such file or directory
make[1]: *** [wmsetbg.o] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/sgunders/WindowMaker-0.60.0/util'
make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
[root@penguin WindowMaker-0.60.0]#
Re:transparent == cool (Score:1)
It used to be fun to count how long it would take him/her/it after a new wterm was released to change all the credits again and release a new aterm, also you could appear like an oracle to newbies by predicting an aterm release and what it's new features would be.
In fact the whole afterstep camp seem to suffer from the same problem - following in the footsteps of Window Maker. What a neat idea those external rendering libraries are! Never seen that before in Window Maker (or Blackbox either, where the author was nice enough to let us know beforehand and even ask permission even though that's not really required but a nice gesture anyway).
How about we include that in our ripped-off terminal emulator? How original! Never seen Eterm do that for 4 years now, and we'll ignore the existence of wterm in case anybody wises up and runs a diff across aterm and wterm sources and realises all we did was change the credits for it to ourselves.
Once all you can do is rip off everyone else, your project and community is dead.
Afterstep is dead.
Re:transparent == cool (Score:1)
the link for the transparent terminals (aterms) is above a couple posts.
the background (and a host of other dazzling ones) is from propaganda.themes.org [themes.org].
most of the wharf applets are stock or i got them from the sites linked from the "applications" (or something) section of the afterstep home page.
feel free to email me if you have other questions!
Re:Window Maker 1.0 (still bubgs) (Score:1)
Although I still find afterstep nice too
BTW the bug is this:
If you start a x session at tty1 you're x display will go to tty7. Whenever you try to start a command line tool in the Run applet it will prompt you for stuff on tty1. I started a "ssh -l my_name
My_Host" in the run applet. On tty1 a command line
prompt was started asking me for a password. To my
stunning suprise the password *was* echoed on the
screen. I did file report.
Re:using kfm or gmc for desktops (Score:1)
It's a great file manager with an OS/2-ish interface. It has Offix DnD support, so works well with WindowMaker's Dock and Clip.
Re:transparent rxvt? (Score:1)
Re:Why Window Maker? (Score:1)
E has no fvwm code in it.
at all.
it used to, but since then it has gone through 2 ground-up rewrites that I know of (prob more) and one of its points-of-pride is that it has no code that is copied from any other wm...
oh yeah and fvwm blows, functionality AND attractiveness are BOTH missing...
no dock (to my knowledge) or customizable panel
clucky config (and I hand edit E configs...)
there is no reason to use it...
it you have a weak computer, run blackbox
if you have a better computer than that, run windowmaker
if you have a nice computer, then run E, not only the graphically best, but it will actually be faster...
Windowmaker Mirror (Score:1)
Re:Window Maker distribution (Score:1)
Re:Window Maker 1.0 (Score:1)
-NG
+--
Given infinite time, 100 monkeys could type out the complete works of Shakespeare.
Re:Window Maker 1.0 (Score:2)
IMO if more company's would do this (and we could convince people that BetaSoftware != BadSoftware), we probably wouldn't see as many products in the 6.0 - 8.0 range that are still trash.
In an nutshell, a 1.0 should be the realization of the original idea for the software.
Sean
Indeed. No- AMEN. (Score:1)
Look, this was neat stuff ten years ago- but just because it's only coming around to Linux in recent years doesn't mean it's _that_ great an idea. It's nothing more than a visual orientation tool, and this is only a reminder of the _real_ state of the filesystem, an imaginary picture and not the true status of the computer. The positions icons are in do not 'exist' in any relevant sense, to the computer. They are arbitrary.
Drag and drop is great- hell, I very often use my MacOS partitions and extensively use drag and drop, and it's totally prevalent in MacOS and works quite consistently- but there are only so many ways I use it, in the long run, and all of these ways could be implemented some other way. Selection in X is so screwy it's a moot point that it isn't drag and drop- and the other use I find is dragging selected text (always text) to the desktop and making a clipping. There are other ways I could get that result, because all it really is, is copying the active selection to a file- that's ALL it is, it's just done with a motion rather than a command.
I have linuxPPC running with a medium-old Window Maker and am well pleased with it, and run nothing resembling a 'desktop'. That's what multiple terms and the applications menu are for, and the latter allows tricks I couldn't begin to do from a 'desktop' with limited action grammar (I'd have to make special aliases to script the running of special other programs in combination- yuck! Not appropriate for use with MacOS).
I have linux (RH 5.1, heavily stripped) running on a _486_ at work with 16M of ram and a mere 240M hard drive, and _that_ runs an old Window Maker and is quite happy with it (and also runs aterms- with the option of making them transparent. Yah- transparent terms on a 486. Very nice way to run console apps on severely limited systems- it's not all that slow, even)
I agree with DFL: I see _no_ significant benefit to a linux 'desktop'. Why, why? I suppose I can see putting icons on the screen, but you don't _have_ to... and anyhow WM offers dock and clip and stuff to let icons be present. I've found, personally, after many years of using a very determined desktop environment, that I find it soothing and kind of Zen to have an empty space where the desktop would be- or a nice picture uncluttered by objects (save the clip- or even sans both dock and clip), or an Afterstep-inspired animated xlockmore background, like star -batchcount 200 -size 20 -trek 0 -straight (or laser, if I want to be veryveryalertandawake!)
Maybe it is simply that people who have used Mac or Windows for years and become very familiar with desktops are more open to looking at other approaches and thinking they are _better_ than what (to the old Windows or Mac user) seems like the old-fashioned way of doing things? When using Linux, I find that the idea of a desktop with icons to launch programs and menubars/taskbars on the screen etc etc etc seems intolerably limiting and trite... I guess it takes all kinds... how many other Mac/Windows users actively try to set up Linux so it behaves different from anything they are familiar with?
"Desktop Environments" vs. Window Managers (Score:2)
If not drag and drop, then what?
Is it a unified look and feel? Can't this be had by using apps based on one toolkit, for less overhead?
Is it integrated apps? Setting aside KOffice for the moment (since it's not *quite* ready), what other "integrated" apps are there (not counting app-swallowing panels, since panels aren't (IMO) an essential part of an "environment" and since that functionality already exists in window managers lacking an "environment")?
Is the big attraction having a "desktop"? What work do you do on it? What benefits does it add?
I'm not trying to be a pain in the neck. I'm literally at a loss for what exactly the benefits are that a window manager like Window Maker or AfterStep doesn't provide. After 4 years of Windows 9X/NT and after spending time with KDE, I still don't see what the benefit is of a "desktop" other than a place for icons to generate clutter. Why do I need that? I do all my work in applications, not on a desktop. So what does this add?
So what is it?
Re:Debian has good wmaker support (Score:1)
transparent rxvt? (Score:1)
Re:Can you turn off that "Workspace X" thing? (Score:1)
Add
WorkspaceNameDisplayPosition = none;
to your GNUstep/Defaults/WindowMaker file.