IceWM 1.0.0 released 166
A reader wrote in with the news that IceWMIceWM has announced that they are now 1.0.0. IceWM is a window manager that strives to be simple, according to the web site, while also being fully usable in default config. It's fully Gnome compliant, and partially KDE compliant.
More Gnome WMs; A good thing. (Score:4)
Something I've noticed about many of the WMs currently under development is that they seem to put a lot of energy into support for "themes". While it is an important practicality to allow users to customize the look and feel of their desktop what I see (especially under KDE and Enlightenment) is a lot of wacky features that don't seem practical.
I'd like to see more Gnome compliant window managers. Choice is a good thing. I feel like Oliver Twist actually, "Please Sir, Can I have some more?" :-)
Eh... (Score:2)
IceWm is fast (Score:1)
Partial KDE support? (Score:2)
"It's like this. We're really trying hard to almost work correctly sometimes with KDE."
--
odds of being killed by lighning and
Re:More Gnome WMs; A good thing. (Score:1)
Re:Eh... (Score:1)
Also, a new feature was added not too long ago that automatically disabled all the extra crap (taskbar) when GNOME was detected.
Is another WM really what we need? (Score:5)
Quantity will never replace quality, no matter how free it is.
Re:IceWm is fast (Score:1)
lean, mean and clean
If you don't like it, change it (Score:1)
Is this really an area that needs filling? (Score:5)
If we want to take more of the Microsoft market share, we need more users.. when you compare how I can change my resolution under Windows with a single click, and I've still got X running at 640x480, now -there- is an area that needs work.
This is a huge discouragement for new users. You can't expect that when you say "this video card and modem won't work, and sound is really complicated to set up" they'll just go "oh, good, I have this extra $500 I needed to waste somehow, why dont I replace most of my hardware?"
Re:More Gnome WMs; A good thing. (Score:2)
As for Enlightenment, it seems silly for people to be complaining about something that is still nowhere near complete (don't believe me? check raster & mandrake's huge list on enlightenment.org). Also, E was completely rewritten betweem DR0.13 and DR0.14. So if raster & Co. were making any attempt to correlate version number incrementation with stability or completeness, then we would be at about DR0.02, not DR0.16.
Okay, now I'm rambling. I just saw the start of a big WM bashfest...
--
odds of being killed by lighning and
Congrats to icewm (Score:3)
Icewm has come a long way, and throughout the development cycle it's always been a fast, usable window manager. It's nicely configurable, and now that it has a couple configuration GUIs, it's that much easier. It's good to see the 1.0.0 mark, and I congradulate the people behind it for their years of effort.
Somebody mentioned there being too many 'almost done' window managers in the open source world, and to them I'd like to point out that this community's definition of 'beta version' is slightly different from that of commercial software
Yes, there are a lot of window managers, and perhaps some of them didn't need to be made, but I don't see any harm in having that much more variety. It's not like your window manager choice is going to make your X apps unusable (And if it does, that window manager has Issues
KaufWM 1.0 released! Features Natalie Portman! (Score:4)
See how easy it is to write a catchy headline?
Seriously, I move for Slashdot to stop posting this kind of 1.0 announcements. You can bet your ass that, as we speak, about half a million attention-thirsty Slashgeeks are hurriedly updating their pet WM projects to "1.0", with hopes of getting posted on Slashdot and scoring collaborators. So don't post this kind of thing - no exceptions.
Re:Is another WM really what we need? (Score:3)
Re:Eh... (Score:1)
KISS, but avoid making it too simple. After all, we have to avoid what Don Norman calls "The Tyranny of the Blank Screen"... a screen that offeres no clues as to what to do next, or what is possible to do.
Why don't you try it first. (Score:1)
Besides, there have been many good window managers, and desktop envirements to go with them. Why do you care if 20 guys make there own crappy versions? It is unlikely they would have helped out the other good window managers.
You are lucky 2 guys already responded, I would have moderated that post down if it had not been replied too.
Re:IceWm is fast (Score:1)
Is that really the goal, though? (Score:1)
If we want to take more of the Microsoft market share
I'm not sure if this is really a priority.. I used to think that we as a community should be out to beat Microsoft like the media always says we are, but now that I look back over the last couple years.. I don't care what Microsoft does, or how big their market share is. The open source community has created something that has made a huge impact, and won't be silenced by an iron fisted corporation, no matter how large they may be.
I've still got X running at 640x480
User error. Fix your X configuration to support multiple resolutions, and press CtrlAlt+ or CtrlAlt- (Using the + and - on your keypad) Or if you demand a graphical one-click answer rather than a three-key binding, see apps such as the Gnome QuickRes Applet [tripod.de].
this video card and modem won't work
Very few, if any, modern (I say modern as in 'made in the last 3 years') and common video cards break X.
The only modems that don't work in Linux are WinModems, which require a Windows driver to function as a modem (And actually, work is underway to fix that pathetic attempt at Windows-specific hardware)
sound is really complicated to set up
I don't know about other distros, but RedHat enables pretty much every kernel sound module available in the default kernel. Any SoundBlaster-esque card should work out of the box, which covers pretty much everything packaged by a major vendor, unless it's a weird speakerphone/modem/soundcard monstrosity like I've seen in the HP Pavillions.
Sure, the situation isn't perfect. But think about what you're asking for. Much of the hardware support in Linux that we take for granted was made possible by hard efforts of volunteers who pounded away on devices to reverse-engineer their functionality. It's becoming easier now as companies are being more forthcoming about their hardware specs, but it's still work being done by volunteers. Don't gripe if they're not supporting everything fast enough for you.
Re:Finally there! (Score:1)
Of course if there is an engine to do this stuff automatically I want it =P
Like I said, try it out. (Score:1)
This WM has been around for a while. It isn't bleeding edge stuff.Why would you even say that? It is just a quality WM, that is at 1.0.
Great! (Score:1)
I'd also like to warmly recommend another of Mark's inventions, FTE (folding Text Editor). It's a great editor with syntax highlight, great autoindent (not just standard stuff that indents at the same level as the last line, but one that changes to next line and indents when you type {) and generally a borland-like interface. You can use shift-arrowkeys to select a block while fte runs under console and other nifty things. It was a step up from joe for me, and I never could get into Emacs/lisp.
fte runs both under X and console, and you can get it from http://www.kiss.uni-lj.si/~k4fr0235/fte/. [uni-lj.si]
Re:Is another WM really what we need? (Score:1)
How does the windows gui suck? (Score:3)
However, I've never heard a good explanation as to why it sucks?
The same design concept is carried through most of the shell (with IE5 this became IE centric, but its not *that* bad, dont get me wrong, i hate ms too, but i'm not stupid about it)
-standardized key combos (cntrl-c copy, ctrl-v paste etc)
-one can get around fairly well without a mouse
-the task bar holds a lot of easy to access information (apps running, system tray, start menu)
-the start menu can be nicely customized (even further with the tweak utils).
-You can choose between an iconified desktop, and active desktop(blech) or no desktop at all (with the tweak utils).
-It's responsive in the tactile sense (buttons etc)
I'm sure someone could make a nice list of win9x gui foibles, but you could make a list twice as long for each of the popular window managers. Everyone knows M$ 'borrowed' a lot of its best gui features from the mac, and theres no reason X wm's shouldn't incorporate the same great features.
NightHawk
Set threshold at -1 FlaimBait to read this comment
Re:Is this really an area that needs filling? (Score:4)
Re:Is that really the goal, though? (Score:1)
I was a little bit unclear on this.. I didn't mean, we must crush Microsoft and stop their evil reign of terror. What I did mean was, there's only 100% of the market to go around, and if we don't take from someone else, we don't grow. The most obvious place to take from is Microsoft. So I used them.
shtika k'hodaah dami (Score:1)
How about E. (Score:1)
How the hell is Quake major software? It is just a game (joking aside).
Re:More Gnome WMs; A good thing. (Score:2)
Besides that, the only real complaint I have is that Raster and Mandrake seem to suffer from a bad case of 'I need to add this new rotational 3D axis compensator or my UltraAmazing fade function will have to use bitmask subtraction!'. They implement an amazing WM but don't seem to see where to draw the line on new features
Re:How about E. (Score:1)
Goes well with GNOME (Score:1)
When used in Gnome, IceWM does not display its own taskbar. It doesn't display its own menus on the root window, wharfs, pagers, etc. It simply decorates the windows and that is all about it.
After experimenting with atleast half a dozen other window managers, IceWM seems to be the most suitable WM to use with Gnome as of date. I haven't yet used IceWM by itself though. Should try it today!
-Sivaraj.
Version numbering (Score:2)
That way when, *gasp*, version 3.0.0 comes out, it is much cooler because you had to wait for it and you know that big-ol' whole-integer version number really means something.
Cf nethack, linux kernel, gnome, kde, enlightenment, &soforth.
Call me a geek...
JD
See the Interface Hall of Shame (Score:1)
Here's the section specific to Windows 95:
An in-depth review [iarchitect.com]
In-depth: Uncommon file dialogs [iarchitect.com]
Artifical Intelligence? [iarchitect.com]
So, is it a floppy or a CD? [iarchitect.com]
Just assume it knows what you want [iarchitect.com]
'Problem' where none has occured [iarchitect.com]
Single tabs are not OK [iarchitect.com]
Improperly grouped tabs [iarchitect.com]
There's a lot more good stuff on the site, but this is the excerpt from the Product Index for Win95. There's one for NT too, if it interests you.
A good sign... (Score:2)
As an aside, I noticed that IceWM is released under the LGPL license. Does anyone know why this is? Also, did this prevent them from being chosen as the default GNOME window manager, when the GNOME team were looking for a lightweight replacement for E (this is before Sawmill came around)?
Re:Is another WM really what we need? (Score:4)
Not who, but what. Answer: usability studies. With extensive usability studies Microsoft has been able to make user interfaces, mice, keybords, joystics etc. that most people think are great, and the rest find adequate to say at least. Maybe some day MS makes a usabilty study called "is stability a good thing" and decides to kill all those damn bugs in windows *g*.
The problem with a lot of open source software is that they have been made by programmers, for programmers. Software like that ends up being overly complicated with too many features and options (EMACS anyone?). I know the OSS community can't perform wide usability studies like Microsoft or Apple, but we really should try put some effort into improving what we have, instead of wasting energy on code forks and new programs that are just as bad as the old ones.
More can't hurt.
I disagree. More can hurt, and it is already hurting Linux. The amount of WM overwhealms me, there is just no way I'm going to try them all. I might try maybe three or four, but after that I'd just give up and boot back to Windows if I couldn't find the right one with those four tries. This actually happened to me, that is why writing this message with the Windows version of Netscape. The Linux GUI is just too clumsy. I do like the powerfull command line though.
Re:Eh... (Score:1)
But I do agree with you that E is very stable and fast. However, "fast" depends on a number of things, the theme you use being one of the most important.
You can go with the simple beauty of a theme like "Absolute E" to the eye-catching glory of a theme like 'Ganymede".
E is so theme-centric, that it makes sense to me not to judge it on its speed using the default themes, but to judge for youself with a theme that fits what you are doing. If you have a large desktop res, and have some screen real estate to spare, there are themes for that. If you're on a 486/DX-33 with 32mb of system memory and a 1mb ISA video card, E will also fit your needs with a more utilitarian theme, without all of the flashy effects.
I think I'll slowly step off the soapbox now, and get back to work.
AdamL.
http://sprawl.net
Re:More Gnome WMs; A good thing. (Score:1)
Actually, ICEwm has as a selling point that its configurability is minimal. The themeability is really nothing more than font and window candy.
Re:E stable? Not! Too much fluff! (Score:2)
--
Geoff Harrison (http://mandrake.net)
Senior Software Engineer - VA Linux Labs (http://www.valinux.com)
We actually use Ice ;) (Score:1)
We have quite a few public systems (ouch 16 & 32 MB...), mostly used as web-machines, and on those systems it's important to give the users an environment that is fairly similar in basic look & feel to Windows.
On this low-end systems we used all kinds of other VMs, can't remember them all, but most of the ones around bout 18 month ago, and had to put notices beside the systems saying things as "Right-click on desktop for menu" (Nope, it didn't help the clueless little old ladys on going to our local library)
Eventually we removed all alternatives, and just made Ice available, with a verry basic Win95 look.
Suddenly all those lost souls actually could use the boxes, most of them propably didn't know they were using a linux workstation.
Similar on my 32MB laptop, KDE & E just bogs me down, the footprint of Ice is quite nice.
Quality in windows. Rare, but.. (Score:1)
IceWM takes the good bits. One of the main things I love when using Windows is the consistent interface all through the apps written in the evil Win32 API and the fact that everything can be done with the keyboard.
IceWM does just this. A windows interface with all the crap thrown out and good linux stuff thrown in. Keyboard shortcuts for everything and virtual desktops. Yummy. Give it a spin.
Re:Like I said, try it out. (Score:2)
I'd recommend anyone to try icewm if you want a window manager that doesn't have too much clutter such as animations, but gets the job done. The default config is very usable (a Win95-type taskbar interface), but personally I have stripped it down further, to get the most minimal interface possible while still being able to do things without obscure hotkeys.
Another interesting thing is that it's in C++ (IIRC), so it might be fun to look at if you want an alternative perspective on how to write a window manager.
Re:1st retard (Score:1)
Hehe... It's Winders with "themes". cool
-BrentIceWM Rocks! (Score:1)
I'm tired of hearing this crap about how Ice resembles Windows 95; Ice does emulate some of the better features of its interface, of course with clean, unbloated code. Besides, you can customize it however you want.
Re:Is this really an area that needs filling? (Score:1)
Over the weekend I was thinking about how computer users (microsoft, linux, and mac) users fit into bell curves. (Disclaimer, I'm not a statistician, and haven't even read anything like The Bell Curve).
Anyway, rate the population by their ability to use any computer and operating system, ranging from barely being able to power the system on, all the way up to people who could code assembler with their eyes shut. Then figure out the amount of each class of user, and you'll probably end up with a neat bell curve:
***************
Whatever. Anyway, take Microsoft, who started out by trying to claim the piece of the pie:
*****[*****]*****
Mac on the other hand started low:
*[*******]*******
Linux on the other hand started out years ago by appealing to the high-end users:
*********[******]
My point? For whatever reason (money in microsoft's case, or community fill-the-need purposes in Linux's case), as an OS evolves, it tends to capture more and more of a market. No "we" involved.
Absolutly (Score:1)
try icepref or iceconf to configure.
Take a look a the home page to get these.
___________________________________
Linux by Libranet - The TOP Desktop
Re:How about E. (Score:1)
I'm sick of people bitching about stuff on
Re:Is this really an area that needs filling? (Score:1)
They probably don't care about user-friendliness, because it's not an issue for them. If they want to configure X-Windows, they fire up vi/emacs/jed/whatever and start hacking away.
.. and I actually agree with this.
Re:Is another WM really what we need? (Score:1)
Though it may not be a replacement WM for Windows, Litestep is a great opensource / free shell replacement with all customizeability Windows should have. It'd actually be nice to see a WM similar to LS on linux that has add-in modules and allows you to bind commands to keys
FTE (was Re:Great!) (Score:1)
Comment removed (Score:5)
Re:Is this really an area that needs filling? (Score:1)
Ctrl Alt - and Ctrl Alt + are still better by a wide margin, as they can be done one-handed WITHOUT the wire-tailed rat. The Windows key combination for such a venture on my machines is:
ctrl-alt-esc, up, up, up, up, up, right, enter, right, right, right, right, shift-tab, right, right, right, right, right, right, tab, tab, tab, tab, right or left to adjust screen res, tab, right or left to adjust desktop res, tab, tab, tab, tab, tab, tab, tab, tab, tab, enter.
I've dealt with too many (l)users who thought they could switch the resolution to 1600x1200 on a 15-inch crapola monitor to forget that one..
icewm is best (Score:1)
I've used icewm since i started using linux.
To a beginner it provides a safe (no complex configs to screw up) easy to use wm. I looked at all the others and this one seems to be one of the only ones that puts back engine before the eyecandy. Others (fvwm) just don't look nice enough.
Now that I kind of know what I'm doing enlightenment has replaced icewm as my fav wm (but not by far) and I still use icewm a lot.
So, beginners. Go for icewm it fast easy to use and has a growing collection of themes to make it look even better.
___________________________________
Linux by Libranet - The TOP Desktop
Re:Is this really an area that needs filling? (Score:1)
Re:A good sign... (Score:1)
Re:Kudos to the IceWM team! (Score:1)
Re:IceWm is fast (Score:1)
Nope (Score:2)
There are far more people who don't use a computer than who are currently locked into a non-linux system. Linux's strength as a bulletproof os suitable for settop-esque consumer devices may help it grab a few of those people. Or it might not.
Second the Motion!! (Score:1)
FTE is a /wonderful/ text editor.. Every time the old vi/emacs holy war starts up in my office, I hold up my beloved copy of FTE.
If you're looking for a simple, elegant WM that supports multiple workspaces and theming, go check out Blackbox [alug.org], which is about as simple and elegant as they get. If you're really bold, after you've learned the 0.5x.0 interface, try out the 0.60.0 Alpha branch, which is at least as stable as the Enlightenment 'stable' releases and has even more themability.
It even supports WindowMaker's dockapps!
MODERATE THIS DOWN (Score:1)
--bdj
Re:Is this really an area that needs filling? (Score:1)
It seems that Apple, MS, and commercial Unix all passed the buck on moving outside their core user base. What's facinating about the Linux community is they've got the gusto to take on pretty much every aspect of the user base 'problem' -- clueless newbies, mouse-weilding artists, UNIX wizards, small and midsized servers, and so on.
--
Re:Is that really the goal, though? (Score:1)
If Microsoft thought this way, they wouldn't be where they are now. The real key is to grow the market and capture the new growth. The price model for Linux is perfect for this.
(Example: Windows NT Server. Most old Novell and Unix shops still run Novell and Unix. NT's market is primarily new installations or Novell/Unix installations that had atrophied for many years.)
--
Re:We actually use Ice ;) (Score:1)
Pager (Score:1)
Great WM, great support (Score:1)
And Marko Macek (main IceWm coder) is such a great guy. The IceWM mailing list is very, very helpful. Marko is listening to all suggestions, and many of them are quickly integrated into to the next version.
Nice work and nice spirit. A great project.
Re:Is this really an area that needs filling? (Score:1)
for the NT users, CTRL-Shift-ESC brings up taskmgr.
Re:E stable? Not! Too much fluff! (Score:2)
you people take things so seriously, you anonymous cowards
--
Geoff Harrison (http://mandrake.net)
Senior Software Engineer - VA Linux Labs (http://www.valinux.com)
Re:E stable? Not! Too much fluff! (Score:2)
--
Geoff Harrison (http://mandrake.net)
Senior Software Engineer - VA Linux Labs (http://www.valinux.com)
Re:Is this really an area that needs filling? (Score:2)
Unless the new user runs a 486 laptop w/12 Meg of memory on which icewm flies . I've got alot of attention from new users when they see what I can do on such a crappy little machine. And icewm is very intuitive to them, too.
Why I like IceWM (Score:1)
"Does the WM work well if you like to keep everything maximized?"
This is what's kept me away from NextStep clones and others that have big menus that are quickly covered up by my windows.
Anyway, just my 2 cents.
Re:Is another WM really what we need? (Score:3)
I'm not so sure that I would agree with you there. I think that the majority of people who use computers don't have a clue about interfaces. They just know that when you click on this a little window will pop up and then they can type this in this box and then click here...etc. Most computer users are just happy that they can send emails and make greeting cards... they don't know or care about the design of a GUI.
(I'm going to make a broad generalization here ->) People like what they are "used to" and if they had to use something different today they would bitch and complain about how hard it is. I remember the first time I played with a Mac, even though it was similar to windows, it was just different enough for me to have to think before I did something. I remember thinking it was "cool" but I was happy to go back to my windows box.
I agree with you about programmers writing stuff for other programmers. This is generally not a good way to please the masses. But hey, I'm a big fan of tons of configurations and tweaks ( I love gnome and kde ) and scripts and the power of the cl etc...so I'm not the guy to make statements on what the public wants or needs.
Re:Like I said, try it out. (Score:1)
Re:Why don't you try it first. (Score:2)
I would have moderated it back up.
why? Because it's a very good point.
If all the ICQ clone writers, or all the email client writers were to get together just think what a great ICQ clone, or emailer we'd have. When Helixcode was starting to write Evolution, they asked the current GNOME email client writers if they wanted to help, so that Evolution could have everything, that everyone wanted.
Admitedly there's always going to be someone who wants something more, but in programs where there's not much room for flexibilty (ICQ clones, email clients, news readers) I think it's a good point.
I always think "Bloody hell, *ANOTHER* ICQ/IM/Yahoo pager...etc clone, do we really need one more?" when I see a new one announced on Freshmeat.
Re:Is this really an area that needs filling? (Score:2)
Re:1st retard (Score:1)
Re:Why I like IceWM (Score:1)
Re:Version numbering (Score:1)
Then it becomes a nightmare when you are searching for a particular version of whatever software you are using.
I have had this occur on several occasions.
Re:forever icewm (Score:1)
mind you, sawmill and scwm are worse... but to each his own i guess
Re:How about E. (Score:2)
(Of course, strong AI wouldn't hurt either.)
The task-bar is optional! (Score:1)
Like I said... (Score:1)
Again, like I said, they . . . , ahh fuck it, im watching TV.
Choice is good (Score:2)
Not who, but what. Answer: usability studies. With extensive usability studies Microsoft has been able to make user interfaces, mice, keyboards, joystics etc. that most people think are great [..]
What? That just plain doesn't make any sense. People should be able to use what they like, not what a group of people thinks is the best. Plain and simple. Usability studies or not. That's part of the philosophy that has produced the free OS (GNU/Linux) that many of us use today.
People will use what they think is the best. The more people use something, the more successful it will become (in general - and especially with OSS software and community involvement). Therefore, the software that people think is the best will become 'selected' in this manner. There is no need for usability studies.
Personally, I love Linux software the way it is now. There are many different choices for anything I could possibly want to do. How exactly is this wrong?
Re:More WMs are nice and good, but... (Score:1)
--
what about blackbox? (Score:1)
not everyone has a 400mhz machine (Score:1)
here's a screenshot [qis.net] of a typical desktop in our lab.
--
Re:Is this really an area that needs filling? (Score:2)
* * * * You have only yourself to blame for X running at 640x480. * * * *
And market share? Sheesh. I used to be an OS/2 user. If you wanna know about misguided evangelism, I'm yer man.
I don't *want* the people who use Windows right now to rush to Linux. No more than i wanted them to rush to OS/2, after the first couple times i convinced someone to give it a shot.
I want the people around me to use the software tools that best suit their needs and capabilities. I don't care what that is, as long as it's effective and supportable.
For that very reason, I don't even try to change the Linux distribution used at work. Let people use what they're gonna use as long as it gets the work done reasonably well.
If you're the type who can't figure out how to hit ctrl-alt-plus (left ctrl and alt, keypad plus), maybe Linux just isn't your bag. Or maybe your problem is an inability to figure out xf86config, Xconfigurator, XF86Setup, or SaX. SaX is my favorite, comes with SuSE. After that I'll take xf86config. The rest can go to the bitbucket for all i care.
All I'm saying is, if you have a lot of difficulty with this sort of thing, maybe you're wasting your time. Use BeOS or something if you don't want to use Windows. Or OS/2, but don't come knocking on my door for tech support if you do.
Or maybe you should start with Corel Linux or Caldera OpenLinux. These two are awfully simplistic in their setup.
Linux fits a specific set of needs and caters to a specific set of capabilities. If someone isn't a good match for it, why torture them with it?
For the record, I have been given the communal goahead to switch the RH6 boxes from Gnome to IceWM. It's generally been agreed upon that E+Gnome is a bohemouth desktop and far more overhead than is called for on a server.
IceWM is lightweight, consistent, and feels very familiar to Windows and OS/2 users. I use the Daniel3 theme. And the hotkeys actually do something useful.
Re:See the Interface Hall of Shame (Score:2)
except that microsoft allegedly has a special department to guarantee interface usability, while linux people simply get it to the point where it works.
except that microsoft has "interface guidelines". It wrote these and asks developers to follow them so that people will get a consistant, pleasurable interface when they use it. linux has no such guidelines made by anyone, and no way to dessiminate those guidelines because of the very nature of the community and x-windows. GTK and QT come almost close but in fact nowhere near to guidelines of this sort. Microsoft, by the way, despite the fact these guidelines exist, does not follow them. (the cornerstone of their GUI is a menu with many many layers of submenus, something they claim not to do.. bad example because i myself am addicted to FinderPop, a mac os utility that allows you to browse your hard drive as a menu with many layers of submenus) Developers for windows do not often follow these guidelines. Apple computer does have a very clearly defined, clearly accessible set of "human interface guidelines". Apple follows these religiously and ensures developers do as well. The result is that in the mac os you have a consistant, pleasurable experience between almost all applications (unless you run Quicktime Player 4.0 or Sherlock 2.0), something windows does not achieve and linux does not even strive for.
except that in linux if you don't like those open dialog boxes you can change them; if you don't like part of the interface you can change it. with windows, you are stuck with whatever interface they hand you, even if it's something totally inexplicable like a web browser used as a file manager.
except that microsoft has the _ability_ to have a consistant interface because all the basic OS pieces are written by the same people. what is more they are not working under the hideous restraints and limitations of the X windows system.
the point is we should not expect as much out linux as out of MS windows. MS windows is currently an average-consumer-targeted product which sells itself solely on the basis of its GUI; Linux is not. You cannot claim Linux fails at its GUI because it does not try at its GUI and a huge number of multiple people are responsible for different tiny aspects of the GUI. This is something the Linux community must adress eventually but they have more important things to deal with right now. i've typed way too much for such a simple post.
oh, and what passes for "copy and paste" in linux is truly abysmal, but that's completely irrelivant.
Re:GUI Linux's weak spot (Score:1)
I wish Linux would endorse KDE or gnome, thus (de facto) killing off one or the other.
Who exactly is Linux, there's no one in the Linux community to say "Gnome is dead, and that's the bottom line, cause Bill Gates said so."
You will NEVER have that happen. It totally goes against everything Linux is about.
The challenge is to get these guys to work together. Instead of developing 200 different window managers, work together to develop one that is flexible enough to let group A have their cake and to let group B eat it too.
The guy with the +5 above is right on. My first thought when reading that comment was "BAM, that's it!".
Get these splintered developers to sit down and agree on how to proceed. Draft some guidelines (or god forbid, some standards) and set about making stuff work together! Isn't that what Linux is about?
Re:Yum (Score:2)
It's documented, too.
Re:See the Interface Hall of Shame (Score:1)
Nor should it. Interface guidelines don't belong at the OS level, they belong at the desktop level. See below.
GTK and QT come almost close but in fact nowhere near to guidelines of this sort.
Nor should they. Interface guidelines don't belong at the toolkit level, that would suggest that a particular toolkit has no application outside the scope of said guidelines, which is a silly restriction.
This is something the Linux community must adress eventually
Again, this isn't an OS level thing. This is a desktop level thing, and it is being addressed. I don't know enough about KDE's efforts, but Gnome has established the Gnome User Interface Improvement Project [jcinteractive.com] to address desired improvements for the Gnome desktop.
except that in linux if you don't like those open dialog boxes you can change them; if you don't like part of the interface you can change it.
Usually the people griping about the user interface are not interested in taking the time to change it themselves. That's why projects like the one mentioned above are important. People are given a central place to voice their desires for improvement, and thus contribute to the improvement of the desktop as a whole. This is the right way to do it.
Re:Is this really an area that needs filling? (Score:1)
And then it's fun to say, "Hey--look what I built!" And see who comes trudging to the door. Then the fact that there are people who look at what you've done, and they care! Some will ditch it for a better thingie, but some will actually take the time to send you an email saying, "This is a good start, but you should really work on these directions." And even if you hate that person and think their opinion sucks--you've got their opinion. It's a dialogue between your team and other interested folks in the world.
All this from your own initiative that you're able to take because all the tools are there and free because of the efforts of other folks and their projects and initiatives. Even if the tools aren't there--you have the tools to build the tools!
That's the power of GNU and Linux. That's the fun, the advantage, the cool-factor. It's even cooler that this massive distributed hobby is even affecting market share of companies that employ people to do what we do as a hobby and for fun. Who cares about the market share anyhow? GNU and Linux have a critical mass to continue to be really dynamic and energetic and active. In this your hobby is FUN! It fulfills life! We have FUN building things while others toil at their respective workplaces building commercial software.
But people have that freedom to solve whatever problems they feel need solving--even if it's been solved a dozen times before. And that's how this community has grown and that's what makes it thrive. Because people are genuinely interested in what they're doing because it's their two hands and their mind that is part of it.
/will
YEAH BABY YEAH! (Score:1)
Re:Freshmeat isn't a stardard, thank you. (Score:1)
Re:OS/2 Workplace Shell (Score:1)
Better Windoze than Windoze? (Score:1)
All the window-managers that I have come across have one thing in common, they all want to be compared to, and outsmart MS-Windows, and I think this is a very misguided move.
Look, this gets very stale, very fast.
IBM have done this years ago - they came out with the slogan "Better Window and Window" for the OS/2, and see where OS/2 is heading?
What the Open-Source community needs to realize is that we do not compete against MS-Windoze. We are Open-Source, and we can use our talent for BETTER THINGS than yet-another-window-manager.
Would someone please listen up -
Please, we do not need to waste out time on outsmarting MS-Windows. Instead, we can use out time better to make Linux, and all its utilities, EASIER TO INSTALL AND USE.
Thank you for reading, and thank you for taking time out to consider what I have just said.
Hoping y'all have a WONDERFUL YEAR OF 2000 !!!
Re:YEAH BABY YEAH! (Score:1)
Re:Is another WM really what we need? (Score:1)
Re:Why don't you try it first. (Score:1)
For some, OutLookExpress is the greatest email-client around.
Personally it makes me wommit and stress' me. I prefer YAM (an Amiga
email-clien), it's flexible, fast and intuitive... to me!
It's like deciding on which colour is the best!
No, choices is good. And with OpenSource anyone is aloved to 'steal'
good ideas from eachother.
Bjarne
It is A Window Manager for the X Protocol (Score:2)
One thing a lot of readers are missing here is the fact that it is just a Window Manager and does not claim to be the OS. IceWM is a good WM. It is light, flexible and easy to use. It makes a great alternative to fvwmX for speed and if you don't have the horsepower (or in my own case with a huge monitor that can only handle 256 colors) / ability to peruse E. GNOME or KDE it is still somewhat glitzy.
The thing our FUD friends are missing is that WM's under UNIX are different for a number of reasons, one of which is scalability. Look, you can't run winNT 4.0 on a 486 (of course that begs the question - why do you have a 486?) and expect reasonable performance. You can't run E on a 486, but you can run aewm or fvwm with no problems.
Even the standard windows GUI (which it refers to as the Operating System) has inconsistancy between versions, small but they are there. Windows, however, does not match the configurability or scalability of Linux, WM's play a part in both the configurability and scalability aspects.
That is why there are so many WM's. It is really more of a natural practicality (is that a word?) than nicety. It also gives the end user a level of enpowerment that no other system (aside from the Open Motif perhaps) gives.
Re:Is this really an area that needs filling? (Score:2)
If there's anything I've learned as a developer, it's "Know your audience". If you audience is techies then target techies. Make the techies fabulously happy. Sure, some computer-illiterate people aren't going to want to use the product, but BFD. On the other hand, if your target is newbies, then target newbies. Make everything simple, easy, and pointy-clicky. They'll thank you for it, and the techies will just use something else.
The mistake is trying to please both (or more) groups. There's no reason that different distros can't target different groups, but I think it's clear that the developing community, as a whole, is thinking more along the lines of targetting techies (simply because that's what they are).
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Re:Why don't you try it first. (Score:2)
It's really no different in the windows world. Go to www.nonags.com sometime and see how many launchpad apps and archivers there are out there, and how many of those are so half-assed you wonder why the author even bothered to publicize them.
Re:See the Interface Hall of Shame (Score:2)
i wasn't saying the fact the guidelines did not exist was a particularly bad thing in itself-- simply that you should not expect linux programs to follow any interface guidelines, but you _should_ expect win/mac programs to follow guidelines because said guidelines exist.
> This is something the Linux community must adress eventually
>Again, this isn't an OS level thing
no.. but it is a community thing. which seems to be how the GUIIP is handling it.
Would be nice if someone would create a distribution based entirely on consistent UI-- instead of slapping in every window manager and program known to man, along with seven almost identical "term" programs (xterm, rxvt, wterm, eterm, konsole, GNOME term.. what have i missed? none of which handle copy/paste in an intelligent manner..) and a huge number of redundant utilities with almost no orginisation to it all, and different items in the menus of each window manager.. choose GNOME one or two decent window managers, _one_ good term program (and set up GNOME to use that one, and tweak IRCII so it opens that term program instead of wterm on