Slashdot Mirror

I use LiteStep some two years and like it, although it has some bugs. The most serious for me is the infamous "lost windows" one (the window gets somewhere out of the viewable area and it's impossible to get it back - you need the DeskLite utility for that).

Otherwise, it's lightweight, nice, clean, customizable and there's quite a lot of themes available.
Just my $0.02.

Not for your sake, as per your comment your aware of other shells for windows, but for the rest of the /.'ers, there are alternatives such as blackbox for windows. Quite cool, imho :)

of the whole article was when he tried to tell me that using a mouse is faster than using the keyboard. Cut and paste in windows is vastly superior to that of linux systems running X. Not only is it unified, it works everywhere. In X, maybe it works, and maybe it doesn't. Some applications don't take kindly to the clipboard, while others tend to try to impliment their own method. I don't care what anyone says, linux isn't all that hot as a desktop system. Like the author complains about windows, it's the little things that make it awful.

In fact, most hardcore linux/unix users i know do everything they can to get away from using their mouse. Guess this guy doesn't use vi/vim.

While we're on the subject of mice, why do i *STILL* have to hack in support for my wheelmouse manually in the conf? Are we not at the point yet where X can detect this automaticly? Making buttons 4 and 5 on my mouse is a pain as well.

The author also fails to mention that you are not strapped to applications like IE and Outlook, they can be replaced, or simply not used. I mean, what is wrong with using firebird and thunderbird? IMHO this is strong evidence that he didn't really explore his options much. The desktop can be replaced as well, with any one of dozens of explorer replacements. Hell, you can even get blackbox for windows or another favorite, geoshell - there are many more if you look. He also failed to mention that installing programs is almost always hassle free, while with linux you're into a horrid mess of library dependancies, un-unified packaging formats, and software that doesn't compile for whatever reason. If windows is so inferior, why is it past all this?

To me, linux users are just like windows users who swore by the 9x series, you're just used to the way things are, and you're past the point of objective thinking. Windows 9x users didn't like how their machines crashed all the time, they just accepted it. Linux users don't admit all the hassles that linux causes them, because they are used to it. When put on the defensive, most people will argue in favour of whatever they're using.

I've used both as primary operating systems before, and hands down, windows is much easier to use, the software is easier to install, and most times, you don't have to follow some cryptic manpage or readme that was designed for other programmers to understand it. My theory is Linux fails not because it's inferior, but because it's written by programmers for programmers. This tends to make it confusing, awkward and just plain hard to use, let alone set up. Just try to set up a pppoe or dialup connection, it's hours of frustrating fun if your distrobution doesn't include something to help you out.

I apologise if i come across sounding like a troll, but this guy's article is laughable, at best. It just goes to show you that you have as much chance of locating an unbiased article about windows on newsforge.com as you do finding an unbiased article about linux on microsoft.com.

I suppose the bright side of the argument is that he was not 100% negative about windows like most linux zealots, but make no mistake, this guy is a zealot. From the very start, he's setting this up to be a negative review.

In the end, i use windows. I want to work, get paid, and live a happy life, not wade through an operating system that tries to make my life hard at every turn.

LiteStep, GeoShell, bb4win, and countless others are available as shell replacements for windows. I have been using LiteStep for about 5 years, and it even made win98 look stable. Very fast, very configurable, modular, and much prettier than the plain default explorer startmenu.

ShellFront and Desktopian are great places to start.

Blackbox4Windows

...but i'm a linux/bsd/sun user.

Theres a reply, buts a score of 1, so people might not view it. (I was thinking same thing, So I'll reply also...)

Windows GUI is ok, mostly just for alt-tab/taskbar. But I switched over to BB4win (Blackbox for windows). Supports blackbox themes, just grab new ones off freshmeat. Virtual window support, and with bbkeys, hotkey support rocks. (shift+ctrl+p = launchs putty)

Also, to help memory useage, switching bloated apps to freeware applications helps. SecureCRT uses 22megs per instance, Putty uses 800K with the same scrollback buffer. I find for WinXP the memory sweet spot is about 320 megs for myself with all my apps (office/exchange/putty/browsers/java apps). Even a slower windows box can get a large improvement by adding ram.

Oh, and on my sun box, I run icewm with the MicroGui theme, with some extra buttons added. Works fine for getting work done.

The Apple comes with an actual GUI far superior to Microsoft Windows

bb4win, which mimics the black box look and feel and is even compatible with the many existing black box styles.

While LiteStep (one of the oldest windows shells) mimics the NeXT OS/Window Manager and has thousands of themes (and it's even GPL).

If you use either of these or one of the many other shells (see Shell Extension City) along with WindowBlinds you won't even know you're using Windows (you can even make it look like KDE or OS X if you want).

The point of all this is to say you're not stuck with the Windows interface, the start button, the task bar, the clock, or that annoying grouping feature of the programs menu. And I think MS has even embraced this some-what with an actual entry for "custom user interface" in gpedit.msc (Win2k and XP pro only). ... So stop complaining about the Windows interface.

On the other hand if you were talking about the much complained about "fisher price" interface you can turn all that !@#$! off, albeit in no less then 4 different places (or crack open the regedit).

----------

Check out Desktopian for more info.

I haven't tried it, but there is a Blackbox for Windows. Although it is a clone, not a port.

I love LiteStep and use it all the time. Recently development has been slowed by hack attempts against the largest LS sites, but no worries: LS is already far more stable that the standard Windows GUI. I LOVE IT in short :)

now the obligatory LS links:
Desktopian
FPN
LiteStep.net
ShellFront

There's a surprising number of other shells out there besides just GeoShell and Litestep. Not just because I write it, but from what others tell me, Serenade is one of the most stable and user-friendly. As with anything under development, it's a work in progress, but it's very usable. You might consider checking it out at Courtah.net. There are some nice themes at Skinbase. SharpE is also a nice shell, but lacks some customization abilities. I don't prefer Litestep because I think it's too disorganized (but it's the foundation of the community), and Geoshell is a nice shell despite forcing you to configure everything through the registry. In short, try many of them out, just make sure you read the directions on how to get your old shell back _carefully_. Look on ShellFront or Desktopian for more info/links.

Regarding the question about how MS deals with these shells: Well, the simple answer is that they don't. It keeps us off their back :). In fact, many of the well known win32 shell developers work or have worked at Microsoft. Alternative shells work just fine under Windows.

Now, there are actually a ton of shells (see the list) out there for Windows, and most are open source in some way or other. The most popular (and one of the oldest) win32 shells is Litestep, which is GPL'd.

For a somewhat decent overview of shells from a windows user's point of view, check out forum topic on deviantART. Alternative Windows Shells basically just replace the Explorer.exe file as the Windows shell... usually also resulting in the replacement of the well known taskbar, start menu, and desktop. Instead, you can use the tools provided by the shell to build your own interface. Shells are very similar to X desktop environments. They do not replace the Windows like a WM does. For general news and info regarding Windows shells, check out the following sites:

• ShellFront
• shellscape

Desktopian.org also covers Windows and shells news in-depth, along with some *nix related news.

Litestep is the oldest shell still in active development. It is by far the most popular shell (with an estimated 10,000+ users) and the most customizable shell (outside of Graphite). You can create almost whatever interface you want, thanks to the 300+ 3rd party modules for the shell. Litestep also has great support through the LS Mailing List and the IRC channels (#fpn, #ls2k, and #ls_help on irc.openprojects.net). Make sure to check out the following sites for Litestep:

• Graphic Language
• JoeBlade
• Litestep.net
• ShellFront
• LS Documentation
• LS FAQ
• The Module List - Module List with descriptions (a little out of date and incomplete, but better for most people)
• the Litestep Installer - a must to get Litestep installed and configured. Make sure to download 'OTS compatible' themes.

The second most popular replacement shell is geOShell, which is largely a minimalist's shell. It has a GUI configuration for most things. geOShell's main site is geoshellx.com. All information can be found there. They are also supported through the geoshellx.com forums and their IRC channel (#geoshell on irc.openprojects.net).

Most win32 shells out there today are either derived from Litestep or geOShell in some way or other. However, there have been two blackbox 'ports' recently to Windows:

• bluebox
• bb4win

It's impossible for me to explain everything here. However, for any *nix users who need to run Windows as well, these shells offer a great alternative to that drab and boring Explorer desktop. Win32 alternative shells even let you have your X desktop on Windows.

Now, the advantage to Object Desktop (namely DesktopX and objectbar is that it doesn't require that you replace your shell (which is a registry key change in NT and a system.ini file edit in 9x). Configuration is accomplished by a GUI. DesktopX is extremely configurable. Keep in mind that running Object Desktop will use up excessive cpu and/or memory. They can do almost anything, but will also use up resources... unlike most shells.

Hope this helps. Many *nix users are completely unaware of the Windows open-source community and of shells in general. We hope this will eventually change.

Regarding the question about how MS deals with these shells: Well, the simple answer is that they don't. It keeps us off their back :). In fact, many of the well known win32 shell developers work or have worked at Microsoft. Alternative shells work just fine under Windows.

Now, there are actually a ton of shells (see the list) out there for Windows, and most are open source in some way or other. The most popular (and one of the oldest) win32 shells is Litestep, which is GPL'd.

For a somewhat decent overview of shells from a windows user's point of view, check out forum topic on deviantART. Alternative Windows Shells basically just replace the Explorer.exe file as the Windows shell... usually also resulting in the replacement of the well known taskbar, start menu, and desktop. Instead, you can use the tools provided by the shell to build your own interface. Shells are very similar to X desktop environments. They do not replace the Windows like a WM does. For general news and info regarding Windows shells, check out the following sites:

• ShellFront
• shellscape

Desktopian.org also covers Windows and shells news in-depth, along with some *nix related news.

Litestep is the oldest shell still in active development. It is by far the most popular shell (with an estimated 10,000+ users) and the most customizable shell (outside of Graphite). You can create almost whatever interface you want, thanks to the 300+ 3rd party modules for the shell. Litestep also has great support through the LS Mailing List and the IRC channels (#fpn, #ls2k, and #ls_help on irc.openprojects.net). Make sure to check out the following sites for Litestep:

• Graphic Language
• JoeBlade
• Litestep.net
• ShellFront
• LS Documentation
• LS FAQ
• The Module List - Module List with descriptions (a little out of date and incomplete, but better for most people)
• the Litestep Installer - a must to get Litestep installed and configured. Make sure to download 'OTS compatible' themes.

The second most popular replacement shell is geOShell, which is largely a minimalist's shell. It has a GUI configuration for most things. geOShell's main site is geoshellx.com. All information can be found there. They are also supported through the geoshellx.com forums and their IRC channel (#geoshell on irc.openprojects.net).

Most win32 shells out there today are either derived from Litestep or geOShell in some way or other. However, there have been two blackbox 'ports' recently to Windows:

• bluebox
• bb4win

It's impossible for me to explain everything here. However, for any *nix users who need to run Windows as well, these shells offer a great alternative to that drab and boring Explorer desktop. Win32 alternative shells even let you have your X desktop on Windows.

Now, the advantage to Object Desktop (namely DesktopX and objectbar is that it doesn't require that you replace your shell (which is a registry key change in NT and a system.ini file edit in 9x). Configuration is accomplished by a GUI. DesktopX is extremely configurable. Keep in mind that running Object Desktop will use up excessive cpu and/or memory. They can do almost anything, but will also use up resources... unlike most shells.

Hope this helps. Many *nix users are completely unaware of the Windows open-source community and of shells in general. We hope this will eventually change.

"I also doubt that anyone but an extremly small minority would go through the trouble of changing the Window UI for something else."

Actually, you're mistaken. There's a fairly sizable Windows shell replacement community. In fact, there's at least one company, Stradock, that makes their living at it. For a ton of links to replacement shell sites check out Desktopian.

I do agree that it's not something the core Gnome team should be thinking about, though.

Well, LiteStep and E-Sense (Enlightment port) was two OpenSource attempts to replace the Explorer shell. And they are not alone, cast a look at desktopian.

We're already cluttered with replacement shells ! The problem with that under win32 is the undocumented APIs, not the coding skills.

Sure you can still skin windows but with XP MS is apparently moving towards requiring the explorer.exe shell in order to do so.. thus leaving the user without a choice again. Well, a choice dependent on the terms and whims of MS. And explorer.exe is notoriously bloated and slow, especially in comparison to the Litestep shell (which is a shell based upon module loading in essence)

I don't see this as a good thing.

I would highly recommend to those who still use Windows at all to investigate some of the various shell replacements out there. I avoided Windows like the plague after becoming used to how *nix will allow me to setup a shell to work the way I want to work and not the other way around. Litestep in particular is the only reason I have MS on one of my boxes, it's that sweet.

Plus I still get a kick out of people asking me how I managed to get Office working in Linux. :)

The Windows (as in, Win32) customization scene has been around for a long time.

There are many programs out there that allow you to change their interface, sometimes only in how they look (WinAmp), but other times in how they act (K-Jofol).

Within the past few years, there have been a number of "shells" that have come out that allow you to ditch explorer (the start menu / taskbar / desktop combination) and use your own interface, like an X-Windows window manager.

Microsoft is trying to have the best of both worlds - a standardized user interface, with the ability to change it all. Personally, I don't think it's gonna work very well, but that may be just because I used to be on the Litestep development team.

Obligatory links:
Skinz.org
DeskMod
Litestep.net
desktopian.org

And those link to many more...

Actually, nivenh is working on a 3d shell for windows using OpenGL called Dimension (yeah I know it's windows, but I think litestep has gone a long way in GUI development, further than linux window managers). Here are a couple links to sites about it:

http://floach.pimpin.net/dimension.shtml
http://desktopian.org/dimension.html

Maybe it's just vaporware, but it looks cool.