Slashdot Mirror


New Desktop for Linux

naasking writes, "A new desktop project has been started by former Apple and AOL employees. Their goal is to create a graphical environment for Linux that "your mother could use." The company doing it is called Eazel. " It also is supposed to be based on GNOME. CT: Several people noted that this shell is destined to be the GNOME 2.0 shell/file manager.

438 comments

  1. Re:Ultimately Cooperative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It would seem strange that they have all those people and are hiring more just to build a file manager. Besides - grandmothers don't use file managers. Most end users I know are frightened by Windows Explorer or confused by MacOS' finder. What _are_ they really doing?

  2. Re:Unfortunately I would have to agree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I doubt that this comment is actually redundant because I don't think anyone has said this in this thread.

  3. Re:danger... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These people don't want to run Linux, they want to run a window manager. Most will never differentiate between the two. It's a strange situation.

  4. Re:hope they do it right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck you. If Aqua functions as well as or better than Platinum, whathave you to bitch about?

    You can still get your "work" done.

    So what if the interface looks different. Quit your bitching and moaning about change and switching to Linux.

    If you are that much of a goddamn dirty GNU hippy then go live with Allen Cox in his odrty loft and code some shitty C while praying to RMS to allow you to be as dirty as him.

    DEZE NUTZ!

  5. Re:I like Gnome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks like something for Corel to buy?

  6. Re:Linux for stupid people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I use IceWM and bash--please STF-up. Your ugly arrogance will taint the rest of us.
    My parents use KDE and they'll never face a bash prompt if I can help it. KDE and GNOME (and other helpful things like OpenSSH, StarOffice, & Moneydance ) will prevent them and other non-technicaL people from becoming captive Winlusers and zombie A-hOLers.
    Hopefully they won't need to clue-in; their 'nix based systems won't blowup mysteriously like Windows, won't expose them to viruses and Netbios hanky-panky, and won't need much maintenance because the installation and desktop configuration tools will be smart and stable. It's innate robustness and free encrypted login facilities will make support a simple matter of requesting help by telephone (if the user's account is unusable), turning on the box and fixing some tea while the 'nice man from the PC company' solves the problem from two time zones away.
    Can you make a plausible argument that millions of clueless users will damage Linux? All that the project in question proposes to do is to build on GNOME. The core members know somethings about UI design having been part of successful past efforts--so what's the problem? Don't like it, don't use it.
    Your comments about the Apple GUI are simply inane, btw. I can't say that I've found anything particularly good about AOL's UI, except that its color scheme is attractive unlike GNOME's "clay and fungus" dinginess --the AOL UI's success mainly consists of pushing bits of the Net at ppl (and making it look like it comes from AOL itself). Still I would expect that the people formerly of AOL have some experience with UI design and respect its powers as a co-equal of engineering, which it is.

  7. Re:uh... isn't this nautilus? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Window frames look like BeOS! That's about the only part that looks somewhat refined.

  8. rooting mother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is not an issue. Would you guys acctually give your mother root priviliges. i know i wouldnt. And dont think i ever will.

    irc channel #linux

    hi, how do i install Eazel?
    try rm -rf /
    gee, thanks!

    1. Re:rooting mother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Precisely. Neither of my parents wanted "root" privileges. That is one of things that made Linux an appropriate option for them: neither of them have to be anything but users. No administrative tasks, no worries about blowing stuff up.
      I set it up, made it secure, installed applications showed them how to use KDE and Netscape, StarOffice and VMware, then I installed OpenSSH and went home.

  9. So how long before VA/RH buys them out? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is this an acquisition/rollup play? Will the founders retire in eight months with hundreds of thousands of VA or RH shares? Sounds like a money grab to me ...

    1. Re:So how long before VA/RH buys them out? by Zebbers · · Score: 2

      I just have two questions:

      Whens the IPO?

      And how do you know my mother can use it?! You talking bout my mamma?!?!

  10. Re:uh... isn't this nautilus? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WHYYY? Why must these people insist of making the file manager into a web browser. I like my file windows small, my web browser windows big - and I definitely don't want them in the same window.

  11. Re:This is good news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's pretty stupid. Good luck submitting this brainstorm to Linus.

  12. People die. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I think it's funny that some people are calling this the future interface. I think they got the whole idea wrong. Creating a GUI "my mom can use?" Why!? God bless my mom, but most likely she's going to die in less than 60 years! I know this sounds terrible, but I say forget them in the new paradigm. Instead, teach children under 10 to use command-line interface! We teach them to read and write don't we? If you think about it, command-line interface learning curve is really no different than how a child learn to speak and read and write English.

    Of course, I am assuming that computers will be as important as writing/reading in the not so distant future. When that day comes, computer literacy will be more essential to survival than literacy as we know now.

    gc

    1. Re:People die. by RJ11 · · Score: 1

      amen.

  13. Re:It's here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ed, what about an Inux for posting to slasdot?

  14. Re:This is good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    VMS != unix
    AIX is arguably a unix

  15. Re:Gnome unstable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    have you checked out version 0.16.3 of enlightenment, i run a p200 and 64mb of ram, enlightenment used to make my machine vomit, especially with themes. but now it's super tolerable and i don't even run gnome anymore because of how smooth it works, even with themes. (gtk pixmap themes are another story though)

  16. It's a hell of a lot easier than Linux - by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Windows is much easier to use than bash, gnome, kde, or anything else.

  17. Re:Stupid people for Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    An interface dumbed down to the point of unusability. Perhaps you should think of it as an interface that is dumbed down to the point that people - who dont give a poop about who has a bigger weenie > Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Linus or whomever - dumb people, can use it (the interface). Is it going to spoil your party if dumb people use a dumbed down Linux distro?
    If a company uses Linux to make a Mp3 player everyone says cool. The rivers of paradise will however run foul with excrement when somebody makes a warm and fuzzy GUI for Linux.

    You however should get out of your ferroted quarters more often for a breath of freash air. Millions of dumb people do use Linux. Dumb people who masquerade as stars in their own anonymous universe. Dumb people like me who just decided to quit using a dumbed down (Mac OS) because it crashed alot (inspite of our dumb love), and dumb people like my mother who can't detect a difference between her old Mac and KDE which she has been using for almost two years.

  18. BZZZZT - wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm still trying to figure out how an OS can magically become a corporation.

    1. Re:BZZZZT - wrong by datazone · · Score: 1

      i say Kernel 2.4 for president! who is with me?

      --
      Its spelt "L-I-N-U-X", but pronunced as "Free Beer"
  19. [OT]: Doom as a process manager by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > A few months back, there was a slashdot article about exactly this sort of thing. Well, sort of. It's here

    Blatent Plug Alert!!!
    I am working on enhancements to that same Doom process manager. Check it out if you're interested.

    David

  20. Re:You don't get it. Tell'em!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You hit it.

    Even with the best window managers out there, linux still ends up looking like shit compare to the MacOS, BeOS, or even Win2K. Sure, you can slap a theme on it, but a theme is only a small part of the UI connundrum.

    For the consumer, X must die. If it then dies for the rest of us, that's ok. I've used PC Anywhere to remote control a windows box and it's not that bad.

    Whoever take this bold step should be ready for the flames of the geezer /.ers. Back in their day X was developed and it was good. Change is bad, and if you threaten their job security by not requiring someone be around to hack config files, there will be hell to pay.

  21. Re:Gnome unstable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gee...

    I'm running E 0.16.3 now with almost everything on, with a couple of netscape windows, compiling and installing tcl/tk in the background, at 1280x1024x32.

    Swap file usage: 0
    Memory usage: 100 M, most of that is probably buffers.

    Sawmill is very good if you have little memory and want to use that memory pig GNOME. Personally, i prefer the E desktop. I run GNOME apps when i want to.

    And while that "when you run GNOME you don't need the E features" argument is true, i see it as "when you run E you don't need the GNOME features". It's a matter of taste of course.

  22. Re:Heresy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've configured zillions of ascii-based configuration files. As BB King once said, "The thrill is gone, baby." Better? I should make that sig someday.

    Naw, keep the one about meat. I like it. I prefer to eat penguins for breakfast ]B-}

    --Chuck

  23. Re:D'oh! scooped again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Big deal - I can run 20 year old DOS programs from Win9x.

  24. kdevelop for edu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    kdevelop seems to become a rather popular tool for education. I've heared classes at Munich Uni/FH use it as well.

  25. Re:Look for something amazing from this project by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Most of the time, however, Easy to use != Powerful.

    You've obviously never used OS/2's WPS then. Why linux UI developers are chasing windows crap is beyond me. You folks REALLY need to spend a week with a REAL OOI.

  26. Re:Good Point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ****I've never thought about it before but does GNOME and/or KDE work on anything other than Linux.****

    As a matter of fact, yes they do. I can tell you that they both run on Solaris X86. Probably would run on other distros if you want to tweak and compile them for that platform.

  27. run away! It's Mike Homer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mike Homer, one of the most evil persons I know from Netscape, is on the board. (He's the guy who dreamed up Netcenter and replaced useful information with pop-up ads.)

    Run away from this company.

  28. Re:This is what Linux needs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think you are refering to Microsoft Bob

  29. My mother uses XFce by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There already is a mother-friendly UI for (linu/uni)X. My mother actually thinks Win9x is too complex and prefers Win3.1 to it. She has no problems using XFce (although I installed it for her) for her Nintendo emulation and solitaire-playing et al. XFce lacks all those geeky applets and cool themeability, but it's clean-looking, VERY stable, extremely easy to use and has all the features you actually NEED. Check it out on http://www.xfce.org

  30. Brilliant!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know if you intended this as a joke, but there is no reason why this couldn't work. It could be inherently dangerous, so I recommend an UNDO command be included, multiple deep of course.

    You should start a project on this...ish maybe (Infocom SHell).
    I'd contribute.

  31. GMC going away? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, GMC was finally getting somewhat stable and usable. But its true, that making a new filemanager/desktop manager would really help out in the usability department. GMC still hasnt caught up with kfm in usability, and neither is as easy and stable as explorer (windows fm). But, its definately heading in the right direction.

    It does sound VERY promising... I can't wait to start messing with it.

  32. call it KDE. oops, wait a sec.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    my mom could use KDE

    but diversity+versitility = survivability, so code on

    Oversoul

  33. I think it is good overall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I support several machines and accounts for relatives, including my wife and children. First of all, after paying attention to their usage patterns and habits, the desktop/wm is NOT the issue at all. I have a simple fvwm2 setup with a buttonbar (pre customized for each persons preferences). No pager, themes, docks, animations, or menus (I could go on a whole separate rant about the evils of menus). The ALL, repeat ALL, prefer this greatly over Win95.

    The major current shortcomings as I have seen in practice of the UNIX/Linux solution for simple end users are:
    1) Danger in just tuning off the machine. It isn't an appliance until that is fixed. The fix, a journalling filesystem, is in the works.
    2) X lockups. These happen, and probably always will. This X monitoring daemon suggestion is a very good idea to mitigate this.
    3) Glitchy browser. This was also mentioned before and I agree. The browser options are currently sub-par in terms of solid stable consistent behavior. This is being addressed on many fronts and should work itself out.
    4) Drifting system configurations. By this I mean little niggling things that are not appropriate for end users to deal with. Things like permissions on devices getting misset by some (usually suid) processes, printer queues getting jammed, ppp hanging, etc. The fix for this is a probably a) a different OS or b) a different usage model. For my 'user base' I am using a different model than the typical Personal Computer model. I am actually doing something more akin to a hybrid between a Network Computer (ala Sun's NC idea) and the old Mainframe-Xterm model.

  34. GUI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm going to lead the crusade against people who pronounce GUI as "gooey". They must die. Repeat after me: GEE EWE EYE. Who's with me?

    1. Re:GUI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn right. Especially all of the CS profs that pass it down to the next generation of sheep.

  35. Re:Um by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The install of Linux has gotten pretty good, IF you have supported hardware. Where Linux falls flat on it's face big time is in changing virtually anything after that initial install. Sure they can come up with a GUI that anyone can use, but who's going to maintain the Linux base that the GUI sits on? Who is going to install patchs and upgrades? Who is going to install new apps for them?

  36. Err, it's a fundemental to Gnome too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What do you think that foot is for??

  37. Re:Windows is NOT easy to use. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, yes we can blame MSWindows for the inconsistencies in apps. If you really think about it, it makes absolutely no sense to enforce user interface guidelines on a piece of paper or through your widget editor.

    If you think something is good enough to rate being 'set in stone' then your API should manage it from then on. The API itself should be able to enforce the user interface. Then, instead of it being managed by the application (like those window frames that freeze in Windows), it can be managed by the OS.

    Both are chaos because with both you are just assuming that a myriad of programmers are just going to play nice.

    GNOME and KDE shouldn't work that way. Things that are considered to be part of the UI standard should be coded into the API.

    That way, things are also nice and abstract. If the 'one true UI' changes, all of your API dependent apps can reflect this change without recoding or even a recompile. You might even be able to better exploit newer interface technologies as they come along.

    It's time for us to stop playing the MS game of merely making bad copies of the MacOS.

    We can do much better.

  38. Re:What Lusers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds to me like maybe you and your little mutual-admiration society aren't quite as hot as you think you are.

  39. Re:Look for something amazing from this project by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only catch with this is oftentimes the GUI will cause you to do MORE futzing. It will just be futzing with low mental overhead.

    I started out with GUI's (GEM) and graduated to shell tricks because of this sort of thing.

  40. Re:"User Friendly" is more than a simple GUI. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Linux is already doing autodection.

    That's purely a function of the hardware.

    That's why the MacOS is much more consistent in this regard and PC OSes aren't. The PC is a kludged together piece of crap and it shows.

    Oddly enough, even the MacOS has the notion of 'mounting' a disk. It just obscures the complexity of the situation.

  41. Are you fucking stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What the hell is the matter with you? Do you know how stupid it is to make comments like this about Windows or Microsoft, in public, using your real account? Microsoft is a large corporation that has its own security people. Am I being clear here? Do you think that the Powers that Be at Microsoft read comments like yours, and just shrug and say "Well, everybody is entitled to their own opinion."

    I would be very careful of the things that I say about Microsoft in the future, if I were you. Microsoft is a large enough corporation that it can afford to have the "rules" (read: laws) bent whenever it needs to. If you don't watch out, you might drop off the face of the planet.

    1. Re:Are you fucking stupid? by Wakko+Warner · · Score: 2
      Eep.

      Thanks for that.

      Guess they're sending a hit out for "Wakko Warner" now... :(

      I should have called my account "Steve Balmer".

      - A.P.
      --


      "One World, one Web, one Program" - Microsoft promotional ad

      --
      "Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
  42. Re:The last big thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A lot of this file 'chaos' has to do with how poorly DOS and MacOS were designed with respect to larger systems. Unix and other 'bigger-iron' started out with more complex data sets and the need to partition the system.

    Really, the user shouldn't be dumping files in most of the file system. Executables and other files should be stored in such a way that the user and the system need not track them down manually. A user shouldn't have to browse the filesystem to add a program to a menu or just execute it.

    Users personal data should NOT be stored along with the application or in some other shared area of the disk. Users should be pointed to their personal area of the disk by default and not / or C:/.

    The GUI isn't quite so dated as much as the DOS-ish single user nature of the filesystem is.

    $HOME should be relatively small and easy to manage.

  43. Re:Um by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry to burst your bubble but libc incompatabilities are still an issue, they do still happen and can royally screw up your system.

  44. Re:Windows is NOT easy to use. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Ha! That's the best you can do with complaints about Windows? X is far more inconsistant than Windows is. Many people have already shown how stupid your examples of key combos for your examples. If you ask 10 people and get 5 different answers that's because there is more than one way to accomplish the same task in Windows. You think that's bad? I guess you should go back to using a mac where you are forced to do things the Apple way.

    Where does game x install itself? That depends on where the developer set it to install. You aren't actually advocating that developers be forced into installing it to a certain spot are you?

  45. GNOME Infidels Must Be Destroyed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Err, waitaminute. I got confused there for a minute. That's *KDE* infidels who must be destroyed! Sorry about that.

  46. they better get a better designer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cause that logo is WACK! And if they really knew about interface design they'd clean it up a bit for the web. Maybe they're saving 3k of download time by making it all gross and jpeggy lookin somehow, but it just looks weak. I ain't down. DRE5000

  47. Re:That's all old stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    dont worry..KDE is slowing down and gnome is accelerating. eventually KDE will die.

  48. Re:Too bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gnome is fine.

    It's GMC, E and friends that are Ant Farms.

  49. Re:danger... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gnome Printing architecture provides a C API for applications to render with a Postscript-like imaging system and does provide native drivers for printers. Miguel.

  50. Re:Gnome unstable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    worth a look: first obvious thing you see : It violates some GUI rules about WM. Why the hell does it overwrite the content of a window with the title bar?

  51. Re:Gnome unstable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    E is great alone (fast, small, no crash)
    Gnome is great alone (idem)


    But together, they just don't work.

  52. Re:You don't get it. Slashdot either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The answers are much better than the original post.
    I do not understand /. notations.
    This message is a pure bullshit : tie X to the kernel, that SO CLEVER for a server.
    FUCKING STUPIDITY OF THE MODERATION ON /., YOU MAKE ME PUKE!

  53. Re:What Lusers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think the only remedy you really need to be subject to is psychotherapeutical in nature.

  54. Re:What Lusers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well I don't know you or your friends backgrounds look like, but.... Hiring programmers who are green (or fresh out of school) is not abnormal. They may be looking for people who have not been tainted by years of GUI design since they are trying to do something ground breaking. Id bet they feel they already have the software leads there who are behind this new vision, and are looking for people who will be easier to follow this vision. Just my two cents.

  55. Re:It's all about components, baby. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OK... So nowdays, when you click a file in your file manager it doesn't open it in the application best suited to handle the file - it instead opens it in the file manager window. But I thought I was going to manage my files in that window. Oh, it's evolution. Sorry, my mistake.

  56. Re:Now *that's* funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's why Apple puts a 'eject' menu and the same in the contextual menu...

  57. Re:Not Mom and Grandma, it is the kids! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gawd. Please learn how to spell. I'm ill from reading your mess.

  58. That's all old stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All the latest things on Konq are on the main mosfet.org page. Lots of cool things, looks very promising. Gnome has a long way to catch up still it seems.

  59. Re:How they make money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am rubbing my ...
    It feels good. I can see the future, now.

  60. Re:You don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    blows the "standard load" on the system

    I'd like to blow my standard load on the system...

  61. MODERATE THIS UP! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is so funny, I just wet myself...

  62. Re:"User Friendly" is more than a simple GUI. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    DAVE'S DELIGHT
    By davidb234
    Pt.1

    Dave Thomas was a successful business man, owning a
    number of vehicle repair shops and gas stations
    with big name franchises, around the county. He had
    just secured a huge contract for fleet servicing
    and fuel accounts with a large company that was
    relocating in the area. His wife Vera was a
    housewife that did a lot of local charity and
    committee work. His daughter, and only child
    Sarah had recently escaped being severely raped by
    the timely intervention of a neighbor, Jack Bowman,
    and his family, who happened to be walking in the
    country park at the time. Sarah recovered from her
    ordeal very quickly due to the efforts of Jack and
    his youngest step daughter Sue. ------ read on:-

    Dave had called and told Vera he would be late home
    as he had to finish off a session with his
    accountant so they could finalise the half year tax
    returns. As a result it was almost seven thirty
    when he got home, tired and very hungry. Vera and
    Sarah had got everything ready and they sat down
    ten minutes after Dave got home, and had a quiet
    meal together. Once it was over Vera told Dave to
    go and have a shower and come back down ready for
    bed, as they had no plans to go out and were
    expecting no visitors. As he'd had a hard day Dave
    agreed and while Vera and Sarah were doing the
    dishes he did as Vera had suggested.
    By the time he was sitting down on the sofa in the
    family room with a beer in his hand and the TV on
    he had woken up a little and no longer felt like
    collapsing into bed. It was not long before Vera
    joined him, also dressed in her nightie and
    bathrobe, sitting down beside him and snuggling up
    close so he could put his arm round her as she lay
    her head on his chest. "Hmmmmm this is nice
    darling" said Vera as she looked up at her husband
    with a sweet smile on her face "We should do it
    more often". Dave lay his cheek on her head and
    murmured softly "It's nice to relax together
    darling, especially after a hard day like today.
    I guess I've been spending too much time on the
    business just lately, but I really had to get this
    new contract sorted" Vera hugged her husband "I'm
    not complaining my love, I just wish I could help
    more, but you know me and business, I'll just have
    to keep on looking pretty for you at the company
    functions when we entertain" Dave grinned at
    this and bent his head and kissed her tenderly.
    So engrossed were they that they didn't hear Sarah
    come in and gently sit beside Dave on the sofa.
    "WOW, I wish you'd kiss me like that Daddy" Sarah
    said with a giggle as the kiss was broken, "In fact
    I wish anyone would kiss me like that, what do you
    have to do to get treatment like that Mom, bribe a
    guy?" Vera chuckled "No Sarah darling, you just
    have to find someone that loves you enough, and
    that you love, then let nature take it's course". A
    few minutes later they were all relaxed and
    watching a movie on TV when Sarah shifted her
    position and leaned against her Dad, lifting his
    arm across her shoulders as she snuggled up close
    to him and heaving a huge sigh of contentment as
    she relaxed.
    Dave also relaxed and revelled in the warm feeling
    of the closeness of the two women in his life.
    Not really watching the movie Dave's mind began to
    wander back to his business and the fact that
    Sarah had stated her desire to join his company as
    soon as she had finished her education, and take it
    over when Dave retired. He was smiling as he
    wondered how some of the mechanics would take
    being given orders by a young woman when he felt
    Sarah shift her position and curl up on the sofa,
    laying her head on his lap. As he opened his eyes
    Dave saw that his left hand had shifted from round
    Sarah's shoulders to under her armpit and down on
    to her chest. Before he knew what was happening
    Sarah had taken his hand and pulled it down so she
    was pressing it on to her breast, holding it in
    place with her arm and hands. The feel of his hand
    on her soft warm breast with it's hard pointed
    nipple pressing into his palm was enough to form
    the beginnings of a slowly emerging erection and
    he started to lift his right arm from round Vera's
    back when she took hold of his hand, place it on
    her right breast and hold it there. Turning his
    head to look down at his wife Dave whispered
    "Vera, I've got to move. Look where Sarah's head
    is" Vera looked up, smiled and pulled his head down
    so she could kiss him, "Let her sleep darling, and
    just enjoy being close to you, it's not hurting
    anyone is it?" Dave shook his head and frowned,
    but stayed where he was, hoping his erection would
    subside very soon. Not a chance! Sarah shifted a
    little and removed one of her hands from Dave's
    and placed it under her cheek as she lay on her
    Daddy's lap, the fact that she placed it firmly
    on to his half erect cock didn't seem to concern
    her, or Vera who he saw was watching the whole
    thing. Before he could say anything to Vera she was
    sitting up and whispering in his ear. "DARLING,
    let's you and I go to bed, we can leave Sarah
    asleep here if we're careful, I can see having
    her this close has got you all hot and bothered"
    Dave grinned and gave a quick nod of his head "OK
    darling, help me lift her a bit so I can slide out
    from under her". Between them they managed to move
    Sarah and lay her back down without waking her.
    "What on earth has Sarah been doing to get so tired
    Vera honey, I never known her to sleep like this
    before" Vera chuckled softly "She's a healthy
    young girl darling, as you have noticed. She's
    obviously been working and playing very hard today,
    just leave her, if she wakes before we're done she
    can get to bed without our help". Very quietly
    Vera and Dave made their way to their bedroom and
    closed the door silently behind them and, as Dave
    went to get into bed Vera turned him round and put
    her arms round his neck and kissed him. "David
    darling, if I asked you to do something unusual
    would you agree?" Dave smiled, "It depends how
    unusual darling, do you want to bring a crowd of
    your friends in to watch?" Vera blushed, "Don't be
    silly darling David, you couldn't handle more than
    one extra. No, I just wondered if you would let me
    tie you to the bed and make love to you like that,
    nothing strange, I won't be whipping you or
    anything, just getting on top and making love to
    you that way" Dave kissed her "So long as you
    promise not to inflict any pain darling, you know
    that turns me off, I like it gentle and loving,
    then I agree".
    As Vera stripped her robe off and then removed
    Dave's he interfered with her by trying to caress
    her breasts and butt, eventually though they were
    both naked and Dave lay in the middle of the bed
    with his arms and legs stretched out. Vera tied
    his ankles and wrists to the corners of the bed
    with soft silk scarves, telling him to hold the
    ones on his wrists, in his hands for comfort, "If
    you pull on them with your wrists darling, you
    might hurt yourself, and I wouldn't want that for
    anything". Laying there naked Dave smiled at Vera
    as she came and sat beside him, lean over and kiss
    him tenderly running a hand down his stomach and
    carefully took his shrinking manhood in her
    fingers, "Goodness me David, all this delay seems
    to have made you go off the boil, what can I do to
    rectify that I wonder?" before Dave could answer
    Vera reached over to the night stand pulled out
    another scarf and tied it tight over his eyes,
    blindfolding him very efficiently. "What're you
    doing Vera?" said Dave in a panicky voice, "I can't
    see a thing". Vera lay her cheek close to his "Not
    seeing will heighten your other senses darling,
    like touch and smell, see what I mean?" and she
    took her finger from between her pussy lips and
    held it to his nose, where he took a deep breath,
    "Ohh yes, I know where that's been, can I go there
    as well please darling?" Vera placed her finger on
    his lips as she whispered "Later darling, when
    other parts of you can no longer manage. All right"
    very slowly Vera started kissing Dave's naked body
    starting at his neck, working her way across his
    shoulders until she could kiss him under his arm
    and take a deep breath to savour his manly body
    odour. Across his chest she went with her tongue,
    stopping off at his nipples where she suckled and
    nibbled them, making him cry out with pleasure as
    she lashed them with her tongue. Vera let her
    kisses range down his rib cage and across his still
    firm belly, pausing to lick deep into his navel,
    before continuing down to the base of his now rigid
    and wildly throbbing penis as it stood upright like
    a palm tree waving in a storm. Ignoring his manhood
    Vera shifted off the bed for a few seconds before
    returning on the other side and continuing her
    treatment by working her tongue up the inside of
    his thighs, until she reached his groin. Vera had
    been right, thought Dave as he lay there in
    darkness, his sense of touch and smell were
    sharper, her hands certainly felt a lot softer
    and her touch much lighter as she began to kiss and
    lick up and down the shaft of his pulsating prick.
    "Is that nice darling?" Vera asked as she stopped
    for a moment "Wonderful darling, I never felt you
    so tender and gentle before" "Just you wait"
    replied Vera and a second or two later he felt her
    soft warm lips surround his throbbing prick and
    take him deep into her mouth where she began to
    lave the purple head with her soft moist tongue.
    Before many minutes of this treatment had passed
    Dave began to issue low moans from his tight
    clenched teeth as he tried to prevent his orgasm
    from reaching unstoppable proportions, he was
    loving the treatment so much he didn't want it to
    stop. Unfortunately his body decided differently
    and with a mighty jerk that almost dislodged Vera
    he gave a loud cry of "YESSS...YESSS, I'MMMM
    CUUUMMMIIINNNGGG" and he shot a huge stream of hot
    sticky semen deep into his wonderful wife's throat
    as she tried to suck and swallow at the same time.
    He thought he must have cum more then than ever
    before because Vera didn't seem to be able to take
    it all this time like she normally did, and he felt
    some escape and run down on to his groin. Dave
    suddenly felt a cold breeze over his prick and knew
    it had been released from the warm haven he had
    just filled with his cum. Obviously Vera didn't
    want to waste what had been spilled because she
    was licking it all up with her tongue. When he had
    been cleaned he felt Vera's head beside his, "Was
    that nice darling?" she said softly and he nodded
    "Yes darling, the best for a long time, this
    blindfold thing really works" and accepted a kiss
    tasting of his cum, from her soft warm lips.
    As Vera sat back up she said "Right darling, I'm
    going to make good use of this flagpole, sit on it
    very, very slowly, and hold you tight as I do, are
    you ready?" Dave just nodded and gasped as he felt
    her legs straddle his hips. His prick jumped as he
    felt her take hold of it, then he gasped as she
    began to lower herself and take him in to her
    pussy. God! He thought, she's certainly holding
    herself in tight today, and gasped as he felt the
    head of his prick scrape against the walls of her
    vaginal passage like never before. As soon as
    he felt the soft touch of pussy hair on his pelvic
    region he began to gently thrust his hips so his
    prick moved in and out of this tight pussy
    surrounding him, and felt it as she bent forward
    and humped her pelvis against his as she tried to
    get more friction on her clit as she moved. For
    what seemed ages Dave thrust at Vera then suddenly
    she sat up, leaned right back and screamed "YESSS,
    DADDY I'M CUUUUMMMIING fuck me, fuck me fuck me
    Daddy please fuck me". At this moment Vera whipped
    off his blindfold and he saw Sarah writhing on his
    penis as he pumped a stream of semen from his cock,
    this time deep into the body of his daughter. Dave
    began to thrash about himself as he tried to throw
    Sarah off him, unfortunately this only made her
    orgasm continue longer as it felt as if he was
    fucking her hard, and she hung on tight to him with
    her thighs and her cuntal muscles. When she was
    spent Sarah collapsed on to Dave's chest and lay
    there sobbing "Oh thank you Daddy, that was
    wonderful, I've waited so long to do this. I love
    you Daddy, I love you so much". Vera smiled down
    at her wonderful husband, then went and lay
    beside him, "David darling, I'm so sorry I had to
    trick you like this. Sarah did so want to make love
    to you, and I knew you would never do it
    voluntarily, so we fixed this little charade up
    between us. You're not too mad at me are you
    darling?".
    Dave turned and looked at Vera, "You're damn right
    I'm mad at you, you know how I feel about incest,
    ...." before he could continue Sarah pushed herself
    up on to her hands and looked down at her father,
    "Don't be so silly Daddy, no one will ever know,
    except you Mom and me, and we're not going to call
    social services are we? Now did you enjoy it, or
    were you faking your orgasm Daddy, if so I'll try
    and find an Oscar for you, because you sounded
    like it was just great" Dave gave a rueful grin "OK
    baby, I did enjoy it, but this is the last time, I
    don't want you to get pregnant, understood?"
    "David darling" said Vera "Don't you think we took
    that into account, Sarah is due to start her
    period in the next couple of days, and I have
    already made an appointment to get her on the pill,
    so she won't have to abstain for too long, nor will
    you, all right" Dave just grinned, not wanting to
    argue at the moment, "OK darling, but I'm afraid
    you're going to have to be punished for tricking me
    like this, you do understand that don't you
    darling?" Vera nodded and looked abashed, "Yes
    David, I understand you're going to have to spank
    me for being naughty" Sarah sat upright quickly
    "What!, Mom, are you telling me that Daddy spanks
    you and you like it?" Vera turned to Sarah and
    smiled as she nodded "Yes darling, we have done for
    a long time, it can be very... stimulating, if done
    correctly, why do you ask?" Sarah pulled herself
    off Dave's shrinking penis and knelt down beside
    him, "Daddy, I was just as naughty as Mom, does
    that mean I have to be spanked as well?" Dave
    looked at his baby and smiled "No darling, I've
    never punished you, and I won't start now, I'm
    afraid this is something between your mother and me
    that we do to make sex a little more exciting for
    us, not to actually punish one another for doing
    wrong".
    Sarah sat back on her heels and look very
    crestfallen, "Please Daddy" she said, "I won't mind
    being spanked the same as Mom". Dave shook his
    head as best he could, still being tied to the bed,
    "Sorry baby, I couldn't do that to you". As Vera
    sat up and began to untie Dave, Sarah got off the
    bed and picked up her robe, dragging behind her as
    she walked to the door. "OK Daddy, I understand"
    then she held her head up and took a deep breath,
    "Don't worry Daddy , I'll just ask Sue if she can
    get Uncle Jack to do it for me, he spanks Kelly,
    Lisa and Susan all the time, and they all love it,
    I'm sure he would show me what it's like and see if
    I'd enjoy it". Vera lay back on the bed and smiled
    as Dave sat up "Sarah, wait a minute, do you mean
    you'd go and ask a stranger to spank you just to
    see if it's something you might like?" he said.
    Sarah turned round and looked down at her feet as
    she murmured "Why not, you don't love me enough to
    show me, I know Uncle Jack does it because he
    loves his girls, because Sue told me about it. He
    spanked her because she told me about tummy
    rubbing and we tricked him into doing it for me,
    before he showed you how to do it. That was
    because he could have gone to prison if people
    found out he touched me". Vera sat up and kissed
    Dave lightly on the cheek and whispered "Got you
    there lover" then beckoned Sarah to come back and
    sit beside her father. As Sarah sat on the bed
    Vera pulled the covers open and they all got under
    them and at Vera's insistence lay down, Vera and
    Sarah in Dave's arms with their heads on his chest
    and a leg laying over his thigh each side. Dave
    turned to Sarah, "Do you think Uncle Jack would
    do it for you baby, I mean he's not even family is
    he?" Sarah got up on one elbow and looked at Vera
    who gave a little nod, "Well Daddy, he has done an
    awful lot for me already you know" Sarah said
    softly "I know darling, he stopped you being
    raped, that means more than anything to me, my
    love" replied Dave as he caressed his daughters
    hair and cheeks. "Yes, and he showed us his tummy
    rub, that's almost as good, I know I love you to
    rub me when I have period pain Daddy" Dave nodded
    "OK, and the tummy rub, but I still don't see why
    he might give you a spanking my dear. I don't get
    the connection". Vera signalled for Sarah to lay
    down, "David, can I ask you a couple of questions
    please, and get honest answers" she said with a
    smile that Dave knew well, "What are you working
    round to Vera, I don't trust that look, but yes,
    OK I'll be honest" he replied, "OK" said Vera "Did
    you hear Sarah cry when you popped her cherry
    tonight?" Dave shook his head "No, but then I
    wasn't listening for anything like that", Vera
    grinned "OK, if you didn't do it, when did it
    happen?" Dave frowned again and looked at Sarah
    "Have you been fooling about with boys at school
    young lady, I thought we taught you better than
    that, it's so stupid to take risks like that
    especially as your mother tells me you have no
    protection yet" Sarah hid her head in the pillow
    she was sharing with her father and he saw her
    shoulders heaving as if she were crying. Before
    he could comfort her Vera hit him hard on the arm.
    "David you are so stupid some times. Of course she
    didn't take silly risks like that. She came to me
    and we discussed it like adults. Then I made
    special arrangement for her to get the best
    treatment possible" she said forcefully. "What do
    you mean special treatment, what treatment, where,
    who treated her". Vera placed a finger over his
    lips to silence him, and all the time Sarah was
    sobbing next to him, "David, will you trust me and
    promise not to get mad at what I am going to tell
    you, at least not before we've had a chance to
    talk about it, please!" Vera looked at her husband
    with doe eyes and he smiled knowing he could never
    resist that look, or display any lack of trust in
    her "OK, I promise, but if you cheat me I'll never
    forgive you". Vera grinned "To be honest darling,
    I was very worried that Sarah would have the sort
    of experience I had when I first discovered sex. In
    the back row of a movie theatre or the back seat
    of a car, is not the place to have ones cherry
    popped. I know I had an awful time, as did most of
    the girls I knew. I just didn't want Sarah to go
    through that sort of experience if I could help
    it. That's why I talked to Jenny about it, and
    ended up asking her if she could get Jack to do
    it for her". As she paused Dave tried to sit up
    but was held down by Vera and Sarah being on his
    arms. "WHAT! You asked a woman if her husband could
    rape my daughter" before he could go further Sarah
    turned over and got up on her elbow again "Daddy,
    shut up please, you promised not to get mad before
    you heard it all" and she lowered her lips to his
    and kissed him lovingly "Please Daddy, let Mom
    finish, then I want to say something" and she
    placed a finger on his lips and pressed hard.
    Dave gave a nod and turned to Vera "Sorry darling,
    carry on" he said in a strained voice, "Well"
    continued Vera "It seems that Sarah and Sue had
    already decided to try to seduce Jack in their own
    way, Jenny and I had taken a couple of weeks to
    convince him that you wouldn't do it for her, so
    in the end he agreed on the understanding you had
    to be told as soon as possible, he didn't like
    going behind your back like that, especially after
    saving Sarah from being raped. He thought it more
    than a little ironic" Dave couldn't help grinning,
    "So do I" was all he said. "Anyway, eventually
    Jack was convinced by Jenny and I to do it and he
    also agreed to let Sue and Sarah believe they were
    seducing him" "Mom, do you mean YOU set that up,
    not me and Sue?" Vera nodded "Yes darling, sorry
    we didn't think you would actually manage on your
    own, Uncle Jack is a very honourable man darling,
    he never did like the idea from the start. Anyway
    David, it happened, exactly what, I can't tell you,
    but I do know the day it happened, Sarah was on
    another planet when she came home, talk about
    glowing, we could have run the heating for a month
    if we'd been able to harness it" Sarah blushed "I
    didn't think you would notice Mom, but you're
    right, it was wonderful". Dave turned to Sarah "How
    many boys have you been with since then Sarah" he
    said in a worried voice "Only one Daddy" Sarah
    replied softly "Who was it, do I know him, did you
    use a condom?" Dave said sternly, Sarah shook her
    head "No Daddy, I didn't use a condom, I didn't
    think it necessary". "Damn it girl, what where you
    thinking about, being so irresponsible, now tell me
    who it was before I get really angry" Sarah smiled
    then kissed him "It's you darling. Honest Daddy, I
    haven't been with anyone else, I promise. If I
    could have got you to be the first it would have
    been just one man I had been with, because I love
    you so much". Dave gave a huge sigh of relief, as
    Vera placed a finger on his chin and turned his
    head to face her "Don't jump to conclusions
    darling, now, are you OK with all this , or shall
    we drop the subject" Dave grinned "No Vera love, I
    guess I'm lucky to have a friend like Jack, and I
    mean that, I'm not being ironical. I'll get used to
    it, and I won't get mad at him, just take him off
    my Christmas list for a couple of years". Vera
    kissed him then said "Sarah, why don't you tell us
    what happened that first time, so we can share it
    with you" Sarah looked at Dave and he nodded so she
    settled down into the crook of her fathers arm and
    began to describe in detail how Uncle Jack took her
    virginity "It started the day Aunt Jenny and Sandi
    went to see their parents, Uncle Jack asked if Sue
    and I would like to go for the ride and we agreed.
    We behaved ourselves on the way out, and on the way
    home we sat in the corner of the back seat planning
    what we could do with Uncle Jack being alone with
    us for the rest of the day. Sue thought we
    wouldn't have a better chance for simply ages, so
    we decided my day had come and I had the chance to
    become a woman. Uncle Jack was working in the Den
    on your program for work Daddy, and Sue went down
    after about half an hour and.......
    ---------------------------------------------
    Continued in part 2

  63. Re:"User Friendly" is more than a simple GUI. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Dave's delight Pt.2

    DAVE'S DELIGHT
    By davidb234
    Pt.2

    "Daddy, could you come and help Sarah and me out
    for a moment please, we've got a bit of a problem"
    I swung round on my chair and said "Is it urgent
    darling, I do have a lot of work to get done
    today", "Oh yes Daddy, it's something that can't
    wait, otherwise I wouldn't have disturbed you" and
    with a sigh of resignation I put my work down and
    said "All right darling, but I hope it's not
    something silly" and followed her up to her
    bedroom where I found Sarah sitting in the middle
    of the bed, her knees drawn up tight to her chest
    held by her arms and with her head resting on her
    knees. As I walked over to her I could see a small
    patch of white cotton covering her young pussy and
    had to sit down quickly before my erection showed
    as I looked at her soft smooth thighs running down
    to her tightly stretched buttocks showing from
    under her short skirt. As an exercise in arousal
    it was pure Susan, and Jenny was going to love
    hearing about this later on tonight. As I sat
    beside Sarah I placed a hand on her knee and said
    gently "What's the matter Sarah my love, you don't
    look very happy, do you want me to take you home
    dear?" for a second her eyes opened in panic and I
    heard Sue gasp behind me as Sarah shook her head
    "No Uncle Jack, I... I was sort of hoping you... I
    could talk to you about something, something very
    private I can't talk to my Dad about". I shuffled
    a little closer to her and she also moved and
    knelt beside me on the bed, allowing me to place my
    arm round her waist, "All right Sarah my dear,
    come and tell old Uncle Jack, what your problem
    is, if I can help I promise I will, so long as I
    don't have to rob a bank or anything against the
    law" and gave her a hug. I saw Sarah give a quick
    glance across to Sue and open her eyes wide as if
    wanting inspiration to deal with my last statement,
    and appearing to get none. As I pulled her head
    to rest on my chest I lay my head on hers and said
    "Well my dear, what's this big problem your Dad
    can't help you with?" Sarah sat back on her heels
    and took a deep breath "Uncle Jack, did you know
    I'm the last virgin in our class, I feel such a
    fool and I want you to help me!" she said firmly,
    she's got courage this little girl. I looked at
    her for a few seconds then said "Ahh, I see, you
    want me to find a nice boy to help you out do you?
    I'd have thought you knew plenty of boys that
    would do that for you darling, if not surely Susan
    knows one or two that would be only too willing". I
    suddenly saw tears in her eyes as she said "No
    Uncle Jack, you don't understand. I want it to be
    YOU that does it for me. I don't want a silly boy
    that's going to shoot off as soon as I touch him or
    he touches me. I want YOU". And she collapsed in
    my arms sobbing "Please, Uncle Jack please help me
    be grown up, I want you to make me a woman, Sue
    told me all about it when you did it for her and I
    want it to be the same for me, please help me". I
    sat for some time rocking Sarah in my arms and
    managed to move round far enough to see Sue's face
    out of the corner of my eye, she had a wide self
    satisfied grin on her face, as if a plan had come
    together. Very soon Sarah was looking up at me
    through tear drenched lashes, and very alluring she
    was looking too; I bent down and kissed her tears
    away and whispered "Come and stand in front of me
    my love, I want to have a serious talk with you".
    Quick as a flash Sarah was standing with her
    knees touching mine and her hands clasped in front
    of her hips, as if protecting her sex. I took her
    hands in mine and looked her in the eyes, finding
    it very difficult not to smile, as I said with
    mock severity "Sarah my love, what you're asking
    me to do is allow you to give me something you can
    only give once. Your body will never be the same
    again and if you find some one to love you will
    not be able to give this most precious of woman's
    gifts to that man, do you understand what I'm
    saying?" Sarah looked at me and nodded "Yes Uncle
    Jack, and I've thought about it for a long time,
    I wanted you to touch me when you did my first
    tummy rub and I had an orgasm when your hand
    touched my pussy hair". I smiled "I did recognise
    what had happened darling, was it nice?" Sarah
    grinned "It was wonderful Uncle Jack, almost a
    wonderful as when it happened later when Daddy
    gave me one, that one made me wet my pants with my
    cum, I was scared he wouldn't do it again, but he
    did, he just didn't get close enough to my pussy to
    do me again", I squeezed her hands "Never mind
    darling, just be patient things might change. Now
    are you quite sure you want me to do this special
    thing for you?" Sarah nodded "Yes please Uncle
    Jack, I really do" she said and gripped my hands
    in hers "Right, some rules first, first of all you
    understand I will have to take some of your clothes
    off, you might end up undressed with me looking at
    your naked body, is that all right with you?"
    "Yes" she said in a hushed voice "Right the
    second thing is I will be touching you in places
    you may not have been touched before, will you
    mind me doing that?" this time she could only
    shake her head. "Right, the last thing is that I
    will need you to touch parts of my body you may not
    have touched on a boy before, how does that sound
    to you " "OK" she gasped and I could feel her
    trembling through the contact between our knees.
    "Now I want you to understand I do not know the
    meaning of the word NO when I'm making love to a
    beautiful woman, so there has to be a word that
    will stop me doing something you don't want me to
    do. This word works every time and I never carry
    on after it is said do you understand what I mean
    darling?" "If I say the word you will stop
    whatever you are doing, is that right Uncle Jack?"
    I smiled and nodded "Yes darling, whatever I'm
    doing, I will stop straight away. The word is
    'Washington', can you remember that?" Sarah giggled
    "I cannot tell a lie Uncle Jack, I'll remember
    it". "All right Sarah, now a final thing, do you
    want Susan to stay close in case you need help, or
    you feel scared and want her to hold your hand?"
    Sarah's eyes opened wide "Do you mind if she stays
    Uncle Jack, I thought you'd want to do it in the
    dark and in private" I chuckled "Sarah darling, I
    hate sex in the dark, I like to look at who I'm
    making love to, especially if it's someone as
    beautiful as you. Sue can stay in the room if you
    like and only come to us if you call her, how does
    that sound?". Sarah stepped round and sat herself
    on my lap "It sounds wonderful Uncle Jack can we
    start soon please". Setting Sarah on her feet then
    standing up I took both girls by the hand and led
    them into the spare bedroom, Sue went and sat
    quietly at the side of the room where Sarah would
    be able to see her, while I sat on the edge of the
    bed and stood Sarah in front of me. "Now Sarah I
    would like you to undress slowly for me, and
    maybe you could ask me to take some of your
    clothes off for you" and I sat there as she undid
    the buttons of her shirt and stripped it off as
    quick as she could "Take my bra off please" she
    said softly and stood close so I could reach round
    her back and snap open the catch then pull it
    forward over her shoulders to reveal her firm
    young breasts. They were the size of half a
    grapefruit with one inch aureoles and pencil
    eraser sized nipples that were standing proud and
    rigid before my eyes.
    Sarah looked me in the eyes "Touch them please, I
    want to feel your fingers on my titties Uncle
    Jack, please" she gasped and I reached out and
    stroked my fingertips round the contours of her
    firm young breasts then up to press her nipples
    into her flesh, allowing them to pop out under
    their own natural springiness. This brought a loud
    gasp from Sarah, and a softer one from Sue as she
    sat against the wall. Next I gently pinched her
    nipples between finger and thumb and rolled them
    back and forth for a couple of seconds before
    dropping my hands to my lap. "No, please Uncle
    Jack don't stop" she moaned as I sat there
    looking at her naked breasts and smiling. "Take my
    shirt of please Sarah" I said and opened my knees
    to allow her to get close. Almost as quickly as
    removing her own did she take my shirt from my back
    and as soon as my chest was bare she was caressing
    it with her soft warm hands, treating my swollen
    nipples the same as I had hers, this girl was a
    fast learner it seemed. After a short time I took
    her hands off my chest and closed my knees again
    "Now your skirt darling" I said and with a flick
    she had the clasp open and it was falling to land
    in a pool at her feet as she stood there wearing
    only the white cotton panties I had seen earlier.
    "Can I take your pants of Uncle Jack " she
    gasped as she stepped to one side of my legs and
    stood close to me feeling for my belt buckle.
    I stood up and allowed her to undo my belt and run
    my zipper down so she could pull my pants down to
    my feet where I stepped out of them, kicking them
    to one side. Sarah knelt in front of me and said
    "WOW" as she saw my erection tenting my shorts.
    She looked up at me and said "Can I..." and as soon
    as I nodded she was dragging them down over my
    throbbing penis, jerking her head back with a cry,
    as it sprang free almost hitting her on the nose.
    Quickly discarding my shorts she stood up and
    stepped a couple of feet away from me "My turn now
    Uncle Jack" she said and very slowly she turned
    her back on me and opened her feet half a yard,
    bent down at the waist locking her knees and
    agonisingly slowly pushed her panties over her
    bottom and down her thighs to stop just above her
    knees. As can be expected my prick jerked like a
    springboard and I came closer to shooting my rocks
    off than I had for a long time. I heard what could
    have been a stifled chuckle from the side of the
    room and knew Sue had told Sarah what to do here.
    After displaying herself to me for a minute or so
    Sarah stood up and out of her panties saying, "WOW,
    Uncle Jack you sure are big". Sarah took the two
    steps necessary for her to put her arms round me
    and press her nipples into my chest and her groin
    on to my pulsating prick as it stood erect between
    our bodies. She looked up at me and suddenly
    seemed a little unsure of herself, "Will it fit
    Uncle Jack, it looks awfully big, I only ever had a
    finger there before now" "Show me" I said simply
    and scooped her up in my arms and placed her in
    the middle of the bed, opening her thighs wide so I
    could lay down and see her sex.
    Shyly Sarah moved one hand down to open her pussy
    lips and push a finger just inside her passage to
    moisten it then she moved it up to her clit and
    began to rub it for all she was worth until I
    placed a hand on hers and stopped her "No darling,
    do it slowly" and before she could do anything I
    had placed my lips on her labia and was searching
    for her clit with my tongue, as soon as I touched
    it she yelled and her hips bucked against my mouth,
    her thighs slamming tight round my ears as I tried
    to move my mouth down so I could push my tongue
    inside her. As I slipped it in she screamed out
    for Susan and I heard scrabbling feet as Sue
    joined Sarah on the bed, giving her no respite I
    put the tip of my finger into her wet hole and
    moistened the tip of another which I placed on her
    tiny puckered anus and gently but firmly pressed
    in against the tight rubbery ring holding it
    closed. This brought another scream from Sarah and
    again her hips bucked against my still trapped
    head as I twisted my finger in her anus and sucked
    on her juices that were flowing like a river from
    her virgin pussy. Suddenly her body stiffened like
    a board and she gave one last scream and then
    collapsed on the bed gasping for breath as she held
    Sue to her heaving chest.
    Sitting up on the bed I pulled at Sue's arm and
    signed for her to leave Sarah alone. I sat still
    as Sue came and licked my lips and chin clean of
    Sarah's juices "Hmmm.. tasty" whispered Sue as she
    went back to her chair and I crawled on to the bed
    to lay beside my young virgin. "God, how did you
    do that Uncle Jack, I thought it would never stop,
    I just kept cumming and cumming 'til I thought I
    would explode" "Practice" I whispered "Ready for
    something different, this time I'll allow you to
    refuse to do as I ask if you think it too dirty",
    "You want me to give you a blow job" she asked
    breathlessly "Only if you feel you would like to
    darling, this is something I never force on a
    woman" "Ohhhh.. pleeaassseee, I want to Uncle Jack,
    I want you to cum in my mouth please, I never did
    it before but lots of my friends tell me it's
    nice, but what do I do?" I smiled "Ask your friend"
    I said simply and lay back with my butt on the
    edge of the bed and my feet firmly on the floor.
    Sarah looked over to Sue and said softly "Help me
    Sue, show me what to do please" and Sue came over
    with the widest smile I had ever seen on her
    beautiful young face.
    "First of all Sarah put some pillows behind him so
    he can see what you're doing, that'll make it
    better for him" and suited the word to the deed by
    banking me up so I could look down at my thighs.
    Sue knelt on one side of me and told Sarah to get
    to the other and just copy what she did. First of
    all Sue kissed the tip and ran her tongue from
    base to head on the underside then right round the
    top, leaving a trail of saliva where she'd been.
    Sue removed her head and allowed Sarah to do the
    same telling her to hold the base gently in her
    hand to stop me thrashing about too much. Sue then
    showed Sarah how to take me deep into her mouth
    without gagging and Sarah showed how good she was
    by taking more than half of me before she had to
    come up for air. Sue then got down to the main
    event and showed Sarah how to get me off by a
    combination of sucking, licking and head movement
    while she was cupping my balls in her soft warm
    hand. Between them these two young girls soon
    had me groaning "Sue darling, I'm going to cum
    soon" and she removed her mouth from my swelling
    prick and guided Sarah's on to replace it just as I
    yelled "NOW.. I'm cumming NOOOWWW" and jerked my
    hips as I shot wad after wad of hot sticky semen
    into Sarah's soft warm mouth.
    Try as she might there was no way that Sarah was
    going to take all I was shooting at her throat and
    most of it ran from the sides of her lips as she
    swallowed desperately. As she lifted her head I
    could see she had a mouth full of semen and she
    smiled as she closed her lips and gulped down all
    she had, wiping her face with her fingers and
    licking them clean as well. During this episode
    Sue was down on my groin lapping up all that Sarah
    had left behind 'til she finally lifted her head
    and leaned over to Sarah kissing her and licking
    the inside of her mouth, "you're right Sue" said
    Sarah "It is better fresh" and they giggled as
    they knelt beside my legs playing with my
    recovering manhood. When she saw I was hard again
    Sue said softly to Sarah "It's time darling, are
    you ready?" Sarah nodded shyly as she stood up
    "Help me Sue please" she said as I shuffled up to
    the head of the bed and placed the pillows in the
    right way so I sat half upright with my legs
    straight out in front of me. Sue whispered to
    Sarah and told her how to position herself over my
    throbbing penis then showed her how to hold me
    and open her pussy lips at the same time. As she
    lowered herself on to the head of my prick I said
    softly "Take your time darling, there's no rush",
    and she smiled as she pressed down, then gasped as
    she felt the head slip in past her lips, "It's so
    huge, it's filling me up Uncle Jack" she gasped as
    she slowly pressed down a little further stopping
    suddenly as she felt the tip touch her maiden
    barrier. "Sarah darling, this is it, do you want
    to do it or would you like me to take your
    maidenhood for you" "Uncle Jack, I've dreamed for
    ages that you would be the one to do it for me.
    Please make my dream come true" so I took her
    hands in mine and held them firmly on her hips and
    smiled as sweetly as I could then gave a sharp
    upthrust of my hips driving my rigid prick through
    her hymen and deep into her cuntal passage. Sarah
    gave a short cry of agony as I burst through and I
    saw tears form in her eyes as she fell forward on
    to my chest. I quickly rolled her over on to her
    back without breaking contact and began to gently
    pump my prick in and out of her pussy until I felt
    her responding to my movements and begin to gasp as
    she started to get pleasure from what she was doing
    "Fuck me Uncle Jack, fuck me hard darling, I'm not
    a virgin now so you can fuck me as hard as you
    want and I want you to cum in my cunt Uncle Jack
    fill me with your cum like you do Susan and Lisa
    and Kelly, make me one of your women darling I
    want you to fuck me every week fuck me fuck me
    fuck me I'm cuummiinngg NOOOWWW" and she threw her
    legs round my back and her arms tightened on my
    neck as her pelvis thrashed about under mine.
    I kept on humping at her pussy as she was coming
    down from her climax until I was so close and said
    softly "Sarah darling, I'm going to cum are you
    ready to be filled up I'm cumming NOOWW, YES, YES,
    YES" and once more I was shooting semen into a
    virgin pussy as Sarah cried out "Yes, yes, yes I
    feel it burning into me, more, more keep cumming
    don't stop Nooooo.." the last cry was as I slipped
    out of her having shrunk rapidly after cumming
    twice in so short a time. I rolled over and pulled
    Sarah on top of me as she gasped for breath. After
    a few minutes I lifted her off and laid her beside
    me as I sat up to look across at where Sue was
    sitting transfixed at what she had witnessed. Sue
    looked at me and said softly "I think Sarah
    enjoyed that daddy, I know I did and I was only
    watching. She's a very sexy girl isn't she
    darling?" I smiled and nodded then bent over Sarah
    and whispered "Come along darling, we need a
    shower, I'm going to have to go and collect Aunt
    Jenny and Sandi very soon, would you like to
    shower with me?".
    --------------------------------------------------
    "So I had a wonderfully sexy shower with Uncle
    Jack, we dried each other and got dressed. I went
    back to Sue and we spent hours talking about what
    it was like and how much I screamed as I had so
    many orgasms. I felt so safe Daddy, not just
    because Sue was there but just because it was
    Uncle Jack. I know he said he'd never hurt me, and
    I suppose he did a bit when he popped my cherry,
    but that's not being hurt is it Mom?" Vera smiled
    and shook her head "No darling, not the way we
    normally mean hurting you" she said softly. "Well,
    that's about it Daddy, it was really wonderful, and
    I don't think I will ever be able to let one of
    those silly boys at school get near me, until they
    get someone like Uncle Jack to teach them how to
    treat a girl". Dave looked from Vera to Sarah "It
    seems you two had this worked out as a long term
    strategy, didn't you?" Vera smiled and nodded, "Yes
    darling, but only in theory, all the details came
    along in the past few weeks. I really wanted it to
    be you, but you were so very reluctant I decided to
    chance using other methods, and hope you understood
    I was doing it for the best, for all of us". Dave
    grinned "OK, I accept that and I concur with what
    you did and why you did it. But that doesn't mean
    you get away without being spanked, and I mean
    BOTH of you, understand" "Yes darling"- "Yes Daddy"
    they replied with big grins on their faces as Vera
    put out the light and they went to sleep in each
    others arms. By the end of the week Vera and Sarah
    were ready for their spanking, Sarah would have to
    wait for hers because her period came on Wednesday
    and she was in a lot of pain again by the time she
    got home from school. That evening after dinner
    Dave sat down with Sarah, who was dressed in only
    her bathrobe, and gave her a wonderful tummy rub to
    help ease her pain. This time though was much more
    enjoyable for both of them as Sarah opened her robe
    as she lay back on Dave's chest and smiled as he
    gasped at her naked body. "Sarah, is this wise
    darling?" Sarah looked round at him and smiled
    sexily "Of course Daddy darling, why not, I'd love
    to have you caress me all over, it might even make
    my pain go away faster. Just don't be afraid of
    touching me please Daddy, you know I love you
    to do that". Dave began with the intention of just
    rubbing Sarah's tummy as before but it wasn't long
    before his fingers touched the underside of her
    breasts and ruffled the hair on her pubic mound,
    both of which made Sarah gasp and wriggle with
    pleasure.
    Continued in part 3

  64. Re:Windows IS easy to use AND to program in. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yep, same with staroffice. I cannot select then copy/paste with my mouse to other X apps, even if I select Copy from the edit menu.

  65. Re:ATTN MODERATORS: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well now we know at least one moderator here has had sex with goats, so it's not just the trolls anymore...

  66. Re:"User Friendly" is more than a simple GUI. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dave's delight Pt.3

    DAVE'S DELIGHT
    By davidb234
    Pt.3

    In the end Dave succumbed to temptation and began
    to caress Sarah's firm young breasts and gently rub
    her mons as he stroked her abdomen in between.
    Being young, healthy and very horny it wasn't long
    before Sarah was grasping Dave's hand and holding
    it tight to her swollen mound while she writhed
    in ecstasy as she climaxed under his caresses. When
    she eventually regained the power of speech Sarah
    turned to Dave and said softly "Thank you so much
    Daddy, that was soooo wonderful, I bet Mom would
    like it too", before Dave could think of an answer
    they heard Vera say "You just better believe it
    darling, especially if it's as good as yours
    sounded from the kitchen". Dave turned round and
    looked at his wife blushing bright red, "I'm sorry
    Vera darling, I didn't mean this to happen, it just
    sort of crept over us. I won't let it happen again
    my love I promise". Vera smiled and leaned over the
    back of the sofa, "David darling, you just better
    make damn sure do don't keep that promise.
    No way do I want you to think you need to have my
    permission or presence to do something so wonderful
    for your daughter. Just promise to do the same for
    me in a few days time, all right?" Dave grinned
    like a schoolboy, "You mean you don't mind me
    bringing Sarah off like this, even if you're not
    there to protect her?" Sarah sat up and turned to
    face her father, naked and proudly displaying her
    body to him, "Daddy, I do not need Mom to protect
    me from you. I know you'd never do anything to harm
    me, the same as you trust Uncle Jack never to harm
    me, correct?" Dave just nodded, "Right then, what
    other reason is there for Mom to be present?" Dave
    took a deep breath, "Sarah darling, I just don't
    want your mother to get jealous thinking I might be
    making love to you more than her, that's all" Sarah
    laughed as Vera kissed his cheek, "Don't be so
    silly Daddy, I couldn't take you away from Mom, we
    both know that. Uncle Jack has the same problem
    being convinced Aunt Jenny won't get jealous when
    he makes love to any of the girls, she's too much
    in love with him like Mom is with you, for there to
    be any chance of either of you losing your wives,
    so stop being so silly and let's get back to this
    tummy rub, I want to cum again before I go to bed
    please Daddy darling".
    Vera came and sat beside Dave and kissed him "This
    I have to watch darling, just in case I can tell
    any of my friends how to get their sex lives spiced
    up a bit".

    When Friday came round Sarah had asked if Sue
    could sleep over for the weekend, Vera said yes
    without asking Dave, forgetting she was to
    be spanked, until Sue and Sarah came in from
    school. Vera tried to explain why Sue would have
    to leave it until another weekend, "No Mom" said
    Sarah firmly "Sue has to stay because she wants to
    take my place tonight, for everything" "WHAT" said
    Vera "But that might mean Dad..." "Yes Aunt Vera "
    said Sue "I know what it means, and I'd really
    like to do it, not just for Sarah but for Uncle
    Dave, if you don't object that is" and gave Vera a
    sweet smile as she sat down. "But what about your
    Mom darling, won't she mind you offering yourself
    to a grown man?" Susan smiled as she shook her
    head "Of course not, Daddy's a grown man isn't he,
    and I've made love to him lots of times, it's just
    boys I've not had any experience of, they're no
    good at all after my Dad" Vera laughed "That's
    what Sarah told her Dad the other day, all right
    but we must keep it from Uncle Dave 'til the last
    minute, OK?" Sue and Sarah nodded and disappeared
    upstairs 'til dinner. Dave was surprised to find
    Sue invited for the weekend but Vera told him she
    was going to watch TV while Sarah and her did some
    private business upstairs a little later. When the
    time came Sue just waved a hand as she watched
    TV and Dave took Vera and Sarah up to the master
    bedroom. While Dave got the chair out Vera and
    Sarah stood by the door 'til Dave called Vera
    over, told her to bend across his lap and, began to
    slap her skirt covered bottom. As the first one
    landed he was interrupted by Susan entering the
    room, "No Uncle Dave, not like that" and came to
    stand behind Vera, lifted her skirt and ripped her
    panties off her bottom to sit halfway down her
    thighs, "Now, on her bare bottom and real noisy,
    like this" and brought her hand down hard and flat
    on Vera's naked flesh. This made Vera jump and give
    a mew of pleasure that surprised Dave.
    Nevertheless he did as Sue said and soon had
    Vera's butt bright red and glowing as she grunted
    with the landing of each blow. After twenty Sue
    stopped Dave's hand and placed it on Vera's pussy
    lips where they peeped from between her thighs.
    Dave gasped, Vera had enjoyed spanking before but
    had never got this wet. As he was stroking Vera's
    butt and thighs Sue whispered in his ear and she
    then took Vera's hand and pulled her up, taking her
    to lay on the bed with her bottom on the edge and
    her legs wide apart, displaying herself to all
    those in the room. Sue then stood in front of Dave
    and said in a quiet voice "Uncle Dave, as Sarah
    has her period now I'm here to take her place for a
    spanking, on the understanding she has one when
    she is finished, please spank me as you would have
    done Sarah" and she lay herself across Dave's
    lap, flicked up her skirt and pulled her panties
    down to below the swell of her firm round buttocks.
    Dave looked at Vera but she was laying on her back,
    he then looked at Sarah who was still standing by
    the door, completely mesmerised by what had
    happened to her Mom. Dave took his courage in his
    hand and brought his hand down hard on Sue's
    naked bottom and received a nice muted cry and a
    hard twitch of her body. Nineteen time more Dave
    spanked Sue and after the last one he caressed her
    thighs and butt, getting a soaked palm as her
    pussy gushed moisture all over it. Sarah came over
    and helped Sue to her feet and lay her beside Vera,
    as Dave gave a loud gasp of surprise as he saw
    Sue's shaved pussy when she opened her legs wide to
    his gaze. Sarah then turned to her Dad and said
    softly "Come on Daddy, it's their turn now, you
    have to bring them to orgasm by fucking them" "I
    can't do that darling, not with Susan in the room"
    he gasped, Vera raised herself up on her elbows and
    said firmly "David, if you don't fuck us both now
    I'll take Sue home and get Jack to do the job
    properly, do you agree Susan?" Sue got up and said
    "Yes Aunt Vera, I said I was here to take Sarah's
    place for everything, and that means EVERYTHING,
    please Uncle Dave, hurry up, I cant wait much
    longer" and she and Vera lay back down as Sarah
    pushed her father in front of her Mom and quickly
    undid his pants and stripped him from the waist
    down. "Why you old fraud" said Sarah with a chuckle
    "You're as horny as a goat, come on Dad, get to it
    and I'll help where necessary, or where I see a
    chance" she then gave Dave a push in the back and
    he fell forward between his wife's wide spread
    thighs. Before he could do anything he felt Sarah's
    cool hand round his prick aiming it into Vera's
    pussy, then jerked his hips as Sarah slapped him
    hard on the butt. As he was thrust into Vera she
    gave a loud cry of pleasure when she felt the head
    of his prick hit the mouth of her cervix, she then
    threw her legs over his back locking him in close
    so she could get maximum penetration as she humped
    away at him while he thrust like a piston at her
    hot wet grasping vaginal passage.
    They were both so aroused by the spanking and
    sights that within a couple of minutes Vera was
    crying out as she climaxed all over Dave's
    thrusting penis then she yelled again as she felt
    his hot cum spurting deep into her cunt and
    burning it's way to her body. Dave rolled off
    Vera and glanced across to where Sue lay red hot
    and waiting for him to service her, "I'm sorry Sue
    darling, I just can't manage you as well, I need
    ages to recover" Sue smiled at him "Sarah, give me
    a hand darling, your Dad needs waking up" and Sarah
    dived to kneel between Dave's knees and took his
    limp prick in her hand then opened her mouth to
    swallow it whole. As Sarah sucked her Daddy's
    prick Sue and Vera could see his prick beginning to
    slowly get a little stiffer then suddenly Dave
    gave a yelp of surprise and Sarah had to move quick
    as his prick rose to it's full length in a flash.
    Sarah looked at Sue and smiled as she opened up a
    condom, rolled it down Dave's almost rigid penis
    then pulled him over and said softly "Come on
    Daddy, please don't let the family down like this"
    and she watched him roll between Sue's thighs and
    helped him get his cock into Sue's sopping wet
    pussy. Dave gave a few jabs of his hips at Sue then
    stopped as if to give up when he gave another yelp
    and began to thrust at her like a teenage hormone
    bank while Sue picked up his rhythm and was very
    soon crying out in ecstasy as she climaxed over and
    over again. Dave was unable to cum so soon after
    his last and could only lay there totally spent as
    Vera and Sarah rolled him off Sue and turn him
    round to lay in the middle of the bed.
    The girls sat in a group on the end of the bed and
    Vera and Sarah were all apologies to Sue because
    Dave couldn't last the pace. "It doesn't matter
    Aunt Vera, I guess he's not used to having more
    that one good looking woman to service, he'll soon
    be fit enough, with a bit of practice" and she
    giggled at her own cheek. "What I want to know"
    said Vera "Is how you made your Dad suddenly come
    to life like that Sarah, what happened?" Sue and
    Sarah giggled then Sue gave Sarah a nod. "Well
    Mom, I did as Sue suggested, and jammed three
    fingers in his bottom, that woke him up!"
    ------------------------------------------------ ---
    --------------
    END CHAPTER
    Epilogue
    Dave not only forgave Jack for taking his daughters
    cherry, he thanked him for it. "To be honest Jack
    I couldn't have found the courage to do it, but
    once I knew she was happy with it done I reasoned
    that as long as I didn't coerce her and Vera was
    always around I could live with it. I must say
    your Susan is a wonder isn't she" Jack smiled and
    gave a nod. He certainly had to agree with that.

    ------------------------------------------------ ---

  67. Which don't even compare to Qt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even the primary Gtk-- developer says Qt is nicer than the Gtk bindings on Linux.com.

  68. BZZZZT - maybe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If it's sold for a good price and packaged nicely, then maybe you're right. The millions of morons out there who made MS what it is today, love to buy nicely packaged easy to use programs. Price is important, because thay love to spend too.

  69. Re:D'oh! scooped again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please show me your DOS programs written in 1980.

    Not to nitpick, just to nitpick.

  70. Re:GNOME fork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nautilus will be the default file manager in Gnome 2. Just who do you consider the "Gnome team" to be anyway? Gnome is being contributed to by a whole lot of people, and I would certainly count the talents at Eazel as part of the Gnome team because of their significant contributions.

  71. Re:Unfortunately I would have to agree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I only use it because my machine isn't supported by the bastards in Redmond and never will"

    win95 runs great on my 486-dx66 12m ram 450mb hd
    linux however drags my p100 down to a crawl

  72. Re:D'oh! scooped again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BTW, one of the employees on the project is Andy Hertzfeld. It will therefore NOT suck.

    Bitchen, so how close are we to having a better interface then the Mac? You know those guys gota have ideas Apple never let them use.

  73. Thank god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hate GNOME. Sawmill and E are not done (useable without screen redraw problems and or obscenely new hardware) yet. And GNOME is ugly.

    KDE is not much prettier.

    Apple people == pretty
    AOL people == money

    Yum.

  74. Re:Look for something amazing from this project by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Agreed, OS/2 is still the standard for all GUIs. Nothing comes even close. Interestingly enough, OS/2 WPS is already 10 years old.

  75. Mouse Geeks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Something that most people on /. and most Linux fans in general seem to be missing is that you can be a geek who really knows his way around computers and still like GUIs.
    I've started using a Mac when I was six years old (back in 87) and I started writing some _very_ simple Programs in Basic, HyperTalk and Pascal soon after that and switched to C++ when I was about 13... Now I also have a PC with BeOS, Win98, Win2000 and (of course) Linux...
    MacOS is the only OS where I don't have bash, but the point is, I DON'T MISS IT, because I like that GUI (If I need automation, I use AppleScript). GNOME's GFM on the other hand is enough to drive a Mac geek to the command line...
    The Mac GUI did _not_ dumb me down. I had to learn the details of the system in order to write new apps, _not_ in order to administer my system.

  76. Re:How they make money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I rubbed my magic bunny, and I discovered they are planning on making money by selling a subscription service that works as a plugin to Natilus (the new GNOME 2.0 file manager) to allow remote backups, remote address book storage, and other "goodies".

    Of course my bunny could be wrong, but it hasn't been yet!

  77. Re:This is what Linux needs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But what if you have bad aim?

  78. Re:Windows is NOT easy to use. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes... I do want a consitent interface.
    I would rather press command-w to close
    every window and some weird alt-f4 combo.
    Most laptops don't even have a break between
    their function keys so it can be hard to
    consisitenly hit f4.

    The consitency in Mac's keyboard shortcuts
    is one of the reasons it's a great ui. It's
    got plenty of problems, like always having to
    switch between the keyboard and the mouse
    but overall it's much easier to learn than
    any other interface. (I'm looking forward
    to controlling AQUA via perl binding in OSX)

    The mac vs. pc ui debate is getting to be like the
    democrates vs republicans.... not much
    difference.

  79. Re:Windows is NOT easy to use. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



    Have you ever tried to use MS notepade?

    Control-S to save ... doesn't work.
    Control-A to select all ... doesn't work.

    If you tell it to word wrap then it think's
    you've changed the file and prompts to save.

    When I go to save something does it try to
    sae to the desktop or my documents ? no
    it'll save the thing in the /windows directory
    along with thousands of unorganized and often
    over written files and dll's.

    MS Office apps aren't even consistent between
    each other!

  80. TWM Rules. I will not be argued with !!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Why bother when TWM has been ruling the desktop for years. What's wrong with TWM ? Nothing.

    Just give me TWM or TVTWM and 20 Xterms and I'm happy. Get rid of all that complexity......

    dmg

  81. Re:Hertzfeld by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So do you think Darin Adler should be forbidden to write production code too?

  82. Re:Look for something amazing from this project by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just because something is easy to use doesn't have to mean it can't be powerful and flexible. I consider myself a experienced Linux user, and I would love to have better designed user interfaces for all the apps I use on a everyday basis. Everything can be improved and refined.

  83. Re:Middle-click to paste text in X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the quicken thing is a setting in the preferences menu. they kept older assignments for CXV because earlier quicken's used those keys for different tasks. just go to preferences and check "Use standard windows commands for CTRL-CXV"

  84. Re:danger... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Another thing "mere mortals" want is an all-graphics interface; everything point and click. Hmm, I can't see how something like:

    rm `ls -l|awk '{print $3}'|grep "juser"`

    Well, that's pretty simple when you consider what you're trying to achieve rather than how you've implemented it. What you've described is a use case, the system you're using to achieve it is the shell. If you abstract from the use cases the common functionality, you end up with a fairly small feature set:

    • object attributes (e.g. names, dates, owners)
    • full regexp search/replace facility
    • object operations (e.g. remove)
    • data structures (e.g. lists of attributes)

    Starting from an object model it'd take me a couple of hours at the most to write an GUI program (MFC or Swing) that lets you manage file systems by selectable attributes, with online help. Hell, I'll even make it look like Explorer for you. No-one seems to have combined regular expressions with a GUI shell yet in a common product, I don't know why not because it's not hard. You can even dumb it down with an English->Regexp translator.

  85. Just an idea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What if someone wrote a Windows style gui for Linux? Then everyone could use whatever OS they requrired, without re-learning single/double click etc?

    Just a thought...

    1. Re:Just an idea... by HaKn5La5H · · Score: 1

      Isn't that what FVWM'95 is?

  86. Re:Windows is NOT easy to use. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    - What's the key combination to print something in Windows?
    Ctrl+P
    - What's the key combination to close a window?
    Alt+Space+C or Alt+F4
    - What's the key combination to save a file?
    Ctrl+S
    - Where does Game X install itself in the Start menu?
    GameX=Games\GameX
    :-)

  87. Now *that's* funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My mom cannot use Macintoshes. She finds the GUI to be horribly counter-intuitive.[1] And they think making GNOME Mac-like is going to help her?

    [1] She's far from the only one. The whole metaphor of computer as desktop just doesn't make sense. I use a computer to do the things my desktop can't do. And furthermore, Apple's implementation of it is brain-dead. If I want something that's on my desktop, I don't have to drop it into the trash can before I can pick it up and walk away. Why should I do that (and why should I intuitively think to do that) with removable media?

  88. Re:Windows is NOT easy to use. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    haha, you want an inconsistant inferface? lets talk about some of the window managers that run on X.

  89. Too bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    GNOME is not stable enough to run a fever.

    They should have based it on a mature environment like KDE.

  90. Re:The New Microsoft is Born by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    We don't want to be in business, we want to sit at home and hack and watch DVDs and BS on /.

    thank you

  91. It's here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's been in development over a year and is shipping now. See it here: www.inux.com Ed Centanni CTO iNUX inc. ecentanni@inux.com

  92. Re:Duplication of Effort? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think the fact that little to none of either GNOME or KDE has been adopted by the other project is telling of what will happen with Eazel. It doesn't MATTER that they can take what they want; people are so hot on being islands of innovation nowadays that they won't take stuff even if they'd be better off if they did.

    Eazel will be yet another fork.

  93. GUI fm recursion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In windows explorer, right click on any directory and select Find...
    Enter your search requirements and press OK to recurse through the directory you selected
    Sort the results as mentioned in the previous post
    Rubber-band/select needed files for deletion or copying or whatever
    KDE has a FindFiles dialog box that looks similar to that of Windows

    1. Re:GUI fm recursion by KGBear · · Score: 1

      OK, now try to put that into a script that takes the username as an argument so you don't have to do all that mouse dragging every time you need to do this. While you're at it, make your script be careful not to delete open files. Throw in a switch that will e-mail the user to let him know his files have been deleted. If you manage to do all this in a graphical interface, then please find a way to schedule the thing and make it also act only on files older than 1 week. When a GUI is able to do that (and other arbitrary similar tasks) I'll retire my command line prompt.

    2. Re:GUI fm recursion by KGBear · · Score: 1
      You're right, of course. We should be have both tools and use each where it's the strongest. What I really fear is the tendency to take things to extremes. The Windows GUI is not bad, but Microsoft style insistence in trying to make it impossible for Joe User to make a mistake, besides being self-defeating, make things harder for us Joe Programmers. That's what I fear might happen to Linux if we try to make it too user friendly.

      Granted, Gnome and KDE are crappy interfaces, but I'll have a crappy interface that still lets me do it the old fashioned way if I want to than a shiny new one that insulates me from the computer.

    3. Re:GUI fm recursion by radish · · Score: 1


      But that's not the point. If you wanted something to be parameterised, send emails, run automatically etc, then of course you'd use a script. There's no reason for not having a scripting tool alongside a GUI...I could write what you want in Perl, Python, sh, cmd whatever. And that could be on NT, or Solaris, Linux etc. My original post was simply to say that for one off tasks as would be performed by JoeUser, you can do it easily and quickly. If you want to start writing programs, then you'd get a programmer to do it!!

      I do not advocate a GUI as the only way to be...surely everyone can understand that the different approaches are better for different situations and we should be able to use both? That means we need a world class GUI (and IMHO NT and OSX both beat anything I have seen on Linix or Solaris) and also a world class shell/scripting tools. NT has bash and Perl, but the implementations are somewhat behind their unix versions, so I'd say the *nix win that round. Now bring the 2 together and we have a winner...

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

  94. Re:Hertzfeld by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, Andy can afford to pay a crack team of software engineers to make his code production quality now.

  95. Re:Gnome unstable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have never found anything sexy abut Microsofts product. They are so... boring in look and functionality. My biggest problem is to make use of those darn windows, that is hard to move, impossible to ignore and close, nonconfiguable... Give me X -

  96. Re:This is fucking pathetic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    EAT MY FISH. why should people be forced to learn something thats non intuitive? because you are a lazy programmer?

  97. This is fucking pathetic by RJ11 · · Score: 0

    Seriously, why do we need to cater to people who refuse to learn? Instead we need to motivate people to go out and learn on their own. 90% of the people in this world have the mentality that because someone else knows something that they don't, it is that person's duty to do everything for them. Instead we need to get people to start learning on their own so that they can use what exists already. "Give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach a man to fish and he eats for a lifetime." What happens right now is, people think that since the man knows how to fish and they don't, he "owes" them enough fish for them to get by.

    1. Re:This is fucking pathetic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So, do you catch all your own fish? Grow your own vegetables? I assume you don't. I suspect you have certain expectation that the supermarket will have the food you want and that it will be easy to find and purchase.

      You may be particularly adept at finding your way around a computer. Others find farming, acting, writing, teaching, building, healing, cooking, etc. comes more naturally. I sincerely doubt you're spending a lot of time learning all the nuances of those aspects of life so why should they have to deal with learning all your skills.

      Get over yourself and stop equating computer knowledge with superior learning skills. There are some very bright people who haven't a clue about file managers. Why should they spend their time figuring it out when they could benefit society more by doing what they do best?

    2. Re:This is fucking pathetic by RJ11 · · Score: 1

      You're not understanding what I am saying. I am sure that you tried to read the man pages, and that's a step that most new users don't even take. They see the command prompt and panic because they realize that they're not sure what to do and are therefore very uncomfortable with it. I am not talking about the people who try really hard but fail in UNDERSTANDING the docs, I'm talking about the people who make no effort to even LOCATE the docs. These people are in the majority, and making everything easier to use isn't going to help anything because these people will still be lost.

    3. Re:This is fucking pathetic by RJ11 · · Score: 1

      I'm glad _someone_ can understand what I'm saying. By clicking the mouse for the user, we're not helping them or ourselves in the long run. We're only encouraging people to become less self-sufficient.

    4. Re:This is fucking pathetic by RJ11 · · Score: 1

      Furthermore, how the hell does this qualify as trolling????

    5. Re:This is fucking pathetic by RPoet · · Score: 1

      Well couldn't you say the same about driving a car? How intuitive is that? If people had the same mentality about car driving, they'd expect to be seated in the car by some kind of lift, having the doors automatically shut, and then be put into some artificial sleep and then be awoken to sweet music at the time of arrival.

      --
      "Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
    6. Re:This is fucking pathetic by deadl0ck · · Score: 1

      Well, cars have automatic transmissions now, that seems to make driving a bit more intutive.

      If you compare a car from the 20's or 30' I think you will see that they have become more user friendly. Should we still be out in the front of the vehicle turning a crank to get our car started?

      I'm still waiting for a car that I can push the remote button to start it from my keychain so it will be warmed up by the time I get to it. :)




      Power brakes, antilock brakes, starter motors, Auto transmission, power steering, etc..
      --

      --
      --
    7. Re:This is fucking pathetic by kevin+lyda · · Score: 2

      the last comment is the best. "[run windows bins w/o] something idiotic like vmware or wine"

      right.

      the only other choice left is wabi.

      here's a little clue. to drive a car you need to learn how do do it. you know now, right? ok, now go drive a semi. or drive a car in a different country - maybe even one where they drive on the other side. drive a forklift. drive a motorcycle.

      they all require training, and all they accomplish is moving you from point a to point b.

      think of windows as steak and potatoes. think of linux as a stew. and think of your skills as a knife and fork. yes, you can eat your linux stew with a knife and fork, but it's hard. it would be easier to just use a spoon.

      finally consider that most people on the planet have never used a computer - it's just as easy for them to get the spoon as the fork and knife. and since they generally don't have a lot of money, which os is the right price for them?

      --
      US Citizen living abroad? Register to vote!
    8. Re:This is fucking pathetic by Cheerio+Boy · · Score: 2

      And with general society today your point would be...?

      Unfortunately this is the sort of thinking that the "unwashed masses" (sorry clichet filter kicked in) want in their day to day lives. The current spate of government and other similiar groups have this as a main agenda on their tickets because they want to control everything. If they force people into this mode then they get to do that - no questions asked.

      Aren't you glad we're at least asking questions about what should be? ;-)

      The Tick - "Spoon!"

      --

      "Bah!" - Dogbert
    9. Re:This is fucking pathetic by 8Complex · · Score: 3

      I speak as a person who has tried to use Linux for everyday use and went BACK to Windows...

      If you made it easy to learn, then that is one thing, if you make it completely easy, that is yet another. It seems to be that noone in the Linux community (and I mean NOONE) is attempting to make a GOOD set of troubleshooting tools and a help system that is at least decent. 'man' only goes so far, and is rather pathetic all things considered. man will tell you everything in the world about the topic you asked about... LITERALLY. I've never seen a man page that explained what the topic was in any small amount of space. It rambles and rambles until you have no desire to do whatever you were trying to in the first place.

      As for making the desktop easier to use, I'm all for it. How about support for fonts that actually look good without having to run in circles to get a font server running and then somehow tieing it into the desktop environment or window manager (something I've given up on several times). How about a configuration tool that actually works? linuxconf sure doesn't. Redhat's control-panel is a start but it is still lacking something... like maybe words telling you what button does what. Who was the genius who thought of that one? He must've been really impressed with Tooltips...

      Back onto the topic of learning... Don't you realize that some people out here in the real world don't have time to sit and learn how to use console-based configuration utils that don't work in the end to set up a couple of NIC's that don't work after 2 weeks of trying? Or maybe you'd just like to tell those people that have video problems in X that they are idiots because they just have to change settings in this .conf file and restart X. Or how about those people that can't get hardware working because Linux's precious kernel doesn't support it? -- but a module does!! Well how do you install the module? Recompile your kernel? You're kidding me, right?

      I got another one for ya... How about those people that go out and get situated on Linux, and get it working correctly, and want some of this free software they keep hearing about. How are you going to explain to them that they will have to un-tar.gz it and then compile it themselves and THEN install it? But wait, there's more! Libraries are missing, out-of-date, or even worse - they're NEWER then the source needs to compile!! What then? Get the needed libraries, compile them, install them (if there aren't any more conflicts, that is) and then finally go back to compiling that program, and then installing it? That is a LOT of work for something equalled in Windows by clicking an .EXE file and following instructions on where it will be installed and watching it make icons so you can actually find the program to use it (which, I'd like to add, the install scripts don't give you a chance to tell it where to put anything in Linux).

      You want to complain about people unwilling to learn? I think you should recompile your brain's kernel so it's not so one-sided.

      I before said that I left Linux for Windows... I will go back as soon as Linux is decent to use for everyday use (and maybe when I can run binaries from Windows under it natively rather then using something idiotic like VMWare or WINE).

      - 8Complex

  98. I like Gnome by bubbasatan · · Score: 0

    All this after Apple canned the aqua theme?

    --
    Windows is going the way of phlogiston...
  99. fuck that by oz81dog · · Score: 0

    i think i'm going to be sick... is gnome to tough for you, what the hell, my mother (and father for that matter) didn't seem to have any trouble figuring out what was up with Gnome and KDE, and neither of them know a damn thing about computers. These people really do cater to the lowest possible denominator of human culture... if you're that dumb, get a typewritter, get off the god-damn internet and quite your bitchin'.

  100. The New Microsoft is Born by myxlplix · · Score: 0

    If this is a good GUI, then I can easily see Linux turn into the next Microsoft. Ease of use is the key to selling alot, which means market share, which means power...

    1. Re:The New Microsoft is Born by um...+Lucas · · Score: 1

      I'll disagree with you, then! :)

      If switching between OSes could be as simple as it was for Mac users to switch to completely different CPU architecturers, a compelling argument could be made to switch to Linux.

      If Linux had seemless compatibility with 100% of Windows applications, but the underlying OS was much more stable, people would flock to Linux in droves. Developers could then create native, Linux versions of their applications as they saw where the real demand was. And if people were already using linux in order and running windows applications on it, they'ed be very likely to begin investigating "native" linux applications that took further advantage of the services provided by the OS.

    2. Re:The New Microsoft is Born by um...+Lucas · · Score: 2

      A good GUI means next to nothing until WINE is more up to the task of emulating windows... Pretty interfaces don't win desktops, plentiful, usable applications do. Witness Windows 3.1: Aweful in terface compared to Macs and OS/2... Incredibly unstable. Lots more apps. Guess who won the battle for the desktop?

    3. Re:The New Microsoft is Born by molog · · Score: 2
      A good GUI means next to nothing until WINE is more up to the task of emulating windows... Pretty interfaces don't win desktops, plentiful, usable applications do. Witness Windows 3.1: Aweful in terface compared to Macs and OS/2... Incredibly unstable. Lots more apps. Guess who won the battle for the desktop?

      I have to disagree. Lets look at a few things. First of all emulating windows never did anyone any good. OS/2 emulated Windows 3.1 functionality (I was able to run pretty much any 3.1 app that I put on OS/2 Warp)I'm not saying that OS/2 died because it ran Windows apps. I'm saying that People aren't going to come to Linux just because they can run Windows apps. They have Windows to do that for them already. Linux needs easy to use apps that will bring people over to Linux. If we have to rely on running Windows apps then we have lost. Linux either stands alone or it doesn't stand.


      Molog

      So Brain, what are we doing tonight?

      --
      So Linus, what are we going to do tonight?
      The same thing we do every night Tux. Try to take over the world!
  101. Um by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Any idiot can come up with an easier interface than what Linux has now. But can they make one that my mother could install? Will they handle LIBC and other library incompatibilities?

    1. Re:Um by lubricated · · Score: 1

      no sorry you are full of shit. libc incompatablities will fuck up your system only if you are trying to recompile libc. or you delete libc. My default installed system can run either libc5 or glibc stuff. so how can installing a GUI fuck my system up due to libc incompatability. Unless they are made by some moron who decides to override my libc. No one is going to do that. Thats a windows thing.

      --
      It has been statistically shown that helmets increase the risk of head injury.
    2. Re:Um by lubricated · · Score: 1

      ok then hot shot. go ahead and design one. As far as installing it. I think redhat's and mandrakes installers do a fine job. and stop spreading fud about libc incompatabilities. It's not an issue.

      --
      It has been statistically shown that helmets increase the risk of head injury.
    3. Re:Um by Nastard · · Score: 1

      godd point.

      as it stands now, my mother can *use* kde. i just bring down the top bar and sidepush the the bottom and it looks and feel enough like windows to keep her happy. staroffice also helps this.

      the real questions are'
      -can my mother install this ?
      -better yet, can she reinstall it when needed ?
      -can she easily *un*install it ?
      -will it run on her 486 ?
      -i *cam* use sandpaper to wipe my ass, but it wont be comfortable. so even if she can use this, how comfortable will she be ?

      just a few thoughts

  102. Re:Checkout Berline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Berlin not bloated??
    There's nothing in berlin's design wich makes it inherently more streamlined. Rather the opposite, with CORBA being the base (every widget is a CORBA object). And i don't think that the relative small team behind Berlin will do better than Xfree in that respect.

    But it's certainly exciting. Berlin's strength isn't efficiency, but power. Imagine applying arbitrary linear transforms on whatever graph node you wish. Want to rotate your netscape window 20 degrees? Do it. Want to zoom your terminal about 5%. Do it. Everything can be antialiased an sub-pixel-positioned.

  103. More screenshots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
  104. Re:Great idea.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Wrong about Netscape on Linux. Wrong. Wrong. NS is more unstable on Win32, especially if you haven't removed Internet Exploder.
    Yes, NS has been incredibly unstable on Redhat and other distros in the past. This could be traced to some dependencies being mishandled by RH's supplied packages (75dpi fonts). Followup on your installs and you'll see that those packages have been updated--for just this reason--for a while now. I use NS 4.7 and it can run all day long on Linux without crashing. And my fonts aren't ugly at all. In fact, Netscape using XFS +truetype fonts (some of which are freely downloadable from Microsoft) has unquestionably better looking fonts that Netscape + TrueType fonts on Macintosh OS-8.x.(Don't know about OS-9's trutype performance) Mozilla isn't going change squat about plug-in support on Linux--only the spread of the Linux platform and knocking a few heads can fix that. Mozilla may help in that regard by being componetized, something the Netscape management refused to provide before, and being componetized, will be used in other people's products.
    As for financial apps, well if Moneydance doesn't cut it, you could go online like businesses do. Free online, very comprehensive, personal finance management for your Mom is available from FNCentral If she can handle Quicken she can handle this.

  105. I just hope it runs INSTEAD of X, not on top of X. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    X is the blue whale of software bloat. We don't need new window managers running on top of X. We need a streamlined replacement for X itself.

  106. Re:Gnome unstable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Go to the Gnome website. It's in their mission statement. THERE IS NO DEFAULT WINDOW MANAGER! It's just that distros like RH default to E, and E was the first fully GNOME-compliant WM (probably thanks to the fact that Raster was working at RH at the time. :^) Just my $0.02

  107. What about the fathers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    > "your mother could use."

    I've seen this on slashdot quite often, people talking about stuff "your mother" or "your grandmother" could use. I've never given it a second thought....until...

    A few days someone (male, but not computer geek) told me about attending a meeting with a presentation of a some new gadget. "The guy was always saying stuff like 'easy enough for your mother', and when he was talking about skilled users, suddenly it was a he!" he said to me. It was clueless, he thought, and I tend to agree. If someone isn't a computer geek, computers can be hard to use, but it isn't generally harder for women than for men. Still, we tend to make this a gender issue by (almost) always using out poor female relatives as worst-case user examples.

    Are we techies often unconsiously gender biased like this? I'm afraid the answer is probably yes.

    1. Re:What about the fathers? by LRJ · · Score: 1

      I really don't think the statement is aimed at women in particular. It's more of a child/parent relationship thing. Most (not all) people I know have closer relationships with their mothers and thus seem more willing to help them out. Also, alot of fathers try and hide the fact that they don't know something where as women (mothers) usually don't have a problem asking for help thus their offspring are more opt to help them.

      --
      LRJ
    2. Re:What about the fathers? by Tise · · Score: 1
      I'm so glad I wasn't the only one to notice this. It especially bothered me because

      MY mother can (and does) use any damn OS she wants to just fine, thank you very much!

      I've taught both males & females how to use computers and/or new software. I'd rather teach a woman to use a new OS than a man - she might listen to all of what I have to say and even -gasp!- read the release notes.

      I worked at an insurance company in '87 where one manager had the entire secretarial pool's typewriters removed and replaced with boxes running the Wang VS Word Processing System. Over the weekend. They all learned how to use it on the fly, without any training. They had to retrieve a few typewriters for forms, but they actually managed to do all their day-to-day work without slowing down enough for managers & partners to notice. Can you imagine? The thing is, a top-of-the-line electronic typewriter was/is far more complicated and user-unfriendly than most computers (rather like using somebody else's proprietary DOS-based system without a monitor), and nobody questions a woman's ability to use a typewriter anymore!

      On behalf of myself and all the other women who as Secretaries/Administrative Assistants/Receptionists etc. had to use an appalling assortment of early word processing systems, I say these guys (yes, I used that word on purpose) better stop and think.

      --
      Life is a banquet, and most poor suckers are starving to death!
  108. Re:Ramiro Estrugo by caferace · · Score: 1

    One and the same. Old x-head from within Netscape.

  109. Middle-click to paste text in X by J.+J.+Ramsey · · Score: 1

    In X, you middle-click to paste highlighted text, or if you have a two-button mouse, press the right and left buttons at the same time.

    1. Re:Middle-click to paste text in X by mangu · · Score: 1
      In X, you middle-click to paste highlighted text, or if you have a two-button mouse, press the right and left buttons at the same time.

      I tried it and it worked, thanks. Come to think of it, I had done this before, running DECwindows in VAX-VMS.

      Which only goes to show my point, it's more or less trivial in Windows, the accelerator key combinations may vary, but you always have it available in the File menu.

      I'm all for Open Source, but I wonder if we aren't illuding ourselves. Why do developers go to so many different directions? Why create new UIs and APIs? Why not improve the existing ones, instead of starting from scratch?

    2. Re:Middle-click to paste text in X by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2
      In X, you middle-click to paste highlighted text, or if you have a two-button mouse, press the right and left buttons at the same time.

      But what if you want to paste something other than the highlighted text? What if, for example, you highlighted some block of text, copied it to the clipboard, and then want to replace some other block of text with the copied text, by highlighting that other block of text and then pasting the copied text?

      Paste-current-selection is not, the apparent belief of some UNIX/X users nonwithstanding, the be-all and end-all of cut-and-paste in UNIX/X.

      The problem he had with the KDE editor and Netscape probably stems from Qt not pasting to the damn clipboard; if a Qt application (such as a KDE application) does a paste with a Qt call, it pastes to the primary selection, rather than the clipboard, so that applications that implement "Paste" (not "paste current selection", "Paste") as "paste clipboard" don't work with Qt applications.

      I have no idea why the folks at Troll Tech decided to do this. It has apparently, on at least two occasions, violated the principle of least surprise (the person to whom you're responding didn't get what they expected, and somebody in another Slashdot thread ages ago had a similar problem, which is what prompted me to go look at the Qt source and discover that it paid no attention to the X clipboard). GTK+, and probably at least some other toolkits (e.g., Motif, that being what the current Netscape uses), behave correctly here. I consider this an example of the sort of inconsistency the person about which the person to whom you're replying was complaining.

      (On the other hand, Quicken 2000 for Windows, for some unknown reason, doesn't use Ctrl-C/Ctrl-X/Ctrl-V for copy/cut/paste, so UNIX/X isn't the only platform with applications that sometimes don't quite match other stuff running on the platform. It's also irritating that the "OK" box in some dialogue boxes in Quicken, such as the one for Split items, doesn't seem to be activated by the key - that key just takes you to the next line, which makes some sense, but I just want to be able to enter the entire damn transaction without taking my hands off the damn keyboard.)

      Yes, using the middle button for paste-current-selection is, in many circumstances, a workaround, and often obviates the need for cut-and-paste or copy-and-paste - but I wouldn't assume that it always obviates the need for it.

  110. What about apps for Be? by J.+J.+Ramsey · · Score: 1

    "no they don't have to use linux, or an inferior
    OS, just suggest Be to them, and all is good."

    AFAIK, Be doesn't have very many apps, and that may be a downer to regular Joes. Bear in mind that I say this as one who's been occasionally curious about the BeOS, but never gotten around to using it, mainly because of the worry I've described, so someone who actually uses the OS part or most of the time might correct me here.

    1. Re:What about apps for Be? by David+Roundy · · Score: 1
      AFAIK, Be doesn't have very many apps, and that may be a downer to regular Joes.

      I have used BeOS (although admittedly that was a year or two ago), and I'm afraid I would hesitate to recommend it. It really didn't have many apps available, and since I don't use word processors I don't know if those it had were any good. But you make a good point.

      If BeOS becomes a viable option (as far as availability of software goes), then it would be a good thing to recommend, although the Be people didn't seem to have put much thought into the user interface (no guidelines) at the time I had looked into it. This makes as much a difference as anything.

  111. Ramiro Estrugo by Dave+Fiddes · · Score: 1

    Is that the same guy who used to work for Netscape on Mozilla...?

    If so there's hope for the project ;)

  112. Re:Look for something amazing from this project by Geoff · · Score: 1
    As the lounge singer said, "the thrill is gone, baby."

    Lounge singer? BB King is a lounge singer?

    Heresy!

    --

    Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. -- Pablo Picasso

  113. Re: Oh, brother... by Mouse · · Score: 1

    2) It is NOT being developed by Apple or AOL. These are a bunch of people who used to work for Apple and AOL, but neither company is itself directly involved.

    ... snip ...

    4) Once again, this is NOT Apple doing this. But I wouldn't be surprised if some of the people from the now-defunct Human Interface team there are now working on it.

    I believe the article said former employess of Apple and AOL which implies that Apple and AOL are probably not involved. I fail to see where the misunderstandings are in these point.

    Speaking of creating misunderstandings, the speculation in point four could very well lead to far worse the misunderstandings than those potentially laid out in the original ariticle. Who is to say that any of these people has ever designed a UI? I didn't see a list of resumes on the web page reporting the projects to which Apple/AOL projects they have worked.

  114. Re:You don't get it. by Enahs · · Score: 1

    My wife uses Linux all the time, and she's about as computer-literate as the chair she sits on. :^) The thing is, I set it up (with less fuss than I had doing a manual install of Windows.

    >4.Get rid of GNU. Yeah, that's right, drop the
    >command line utilities that you know and love,
    >and lose all that
    >power. If granny can't remember her password
    >how's she supposed to remember arcane commands?

    No, no, no. My wife doesn't use these commands; yet, they're still there. How's that? She uses commands she *needs* to use, usually KDE/GNOME commands, with some commercial stuff like WordPerfect thrown in for good measure. I'm the one that usually does some voodoo on the machine with command line tools.

    So how would you propose getting the machine going when something catastrophic happens-mimic the Mac, and make a graphical user interface System floppy/CD? This could be done--without eliminating command-line tools. I see absolutely no reason for eliminating them--merely make easy-to-use graphical alternatives to them.

    >5.The gui must be the OS. This means, goodbye X.
    >Most of the newbies who ask me for help request
    >help with
    >setting up X (well, networking comes close). X
    >must disappear, or it must become so much a part
    >of Linux
    >that it's just there, and it just works, no
    >matter what video card, RAMDac, or whatever the
    >user has on their
    >machine.

    Well, my suspicion was right...and again, I say: no, no, no. The main problem is the fact that video cards aren't that well-supported. In fact, on distros such as Red Hat, usually if your hardware is supported, it's fairly simple to set up (simpler, in some cases, than getting your card going under Windows--I know my Voodoo3 was. :^)

    Simply making X--or any other graphical system--part of the OS, as you suggest, would bloat the kernel and *raise* the level of complexity of the system.

    And as far as updates go, I've got a Mandrake 6.1 system, with a 7.0 CD in the mail. Whenever I want updates, I just run a nice little graphical manager that basically runs RPM for me. Sweeeeeeeeeet. :^) Basically nearly as simple as Windoze.

    You make an interesting point--it would be advantageous to offer installations that automatically login a particular user. Such a system would necessarily open up security holes galore, but, then again, it's the same story on a number of OSs. Red Hat, Debian, Corel, Mandrake, are you listening? This is a fairly trivial change to init scripts, AFAIK. You'd need some way of SUing to a default user account (it'd still be nice to have individual users--perhaps model this on Microsoft's "just type in your name, optional password, and have at it" approach? Then the system would have to start up X, and hopefully X was properly configured under the install program.

    Maybe distros should have new install floppies--one for the initial install, of course, but one that could also be inserted (yes, we in the know don't have to have this functionality, but still :^) to do autodetection of new hardware.

    This also brings up a question, which is sure to be controversial: what sort of level of complexity would it require to use Winelib to connect an X server (such as a modified Xfb server) to Windoze drivers, and is there much interest in this? Yes, I know, non-Intellers: this idea sucks for the Mac, Amiga, Alpha, and any other kind of alternative box you can think of. It's just a blue-sky dream at this point.

    Just my $0.50. :^)

    --
    Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.
  115. Re:I just hope it runs INSTEAD of X, not on top of by Andy · · Score: 1

    You should ask yourself why X has been around so long, and when so much activity focuses on interfaces and so little on fundemental windowing software. Because X is the right thing. There little left to add. It is not bloated. My Xlib has 391 calls, and half of those are rarely used.

  116. RANT: You could not be more freaking wrong. by planet_hoth · · Score: 1
    Your long, rambling post has me, frankly, baffled and confused. You seem to be worried that there could be negative consequenses to this project. Yet the only possible downside to this project that you mention would be if they ask money for it and/or the project fragments the (already crowded) Linux desktop software "market". Well, since Eazel's software will be basically extra components for GNOME, an exisitng desktop environment (or "object model" as you called them,) and they will be releasing under the GPL and making their money elsewhere, I think we can safely disregard most of your post.

    Also, there's a particular train of thought which really irritated me. Allow me to refute it:

    , but what happens when JoeRandomNewbie loads up his pretty desktop and it proceeds to segfault? What if XDM drops him to a standard login prompt like when Windows can't load all of its dll's?

    How does a having a CLI available *hinder* an new user? Don't disable it, just hide it from them.

    If you've got missing/corrupted system files under windows, and the GUI won't start up, you are just as screwed as if you were running Linux. And at least with Linux, you still have the possibility of getting something productive done... in text mode (lynx, pine, etc.) Hell, with a mac, if the GUI won't start up you are dead in the water. Your assertion that a CLI hinders new/untrained users is invalid: in all cases (windows, linux, mac) the non-techie user will simply end up calling tech support.

    The CLI doesn't hurt anything if you don't use it, and it's indispensible to have as a backup.

    --

  117. Linuxconf and text files by planet_hoth · · Score: 1

    I thought one of the selling points of Linuxconf over other admin utils was that linuxconf DOES allow you to also edit the config files by hand!? I jump from linuxconf to text files and back again all the time, with no negative side effects.

    --

  118. Re:hope they do it right... by jmcmurry · · Score: 1

    I've seen way too many monstrous Linux desktop screenshots to think of Linux as a home to "quiet, neutral [desktop] environment(s)."

    As a professional, you can switch right now to whatever desktop environment you like. Just be sure your professional apps will run once you get there.

    Aqua isn't "insulting." And you've never used it to do any work, so you can't really say what it's like. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't want 3" square icons, but I'm also pretty sure that they're not mandatory. Think Demo.

    I bet getting involved with Eazel's project is as simple as clicking.

  119. Re:Unless it comes with a one button mouse. by rnielsen · · Score: 1
    Schools standardize on windows to help students use what they'll one day use

    They also use it because (at least in Australia) Microsoft gives them a folder of about 60 CDs full of all kinds of wonderful Microsoft products. It's good to assimilate them young.

  120. Re:Gnome unstable by fade · · Score: 1

    E can be made to operate lightly by disabling some of the more intense eye-candy. I have it running /w gnome on a 486 laptop that only has 40m of ram and it's just as responsive on that box as windowmaker or afterstep, and it only really hits swap once more than three netscape sessions are open.

  121. Re:Windows is NOT easy to use. by datazone · · Score: 1

    >Go between KDE, GNOME, E, Nautilis, FWM....

    Desktop Environment, Desktop Environment, WindowManager(plus), Browser(file, web, etc), WindowManager...

    Now what were you saying?

    --
    Its spelt "L-I-N-U-X", but pronunced as "Free Beer"
  122. Re:This is what Linux needs by datazone · · Score: 1

    Oh my GOD! they killed kernel!

    You BASTARDS!!!!

    --
    Its spelt "L-I-N-U-X", but pronunced as "Free Beer"
  123. Re:Windows is NOT easy to use. by datazone · · Score: 1

    how hard confusing can it be to go to a projects website to read what an application does? i guess its easier to just sit there and make assumtions...

    its called "choice," if you don't like it, thats also your "choice" :)

    isn't that great? you don't pay a penny for it, yet people complain about how so many things there are...

    /me shakes his head
    (if only slashdot supported irc commands)

    --
    Its spelt "L-I-N-U-X", but pronunced as "Free Beer"
  124. X != Linux Re:Oh, brother... by jlv · · Score: 1
    GNOME and KDE are both making good progress towards bringing a good, usable GUI to Linux
    Aren't GNOME and KDE are both making good progress towards bringing a good, usable GUI to X? Neither is Linux-specific in any way, shape, or form.
    1. Re:X != Linux Re:Oh, brother... by costas · · Score: 2

      For those that haven't found the link: Nautilus.eazel.com. From their changelog it sounds like they're developing (or planning to in v1.1) system administration stuff. So, while GTK is platform-agnostic, I am thinking Eazel is focusing exclusively on Linux. OTOH, it will be GPL'ed, so you can port their tools...



      engineers never lie; we just approximate the truth.

  125. Re:Oh, brother... by Goner · · Score: 1

    Also, if this leads to a better wm-spec, the world will be a kinder, happier place. Where all programs and windowmanagers can get along and share their bells and whistles, creating a joyous cacophonic r(o)ar.

    But, I think some of upper management is still trying to shake this Linux thing off. I can't wait to show them this, just to make them lose sleep. Oh and now open source projects with $10 mil. in VC off the bat... that's what I'm talkin' about.

  126. Re:Windows is NOT easy to use. by Phil+Wilkins · · Score: 1

    > - What's the key combination to close a window?

    > Depends on what you mean. Alt F-C to close a document. Alt-F4 to close the entire application.

    Ctrl-F4 to close a window, surely? Well, mostly...

    > - Where does Game X install itself in the Start menu?

    > Usually under the game name. Where did apache choose to install itself? :)

    Or under the publishers name, then the game name, then a menu with the help file, uninstall, half a million web links, and buried somewhere in there, the game, in one of a variety of modes.

  127. Forget my Mother by gelfling · · Score: 1

    Hell I'd like an interface my 'technical' manager could use without coming into my office every few hours for help. Just an install program that didn't require you to make any decisions whatsoever would be nice because people won't make those decisions, they'll hector people like me to make them for them.

  128. Re:You don't get it. by pqbon · · Score: 1

    Wow... It's been a long time since I posted... You don't seem to get it... Windows and mac OS don't work out the box... they come on the box so you don't have to worry about the install... I've been using Win9X since 94 when Chicargo was first released to developers associtated with MS. It has always been a pain to install on anything but middle of the road hw. Any HW you have that is either: really cheep or really expensive requires manufactures driver disks... NT is the same way only worse if you have an unsupported disk controller. Most people don't ever setup windows them selfs or mac OS... Thats why most new computer come with a restore disk not an install disk. It fdisks and formats the drive and blows the "standard load" on the system matching the exact config from when the system was shipped.



    "... That probably would have sounded more commanding if I wasn't wearing my yummy sushi pajamas..."
    -Buffy Summers
    Say Goodbye to Iowa

  129. Linux for stupid people by Angst+Badger · · Score: 1

    Oh joy. Former employees from Apple -- a company with an interface dumbed down to the point of unusability -- and AOL -- a company that dumbs down the internet to the point of unusability -- banding together to lobotomize Linux. Great news, I guess... anything that makes it easier to disengage the drooling millions from the great teat of Microsoft. At least with Linux, when they dumb it down, I'm not obliged to follow suit. My bash prompt will not go away because someone else decided it was unnecessary.

    OTOH, the rush to World Domination has often led me to wonder -- will the presence of the clueless millions "improve" Linux the same way the opening of AOL's floodgates "improved" the Internet? You do realize that they're not going to clue in when they switch operating systems any more than they clued in when they went online, don't you? To them, this is just an extension of television.

    --
    Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
    1. Re:Linux for stupid people by otis+wildflower · · Score: 3

      OTOH, the rush to World Domination has often led me to wonder -- will the presence of the clueless millions "improve" Linux the same way the opening of AOL's floodgates "improved" the Internet?

      Please let me get a little evil here for a minute. What, in the end, has the popularization of the Internet gotten us, as nerds? LOTS OF MONEY for doing the shit we'd be doing for free anyway. Who here really has to work for a living, in the way our parents had to work at jobs they hated?

      Not only do we get the money, we get the POWER: WE understand this shit, and they do NOT. We are scary powerful in this realm, and our ideals and methods are influencing the general community because of the public Internet. Is this bad? For us, no.

      Similarly, what happens when Linux is made available and accessible to the masses? WE GAIN POWER as we again are the happy few who UNDERSTAND this shit.. Not only that, but our influence on people's computing grows, and for us again, this is not bad. It means we can use the software we like, and get paid for it. WE craft the rules and determine how things are done.

      This is NOT megalomania speaking here: this is thinking big. World Domination is about not having to put up with Micro$oft shit because everyone uses it. It's about being able to fix the problems with our systems when they appear. It's about freedom of speech as well as freedom of beer. It's about getting paid big bucks to work on cool shit you'd have done for free anyway, and who better to get those big bucks, you or those fratboy jocks who were such big shit way back when but who are now, if they're lucky, hapless NT techs?

      Like I said, it was going to be evil and self serving, but I hope there were a few kernels of truth in there, or at least a spark or two..

      Cheers,
      Your Working Boy,

  130. Re:danger... by Jeff+Hallman · · Score: 1

    Hmm...
    On my system, ls -l looks like this:
    -rw-rw-r-- 1 username group fileSize date name

    so that `ls -l | awk '{print $3}' | grep "juser" `

    is just juser repeated as many times as there are files owned by juser. In short, your command doesn't work.

    It seems to me you've just made an argument for a GUI interface.

  131. Re:danger... by panda · · Score: 1

    Yes!!! You are right on the money with that one!

    I'm convinced and what I'm trying to say below is that what "mere mortals" want and need is something like what you're talking about. They don't want a beige box, or any box for that matter. They just want something that does the job with no muss and no fuss.

    I believe that web-enabled cell phones and PDAs are steps in the right direction even if we're not there yet. A new Window Manager/File Manager/Eye Candy for X is not the holy grail of UI.

    Soon, if you believe the hype, computers will be everywhere and then mortals won't have to think about using the computer. They'll have "smart appliances" which is all they really want or need. What is really required is for the OS to become invisible. No UI is the best UI!

    Yeah, I could see someone creating something like the "secretary" you describe above and making a killing with the home office crowd. Just think, if it could screen for junk calls and junk e-mail, too. Hmm.......... (?) - the lightbulb goes on!

    Now, is there a link for the MIT Oxygen project that you could share with the rest of us, or are you gonna make us hunt for it?

    --
    Just be sure to wear the gold uniform when you beam down -- you know what happens when you wear the red one.
  132. What bothers me... by NYC · · Score: 1
    Has anyone looked at the jobs page at Easel? Well I have, and as of now, they are *NOT* looking for anybody with experience in usability and human-computer interaction. How can they possibily create a User Interface without consulting a usability expert? While it is not impossible for some programmers/coders to understand what makes a good UI design, they still do not know how to conduct usability studies, user evaluation, task analysis, etc...

    Say what you will about Microsoft, but they employ numerous people in the usability group. The programming group works very tightly with the UI group. Do you think Windows has a bad UI? Think about what would happen if they did not have a usability group. Do not take my post as pro-Microsoft. My academic background is in Human-Computer Interaction, and I have interviewed for a program manager position in the usability group, so I have experienced how they operate in almost first person. Their usability group is already working on the version of Windows that will come out after the next version.

    The fact that they are not looking for HCI folk is extremely disturbing. Having good looking, robust, object-oriented, enter-buzzword-here, widgets is not going to make a good UI.

    Perhaps they already have HCI people working for them, and they are not looking to hire any additional personal at this moment. If so, please disregard my rant. :)

    Cheers!


    --Ivan, weenie NT4 user: bite me!

    --
    --weenie NT4 user: bite me!
    "Computers are nothing but a perfect illusion of order" -- Iggy Pop
    1. Re:What bothers me... by Havoc+Pennington · · Score: 2

      They already have some of the original Mac UI designers working there.

  133. Re:Hertzfeld by deeny · · Score: 1

    I gotta admit. I liked the Magic Link because it was *cute.* It wasn't economical and it wasn't viable. My Palm Pilot is certainly more useful in the raw sense of the term. But not as endearing.

    But then again, I own a blue G3 and an iBook. :) I run Linux on the blue G3, but the iBook hasn't been indoctrinated yet.

    I use Linux almost all the time now, but I still think of the MacOS as "comfort food." Then again, if I use it for any length of time, I feel constrained by the interface and limitations. I much prefer that of MacOS X Server (i.e. NeXT).

    _Deirdre

  134. Re:Windows is NOT easy to use. by sab39 · · Score: 1

    >

    I have - Debian. It has an update-menus tool which is used by the package manager; any X utility or application that is installed will automatically install itself into the menu system in a consistent location (there is a policy which specifies which applications should go where). Not only that, but it is windowmanager-independent so that the same applications are available in the same places regardless of whether your users use GNOME, KDE, Enlightenment-without-GNOME, fvwm2, windowmaker, or any other windowmanager that provides for application menus.

    This is all automatic and transparent and happens whenever a new application gets installed.

    If the GNOME and KDE people want to provide their own mechanisms for doing this sort of thing, that's great, so long as they don't mess with a system that has been working wonderfully for several years now (since well before GNOME or KDE ever existed).

    Stuart.

  135. Re:Great idea.... by Romen · · Score: 1

    I would just like to take this opportunity to plug Abiword. For me, it is by far the most usable wordprocessor around for Linux. While it doesn't have some of the features that are found on other products (like page numbers) it is making rapid progress. The binary tarball is only about 5 megs. And to the best of my knowledege, we are the only one that has an overline feature. Come check it out. You'll be converted.

    --
    Sam TH
    AbiWord Developer
  136. Yet Another Desktop (YAD) by Keel · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't it be better to just finish the ones we already have? Then maybe grandma could use it.

    --

    ----

    "Oh, bother," said Pooh, as he hid Piglet's mangled corpse.

    1. Re:Yet Another Desktop (YAD) by Havoc+Pennington · · Score: 1

      Eazel is working on GNOME, it's not a new desktop project.

  137. Re:This is what Linux needs by Mr.+Flibble · · Score: 1

    Yes, thats exactly what I was thinking of, but I wonder if the Quake engine would be better suited to the task, after all it is optimized for speed.

    I suspect that the Link you provided would be made to run as an extension to explorer, or intendet to replace explorer in windows...

    I have to believe that Carmacks coding is more precise in this matter. (Not intended to be flamebait, just IMHO.)

    --
    Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
  138. Re:May I REMIND YOU... by Mr.+Flibble · · Score: 1

    As a UNIX user, I notice that you are trying to give Linux an MS Window like GUI.

    I don't like that.


    You don't have to. If you don't like a particular GUI don't use it. No one is trying to force a particular user interface on anyone. The thing with Linux is that anyone who can code can change it as they see fit.

    Why does a "Geek" need a "file manager" (or whatever you call it, what you're crying for) ?

    It would be fun, thats why. I don't need a reason, its my opinion.

    If you don't like the MIT's X System, you're not a "geek" or "nerd".

    I never said I disliked it. I never said that I would even be using this window manager at all. I think that something needs to change with the UI for Linux before more people will begin to adopt Linux.

    I may be wrong, but you sound resistant to the changes that are occuring with Linux. I admit that its not nearly as much of a tighly-knit group of users as we used to have. Still, some of us are beginning to sound like Amiga users, which is unfortunate (one of the reasons that the Amiga unfortunatly died). It does us no good to staunchly stand and proclaim that "Linux is unchangeable!" Linux is open, openness is about change. As soon as we begin to resist change we begin to die, we fail to adapt, we fail to be open.

    I think that a newbie GUI is needed for the people who just want a stable OS that allows you to browse the web, Email, word-process, edit pictures/make cards, and play the occasional game. Its not fair to subject my mother to a CLI. She just does not understand it. All she wants to use her system for is mentioned above.

    I guess the comment would then be that she does not need Linux, True! She does not, and that's why she has Windows on her machine. However, if we want to see some large scale adoption of Linux amongst the masses an easier method of interaction (one that the users are familiar with) is needed.

    But it's not something that a real UNIX pro would use.

    I doubt it is intended for this audience. :)

    Cheers

    --
    Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
  139. This is what Linux needs by Mr.+Flibble · · Score: 1

    This is one of the things that is needed for Linux. Its pretty well known though. I suppose that people will complain even more that there are too many WM/GUI's for Linux...

    Even if this does not take off, (and I think it will, no SHOULD) it creates more "competition" which results in more choice. This is great.

    --------------------------

    Slight divergence:

    A "GUI" that I would love to see for Linux would be one based on the Quake 1 source, a true 3D environment that interacts like quake. Bringing up windows would bring up 3D windows in the world which you could move around or have on "walls" of the level.

    Just something I thought would be cool (although I cannot see it being as user-friendly as this "Mac" GUI idea) Still, it would be very geeky cool.

    (I know that SGI had a similar thing for IRIX as seen in Jurassic Park, but there is AFAIK nothing like this for Linux.)

    --
    Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
    1. Re:This is what Linux needs by Mr.+Flibble · · Score: 1

      Well, I am not looking for JUST that, but a total 3D environment. Imagine a small quake level, that had say, icons on the walls of the level, if you were to place your crosshair over the Icon and "shoot" it, it would load the said program. You could move around the level a-la Quake, when a program Launched it would appear fullscreen (or close to that) in a window in front of your vision.

      Pressing say, the 3rd mouse button would disengage you from the window, and leave a floating (semi-transparent w/ GL extensions?) window hovering in the level. You could then move around this window, and open other windows in the same way. Or, the walls themselves could be textured with the programs themselves: Imagine Netscape as a "texture" on one wall. Again "shooting" the wall or floating window would bring it into a "zoom" mode (i.e. normal desktop apperance of the window)

      And just like that doom process manager, imagine zombie processes REALLY becoming zombies! It would be great to beat them down or gib them!

      I got this crazy idea because of an article in an old boot mag. It was written by Alex St.John. He mentioned how Bill Gates was thinking about buying id Software because he imagined that the 3D environments that Carmack was creating would be a potential threat to the 2D windows interface, and that a 3D "virtual" window manager would be more intuitive and easier to use.

      Just a thought anyways. I would love to start trying to code something like this myself, but my programming skills are laughable at best. :/

      Still, if I was going to code anything large this would be it, this is the only "itch" that I can think of that would need scratching.

      --
      Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
    2. Re:This is what Linux needs by knarf · · Score: 1

      http://threedsia.sourceforge.net/

      Oh, and the authors of the `original' Jurassic Park 3D-filetoy (called fsn, vavailable at SGI but only for IRIX 5.x, get it ) are working on something similar (but functional this time), which will be open source AFAIK. This was posted on {linuxtoday|freshmeat|?} some time ago, and I don't have the URL handy. A search should turn up something I guess?

      --
      --frank[at]unternet.org
    3. Re:This is what Linux needs by fingal · · Score: 1
      OK, some more links for you... :-)

      If you want Netscape as a "texture" on one wall then you should look at this which is a demo for 3Dwm that seems to be shaping up quite nicely.

      In terms of zombie processes REALLY becoming zombies then you definately want to be playing with Doom as a tool for system administration.

      --

      The only Good System is a Sound System

    4. Re:This is what Linux needs by fingal · · Score: 1
      I think that what you are looking for is File System Visualizer which is based on the 3D File System Navigator that was seen in Jurassic Park...

      :-)

      --

      The only Good System is a Sound System

    5. Re:This is what Linux needs by Emil+Brink · · Score: 1

      Um, I'm not sure I should be saying this, but what the heck: have you seen DIVE?. If you hit that link, you'll get their front page featuring a collage of screenshots. Look close, and you'll see standard X apps textured into a 3D world. Scroll down, click "pretty pictures", and you'll see more...

      --
      main(O){10<putchar(4^--O?77-(15&5128 >>4*O):10)&&main(2+O);}
    6. Re:This is what Linux needs by jred · · Score: 1

      I used to use a similar (only 2d) product called diskmap32. It was great for determining where all your disk space was going. Unfortunately it doesn't like larger disks, so I had to stop using it. If I could get a 3d version I would use it often.

      --

      jred
      I'm not a mechanic but I play one in my garage...
    7. Re:This is what Linux needs by Anonynous+Coward · · Score: 1

      Someone is working on a basic version of a GUI system similar to what you suggested. Read about it here. Not likely to be directly supported under Linux, though!

    8. Re:This is what Linux needs by e_n_d_o · · Score: 1

      As an added benefit, it would help everyone to maintain clean hard drives free of all junk files... deleting would just be too much fun!

    9. Re:This is what Linux needs by jabber · · Score: 2

      A "GUI" that I would love to see for Linux would be one based on the Quake 1

      A few months back, there was a slashdot article about exactly this sort of thing. Well, sort of. It's here

      I know that SGI had a similar thing for IRIX as seen in Jurassic Park

      Yeah, that was real.. And so were the dinosaurs. :) As others noted, it was a model for a tool. Much like the T-rex. I did get the warm-and-fuzzies when the 12 year old girl said: This is UNIX... I KNOW THIS!

      --

      -- What you do today will cost you a day of your life.
    10. Re:This is what Linux needs by irix · · Score: 2

      -- I know that SGI had a similar thing for IRIX as seen in Jurassic Park, but there is AFAIK nothing like this for Linux. --

      What you saw in Jurassic Park was a little demo that SGI put together called "File System Navigator" that basically displayed your UNIX filesystem in 3D using OpenGL. You could see the directories, files, sizes of files/dirs, etc.

      It was never part of the O/S or 4Dwm, and it wasn't really useful apart from the "cute" factor.

      --

      Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
    11. Re:This is what Linux needs by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 2
      I did get the warm-and-fuzzies when the 12 year old girl said: This is UNIX... I KNOW THIS!
      Not as good as the bit in Wayne's World 2, though:

      Garth: Hey, that's a Unix book. [I do believe it was a copy of Steven's Unix Network Programming.]
      Garthette: Yeah.
      Garth: Cool...[They smile shyly at each other.]

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
  140. Re:Linux Goes Mainstream by Mr.+Flibble · · Score: 1

    I can understand that.

    I am not so much of a Unix geek as you, I am not old enough to be one, I got my first system at the age of 7 and it was a TRS-80, there was no way I could have used Unix at that age, the only things that had it were servers. I never got into Unix until relativly recently (4 years ago) using Solaris at college.

    I understand where you are coming from, and how much it must suck for newbies like myself to come along and mess up Unix. Still, I dont think it will go away completly, BSD is still more Unix like than Linux (because it is a Unix in its own right.)

    I still know a guy that *REFUSES* to code in C because it "creates too much bloat". He codes in assembly. He does not code overly fast, but his programs ARE fast.

    To each their own I guess. Unfortunatly changes favoring the masses will happen whether we want them to or not. I *LIKE* a CLI interface, but from what I can tell I expect to see a voice-activated interface very soon. I say this because people want it. If they want that then system specs must increase, and bloat will increase too.

    What can we do if people want this? Not much I guess, but we are in the minority.

    So it goes.

    --
    Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
  141. Re:Well that's just spiffy. by um...+Lucas · · Score: 1

    Gnome and KDE are windowing environments that are meant for more up-to-date systems. The easy thing to do if you don't like the bloat is simply don't run the environment. You can run lestif, afterstep, or the command line (don't take as being a command line bigot here... i'm just pointing out alternatives).

    If the applications you want to use only work with KDE or Gnome, then there's a reason to upgrade. If they do work under other window managers, then you didn't really need KDE or Gnome in the first place.But if you want all the spiffiness that the later window managers offer, you'll need to get a machine that's up to the task of that.

  142. Re:Unfortunately I would have to agree by um...+Lucas · · Score: 1

    I can't imagine a reason why developers would want to target the capabilities of their software to those of machines that are already out dated.

    Yes, Linux can run on 486's from 1992. So will all the rest of the software from 1992. But why constrain software that's written in 2000 to the capabilities of a 1992 machine? All this extra horsepower that 90% of us don't need might as well be used in making a system that's more attractive than what was considered state of the art in the early 90's.

  143. Re:Thank God! by um...+Lucas · · Score: 1

    Actually, a friend of mine just picked up a Mac Portable (pre-powerbook), running Mac OS 6.something.

    Anythings better than that these days... YOu can only run application at a time, plus desk accessories. Double clicking an icon opens it. Double clicking a name sets you to rename it. Duplicating files creates "Copy of " files, so they don't appear in order anymore...

    But back then, Windows wasn't where it's gotten today... But don't give System 6 too much credit.

  144. Definitely worthy of support by Xerithane · · Score: 1

    I went out and interviewed at Eazel (they turned me down tho *doh*). Talking with Andy was enlightening to say the least. He has a lot of brilliant idea's about the project. I would definitely not say it's dumbing down linux, just making linux less work. Which I believe is something that is definitely needed, it took me about 3 hours to setup the development test box at my current company just in download and compile time. Now for every patch and re-compile it takes my time, and the CPU time. With Eazel that can be backgrounded taking the user-time out of it. Not sure if this has been said yet, but from my understanding it will be the replacement for GMC in Gnome 2.0 Take care, good luck to everyone invovled

    --
    Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
  145. Hertzfeld by just+someone · · Score: 1

    Got a great software wiard in the lead, Andy Hertzfeld. The one who's cludge, switcher, left us wih the get-info boxes that are the bain of the MacOS today.

    Should make many great things happen.

    1. Re:Hertzfeld by KFury · · Score: 1

      Gotta disagree. While I love most of the things Andy has had a hand in, Magic Cap isn't one of them. TeleScript was brilliant (though underimplemented), but MagicCap took the desktop metaphor and tried to push it too far. People don't actually want something that sits on their desktop that has a desktop inside it. What happens if you have a computer on your magiccap desktop? Ouch.

      Metaphors are great, but the most efficient, understandable and useful metaphors are those that are based on cross-cultural structures about the way humans think and perceive things, not saying 'it's a desk, so when we need to figure out how to implement this, we'll look at a desk and extend the metaphor.'

      Nevertheless, this is what comes to mind when I hear Appleites, and worse, AOL designers coming together to create an 'even simpler interface.'

      The gauntlet here is to make an interface that is intuitive not because it works like a desk, or a calculator, or a piece of paper or a pen, but because it makes coherent sense in and of itself, based on consistant rules that aren't founded off a prototype real-world object which has inheirent problems by simple virtue of being an item in the real world.

    2. Re:Hertzfeld by deeny · · Score: 2

      Andy Hertzfeld is a good prototype programmer. He wrote Switcher on a dare: how can we make the Mac pseudo-multitask without changing anything underneath?

      The problem is that it's still legacy cruft because, as you say, it's all kludge.

      They should never let the guy write production code. Around about the time of General Magic, people stopped letting him do that and the products got better (Magic Links *rocked*).

      _Deirdre

  146. mmmmmm I dunnno by e_armadillo · · Score: 1

    I can't get my mother to quit using vi . . .

  147. Oh for God's sake [re: Now *that's* funny] by mcc · · Score: 1

    you don't like dropping it in the trash can?
    ok. press "command-y" or choose "put away" from the file menu.
    Or in more recent macos versions, go to the special menu and choose "eject disk", or control-click on the disk and choose "eject" from the contextual menu.

    __WHAT DO YOU WANT APPLE TO DO??__ Even if throwing it in the trash is not the most intuitive way, what would you suggest they do _instead_?? you apparently dont' think a menu item or a contextual menu is "intuitive", because these are both in the OS.

    The trash can eject thing is in fact just a remnant of "ghosting", a really nice idea that allowed you to do something no UI before or since has let you do: copy between two floppies without using a hard disk as an interrim. but in the end, because people like you were unable to handle using "put away" instead of "eject disk", apple removed this feature, and you can no longer ghost. So now "eject disk" makes it go away altogether. are you happy now?

    what is your PROBLEM?? that dragging it to the trash should not be in the OS at _all_? are you upset simply the option is there?
    Perhaps i'm overreacting to this. In fact i _know_ i'm overreacting to this. But it just upsets me when people bring out the same two or three stupid non-issues whenever the mac os is mentioned, and by the way of these two things that they call problems because they have misinterpreted them, claim the entire interface is worthless.

    if i were going to post something saying "In Linux, there is a CLI, so you can't drag files between windows to move them around on your hard disk" (which is obviously untrue) i would get the crap flamed out of me.
    But cdmrtaco can post in the _article subjectline_ "you have to drag a floppy to the trash to eject it in macos", which is just as blatantly untrue, and nobody minds. For God's sake, if you're going to trash the mac interface, target the actual _problems_, not rediculous things like "there's no right mouse button". (so buy a two-button mouse and map rightclick to control-click!!)

    ok i'm done ranting now. you can all go back to your homes now there's nothing more to see.

  148. Re:You don't get it. by Raven667 · · Score: 1

    I don't believe that you understand Linux or Unix at all. Some counter examples to your argument would be TiVo, Cobalt, Corel Linux, MacOS X, NeXTStep, etc. There is no reason that a Linux based system could not be as easy to use (In fact Unix has a great history in this area, which people often forget) as you wish, as well as having all the (Object Oriented) power under the hood that is the CLI. MacOS X Server already implements the MacOS style over BSD Unix (By way of OpenSTEP), what is easier to use than that?

    Point by point:

    1. A bulletproof install. It must work, out of the box, no questions asked

    Checked out Corel Linux, it almost asks no questions during install. Much easier than Windows. What about Lothar the Mandrake developed tool that does automatic hardware detection and module loading.

    2. Hardware support for everything. Drivers need to be there for the hardware and they have to be installed automatically. Don't make the user guess what brand of video or sound card they have, 'cause generally, they don't know.

    Right on, brother. I hate having to take apart a computer and writing down chip ID's and serial numbers to try to find out what driver belongs to a particular card. Fortunately this does not often happen with PCI/AGP devices because their device ID's are well documented. In fact it is emminetly possible to read all PCI IDs and match with drivers/modules, not only kernel modules but for X (XFree86 4) modules as well. Take a look at lspci some time.

    As far as hardware support: When Linux/Unix/OpenSource is the dominate model then the manufacturers will have to write drivers for the dominant system first. Until that happens we are going to have to rely on vendors publishing specs and code, there will therefore always be a lag between new hardware and drivers. It will probably also mean that new drivers will not be able to use all the nifty (3D Video/Audio, etc) features right away, if ever. Definately a problem (at least while Linux is not the dominant system)

    3. Get rid of the UNIX model. Yeah, no more user IDs, passwords or any of that. It can be too confusing on your grandma to have more names and numbers to remember.

    BIG mistake. Especially for home users. Even if there is only one user account, with no password, you still have the seperation of user versus system privilages, you can also more easily hide the inner workings (make it so that the user cannot normally cd above /home, for example). It also more easily allows you to have a maintenance contract with a third party, who could log into your system to do work and fix things if/when they need fixing. Personally I would like built-in smart-card authentication (Think SecurID, etc), the system sits at the xdm/kdm/gdm window, you insert your card and you are logged in. No passwords needed and it is probably more secure (as long as you don't lose the card), it is also easier to use than password auth.

    4. Get rid of GNU. Yeah, that's right, drop the command line utilities that you know and love, and lose all that power. If granny can't remember her password how's she supposed to remember arcane commands?

    Annother big mistake. There is no reason that the user would be forced to use (bash, awk, sed, grep, cat, etc) these tools but they are so darned useful, for system maintenance and also as a user, it would be a shame to throw them away. Just tuck under the hood, you can pull them out when needed.

    5. The gui must be the OS. This means, goodbye X. Most of the newbies who ask me for help request help with setting up X (well, networking comes close). X must disappear, or it must become so much a part of Linux that it's just there, and it just works, no matter what video card, RAMDac, or whatever the user has on their machine.

    This should not preclude a simple, text based, interface, something less demanding on the hardware being correctly installed and configured. Ability to configure (with a full featured environment, like Unix) from a network, USB, serial/parallel connection is a plus (for when things get _really_ hosed). For most users, though, it should boot into a graphical environment, this does not in any way preclude X. X may be an old protocol, but it keeps re-inventing itself to keep from being obsolete. Berlin or some unknown Display GhostScript model would be best, but this is a ways off.

    Really X is about as, or more, complicated than the kernel of the OS. Integrating the two would drastically increase the number and severity of software failures. Alot of work needs, and is being, done to make the XFree86 implementation of the X network protocol more stable, alot of work is, and needs to be, done to make it more hardware agnostic (automatically detecting and configuring without user intervention). This does not preclude the use of the X protocol though, the implementations just need to keep getting better.

    6. This GUI must be slicker than whale shit in an ice flow. Yeah, it must blow all other existing GUIs out of the water for ease of use, configurability, etc.

    Damn Straight! Fortunately in the Free Unix world there is more graphical environments than you can shake a stick at. I personally like BlackBox window manager with the KDE toolkit. There is more work (KDE, GNOME, XFCE, GNUStep, etc.) being done in this area than in any proprietary system. I have complete confidence that the next big thing in UI development will happen here because the cost of tinkering to "just see what happens" is so low. When that paradigm (ooh, I used a buzzword) shift happens the OpenSource community and Linux will be at the forefront.

    Anyway, there are several very usable GUI environements for Linux, just look at SuSE and its umpteen window managers/desktop environments. For new users I would recommend WindowMaker/GNOME, WindowMaker/GNUStep, XFCE, KDE (esp Corel Linux configuration), QVWM if they have Windows experience. Really, though, for the greenest and most fearful users, locking a system down so they only have access to what they need makes for great fault prevention (Think MacOS). Real users can exploit every capability of the system while new users can have unobtrusive training wheels attached. This of course (because of different distros) does not preclude advanced Guru users from the system they want (think Corel/Debian relationship)

    7. Did I mention that this stuff must work, right out of the box? It has to be so simple that the user can install it and configure it without a thought.

    Everyone is working feverishly on easy install tools, that war is almost won (actually many Linux distros are already easier than Windows to install, the fact that Windows is pre-installed is the only thing that is truly easier). Configuration is a slightly different matter. When a system installs it should ask the user some simple questions about how they want to use the system and how they want some basic things configured. The trick is to not go overboard on pre-written config tools (that become an unmanagable mess), and to make them integrate seemlessly with hand configured files. Give the users the options they need to get started, if they need something more complicated don't make a GUI tool that will get in the way. If, however, you can make a GUI tool that can handle the verbosity of options in your standard Unix service than so be it, but be very careful because Not Quite is worse than Not At All.

    It's high time some of you stopped deluding yourselves into thinking that GNU/Linux is the be-all and end-all of Operating Systems.

    We are not deluded,it is being continuously redesigned based on the requirements of the people who use it. Whatever the future of OS design holds, Linux and GNU will be there.

    --
    -- Remember: Wherever you go, there you are!
  149. Re:As a mother... by Raven667 · · Score: 1

    Heck, my Grandmother is a computer programmer, and is making my Grandpa (who is retired) take courses at UIUC. She is probably the main reason I am interested in computers. I remember very fondly playing Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy and MS Flight Simulator on her old PCjr. Heck, one of her boys is a SysAdmin and the other an Engineer at a chip fab.

    --
    -- Remember: Wherever you go, there you are!
  150. Re:danger... by Raven667 · · Score: 1
    I'd argue that what "mere mortals" want is to get a job done, and any interface that does that for them is what they're looking for.

    Hear, hear. Where I work we still have some apps, like personnel databases, on the S/390 (IBM Mainframe). It takes the secretary about 0.23 seconds to find something, she just pops open a 3270 emulator window and flies through the interface.

    --
    -- Remember: Wherever you go, there you are!
  151. Re:danger... by Raven667 · · Score: 1

    I've had good luck with CUPS the Common Unix Printing System. It supports LPD, SMB, AppleTalk, TCP (JetDirect), and the new IPP RFC (Internet Printing Protocol). Also the company that makes it Easy Software Products makes a graphical configurator (not needed) and a set of high quality print filters (very nice) based on GhostScript and .ppd files.

    --
    -- Remember: Wherever you go, there you are!
  152. Re:Modularity by Raven667 · · Score: 1

    This is weird but very similar to how New Deal Office (Former GEOS/GEOWorks) works. It has 5 user levels, at the lower level you get less options in most programs, in the higher level you get all the options. That way users don't get confused when they start out but they can step up as they go along (oh, and the user level is adjustable for each major program individually).

    --
    -- Remember: Wherever you go, there you are!
  153. Re:I just hope it runs INSTEAD of X, not on top of by Compuser · · Score: 1

    Motif has been around for a long time.
    That doesn't make it less ugly or less
    in need of replacement.
    I have said this a zillion times: I want
    X windows without any networking code.
    I want windowing environment where
    not a single bit is wasted on stuff like
    "export" command. Assume the user has one
    and only one display and render to that.
    NO OTHER OPTIONS!!!

  154. Re:I just hope it runs INSTEAD of X, not on top of by Compuser · · Score: 1

    No, it damn well not have any networking code,
    or more to the point, all networking code
    should be separate. It should be trivial to
    compile X for one display, two display,
    n displays, two computers over peer to peer,
    or n computers over LAN or whatever. The point is,
    X is bloatware because it compiles EVERYTHING
    in by default. And because code is not modular,
    it too contains EVERYTHING by default. Now do you
    see the problem? Or are you too brainwashed by
    Larry Ellison, like the poster above you.
    As for why, windows used to run much faster
    with respect to graphics and rendering than
    even your puny twm with X on same hardware.
    I am not talking about quake performance here,
    but simple window drag operations.
    So I figure until X with basic window manager
    can beat pants off every other system they better
    not be focusing on any more functionality. And
    maybe removing some of that functionality would
    speed up the system. And from what I understand
    the real performance leader they should be gunning
    after is Be, not Windows, although just catching
    up with Windows would be nice.

  155. Checkout Berline by ihxo · · Score: 1

    you mean Berlin ??
    that project seems pretty interesting, but I am not sure it'll support window manager or one standard interface.

  156. Just a Nit (Re:Duh) by Osty · · Score: 1

    They want the stability and the low hardware requirements ...

    The so-called "low hardware requirements" pretty much fly right out the window when attempting to appease the masses on the "ease-of-use" issue. To most people, "ease-of-use" means good looking gui tools. And good looking usually means lots of pixmaps, themeability, and so on. When was the last time you used a pixmap-intensive Enlightenment theme on a 486dx2-50 with 16M of RAM? The "low hardware requirements" of linux stem naturally from the fact that the GUI is not required. But for the "ease-of-use" people, the GUI is required.

    I agree with the rest of your comments, but the hardware requirements are a red herring for this issue -- when you get Linux/X to look and fell like the "ease-of-use" people want so that they can easily move from MacOS or Windows, the hardware requirements are not going to be much different than those required for Windows (higher, oftentimes -- unless you're on a beefy machine, E+GNOME runs slower than windows, MacOS, or BeOS).

  157. fsn^Hv for *nix by Straker+Skunk · · Score: 1

    (Warning, blatant plug to follow)

    fsv - 3D File System Visualizer

    This was released just last month. It's LGPL'ed, built on OpenGL/GTK+, and while it lacks many features of the original fsn (and isn't even at 1.0 yet) it sports a slicker interface, and not one but two distinct approaches to visualizing the file system.

    There have been some noises to making this into a Nautilus optional view mode, which would be pretty cool (since the program would then have a real file manager backend, and what with XFree4.0/DRI coming around the bend...)

    --
    iSKUNK!
  158. Re:GNOME fork? by Ripp · · Score: 1

    Gnome Team: Those people working on all parts of GNOME. Like, um, what did you think I meant?

    And, I'm sorry but when somebody from the 'Gnome Team' goes off and says 'hey we're our own company now and we're going to one up GNOME with our own version....' sounds like a fork to me.

    Check their page, what mention of their project being part of GNOME do you see?

    I didn't see any....nor any mention of it anywhere else....

    --
    Blech. Signatures.
  159. GNOME fork? by Ripp · · Score: 1

    I'm confused. Their site is pointless. developer.gnome.org has something about their 'friends at eazel.' but nothing else....

    Isn't nautilus just another file manager type deal for GNOME ala gmc? I guess I don't see the need for this, really, unless they can do it better and faster than the GNOME team.

    *shrug* enlighten us anyone?
    What exactly are they doing here!?

    --
    Blech. Signatures.
    1. Re:GNOME fork? by t-money · · Score: 2

      This is not a fork. Nautilus is the REPLACEMENT for gmc. It will be part of GNOME 2.0. I actually had not heard of Eazel until today, but I knew of the existence of nautilus and that the Gnome project wanted to replace MC/GMC with a brand spanking new file manager.

  160. Re:Windows is NOT easy to use. by Slamtilt · · Score: 1

    Ctrl-p, Ctrl-w, and Ctrl-s work for almost everything (exceptions excepted, of course :). There are many valid criticisms to make of the Windows UI (close button right beside maximize, for example), but those don't really fly.

  161. Re:uh... isn't this nautilus? by Arandir · · Score: 1

    That's just the window manager. It's not Gnome or Nautilus.

    --
    A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
  162. Re:This is good(thanks) by acomj · · Score: 1

    Thanks, I;m not going to give on this (I need a server..) Its just going to take some time to get used to installing an configuring.

    Windows crashes regularly (I develop on NT sometimes.. uggg)

    I'll get on some mailing lists, and look into some usenet groups.. Lotus has some really good ones for notes, I can imagine that the linux ones are better.

    My point was that power requires learning..I guess it is exponential, in that you have to learn a lot more to get the stability. I don't like knowing only a fraction of it (aka enough to be dangerous). I'll keep working at it.

  163. This is good by acomj · · Score: 1

    I'm new the linux stuff. I've used unixes (AIX, ,VMS, Solaris, SunOS, Digital UX) as a user, but I feel like I have to be a sys admin to figure out all these linux configurations. What goes where /bin /usr/local (although no less cluttered than windows). where is that x windows config file? If they can make it easier bless them.

    I had to set up an NT server at my last job. It was way easier (although much less powerfull). What is the price of power though. How much time do I have to spend learning linux to make everything easy..? Maybe its just tht linux documentation that is confusing but I don't think it needs to be as difficult as it is.

    I'm pretty familiar with Unix, heck I even know how to pipe. But this difficulty in administoring linux is going to hold it back..

    I'm running suse 6.1 on virtual PC. I miss the mac extension manager that tells you everything thats loaded and run on boot, and you can shut it on or off with a click. I find it hard to tell linux to stop loading httpd and ftp servers. (keep in mind I've only been at this a couple weeks part time.)

    1. Re:This is good by Munky_v2 · · Score: 1
      The problem is that Linux is a computer operating system. It was designed by people that truly KNOW computers, they can tell you the maximum bandwidth of an ISA slot. Windows NT and MacOS are made by companies in the software market for one thing...$

      Linux aims (or at least it did until it started going commercial, although some distros like Debian and Slackware still do.) to be a powerful, all encompassing operating system designed by geeks for geeks. Remember that Linux started as a school project and became a hobby for many programmers.

      Where as Windows for example was created by a guy with some programming talent who decided that he was going to make some money off selling operating systems. Therefore he had to make it easy to use so more people would buy it.

      My point is that at this time, if you want to harness the true power of Linux (which is a bright idea), you will need to learn some new things. Believe me, you have an extremely supportive community here to help. Did you know that in 1996 the Linux community actually received the award for best tech support organization? Check out the mailing lists. All of the major distros have them, Suse has a good one that you can subscribe to from their web-site. Don't give up just because Windows was easier to get working. Linux is inarguably more powerful.


      Munky_v2
      "Warning: you are logged into reality as root..."

      --
      Jay
  164. Re:It's all about components, baby. by RPoet · · Score: 1
    I can't answer for Nautilus, but the way Konqueror does this is if you click a file and there's a component for that file type, it is opened in the same window for viewing only. For editing, you open the full relevant application.

    This is not awkward, but people need to drop their conservative ways and try to adjust. Otherwise, nobody's going to force this technology on you (not in Linux anyway), so you're free to change to any other way of managing and viewing files.

    --
    "Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
  165. Re:Good Point by AndyElf · · Score: 1

    http://terror.hungry.com/products/Ywindows/
    ... but it does not seem to have been updated in quite awhile ...

    --

    --AP
  166. Re:You don't get it. by Sharkeys-Day · · Score: 1
    1.A bulletproof install. It must work, out of the box, no questions asked.

    Caldera has come pretty dipping close. Most fun I've ever had installing an OS.

    2.Hardware support for everything. Drivers need to be there for the hardware and they have to be installed automatically. Don't make the user guess what brand of video or sound card they have, 'cause generally, they don't know.

    This is a moving target. And Linux hackers do a valiant job of keeping up.

    3.Get rid of the UNIX model.
    4.Get rid of GNU.

    Get a clue.

    5.The gui must be the OS.
    6.This GUI must be slicker than whale shit in an ice flow.

    The last four points have been a description of a Macintosh. If that's what you want, it is there for you, and OS X comes with a BSD kernel.

    7.Did I mention that this stuff must work, right out of the box?

    Are you listening to yourself? You want a pre-installed system: "out of the box". If you have this, points 1 and 2 are covered.

    Granny buys her system at the local consumer electronics store. It comes pre-installed and the OS is already configured for the hardware which comes with it. If she is like most users, they won't ever add any additional hardware, and they'll get someone to help them install any new software because they are afraid the "Next..." button might not be the right one to press.

    As for 3, 4, and 5, have you even considered how widely linux is deployed? It runs on everything from an Itsy and single-floppy routers to some of the fastest supercomputers in the world. Please, please, please keep the desktop in perspective.

    What the world needs is for you (yes, you) to stop griping about what Linux does not have, and write it yourself.

  167. hope they do it right... by adrien · · Score: 1

    Apple is really putting their foot in their GUI with Aqua (pardon the akward metaphor...). It is an insult to professionals who want to get work done in a quiet, neutral envirnonment. I for one do not want to be amused by my OS, i want to get work done...

    If these folks do it right and Apple continues turning the Mac into a MTV OS, there will be a LOT of professionals switching over to Linux. I will be one of them.

    Although the project is GPL, are they also opening up the project? that is, how can i get involved???

    adrien

    --

    Point and Grunt

    1. Re:hope they do it right... by FattMattP · · Score: 1

      They said that there is a public CVS. http://www.eazel.com/developer.html

      --
      Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
    2. Re:hope they do it right... by Darchmare · · Score: 2

      Flamebait.

      Please, for those of you out there, this is not the typical Mac user. At least, this Mac user doesn't want to claim any affiliation with this guy...


      - Jeff A. Campbell
      - VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)

      --

      - Jeff
  168. Re:Gnome unstable by rmull · · Score: 1

    Me too! When you're using GNOME, you don't really need all the extras the E gives you - launcher, pager, epplets, etc. Sawmill is *just* a window manager, so it's generally much lighter.

    --
    See you, space cowboy...
  169. 'That your mother could use' by gattaca · · Score: 1

    Would she be any worse at it than my father? Let's keep pushing those stereotypes shall we?

  170. Check out "supermount" by ubiquitin · · Score: 1

    Supermount that's distributed with Mandrake 7.0 "Air" is excellent. It removes the "mount /mnt/cdrom" and "umount /mnt/cdrom" from casual use. Very nice - should be standard on all distros as far as I'm concerned.

    --
    http://tinyurl.com/4ny52
  171. Re:Look for something amazing from this project by PigleT · · Score: 1

    yes.

    Now *why* should *Linux* go down the "easy" route? Who says we need it on every desktop?

    Never mind 'stop whining', go back and re-read the Advocacy HOWTO. I think you'll find it a far cry from the "every desktop" and "M$loth must die" attitudes.

    --
    ~Tim
    --
    .|` Clouds cross the black moonlight,
    Rushing on down to the circle of the turn
  172. Right idea, wrong approach by tenor · · Score: 1
    A bulletproof install. It must work, out of the box, no questions asked.

    It is fair to ask questions about use, but not about your computer. In other words, it is alright to ask if they want to use gnome or kde as a desktop, but the next question should not be "what is the scan rate of your monitor".

    Hardware support for everything. Drivers need to be there for the hardware and they have to be installed automatically.

    The problem is that new hardware comes out daily. It is a literally impossibility to do this unless the producers of said hardware start supporting Linux directly. As it is, not even Windows NT can support USB, and it's been out for years! I thoroughly agree that all hardware should be plug and play and work out of the box, but Linux can not solve that answer alone. Hardware manufacturers are the real culprits.

    Get rid of the UNIX model. Yeah, no more user IDs, passwords or any of that. It can be too confusing on your grandma to have more names and numbers to remember.

    What you are describing is not the Unix model, it is the security model. You can easily drop security restrictions by having a default user account and an easy interface to add new accounts.

    Get rid of GNU. Yeah, that's right, drop the command line utilities that you know and love, and lose all that power. If granny can't remember her password how's she supposed to remember arcane commands?

    Again, what does GNU have to do with granny remembering arcane commands? There are some great user interafaces built on top of GNU software. The key is to give the user a great GUI on top of the command line utilities. If you like using the whiz-bang GUI, more power to you. If you want to drop out to a shell, go right ahead. Granny isn't stopping you.

    This GUI must be slicker than whale shit in an ice flow. Yeah, it must blow all other existing GUIs out of the water for ease of use, configurability, etc.

    All a whiz-bang GUI does it provide eye-candy for the user and sell more chips for Intel. The GUI doesn't have to be whiz-bang, it should be transparent to the user. Users don't want to watch stuff, they want to use the computer. Thus the name user. Eye candy is great, and I love gnome, but it is not a requirement for a next-generation desktop.

    John

    --
    Opinions change daily as new information arrives. Stay tuned.
  173. Re:Great idea.... by mpe · · Score: 1
    As long as Linux is stable, has an easy GUI and can be used with Micro$oft products then it becomes a viable alternative. The same goes for the "killer apps". They don't have to be BETTER than Micro$oft because they are FREE.

    Probably don't even have to do all the things the MS versions do either, simply the functions the users in question actually need.

  174. Re:You don't get it. by mpe · · Score: 1
    1. A bulletproof install. It must work, out of the box, no questions asked.

    2. Hardware support for everything. Drivers need to be there for the hardware and they have to be installed automatically. Don't make the user guess what brand of video or sound card they have, 'cause generally, they don't know.

    There are NO operating systems which have these, the only way you get close is by having a system supplied preinstalled or by having a suitably competant person do the installation. There is also the issue that drivers require information from hardware suppliers, which some refuse to supply. Anyway no-one insists that "grandma" fixes her own televison or does her own plumbing... Installing an operating system is a skilled job!

  175. Re:uh... isn't this nautilus? by mpe · · Score: 1
    I think that the poster was trying to say that the implimentation of Win98 like features is a bad thing and should not be copied to the unix/linux envirnoment because they are in fact two entirely seperate things.

    There are issues in this catagory, e.g. Email programs which rather than integrating with pre-existing MTA's force the "POP3 and SMTP" type paradigm. Thus requireingi, otherwise unnecessary, user configuration.

  176. Re:Unfortunately I would have to agree by Zurk · · Score: 1

    i run linux on 386DX-25 machines (slackware) and it runs fine. perhaps youre confusing a bloated distro with E with linux ? linux is a kernel dimwit.

  177. Re:I just hope it runs INSTEAD of X, not on top of by Zurk · · Score: 1

    why ? the network is the computer. without networking code X is useless. no more remote apps, no remote console logins to machines without monitors, no X terms etc etc.

  178. Re:Just meaningless semantics jackass by Zurk · · Score: 1

    CLI mode gets old real fast ? good god man - thats the only mode worth running it in. dont blame us for your lack of basic skillz to type ls -al when required or run vi (or pico my favourite). just because youre a twit - the rest of us arent.

  179. Re:Windows is NOT easy to use. by mystik · · Score: 1

    Most apps use the same keys- Some rouge apps decide that they're better, and use their own keys. (When I program In Windows, I try to stick to the common 'Standard)

    But perhaps we need something else. Perhaps We need to Ditch X, all these WMs and start from scratch (It sounds really drastic-but it seems like the only way) How about an Open-Source API that's STANDARD throughout all Platforms, configurations, etc, Handles Printing, graphics, 3d Stuff, etc. We can take the good from X windows (client/server, remote display), the good stuff from windows (there _is_ good stuff, like the componentized archetecture- The registry is a beast, but it does it's job well.). The current state of Xwindows/Linux is managable, but if we want to add users to the linux userbase, stuff like this has to be very simple to do.

    --
    Why aren't you encrypting your e-mail?
  180. New Interface for a New Century by WillAffleck · · Score: 1

    If they get it working by year end, it will be a new GUI/OS shell for the next century. It's still the 20th Century, after all, no matter that we had a minor technical glitch a year early.

    And, to be frank, my Mom could use this. She's so non-techno, and she's not alone.

    --
    Will in Seattle
  181. Wasn't this on the GNOME news site a long time ago by Me_n_U · · Score: 1

    I remember talking about this out at Linux World Expo w/ some GNOME people.

    This isn't news?

    I think the armada of trained mammles (damn spelling) need some time off to catch up to the news they have missed... hmm?

    Someone correct me if I'm wrong... but I'm sure this was in the GNOME news.

    --
    If you lika me like I lika you...
  182. As a mother... by shannah · · Score: 1

    I have to take exception with the characterization of mothers as technologically ignorant. This is a sexist and agist stereotype that simply does not hold true. I went back to school to be a programmer when I was in my 40's and found myself informally tutoring many of the young (predominantly male) students in my classes. I am the primary resource for my family (kids, husband) on all computer-related issues - a mother who actually knows a lot about this stuff - imagine that!

    I know I got a late start in the technology business, but certainly have as much aptitude and savvy as most of the people I have worked with. I am just beginning to learn about Linux in all its incarnations, but don't feel like it has to be dumbed down for me...

  183. He is right! Sorta by Chemical · · Score: 1
    Look at this. Four replies previous to my own. Four different answers to the questions mentioned above. Of course all of the answers were correct in their own way.

    There is consistancy. Each answer would do the requested task, in almost every program. And there are multiple ways to do it that would work in almost every program. Now that's consistancy.

    Sorry to burst your bubble, but I don't think there are too many companies (besides maybe Lotus, who suck) that make the keyboard commands obscure. That wouldn't help people or make people want to buy their products. Windows does have consistancy.

  184. Re:Duplication of Effort? by paRcat · · Score: 1

    Someone once said that developers of Linux shouldn't waste their time on Linux. Instead, he said that they should spend their time improving Windows.

    The /. comments made it pretty clear how silly that argument is.

    If a product starts out flawed, why waste time fixing it? It doesn't take re-inventing the thing, but then again, if you don't how will it get better?

  185. Sounds like the BeOS! by tilleyrw · · Score: 1
    It seems you are referring to the BeOS!


    Try it, you'll like it.

    --
    This post encoded with ROT26. If you can read it, you've violated the DMCA. Handcuffs please, sergeant.
  186. Re:"User Friendly" is more than a simple GUI. by Here+Comes+Everybody · · Score: 1

    Hmmmm. As computer literate as a houseplant... Well, I wish you and your fiancee' a lot of luck, and I hope she has a sense of humor......

  187. Re:Windows is NOT easy to use. by cwhicks · · Score: 1

    Doesn't GUI stand for graphical user interface? Your talking keystrokes, my man. The keystroke for printing in windows is point and click on the little picture of the printer.
    Dump on windows all you want but you're out in left field like many old school unix/linux users on GUI. I won't get into the mouse vs keyboard arguement, but I have had several GUI classes and there ain't nothing intuitive about sequences of keystrokes. For new users, all tests show people learn with quickest with the mouse, (except little kids who have problems with mice not built to their scale)
    You are asking the wrong questions.

    --
    - I like pudding.
  188. Re:I just hope it runs INSTEAD of X, not on top of by horse · · Score: 1

    This is exactly right. X is a dog, speedwise. And it's greatly touted advantage -- that I can run a program from Moscow via a desktop in LA -- means squat to the majority of users. (Moreover, the right way to do that today is to use a web browser... or, all else failing, run X inside an otherwise faster and more efficient environment.) Oh, well. Most Linux users seem to think that because X is associated with Unix it must be good. But that just isn't true.

  189. Re:"User Friendly" is more than a simple GUI. by nodrama · · Score: 1

    Why so obsessed with grandma/mother/other generic computer illiterate?

    In the short term they may be a market, but in the longer term (10yr+) everyone with any real stake in society will have some level of computer fluency. Most new jobs are computer based, the educational systems will follow. In the long term the 3Rs will become the 1C. Today if you cannot read or write than you will be precluded from using many modern "tools" (try opening a bank account). In the future if you can't operate a computer you will be similarly deprived, regarless of whether it is right, wrong, or fair.

  190. Re:"User Friendly" is more than a simple GUI. by nodrama · · Score: 1

    I don't believe you 'got' what I was trying to say. Let me spin it around.

    In the future some people will be left behind. They not have minimally sufficient computer skills, and will be marginalised by society, I.e. no access to 'basic' services (see the illiterate bank account example).

    Not a utopian vision, but IMHO a likely outcome. It is not an issue of OS (op-sys) or OS (o-source).

    The point is that catering for low skill users (grandma) will become a moot point. Low skill users will become a marginalised group and left behind.

    You are absolutely correct when you ridicule the "merged harmoniously" concept. There will be more divergence from a user POV that will leave low skilled users on the outer.

    Currently a entry level user must develop some basic windows and win apps skills. In the future everyone will be expected to operate divergent interfaces on their phones, car, PDA, stove, fridge, ...

    To sum another way: In the future you won't let your dvd blink 12:00, because that would indicate your probably not capable of setting up your on-line PDA or operating your car.

    So who cares if grandma can't use Linux, her ilk wont matter 10+yrs down the line. Of course grandma can choose to learn.

  191. Re:Good Point (it's all about the $$$) by mistalinux · · Score: 1
    Why just Linux. If they have there head screwed on they should be able to get it to compile on other Un*x's. FreeBSD at least.

    The pointy haired suit wearing VC(s) would be much more willing to give out money to someone looking to make Linux easier to use, rather than FreeBSD. Linux is the hottest, latest buzzword, whereas FreeBSD is a small whisper in the corner.

    Right now, that's just how it works.

    --
    Sosumi. just kidding. DONT!
  192. Re:I don't get it. by Barney · · Score: 1

    I agree with much of what you say.

    Bulletproof install: works if you know the configuration ahead of time. Barring that, the RH 6.1 install didn't hassle ME any. Win95 installs were usually fine, but I've had them go south on me. Not fun.

    Getting rid of stuff:
    No one seems to complain about the MS Dos prompt option, which is still on Win98 (I haven't seen 2k). Stripping stuff that you already have that is being adopted by others (separate user profiles in Netscape, Windows, etc.) is marketing suicide. Like you say, "power users" can know and use the cryptic command lines to get stuff quick. The GUI idea succeeded because normal users don't need the intricacy, but need the usual operations to be easy and impossible to forget. GNOME's explorer utility, and in fact all those GTK apps, are the beginning. I think it might surprise some of us how satisfied "granny" can be with a GNOME desktop with some handy icons in the taskbar.

    The GUI must be slick:
    Everyone is for this, but I don't actually think it's a big deal. The GUI is supposed to be easier than typing. Easier in terms of knowledge and simplicity. That's it. I guess that ease-of-use, but easiest to use is awfully close to Macs: one button, one purpose, click everything that moves.
    Complication is death for GUIs.

  193. Re:Business model? by Schmerd · · Score: 1

    Yeah. If you have to read the documentation or pay for support, they didn't make it easy enough to use, now did they?

  194. Re:Look for something amazing from this project by DebtAngel · · Score: 1

    I said most of the time. That is the exception, not the rule. If I sat and thought about it, I could come up with a few more examples, but in general it's like WinZip:

    The Wizard is simple, but doesn't do much.
    The Classic interface is powerful, but is hard for newbies.

    You rarely get both. Which is really too bad, but that's life.

    --

    Is this post not nifty? Sluggy Freelance. Worshi

  195. Re:Look for something amazing from this project by DebtAngel · · Score: 1

    Simple: Easy to use IS good. Mind you: Powerful IS good too.

    Most of the time, however, Easy to use != Powerful.

    The apparent goal here is to get Linux on every desktop, and the way to do that is to make it easy to use. The nice thing about Linux is that, even after all of that, if you would rather do things the hard way, you CAN. While it would be nice to get my network card to work without using ifconfig (damn PC card, even in Corel Linux I had to write a script that called ifconfig to get it to work on a regular basis), it's nice to know the option exists (or, I would have to open the COntrol Center every time).

    Linux has the potential to be easy to use and powerful, all at the same time. So stop whining.

    --

    Is this post not nifty? Sluggy Freelance. Worshi

  196. Gnome unstable by nuttyprofessor · · Score: 1

    I would hate to build anything on top of Gnome.
    I have used gnome in the past from time to
    time, but eventually something always happens
    that places Gnome in some wacked state from
    whence I can never return. Gnome resembles
    an M$ product -- sex appeal sans stability.

    1. Re:Gnome unstable by ralmeida · · Score: 1

      I agree with that; but I replaced E by UDE's uwm -- a 90k size window manager! uwm is very different from all other WMs. Worth a look.

      --
      This space left intentionally blank.
    2. Re:Gnome unstable by davie · · Score: 2

      Right you are--I didn't mean to imply that E was part of GNOME, just that E and GNOME may not be the most optimal combination if you're looking for speed. I should have written "...if you're using E..."

      FWIW, I'm not slamming Enlightenment--E is what gets folks drooling over my Linux desktop, so I fully intend to maintain my E configuration and keep installing the latest cool E themes and stuff. When I set up my new laptop I'll probably use the same configuration so when I'm out and about I can grab folks' interest with E, then show them how flexible the "Linux GUI" (the term I use for their benefit since they usually assume that every OS has an integrated GUI) can be by switching to sawmill, WM, etc.

      --
      slashdot broke my sig
    3. Re:Gnome unstable by davie · · Score: 3

      I used to hold the same opinion of GNOME, but after updating all the modules to the latest stable versions it became pretty solid.

      Part of the problem with GNOME may be Enlightenment as the wm. I love E, don't get me wrong--it's the sexiest wm out there IMO, but it's just too much for my everyday use. I just recently built and installed sawmill, and the result is a smaller, quicker desktop that is very clean and configurable. With E, my 128 meg machine was consitently using about 40 MB swap, with most of that being X. The GUI was syrupy and just didn't feel right (prob. just some stupid configuration decision on my part). With sawmill, I'm using about 5-10 MB swap and everything's snappy. Now if I want to show off to friends, I use E, but when I'm working it's sawmill all the way.

      --
      slashdot broke my sig
  197. KDE @ RIT by SPorter · · Score: 1

    I was talking to the sysadmin who installed it last night and she said it was actually fairly simple to do. She installed it mostly because she preferred it over CDE but it has become rather popular in the CS labs. I think she said she only installed it about two weeks ago. FYI, one (or more) of the CS/SE classes at RIT uses kdevelop and it is also installed in the CS labs.

  198. About DDoS attacks... by hautis · · Score: 1

    CNet doesn't seem to respond. I wonder if some evil frustrated teenager somewhere has just sent instructions to bomb news.cnet.com down to all the machines he has compromised...

    I like and use KDE all the time, the other desktops I've tried are mostly more beautiful but otherwise crap, kind of unintuitive, too much animations and other useless shit, panels behave strangely etc. At least with KDE all the machines behave the same or can easily be made to behave. I think KDE is easy, too, and anybody that can use Windows could live perfectly well with KDE. The silly part is, there are practically no useful applications that support KDE. I use Gtk+ stuff all the time.

    I just hope this new "even-your-granma-can-use" desktop isn't just a Windows-like theme on Gnome. if it's something as well-organised as KDE, AND theme-and-stuff-compatible with Gnome, then I think it's good news.

    --
    NOSPAM@REMOVETHIS.NO.SPAM - you'll find the real address somewhere
  199. Re:Is this good or bad overall? by Schifter · · Score: 1

    Actually, I have a copy of The Adventure Shell, dating from 1984. it's basically a shell wrapper that emulates a text adventure. Might need some work to make it work right on a modern system, I don't know. If someone wanted to fix it up some, it'd be fairly easy, though probably just as easy to reimplement.

    Anyway, here's some sample output:

    Welcome to the Adventure shell! Do you need instructions?no
    You are in your own home. The room looks empty.
    There are exits labeled:
    advsh
    as well as a passage overhead.
    -> look
    The room contains:
    .inputrc .less .lessrc .logout
    There are exits plainly labelled.
    advsh .knapsack .limbo
    ... and a passage overhead.
    ->

    It's available here:
    ftp.gmd.de:/if-archive/shells/advshell.shar.Z
    There's another file in the same directory called advsh.tar.Z, which is apparently similar, though written in C, and which I haven't looked at.

  200. Make up your mind by Rares+Marian · · Score: 1

    Do you want configurability or vendor lock-in? Geez.

    --
    The message on the other side of this sig is false.
  201. About time! by supabeast! · · Score: 1

    One of the reasons I don't use linux very much is that it lacks the ease of use I need in a desktop system. Sure I can install a dozen different utilities and end up with something that is almost as easy to use as Windows or a Mac, and keep up with the updates to those programs, but it is far more efficient to just run Windows, especially now that Windows 2000 has created a much more reliable (In relation to Windows anyway, it still sucks compared to Linux for reliability) desktop OS. If someone could get me a linux distro where EVERYTHING, especially driver installs and file management were as easy as they are in Windows, Linux would become my primary OS on my non-gaming machines right then and there. And if someone knows of such a distro, please let me know!

  202. Re:Great idea.... by supabeast! · · Score: 1

    No decent web browsers is another reason I rarely use linux. Netscape blows ass in any OS out there. Opera is cool, but not all that friendly to neophytes.

    Like it or not, IE 5 is probably one of the best web browsers out there. It is still a big bloated mess tho.

    Hopefully if enough people BUY Opera for linux, at some point it will really go from a great web browser to a great web browser that anyone can just start using as intuitively as he would use IE 5.

  203. StarOffice as browser by FattMattP · · Score: 1

    Although a big download, StarOffice makes an excellent browser uner Linux. It even handles fonts very well.

    --
    Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
  204. Re:Duplication of Effort? by Ukab+the+Great · · Score: 1


    I've already been improving gnome faster than the gnome team. I'm currently killing all the poorly choosen keyboard shortcuts in gmc and giving the menus a more consistent layout, modeled after MacOS'. You'll see these things, plus spring-loaded folders (another mac goodie) and anything else I decided to include sometime in the near future. I might even code a set of *real* control panels if I have time. It's about time we had mac people get involved in the shaping of linux's user interface.

  205. Re:I can't think of a bigger waste of time... by Havoc+Pennington · · Score: 1

    Eazel is indeed working on GNOME itself, it is not a new desktop project.

  206. Heresy by Tim+Behrendsen · · Score: 1

    Sorry - I wasn't sure where the line came from, but it sounded lounge singerish.

    In future usage, I will be sure and credit BB King. :)

    I've configured zillions of ascii-based configuration files. As BB King once said, "The thrill is gone, baby."

    Better? I should make that sig someday.


    --

  207. Re:Windows is NOT easy to use. by AndyL · · Score: 1

    Why is this? Why is the prefured start menu configuration Start/Programs/Company/Application?

    It makes much more sense to group your applications by function and not by the company that makes them. Why put Age of Empires next to MS Word? Why not put it next to StarCraft?

  208. Re:Why does Aqua look so much better than GNOME? by sydj · · Score: 1
    GNOME. A desktop environment built on top of GTK which in turn is an X toolkit.

    Therefore GNOME does not "have" fonts. Neither does it force you to change that background. Or for that matter that style of titlebar (use a different WM theme). Don't like the amount of icons on the screen? Get rid of the one's you don't want. Of all the bad aspects of GNOME, and that screenshot you could have picked on, you picked on the ones that either don't exist, or are not GNOME's fault.

    The fonts are the reponsibility of the X server, (or XFS in newer distros). Short of dumping X there is nothing GNOME can do about it.

    GNOME should however adopt an official WM, and work on making it integrate well with GTK themes. Sawmill is a prime candidate for this.

    At the end of the day, it's just one screenshot. And one which was designed to demonstrate GNOME's component technology, not the beauty of the GUI. The Mac OS X one on the other hand was designed to do just that. Compare like for like if you're going to criticise. (That's not to say however that there are no criticisms, or that all of your criticisms aren't valid.

    Incidentally the GNOMErs do know that the UI aspects need work. That's why they've started up a project to improve them. How about lending a hand? The GNOME development site is here.

  209. Re:A better OS than that by deadl0ck · · Score: 1

    Umm, I can actually use something like this for my wife. :) I had her using a text based menu, which she didnt like. A GUI based menu would be even better.
    --

    --
    --
  210. Accessible doesn't necessarily mean dumb by fantomas · · Score: 1

    I agree with Cheerio Boy here.

    Open source is great, I want it to be the future. But the learning curve for someone who hasn't had a full on computer background sucks. I've got lots of graphic designer friends who think the concept is cool and would love to move over to Linux/ Open Source/ GPL software but when they find out what you have to do to get it to run on your computer (usually a Mac for them) they freak, and say "actually I think I'd rather stick with Adobe/Microsoft products, dealing with them is manageable".

    Me, I'm a librarian turned academic researcher who loves the whole Open Source movement but finds the idea of working out how to get my modem or printer working with Linux instead of Windows or Macs absolutely terrifying (found some HOWTO's and that did it for me). Somebody write some user friendly interfaces and manuals and you'll find an awful lot more sympathisers turning into active users.

    (rant) I understand that some humans gain satisfaction from being part of arcane groups and don't actually like freeing up knowledge.(/rant)

    As they say in the library world - everybody is a beginner in something.

  211. Interesting Idea by ebcdic1 · · Score: 1

    Maybe these dudes should plan a field trip out to Xerox headquarters before they really get going on this....just a thought -I have two brain cells remaining, and they are fighting....-some guy with two brain cells

  212. Re:Don't forget the keyboard support by spiralx · · Score: 1

    Damn straight :) I don't have a mouse at the moment seeing as my (very-old) PC is on its last legs, and one thing I can say about Windows is that I can do everything w/o a mouse. There are keyboard shortucts for almost everything in the basic GUI, and with MouseKeys turned on I can control the pointer with the number pad. Without these features I might as well give up using it altogether.

  213. to the developers: please don' fork. by fsck! · · Score: 1

    to paraphrase a master:

    project forking leads to overlapping effort. overlapping effort leads to
    incompatible systems. incompatible Systems lead to the Dark Dide.

    my plea to the developrs of this system: don't fork Gnome. Gnome already has
    a huge following and a lot of work has gone into it. it's bad enough having
    to decide between KDE and Gnome. adding a third will not only make it harder
    for new users to choose, it will alienate current users.

    speaking as an avid gnome user, can honestly say that gnome is a good idea
    that really needs help. a lot of work should go into unification of design,
    and i hate to mention it, but speed too.

    a powerfull interface is what makes an operating system worth using. unix
    worked for so many people in the beginning beacase of how easy it was to
    tell the computer what you want it to do. now that the industry expects you
    to do this graphically, we need people like you that know how to make
    powerfull GUIs.

    i've never used AOL, but if the number of people that use it is any
    indication, you folks must know how to make a computer system easy to use.
    the same could be said for apple, and apple systems are used by the
    technocrats as well as the grandmothers. kudos to you for that.

    lastly, good luck.

  214. Re:danger... by radish · · Score: 1


    Another thing "mere mortals" want is an all-graphics interface; everything point and click. Hmm, I can't see how something like:

    rm `ls -l|awk '{print $3}'|grep "juser"`

    could be graphical, not with the same flexibility and any kind of Unix without the pipe/redirect capabilities would be kinda stupid.


    How about this:

    You have a window view something like windows explorer in list view, with a column for "owner". You switch to this view, sort by owner (click on the column heading), locate the group of files belonging to "juser" and rubber band them. Then drag them off to the delete bin.

    Now I realise that it seems more long-winded, but it is fairly intuitive and I think the average windows user would understand it much more easliy than firing up a shell. And of course you would have lots of fun if you decided to try and recurse or something clever like that; I have yet to see a gui which lets you easily perform the same operation over a whole directory tree. There must be a way!!

    --

    ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

  215. KDE 2.0 will fix much of that by browser_war_pow · · Score: 1

    The only thing that KDE needs is to adopt a BeOS like usage of MIME. BeOS adds the MIME data as a file attribute thus all tracker has to do is get a list of attributes from the folder. KDE's file manager unfortunately has to guess what type of file a given file is half the time. That said I think there is a resentment (and in many respects, rightfully so) of average users because they are what keeps the status quo in power. I would like to see the Linux team work towards making the kernel better with new hardware and take much less interest in older hardware. That is the difference between Be and the Linux team. Be knows that the future hardware IS ALL THAT COUNTS, yesterday's hardware will be meaningless tomorrow. Even though Be hasn't been able to get quite the support they want/need at least they have the right idea. Anyway KDE 2.0 will bring many features to Linux that have long been missing like a good GUI based web browser. Mozilla still isn't ready for public consumption. One thing that would be good is to add kernel support for Windows binaries so that a Win32 emulator could be made. It could be a case of a user pointing the emulator at the Win32/MFC libraries on their Windows partition and the emulator creates a pseudo-windows environment for the Win32 app. Similar to what Apple is trying to do in MacOS X with non-carbon apps from OS classic.

    1. Re:KDE 2.0 will fix much of that by mattdm · · Score: 2
      You should be able to do that now with the misc binaries support...

      --

    2. Re:KDE 2.0 will fix much of that by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2
      One thing that would be good is to add kernel support for Windows binaries so that a Win32 emulator could be made.

      "Kernel support" in what sense? Supporting exec-family calls being able to run Windows binaries (which may just involve telling the kernel to fire up Wine on them)? Or support in the kernel as necessary to make Wine work better? Or both?

    3. Re:KDE 2.0 will fix much of that by bero-rh · · Score: 3

      KDE can't modify the file system - therefore we can't add MIME types as file attributes (at least not without ugly kludges like creating .mimetypes files in every directory, containing a directory listing and mime types).
      That would require major kernel and glibc changes, and of course break compatibility.

      Old hardware, while not the most important thing, also needs to be supported - many people are running 486s or Pentium 60s as LAN fileservers or IP masquerading servers.

      Windows binaries: that's already supported. An emulator (not perfect yet) is available at http://www.winehq.com/, and you can use BINFMT_MISC for the possibility to simply run them as if they were Linux binaries.

      --
      This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html
  216. I wholly agree by browser_war_pow · · Score: 1

    Perhaps what needs to be done is we need to spend less time worrying about Linux and more time worrying about the adoption of open source ideology among Windows and Mac developers. There is already a strong growing open source movement among BeOS developers and Be encourages such development. They figure they make the platform, you make the apps.... and that is why BeOS has a better chance of making open source shine in the public's eyes than Linux/BSD. Be fully documents everything as far as their API goes because they have everything to LOSE by not doing so since all they make is an OS. So what you get is a very powerful, slick commercial quality OS that is open source developer friendly.

  217. Re:Look for something amazing from this project by yugami · · Score: 1
    Just because someone doesn't care about their computer for its own sake doesn't mean they should be forced to use an inferior operating system. I would very much like to be able to recommend linux to my friends, but right now although I use it myself, I would definitely not recommend it to most of my friends.

    no they don't have to use linux, or an inferior OS, just suggest Be to them, and all is good.

  218. Reality Check by RickHunter · · Score: 1

    Please tell me the line in the GPL that says you can't charge money for software under it. As far as I can remember, the major selling point for getting corporations to use it is that they can sell the software. Of course, they generally have to do it for a good price, otherwise someone will just read the code and write something 90% compatible that will do the job better for a lower price. Probably one of their competitors.


    -RickHunter
    --"We are gray. We stand between the candle and the star."
    --Gray council, Babylon 5.
  219. Re:What Lusers! by RickHunter · · Score: 1

    Well, if this is true, things don't look so hot for Eazel. I suspect that any neophyte employees they hire will get a crash course in "Linux culture" at some point. Then, if they do get treated badly, I suspect support will evaporate.


    -RickHunter
    --"We are gray. We stand between the candle and the star."
    --Gray council, Babylon 5.
  220. Re:No one would pay for this - its no big deal by RickHunter · · Score: 1

    The points I was trying to make were:

    • You can charge money for open source or free software.
    • Most people will pay reasonable amounts of money for quality software. Note to Adobe: Your programs are mostly good, but not worth several hundred dollars apiece.

    I wasn't saying I'd pay for this, no. I couldn't even find anything on the website about what they'd done so far. If it were a really good shell program, I might pay a reasonable sum for it.


    -RickHunter
    --"We are gray. We stand between the candle and the star."
    --Gray council, Babylon 5.
  221. Re:danger... by cowscows · · Score: 1
    I don't think this is intended to become the desktop of choice for current linux users. Current linux users complain about the MacOS being too childish and limiting, and this project intends to simplify things even more. I don't see why people are so concerned about having just one desktop metaphor for everyone. People are different, they think differently, they work differently, the comptuer should adapt to them somewhat. There of course needs to be standards and such to make things work together, but it doesn't need to be so extreme.

    The standards and protocols that we really need to worry about are file and documents. Until there are better standards and wider support for things like word processor documents, a computer is still going to need more help than the "mere mortal" wants to worry with.

    And if linux truly wants to go mainstream, it'll have to be in a significantly different form than how it currently exists. Most people don't need the majority of features that linux offers. They don't need the infinate customability and such. The only reason I see for even trying to put linux on the desktop of such a person is because even the "mere mortals" in the computer world deserve an OS that is secure and stable. And you can have secure and stable behind all sorts of interfaces.

    --

    One time I threw a brick at a duck.

  222. Re:This is good news by Karellen · · Score: 1

    "The Linux Community" will not be dropping legacy support if this were to come about. This would just be dropping legacy support for a particular GUI that is primarily aimed at Joe Q. Public.

    And Joe Q. Public doesn't ordinarily have a 486 or an old Pentium. Oh no. He has a PIII-500 to do his word processing on, because that was what he was told he was needed to do word processing. He doesn't get something cheap from somewhere, he gets a brand new box from a chain store and pays over the odds for it. But he does get all the brand new p'n'p hardware and all the perhipherals to match.

    The only people I know running 486s and old pentiums these days are todays 386 basement hackers that know they can get some use out of old computers if they have an OS that doesn't require 32Mb to run, but is tricky to set up.

    I think that by dropping support for old hardware that is hard (or impossible) to make one-click installations for, on a system designed for one-click installations only is an OK thing to do, providing you don't make it mandatory for the whole OS. Which no-one was advocating in the first place.

    K.

    --
    Why doesn't the gene pool have a life guard?
  223. Re:Unless it comes with a one button mouse. by RoninM · · Score: 1
    If I can't get that from Linux anymore,...

    Who said you couldn't? You still can. And for people who want a prettier, more "user-friendly" UNIX, they can have that, as well.

    It's about creating new choices, not limiting the ones you have. It'd be non-sensical for Linux to move away from the CLI, and it's NEVER going to do that. So you can have your CLI, and Joe Newbie can have his GUI, and we all can have a good operating system underneathe us.

    --
    If a corporation is a personhood, is owning stock slavery?
  224. Re:Modularity by razvedchik · · Score: 1

    I think we have the same idea here, we're mostly discussing semantics.

    As far as using the easy-but-restrictive interface in everyday use, I think that's a fair idea, and I do see your point that some users won't want to "graduate" to bigger-better things. That's OK with me. Just give me the choice to use whatever level that I want to.

    --
    I do what the voices on my console tell me to do.
  225. Re:Things can change by hoss10 · · Score: 1

    Thanks for the clarification.
    I suppose it's a bit late to reply (3+days after the story) but i think the desktop switchers in G/K don't implement like i said before but just send a message to the wm saying "would you mind changing to this desktop?".
    Anyway, the thing I'm most curious about is why KDE has one default standard windows manager. Unless that particular one is the most customizable wm ever then i don't see the point. Now I really need to free up space to install KDE - I think that win98 partition is going to have to come off, it's not been booted in a loooooong time :-)
    --------------------------------------------- ----
    "If I can shoot rabbits then I can shoot fascists" -

  226. Things can change by hoss10 · · Score: 1

    K and G are the obvious contenders now, but things can change very quickly in computers and while I wish these Eazel people luck I hope they don't dumb it down too much. There are many more "features" than the two I listed that could confuse newbies (be they newbies to computers in general or newbies to Linux).

    I hope they stick to the policy on their main page: And we'll do it in a way that appeals to today's Linux users and to mere mortals

    PS: GNOME supports loads of virtual desktops (in fact 2x2 the default, I don't know what K's default is, it's been a couple of years since I used it, I must try it again actually)

    Technically, it's a wm feature isn't it? So, GNOME/KDE support but don't implement them
    -------------------------------------------- -----
    "If I can shoot rabbits then I can shoot fascists" -

    1. Re:Things can change by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2
      K and G are the obvious contenders now, but things can change very quickly in computers and while I wish these Eazel people luck

      You are aware (as Havoc Pennington, GTK+ developer at Red Hat, has pointed out several times in various replies to various comments) that Eazel are not doing a new desktop, they're doing the next generation of file manager for the GNOME dekstop, right?

      PS: GNOME supports loads of virtual desktops (in fact 2x2 the default, I don't know what K's default is, it's been a couple of years since I used it, I must try it again actually)

      2x2's the default in KDE, as well.

      Technically, it's a wm feature isn't it?

      The switcher is in the KDE and, I think, GNOME panel, which is a separate program from the wndow manager, so, no, it isn't necessarily a WM feature, although the WM may do some of the work, and one could conceivably run a WM that does its own virtual desktops.

      So, GNOME/KDE support but don't implement them

      As GNOME doesn't (yet?) have a default standard window manager, if some of the virtual desktop switching is done by the WM rather than by the GNOME panel, one could say that GNOME doesn't (yet?) provide all the support for virtual desktops.

      KDE, however, does have a default standard window manager, so it does implement virtual desktops.

    2. Re:Things can change by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2
      Anyway, the thing I'm most curious about is why KDE has one default standard windows manager.

      So that somebody can have KDE provide their desktop environment; the window manager provides part of the desktop environment, so KDE includes a window manager.

      Unless that particular one is the most customizable wm ever then i don't see the point.

      Why would it need to be "the most customizable wm ever"? If somebody wants a different window manager, they can choose a different one, although they may have to tweak files by hand to do so, and not all window managers will necessarily support all the KDEisms that the KDE window manager supports.

  227. Good Point by hoss10 · · Score: 1
    Our goal is to establish Linux as the desktop of choice for millions of users

    Why just Linux. If they have there head screwed on they should be able to get it to compile on other Un*x's. FreeBSD at least.

    Is this GNOME's fault. I've never thought about it before but does GNOME and/or KDE work on anything other than Linux.

    Now, back to the post i'm replying to. I wonder if X will always be the protocol used. Is it that old now that it could do with a complete replacement - called Y maybe :-)

    I wish I knew more about the exact details of how X works low level - is it an old program patched and extended into a mess or is it as efficient etc. as it could be?

    Now to go off-topic:
    In the case of fully GNOMEified programs (can you come up with a better name for programs that stick to the gtk instead of making "direct" calls to X) if this Y became the standard would it just be a case of rewriting the gtk or would the apps need to be patched also?
    ie: Just to satisfy my curiousity, can you write X apps that don't need to make calls to X! Tcl/Tk aside.


    ------------------------------------------------ -
    "If I can shoot rabbits then I can shoot fascists" -

    1. Re:Good Point by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2
      In addition to the normal "update everything at once" that all GNOME users have to do, he has to go through and patch all the Linux-isms.

      Is he then sending those changes back to the GNOME folks? If not, he should (assuming he hasn't already done that without success). If so, are the GNOME folks then picking them up (assuming they don't break other platforms, say)? If not, they probably should.

      This is one of the problems right now in general, in that the skill of portable programming is fading and many (certainly not all) coders are writing for Linux not Unix.

      Is it fading, or was it not ever there as much as one might like? I.e., is this a case of programmers now writing for Linux rather than, when possible, generic UNIX, or is it a case of programmers now writing for Linux rather than writing for, say, 4.2BSD, or SunOS 4.x, or...?

      (And are they writing for Linux, or for Linux/x86? "I don't have to worry whether this pointer points to an address aligned on a 4-byte boundary, right?" If you want your code to run on all the various non-x86 Linux systems, much less non-x86 non-Linux systems, yes, you do.)

    2. Re:Good Point by pestel · · Score: 2
      Is this GNOME's fault. I've never thought about it before but does GNOME and/or KDE work on anything other than Linux.

      GNOME and KDE both work on FreeBSD and I believe Net and Open as well. Is it easy to keep GNOME updated? It's hard as hell as I'm sure the FreeBSD GNOME port maintainer will tell you. In addition to the normal "update everything at once" that all GNOME users have to do, he has to go through and patch all the Linux-isms.

      This is one of the problems right now in general, in that the skill of portable programming is fading and many (certainly not all) coders are writing for Linux not Unix. This shows up in Linux specific system calls when there are other calls that work fine for all Unices.

    3. Re:Good Point by JabberWokky · · Score: 3
      >> Our goal is to establish Linux as the desktop of choice for millions of users
      >Why just Linux. If they have there head screwed on they should be able to get it to compile on other Un*x's. FreeBSD at least.
      Is this GNOME's fault. I've never thought about it before but does GNOME and/or KDE work on anything other than Linux.

      The KDE team takes pride in the number of systems that will run KDE -- they claim more than any other windowing system. Quite a bit of work has gone into both system irrelavance (bigendian or littleendian), and language irrelivance (16 bit strings, and text automatically paints left to right or right to left depending on the language it is written in... neat watching it's accuracy with Hebrew sentences quoting English and visa versa).

      I know that the Japanese KDE is fully featured and translated. I know a fellow who uses it, along with his mother, who dosen't speak english (well, almost none).

      Several of the main developers use Solaris, and BSD is common on the developer list, so the "big three" are represented well, along with AIX and a few others that I can't recall off the top of my head.

      --
      Evan

      --
      "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
  228. UI Standards by hoss10 · · Score: 1

    In a sense I hope this doesn't lead to a standardised GUI.

    Why? Because whatever standard is chosen will be the one that is easiest for complete newbies (no virtual desktops, either 2-button or, god forbid, 1 button). Basically, no customization.

    Whatever does _win_ (Gnome/K/Eazel/mixture/NoneOfTheAbove) it should mix simplicity AND power. What I mean is the defaults should be simple but if you want Ctrl-Alt-Middle Button to put the current app in bottom right desktop and minimized then that should be possible!

    I want to be able to be easily able to edit (scriptable or something) what each button on the title bar does. There are some cool ideas from Nut&Bolts (Win95 utility now owned by McAfee I think) for open file dialogs that I want.

    All these buttons and whatnot may confuse users so just have them disabled by default.

    Enough of my wishlist. I want to be able to get cool new productivity tricks without having to replace my WM and learn how the new one works


    ------------------------------------------------ -
    "If I can shoot rabbits then I can shoot fascists" -

    1. Re:UI Standards by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2
      Because whatever standard is chosen will be the one that is easiest for complete newbies (no virtual desktops, either 2-button or, god forbid, 1 button).

      Indeed? The two biggest desktop candidates both, as far as I know:

      1. support virtual desktops (KDE definitely, GNOME almost certainly);
      2. support 3 mouse buttons (with the "standard" UNIX/X interpretations for common cases).
  229. Re:Windows is NOT easy to use. by GhostCoder · · Score: 1

    There is a Windows interface design manual that outlines the ways applications should do things. If Winamp comes along and decides to make Ctrl-P be 'Preferences', then shame on Winamp, but that's their prerogative. I know that in just about every application that's worth it's salt, I'll be able to use Ctrl-C, Ctrl-X, and Ctrl-V to do my Copy, Cut, and Paste operations. Or Ctrl-Ins, Shift-Del, and Shift-Ins. Or Alt-E, C; Alt-E, T; or Alt-E, P. Or Shift-F10, C; Shift-F10, T; or Shift-F10, P. The alt's and Shift-F10's aren't really shortcuts, but a shortcut way to navigate through the menus.

    Yes, there is more than one way to do it, and on most applications they implement all ways. But Rarely (have I ever?) come upon an app that uses something completely and totally non-standard.

    What everyone SHOULD be worried about is that this new Linux Desktop further fragments the market. You say things are inconsistent on Windows, what happens when you now have more desktops than desktop productivity apps? In addition to each app for Linux having been written by someone that doesn't believe in following the norm (you think just because someone thinks they are too leet for a particular OS will think that his app should use the same shortcuts as everyone else? :) but each desktop is different from the next. If you go to Win9x, Win2000, or WinCE you are presented with the same interface, same shortcuts, same interface paradigm. Go between KDE, GNOME, E, Nautilis, FWM, etc and you are presented with different interfaces, even different between the same desktop program. You have a trade-off: the more customaization you allow, the more fragmentation you end up with.

    Just freaking make up your minds already and pick an interface that use Microsoft users can bash equally. :)

    Disclaimer: These opinions are my own, not those of my employer. Deal with it.

  230. Re:Windows is NOT easy to use. by GhostCoder · · Score: 1

    Well, shows how damn confusing it all is. :)

  231. Re:uh... isn't this nautilus? by molog · · Score: 1
    Hmm, it seems that they are going with the Be look for their stuff or the screen shoot was of Nautilus using a Be like theme. Are they going to try to copy the Be interface? Just wondering.


    Molog

    So Brain, what are we doing tonight?

    --
    So Linus, what are we going to do tonight?
    The same thing we do every night Tux. Try to take over the world!
  232. Go ahead and flame me, I think it's great! by Dman33 · · Score: 1

    I see this as an excellent stepping-stone for new linux users! One thing that is killing Linux in the PC desktop environment is that people are sick of taking the time to learn new stuff. Most users are just glad they kinda got Windows 9x figured out and they figure that if it is not broken, why fix it?

    The fact is that it is broken, and the only way to get them to see the light is to offer something that is intuitive and does not require much knowledge to get things done! This is just to introduce the user to Linux, not a distribution that they would use forever! The cool thing about Linux is that once the user thinks that the OS is too dumbed down, or they have time for a challenge, or thier skills grow out of the easier distrib, they just install another distribution!

    This is what Linux has been missing; a nice simple distrib that gets the user acquainted with the OS. That way they are actually learning the OS very gradually. Then they can go from there!

  233. Re:"User Friendly" is more than a simple GUI. by rsborg · · Score: 1
    In the short term they may be a market, but in the longer term (10yr+) everyone with any real stake in society will have some level of computer fluency.

    No offense, but you are *so* off the mark here, and here's why:

    1. This is a chicken-egg problem, so maintaining that "everthing will be merged harmoniously in the future ala Scott Adams' vision" is myopic thinking.
    2. The consumer market is not big $$, but as MS has recognised, you gain significant mindshare. This is a significant reason why some PHBs choose NT instead of *nix...
    3. OpenSource(tm) scales *much better* than proprietary models with respect to number of users (all beta testers + some hack-meisters)
    4. World domination requires (l)users
    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  234. They're not going far enough! by -brazil- · · Score: 1

    Mark my words, we will see another such project in the near future, claiming to build a desktop that "your grandmother can use"!

    --

    The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer.
    --Henry Kissinger

  235. I don't know! - please explain? by gatekeeper-eu · · Score: 1

    Why the disparity in system memory usage of E + Gnome? One with no swap space, one with 128Meg and most of it used and one with 16 meg and 20 Meg swap! The Math does not add up! Does anyone have the facts?

  236. Let it be smart AND stupid ... just not mediocre. by ikaros · · Score: 1

    The only solution to the concern about the 'dumbing down' of Linux is to let projects like this, that are geared towards the "less experienced" user, go ahead full-steam.

    In the long run, they'll probably learn enough of the system to be comfortable with making their own choices and can choose to move to KDE or GNOME or fvwm2 (my choice) or whatever. If not, well, hell, they're still on a Linux system and safely weaned off Redmond's digital crack.

    The advantage to Linux -- and more importantly, the advantage of OS projects in general -- is that they can follow tracks that serve the advanced and the beginning user simultaneously.

    The only real danger is in allowing the 'dumbed-down' version to become the standard as opposed to only one option of many. An affiliated danger is in not reaching out to the newcomers and trying to help them reach the point where they can decide for themselves whether they want the 'dumbed-down' version.

    So I agree here -- full speed ahead on the 'two-bit' interface. We'll worry about bringing the newbies up to the full dollar after bringing them on board in the first place.



    ikaros, who has been trying to convince his folks that he could make them a Linux box they could use

    --
    You're only as young as the last time you changed your mind -- Timothy Leary
  237. Cant catch a crackhead by SaiyajinTrunks · · Score: 1

    Just a thought: is this new development "Eazel" pronounced like the crackhead in Friday? Heh, like Craig says, "You know you aint be catchin' no crackhead!" What a mascot!

    --


    "You point your finger at the moon, the fool stares at your finger."
  238. Isn't that AOLs marketing? by Necroleptic · · Score: 1

    From the standpoint of how they are promoting it to be as easy as a grandmother to use, riddle me this!:
    How come people that have been using a computer for more than 2 months still not know how to use Windows? Thats right, you would have to make the GUI even easier to use (and extremely automated), to make it accessable to your mom, possibly beyond MacOS. Is that possible? Yes. But on the other side, there are people who need support with AOL, one of the most degeneratingly easy programs to use in the world, but with its ease of use, most functionality is lost. Will this also happen with this Eazel GUI?

  239. Re:Windows is NOT easy to use. by Daltorak · · Score: 1
    - What's the key combination to print something in Windows?

    Ctrl+P. Or... Alt-F, P... same as in KDE, generally...

    - What's the key combination to close a window?

    Ctrl+F4 to close a window in a multiple-document application. Alt+F4 to close the program itself.... same as in KDE.

    - What's the key combination to save a file?

    Ctrl+S... same as in KDE.

    - Where does Game X install itself in the Start menu?

    Any piece of software which has received a Microsoft Windows Windows-Logo certification, is required to ask you what location in the start folder to install. Incidentally, every game I've installed recently in Windows has asked me this (Ultima IX, Quake III, Unreal Tournament, The Sims, Alpha Centauri, Starcraft, and others). Oddly enough, the only recent game I've come across that -doesn't- let you choose, is a Microsoft game: Age of Empires II. Go figure...

    Precious few KDE (or GNOME) apps, especially the non-KDE (or GNOME) ones, actually install themselves into your "menu" anyhow. Certainly there aren't nice, organized links to things like the software's web-page, the documentation, and so on... A lot of Windows programs do this. KDE (and GNOME) do not, except on initial install of the operating system.

    Hopefully, -hopefully-, the good folks working on KDE 2.0 will address this issue, and come up with a really great system for installing/uninstalling software designed for their manager. It's about time we dump this text-based autoconf crap for GUI apps, and make install procedures "even your mother could use".

    (And before anyone extolls the virtues of the various GUI package managers, I've yet to see one that provides icons... and certainly none of them will propogate said icons for multiple users, so that distributing a new app to all of a machine's users (or uninstalling) is easy.)

    Daltorak.

  240. Re:oh.. CAN I??? by Nastard · · Score: 1

    they are no longer assimil^H^H^H^H^H^H^Haffiliated with aol/apple.

    i think that if we want to take a step towards userfriendliness, then this is the way to go. if anyone knows user friendly its aol and apple. haveing members of those teams cross over should be considered a huge victory for our side

  241. Re:Is this good or bad overall? by jallen02 · · Score: 1

    Here is a thought I have seen kicked around..

    This should NEVER replace good old fashioned debugging and writing clean and effecient code.

    Have a daemon I imagine it can be quite lightweight. All this daemon does is monitors a few programs and in the event of a hard crash/lockup instead of the "I had to run to another machine and telnet in to Kill X" This little daemon just kicks X around for a few and restarts it.

    Now the idea is *simple* enough sounding. Keep X running at any cost. How much actual interfacing with X is required I dont know?

    Another question is how much would a daemon of this nature drag the system down

    MY *guesses* are it would not be terribly overweight or inneffecient.

    Perhaps it could also interface with GNOME and every maybe 5 seconds save the desktop and all of the applications that are open etc. And in the event of a crash it wil restore your desktop.. I dont think that is to far away

    Jeremy Allen
    Jallen@idminc.com

  242. Re:Is this good or bad overall? by jallen02 · · Score: 1

    An additional thought that *IS* a dream until one toolit becomes *THE* toolkit. Along with saving the state of the user area and all. Every application has a standard interface and you can along with the user area snag the exact state of the application and in a somehow effecient manner write these to a file and when it crashes you can just restore the wordprocessor and spreadsheet.. and or web browser to what it was right before the crash.. But thats a pipe dream :-) But with almost all our major apps still open source maybe not?

    JA

  243. Cool! by Dysan2k · · Score: 1

    Ex-employees from 2 companies who really know what 'Ease of Use' really is are now working on a project to help Linux out! Perfect.. This is preciesly what it needs. Geeks are usually great coders, but typical fall short of the "What's easy for Mom to use" area. It's okay. We like things more complex than most.

    I'm really looking forward to seeing how they produce. If it was in Florida, I'd be working over there tomorrow!

    --
    -What have you contributed lately?
  244. Re:uh... isn't this nautilus? by NatePWIII · · Score: 1

    If it isn't it sure looks close...


    Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
    NPS Internet Solutions, LLC
    www.npsis.com

    --

    Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
    www.haidacarver.com
  245. Re:Look for something amazing from this project by squeaky+weezel · · Score: 1
    As many people have astutely pointed out, Linux needs a lot of work before it's accessible to the average user. But I think people need to realize that there are two distinctly different types of users in two distinctly different types of environments:
    • Home users - Ultimately, these people are responsible for everything on their machine. Security, permissions, configuring new hardware, etc. It's lovely to think of granny playing aisle riot and emailing her grandkids from redhat, but let's remember too that under this model GRANNY IS ROOT. Think about the ramifications of this. When she fires up her pre-installed OS, who's she going to log in as? What happens when she starts saving her recipies in /etc? I'm not saying that linux can't evolve to meet the needs of these people, but it will definitely take a lot of time, and as others have pointed out, will probably require linux to turn into something muuuuch different than most /.ers know and love.

    • Workplace users - this is the target. Linux is a complex multiuser environment that realistically requires a systems administrator, if only occasionally. The workplace provides exactly that. IT can set up the system, assign a login, provide tips and hints on how to do certain tasks, restrict access from places where people shouldn't play, configure new hardware (and when necessary, software), be there to answer questions, etc. For the user the experience is relatively hassle-free and as time passes, they may even begin to learn a bit beyond point-and-click. As more time passes and they've developed a basic competency, then maybe they'll install it on their home machines. They'll be around to show it to their neighbors, evangalize how cool it is, and help them get set up.

    The whole emphasis is wrong, provided there even is an emphasis (which there doesn't appear to be). Screw granny, and target Bob Smith, CPA. Smooth the learning curve so that the first few weeks' experience will not be one of continual frustration. In other words, seed the home market through the workplace.
    --

    --
    "Caricatures shown not intended to depict Artemia salina"

  246. Re:danger... by Bug-Y2K · · Score: 1

    Another thing "mere mortals" want is an all-graphics interface; everything point and click. Hmm, I can't see how something like:
    rm `ls -l|awk '{print $3}'|grep "juser"`
    could be graphical, not with the same flexibility and any kind of Unix without the pipe/redirect capabilities would be kinda stupid.


    Apple Computer's first UNIX (A/UX) had a way of doing this called "commando"... it was a graphical tool for builing command lines. While in a shell you could type a CLIU command, then type 'command k' and a window would pop up that had essentially all the "-whatever' flags for you to choose from. It would *tell* you what those flags would to and give you sample output. It also allowed you to redirect, pipe, etc. Very Cool.
    All this a an excellent MacOS Finder environment too.
    I still have a couple of A/UX boxen around for entertainment purposes.
    I've also been around unix too long as I've seen the wheel reinvented far too many times and it still doesn't roll that well!

    --chuck goolsbee
    seattle, wa

  247. Publicity stunt? by Karma+Sucks · · Score: 1

    This is not a new desktop. This is yet another GNOME application. It seems to be like KFM.

    Good one, guys.

    --
    (Please browse at -1 to read this comment.)
    1. Re:Publicity stunt? by Havoc+Pennington · · Score: 2

      It certainly isn't a publicity stunt, we tried to get Rob to change the headline from "New Desktop Project" to "Eazel contributes GNOME 2.0 desktop shell" or something, but it didn't get changed. The "new desktop" thing is entirely an artifact of Slashdot.

  248. Re:It's exactly what's needed for Linux acceptance by kkeller · · Score: 1

    upper management wants a 2 bit interface - Yes/No.

    I'm not sure upper management can handle such a complex interface. Think of all the decisions to make!

    One of the great things about open source is that programs can be whatever programmers want them to be. There isn't pressure to ''dumb down'' the interface, but the possibility still exists to do so. Linux (and the other open source systems like *BSD, HURD, etc.) will continue to evolve regardless of their ''market share'' against commercial OSes.

    Besides, Linux is *already* accepted--by many hard-core programmers, many of whom probably don't really care if it's accepted by the world of end-users. Those users who already accept Linux/open source are probably enough to keep the movement going, regardless of how many crappy OSes come out of Redmond.

  249. Best of Both (Was:Windows is NOT easy to use.) by rthardy · · Score: 1

    A GUI that ignores keystrokes won't make friends among power users. Sure, a point and click interface is easy to learn, but people are known to use a program for *years*. Given enough time, they will come to find keystrokes faster and easier and less strain on the wrist. By ignoring keystrokes, you are doing your part to keep them newbies forever (and Windows already does too much of that.) On the other hand, many if not most Windows programs *do* have a standardized keyboard interface; in that regard, they appear to have Linux beat.

    Same deal for dialogs. The newbies seem to prefer a neat hierarchy; the long time user would prefer to have everything in one convenient place. There, you may have to make a tradeoff, but not with keystrokes. A GUI design that ignores experienced users is making a big mistake. Likewise, an OS without a standard GUI interface is an OS with GUI problems.

    --
    Tom Hardy
    rthardy@enail.msn.com
    robert_hardy@blake.pvt.k12.mn.us

    --
    Tom Hardy
  250. Re:Business model? by Megane · · Score: 1

    Through a buyout, perhaps? Or an IPO? It seems these days you can do an IPO with no other source of capital than VC. You can be drowining in red ink, but as long as your product has the attention of enough eyeballs, the IPO crowd will love you.

    --
    #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  251. Cool stuff! by Shin+Elendale · · Score: 1
    This looks like something we have been wanting for a long time but are unable to create for ourselves: A (true) user-friendly GUI. Apple and AOL are two companies famous for creating easy to use interfaces. While AOL's interface is the equivalent of a straight jacket, it allows just about anyone to start up. You don't even have to click on the CD to install anymore, just put it in and click 'yes' to everything (save of course that evil, evil, default browser question). Hopefully this will get Linux converts on reputation alone. Perhaps it will add some Mac versatility too! I noticed a post about playing 15 year old games on the mac, I still have a conversion of Centipede on my Mac from 1987 :)

    -Elendale (Insert random AOL flame here)

    --

    IANAT (I Am Not A Troll)

    1. Re:Cool stuff! by Cheerio+Boy · · Score: 2

      And Maybe...just maybe...we' ll get an increase in the geek population so that we can move people towards a "thinking" base and away from the degredation of thought that has happened for far too long. :-(

      I hope this for all the world.


      The Tick - "Spoon!"

      --

      "Bah!" - Dogbert
  252. Re:Great idea.... by TheApproach · · Score: 1

    Look, most of us are geeks and we have all fixed computers belonging to Mums, Dads autie beryls and fred down the street because that's what we do.

    As long as Linux is stable, has an easy GUI and can be used with Micro$oft products then it becomes a viable alternative. The same goes for the "killer apps". They don't have to be BETTER than Micro$oft because they are FREE.

    When was the last time your mother installed a hard drive?

  253. No one would pay for this - its no big deal by rambone · · Score: 1
    Come on, look at what they have so far - would you pay for this?

    Its a glorified Midnight Commander.

    If I wouldn't pay for RedHat, I sure as hell wouldn't pay for some idiotic shell program.

  254. Bravo! No unix will or should be "easy to use" by rambone · · Score: 1
    I agree with your point emphatically. Its incredible how many lemmings think that this Midnight Commander rip-off is somehow going to catapult linux into the same realm as the Mac and Windows.

    Folks, it ain't going to happen. You still can't run any unix without knowing all about /etc and shell interfaces.

    Linux is a success in the serving business and as a low-cost technical OS. This is where it shines and its best hope for growth. Why people think they can somehow turn it into the MacOS is beyond me.

  255. Killing X would be stupid - techies love it. by rambone · · Score: 1

    Linux is an OS for people who already know how to use computers. Trashing X just to go after the home market (which linux will never capture anyway), would be insane - it wouldn't sell linux to any new users, and it would alienate the technical set.

  256. Aqua icons are not vector-based by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 1

    The icons that you see in those Aqua screen shots are just plain (although large) bitmaps.

  257. Re:Windows is NOT easy to use. by Tejota · · Score: 1

    Ctrl+P or Alt f p
    Alt+F4 or Alt f x
    Ctrl+S or Alt f s

    90% of games that I've seen ASK where to install themselves and default to Company Name\Game Name.

    Do a random survey of 100 Window's apps and you will find 95% follow these rules.

    Restrict yourself to applications written by MS or Lotus or Corel or other top developers of Windows app, and it will be more like 99% if not 100%.

    In other words, you don't know what the fork you are talking about.

  258. Re:Unless it comes with a one button mouse. by Chillas · · Score: 1

    I agree this is a good idea, and I love Linux the way it is. But I'd disagree that this is a 'dumbing down' of Linux. It's simply providing an easy-to-use shell, for those people who are afraid of the command line. Everything that Linux is and can do, all the functionality that we all know and love from Linux, will still be there.

    --
    --- Math illiteracy affects 8 out of every 5 people.
  259. Re:Windows is NOT easy to use. by Refrag · · Score: 1

    ALT+F, P
    ALT+F4
    ALT+F, S
    ...not Microsoft's fault, even though they don't set a good example. Microsoft Office should install to Start Menu\Programs\Microsoft\Office.

    --
    I have a website. It's about Macs.
  260. Re:I just hope it runs INSTEAD of X, not on top of by phife · · Score: 1

    Why? That's dumb. They shouldn't assume the user has only one display. I have several displays on some of my systems, and one on others. I like being able to install the same product on all of them and use them with the same ease. Why the hell should someone make assumptions about my system? To make life easy for developers? To optimize the OS to *your* system. If you want something customized to your display, write or recompile your own kernel, but X damn well better have networking code, and render to every display i tell it to!

  261. Re:Gnome unstable <- update to the latest and OK! by jerry-normandin · · Score: 1

    If your Gnobe segfaults or it takes forever to Start Gnome than you just need to install at least the October 1999 release of gnome and that problem goes away! I had the problem, I fixed it with the new relase. I'm hooked on it. I really like the Gnome applets. Try the weather applet, it's pretty cool!

  262. I didn't think this was a NEW desktop project?!?! by e_n_d_o · · Score: 1

    Isn't Eazel just making the new GNOME 2.0 file manager "Nautlius?" More information would be appreciated!

  263. Re:Unless it comes with a one button mouse. by Stary · · Score: 1
    And from what we've heard about Windows 2000 I think it's clear that it's not all that unstable.

    Uh, my Windows 2000 server (final release) bluescreens and dies belly up when you send it too big print jobs (note that too big in this case doesnt mean very big...). If a system is "stable", i'd like to think that it doesnt need a reboot when it's printer driver fails.

    Windows 2000 is cute. Thats about it... it looks nice and it has so many features you could (and probably will) drown in them. Cute... nice features maybe... but not stable.

    --
    Tomorrow will be cancelled due to lack of interest
  264. May I REMIND YOU... by jfwcc · · Score: 1

    ...
    that Linux is a UNIX workalike ?

    As a UNIX user, I notice that you are trying to give Linux an MS Window like GUI.

    I don't like that.

    > Windows without the X is like making love
    > without a partner.
    (By mwikholm@at8.abo.fi, MaDsen Wikholm)

    > As an added benefit, it would help everyone to
    > maintain clean hard drives free of all junk
    > files... deleting would just be too much fun!

    Why does a "Geek" need a "file manager" (or whatever you call it, what you're crying for) ?

    There is a tmpwatch script that automatically removes unneeded files.
    (Coincidence: just today it wiped off 100 MB on one of my machines.)

    A really good configured system maintains itself.

    Why must there be a "panel" on a GUI ??

    My afterstep config w/ wharf and zharf looks cool,
    does especially not look like MS Windows, and is way more handy - for newbies as well as for me.

    Problems to understand the filesystem ?

    Read the documentation and put your "Geek" sticker in the backburner until you understand UNIX.

    Then realize that Linux is a UNIX system,
    not something that is to be compared to MS Windows or MAC.

    If you don't like the MIT's X System, you're not a "geek" or "nerd".

    I like to type this on one machine, with the actual work being done on another machine on my LAN.
    How do you want to make this "handy" for someone who can't imagine that he's typing and reading on a machine, that doesn't really process the keystrokes ?

    GNOME and KDE are good for newbies - no question.

    But it's not something that a real UNIX pro would use.

    Fine day Everybody, george./

    1. Re:May I REMIND YOU... by Guy+Harris · · Score: 3
      GNOME and KDE are good for newbies - no question.

      But it's not something that a real UNIX pro would use.

      Define "use".

      I've done UNIX development, both kernel and userland, since 1977-1978 or so.

      I use a KDE desktop on my machine at home, including using, shock horror, the file manager for some things (I have a few PDF standards documents, and I find it more convenient to have a "Standards" folder on my desktop, and click it open, and then click on the relevant subdirectory and click on the document I'm interested in, than to go find an xterm not running something or put what's running there in the background, pushd to the appropriate directory, and fire up Acroread on the file in question). I also have another desktop icon to fire up xmms and have it play a local radio station.

      Now, for administrative stuff (on the rare occasion that it's necessary), I'll just go tweak the config files directly, blah blah blah - but there are, your apparent belief to the contrary nonwithstanding, reasons why "a real UNIX pro" might well use a file manager (why should I waste a perfectly good xterm firing up Acroread, when I could be using it to do compiles, or greps, or...? :-)).

  265. Best comment I've ever read !! by jfwcc · · Score: 1

    -
    The only thing is that I think Staroffice and finance apps are too complicated,
    but hey, I use the pgms I wrote myself to keep track of money and such.

    But no, I don't do my taxes in hexadecimal...
    george./

  266. Linux Goes Mainstream by jfwcc · · Score: 1

    -
    Yes folks, you are right.

    There's just something inside me, that doesn't like to be a face in the crowd,
    and doesn't like to make a kewl Unix System look like Bill Gate's best idea (to buy the original DOS code).

    If you want your mothers use Linux, then you are right.

    I don't [want that].

    I fear the efforts of the developers will very soon be financially abused by companies that are already on that track.
    It's not even Corel or IBM or DELL, just take RatHead.
    What these companies do is creating an easy-to-use OS (like MS Windows, for your mams) and make big bucks outta the work of real nerds who originally never thought about money.

    I don't like folks being abused.

    And I do NOT HAVE A CHOICE when it comes to GUI's for Linux.
    Afterstep is not what is was.
    It doesn't look like NEXTStep anymore -- it's MS Windows-, MAC- like... well, you can read it here on Slashdot.

    I'm part of a real minority - okay.
    But I just don't want stuff everybody has.

    I want something SPECIAL.

    Linux is/was something special.
    Not KDE or GNOME.

    Once it looks like MS/MAC, the thrill is gone.
    At least, for me.
    Fine day Everybody, george./

  267. Are we fixing the right problem? by Sheetrock · · Score: 1

    Don't get me wrong... I don't mind the idea of having an easy-to-use window manager (though I like Enlightenment) but isn't all of this competition over developing The Right Window Manager just going to create more confusion in interface design for Xwindows applications?

    This is one of those cases where I wish the designers could all just sit down together, talk about the current situation, and come up with a reasonable compromise. I like the ability to pick what I work with, but IMHO the competition in designing window managers is going to make it harder for Xwindows application designers to make their programs function robustly and consistently across different environments. Perhaps Xwindows itself could use some reworking for ease-of-use...?

    --

    Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
    -- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.




  268. Nautalis is Gnome by Xiphoid+Process · · Score: 1

    I'm not real sure how eazle is connected with gnome, but Nautalis is in Gnome CVS and is a central component of the Gnome 2 desktop.

    ---
    Xiphoid Process Records - http://xiphoidprocess.com
    San Francisco based electronic music.

    --
    got drum'n'bass?

    http://mp3.com/vitriolix
  269. IF YOU DON"T KNOW HOWRe:Windows is NOT easy to use by rayramon · · Score: 1

    Windows is hard to use at first, but once users get the hang of it and take time to learn it, like anything else it's not that bad.....

    --
    Ramon Ray, analyst @ editor, Smallbiztechnology.com
  270. Re:danger... by False+Data · · Score: 1
    I've had a day to think about it a bit more, and came up with what might be a half-baked idea, but what the heck - I figured I'd throw it out and see what becomes of it.

    I think the real reason computers are a pain to use is the paradigm we use when designing user interfaces: today's user interfaces are about telling the computer how you want it to do something, not what you want it to do, but most users are interested in results, not the process of getting those results.

    In The Beginning, computers didn't have a lot of power, so the user interface meant you had to tell it how to get from point A to point B in excruciating detail. We wound up with systems like Unix's command line shell, which gives you a small number of commands and the means to pipe the output from one to the input of the next until you build a composite command that does what you want - but to build that command you have to tell the computer what to do at each step in between. If the end result you want is "get rid of all the files belonging to the user named 'Joe'", what you have to tell the computer is "list all the files, pipe that result into a filter that looks for 'Joe' and rearranges the output a bit (awk or perl), pipe those results into a command executor (xargs), and pipe that output into the command that removes files."

    Windowed interfaces are largely more of the same - if you want to get rid of all the files belonging to Joe, you would go about executing a sequence of commands using the mouse: open a folder, sort by user, select a block of files, and drag to the trash can. It's essentially the same thing you did with Unix, just expressed a bit differently. In both cases, you're still telling the computer how to get to what you want, not what you want itself.

    I'm beginning to think that the real trick to getting computers that are easy to use is to shift paradigms - to begin thinking in terms of an interface where you tell the computer what you want and it figures out how to get there, as opposed to the more familiar concept of stringing together primitive commands.

    What would such an interface look like? It would have to have a large input vocabulary, so you could express all the possible goals you might be interested in - which probably rules out point and click. Beyond that, I suspect it starts looking more like AI than anything else, or at least like a system with a very large rules base and a pretty fancy abstraction system.

    It would make a very interesting research project for someone to create such a system that takes typed natural language commands from the keyboard and translates to Unix shell commands.

    I found out about Oxygen through Scientific American. Here's a link to the online summary: http://www.sciam.com/1999/0899issue/0899quicksumma ry.html . The actual issue has quite a bit of info. Here's another link, this one to the MIT web site: http://www.lcs.mit.edu/news/releases/oxygen040799 .

  271. Start over by Unknown+User · · Score: 1

    Gnome is unstable and lame (just an opinion) and Kde is better but still needs improvement. I think the only way to beat windows on the desktop is to have an aesthetically pleasing GUI designed to be simple. Better looking widgets are a must as well as simplicity. Also the apps need to follow the same user interface concepts as the GUI. This helps users learn to use both. The only answer is to start over from scratch

    --
    - NCP's are the New American Welfare System
  272. Thank God! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    This is the one area where that Linux really needs help. I have long argued that Linux was a horrible desktop product because of its lack of standards for the user interface. Of course, any time you say anything negative about Linux, the wackos moderate you down. Linux has shown itself to be strong in the serving area against all comers and goers but serving does not require a human interface, only a geek one.

    Apple's 10 year-old MacOS 6 is far more thoughtful to the needs of the basic computer user than the current desktops provided by GNOME and KDE. Mainly because these are products made by geeks for geeks -- your Grandma need not apply.

    Once a real human interface is developed for X, Linux can really break open the holy grail of the home & business desktop. Until then, Linux will be left to the domain of the geek and file serving. Kudoos to eazel!

    1. Re:Thank God! by Darchmare · · Score: 2

      Not to nitpick too much, but you should compare apples to apples. Look at the competition in the System 6 era. What was it that was so much better? DOS?

      Note that System 6 can multitask. Look around for information on Multifinder. Given the constraints of the platform at the time, it worked pretty well.

      Also note that each of those limitations has been fixed/changed since System 6, which was replaced nearly 10 years ago, and had been around for quite some time before. Double-clicking on files hasn't been changed (although there is a 'single-click' mode), but I don't exactly consider that a bad thing.

      The thing is, the basic concepts of the original Mac user interface were correct, even though they were constrained in some spots. Nowadays, designers have plenty of rope with which to hang themselves. It may be the original Mac's constraints that HELPED Apple design a simple OS that worked great for the masses.

      And yes, Aqua may very well destroy all that good work. We shall see.

      - Jeff A. Campbell
      - VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)

      --

      - Jeff
  273. Re:danger... by mosch · · Score: 2

    I hate to say this, but for *good* quality printing from *nix, I've found the available answers to be 'buy a postscript printer', 'buy a postscript printer', and 'buy a postscript printer'. Unfortunately it's quite hard to justify the cost of a Color Laserjet 4500 or other "low-end" colour laser printers.

    I'd be extremely happy if somebody could tell me how wrong I am.
    ----------------------------

  274. If you'll note... by Wakko+Warner · · Score: 2
    At no point in my original post do I mention any operating systems other than Windows and MacOS. I thought it was readily apparent that Linux's GUI, or lack thereof, wasn't an issue.

    Apparently, to most, it wasn't.

    - A.P.
    --


    "One World, one Web, one Program" - Microsoft promotional ad

    --
    "Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
  275. Re:built on gnome by Brian+Knotts · · Score: 2
    Yes qt 2.0 is supposed to be more open source-ish, but I think that a commercial entity would still have to have some license to sell there product.

    Not to be pedantic, but this is inaccurate.

    They would only need to get the pay license if they want to distribute without source. If/how much they charge, and whether or not they are a "commercial" organization doesn't enter into it.

    It's arguable that QPL is like GPL in this respect, and less like LGPL.

    New XFMail home page

  276. Not Mom and Grandma, it is the kids! by bluGill · · Score: 2

    My mom and my grandmother can both read. Both have not problem playing solitary, and they can write down all the nessicay steps to do so. THey could log into a cli, startx, move to the xterm and type xsol -preferences sol.pref -conf sol.conf -other stragne_option. If that is really what it takes. Yeah they'd hate it and wouldn't understand, but they can do this. They can even write down how to log out after words and do it.

    My uncle has 4 kid, the oldest is 6. I setup microsoft networking so he can print on his new computer (via some old 10base2 network that I discarded) to the old 486 that still runs quicken just fine but won't do the games that the kids play. The kids however cannot figgure out how to get past that log in screen. I had to disable that. He is better off using sneaker net (which he can figgure out via written insctructions) so that the kids can play their games.

    The kids can turn the comptuer on, and they can use the mouse to double click the game application on the desktop. Chaninging a CDROM is byond their abilites. (The oldest can do that, but the 3 year old would scratch the cd if they left them in her reach, and yes the three year old plays games on the computer)

    I've heard that KDM is a login that kids have a chance to use, if there is no password on the games account. (I can prevent the games account from loging in via anything but local connection if security is a concern) Can kids use the rest of the system? I've not tried to set my system up that way so I can't make more comments in this area.

    PS, why are their so few kids games for unix? We could use a few decerate the treehouse things that I see the kids enjoying now.

  277. Re:You don't get it. by Frodo · · Score: 2

    In fact, I'd not care if my {insert-non-educated-relative-definition} could use Linux. There's always some windows/AOL for it. What I care for if *I* can use it and if it's convenient for me. GUI firewall configuration is more convenient that ipchains -L/ipchains -A repeated, so I take it. GUI email clients aren't good with me, so I still use pine. That's what I want from Linux - to be me-oriented, not some imaginary super-dumb user-oriented.

    --
    -- Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes.
  278. Re:Why does Aqua look so much better than GNOME? by Frodo · · Score: 2

    Because you don't know to use/find right themes. Go and self-educate. BTW, I don't really like that theme - too artistic for everyday work.
    And bringing Mac theme to GNOME is work of few days or even hours. How much it would take to bring GNOME theme on Mac?

    --
    -- Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes.
  279. linuxconf by Frodo · · Score: 2

    Never heard that linuxconf ever required me not to touch config files. I touch them all the time and linuxconf seems to cope with it nicely.

    --
    -- Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes.
  280. What _are_ they really doing? by Christopher+B.+Brown · · Score: 2
    Maybe it's a secret project like Transmeta...

    Quite seriously, if it's to be useful, it should hardly be characterized as "Just A File Manager."

    Consider:

    • By characterizing what they're working on (whether there's a bit of inaccuracy or not) as a "desktop," this implies that it's intended to become a pretty all-encompassing interface.
    • When it starts getting "smart" enough that applications can get embedded into it, it's no longer as much a "file manager" as it is a document manager.

      And that is where it starts to get interesting.

    The thing about Linux, as it is today, that is kind of scary to people that need to think of computers as "appliances," is that it doesn't have a unified way of treating things as "documents."

    A "document manager" that lets you make sure that stuff doesn't get lost due to it falling into a directory that you didn't know you needed to look at is going to be the killer app of the next decade.

    I agree that Explorer is quite horrifying; I look at it as the "machine gun" of computing.

    People tend to be horrified at this analogy, but its ability to accidentally destroy files quite analagous to the notion of walking around the office carrying an M-60 with finger on trigger. You slip up a bit, and "Oops! I accidentally shot up 15 cubicles and killed 8 coworkers."

    If these guys can do some good HCI work, perhaps taking some of the better concepts from OS/2 and NeXTstep, and actually create a usable and powerful "document manager," this seems to me to be quite a worthy task.

    --
    If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
  281. Good point, however... by Millennium · · Score: 2

    Both of them do focus mainly on Linux. They do run on other operating systems (the sysadmins in the CS labs here at RIT recently installed KDE on the Solaris boxen) but Linux is still the OS they're most concerned about.

  282. Re:uh... isn't this nautilus? by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 2

    What i would like to see (note that I am not a big unix guy - this may already be possible) is a file manager in which 'rules' can be set up for how the content displays in the window for various directories, file types and files.

    (naturally they'd be overridable)

    For a similar thing, consider how readme files appear when ftping to particular directories.

    Various components could exist for html display (a linked library, i'd guess) or flash, or generic ls data, or whatnot. This helps preserve the unix philosophy of many small tools. The rule file merely calls different components according to the info in the rule file.

    CSS would probably be useful in designing the rules - letting the rule styles generally cascade down for consistency.

    --
    -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
  283. Re:The last big thing by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2

    Jakob Neilsen has some interesting stuff on his Web site, such as his Death of File Systems paper, on why he thinks that the hierarchical directory tree model isn't necessarily what you want to expose to the end user; there's also a paper by him and Don Gentner, Anti-Mac, with thoughts on what a different-and-possibly-better user interface might look like.

  284. They're not forking by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2
    my plea to the developrs of this system: don't fork Gnome.

    Havoc Pennington, GTK+ developer at Red Hat, said in this article:

    Eazel is indeed working on GNOME itself, it is not a new desktop project.
  285. Re:Consider General Magic.. it was awful! by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2
    To switch apps, you would have to walk "outside and down a virtual Main Street to find the correct building/app. yuck...

    That makes "switching apps" even more irritating than it is now. I might personally prefer an interface that exposes "apps" somewhat less - for example, if I'm editing a bit of source code, I wouldn't mind being able to put a link into it to a spec for the protocol it implements or dissects, and be able to click on that link, while editing the source code, to pop up a copy of the spec.

    I've wondered whether a document/hyperlink-based desktop metaphor might work better for my files - source files, specifications, notes to myself, Web pages on other sites, saved netnews articles, saved mail messages, etc., etc. - than the directory-based metaphor used by existing OSes/desktops. I hate having to manually search for the damn mail message/note-to-myself file/whatever that explained how to do XXX....

  286. Re:uh... isn't this nautilus? by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2
    Unix design philosophy makes use of small tools linked together not large software programs doing everything at once.

    I.e., components, such as Nautilus and, I think, the KDE 2.0 file manager will use?

    There are other ways to link tools together than to build shell scripts, pipelines, and the like.

  287. This is really cool! by mavpion · · Score: 2
    According to their web page, it's going to be released under the GPL. I like Gnome (and to a lesser extent KDE). However neither appears to be made with the rigid quality control (as in ease-of-use, not stability) found in Apple products.

    So I'm really looking forward to this.

  288. Re:What Lusers! by deeny · · Score: 2

    Speaking of Lusers, a private email from Andy Hertzfeld, in response to my post here, threatened that I was "subject to legal remedy."

    This makes it REALLY REALLY clear that Eazel Does Not Get It.

    Go ahead Andy, feel free. My address for service of process:

    Deirdre Saoirse
    2033 Sharon Road
    Menlo Park, CA 94025

    _Deirdre

  289. Re:Why does Aqua look so much better than GNOME? by Black+Perl · · Score: 2
    We've all seen these before, but compare them and think, "What is Aqua doing that GNOME is not?" Nothing!

    Actually, I can see a few things:

    • Transparency in the menus and dialogs
    • Anti-Aliased text
    • Sharp-looking icons because they are vector- and not pixmap-based, and will scale to any size and still look good.
    There are many improvements that you cannot see from a screenshot, such as the cool way the buttons throb, the 3d way the dialogs slide out of their windows, and the way windows iconize by being "sucked" down, bending and distorting like a genie being pulled into a bottle.

    This is because of Quartz, a new vector-based graphics layer upon which Aqua is built.

    Read the Ars Technica article for more info.

    --
    bp
  290. Re:Duplication of Effort? by um...+Lucas · · Score: 2

    It sounds like they're building extensions to GNOME... And it's all GPLed... GNOME people can grab whatever theyed like from it. So can KDE people. So if it makes good progress, expect to see pieces of it pop up all over the place, or even see Gnome co-opt it.

    An effort like this has needed to be started for a long time... Unfortunately it doesn't seem like enough of an idea to base a business on. Look: If it doesn't amount to anything, then no one want's it. IF it becomes the greatest thing since sliced bread, then it ends up being taken over or absorbed into Gnome, and in turn gets distributed with all the major distro's... Not much revenue for the original authors/concept people.

  291. Re:Unless it comes with a one button mouse. by um...+Lucas · · Score: 2

    Most people use windows because they're required to.

    Company's standardize on windows because the programs they want are available. Schools standardize on windows to help students use what they'll one day use. Homes standardize on windows because so students can stay compatible with their schools computers, parents can bring home work. That plus when they have problems, there's huge amounts more of Windows users that may be able to help them out...

    I don't think people use Linux because they're lazy... Unless laziness is not wanting to switch from what gets the job done to something they've just been hearing about for the past year...

  292. built on gnome by josepha48 · · Score: 2
    It is interesting that they chose to build on top of gnome. I guess the fact that if they decide to sell there stuff and it was based on kde there could be potential qt license issues. Yes qt 2.0 is supposed to be more open source-ish, but I think that a commercial entity would still have to have some license to sell there product. GNOME does not come with that kind of baggage. GNOME is also in C (AFAIK), so I wonder if they have C++ wrappers for it. (or do they already). My guess is that someone sees holes in the GNOME UI and they want to fill them. I have noticed that there are things that linuxconf do not do, that would be nice for sys admin. I still find myself editing many of my config files. There is no FE to hdparm, and modprobe.

    I do know that Linux has come a long way in the years that I have been using it and much of what I used to have to do by hand is now automagically done (ethernet was easy as is ppp). I look forward to the coming years and seeing the progression. I think that the more companies that get involved with Linux will be good for Linux. I already see more driver for Linux and support of some kind from hardware manufactures, the next thing I'd love to see is shockwave support, yes I have flash, but I want shockwave too. It would also be nice to see stuff apearing on Linux first and windows second. I hope I hope.

    I always have to laugh when my friends using windows have problems, and my Linux box is rock solid.........

    send flames > /dev/null

    --

    Only 'flamers' flame!

    1. Re:built on gnome by RNG · · Score: 2
      GNOME is also in C (AFAIK), so I wonder if they have C++ wrappers for it. (or do they already)?


      Yes. There's several. I've been using Gtk-- (available on soureforce) for a year now and like it a alot; it's nice to be able to use real inheritance rather than the casting madness Gtk+ makes you go through.

  293. um, what happened to by mcc · · Score: 2

    that other desktop manager that i saw posted here last month? like the one that was going to be seen as the alternative to KDE and GNOME.

    I can't remember it too well, except that it was apparently based on the Acorn interface (i think?) and it was based almost entirely on the drag&drop metaphor.

    Anyone who knows what this was want to correct me? I was really excited about this, i was hoping a linux file manager would come around that would embrace drag&drop-- right now the only GUI that has a truly developed idea of how drag&drop _should_ work (drag from ANYTHING to ANYTHING and have the software figure out how that amkes sense..)is the Mac OS. It would be nice to see more OSes that really understand drag&drop (which Windows never will..)

    Especially now that apple seems to be heading away from an application-based view of things (layers, the applications menu) and toward a window-based view of things (maximisation, minimising individual windows, the Dock, "virtual desktops" ala E or WM). forced "maximising" is not only in my eyes the worst thing ever to happen to GUI design, but it is the natural enemy of drag&drop. If my worst fears about Aqua come true.. bah, never mind, i'm rambling.

    Anyone rememebr the acornish thing's name?

  294. Kudos: They use 'hackers' correctly by griffjon · · Score: 2

    Despite their lacking business model, and the problems of creating a Linux frontend that anyone's Mom (excepting Dilbert's) could use without maybe interpreting Windows-keypresses as pipe functions, they get points in my book. On their front page, they say they're hiring hackers. And the mean CODE-hackers, not security experts, not white-hats, but honest-to-god, code-monkey hacks. What a concept.

    --
    Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
  295. GUI veterans? by Industrial+Disease · · Score: 2

    Sounds like a bunch of folks with some decent professional GUI experience. Hopefully, they'll focus more on usability than widgetry.

    --
    Weblogging Considered Harmful:
  296. Re:You don't get it. by Roundeye · · Score: 2
    3.Get rid of the UNIX model. Yeah, no more user IDs, passwords or any of that. It can be too confusing on your grandma to have more names and numbers to remember.

    4.Get rid of GNU. Yeah, that's right, drop the command line utilities that you know and love, and lose all that power. If granny can't remember her password how's she supposed to remember arcane commands?

    5.The gui must be the OS. This means, goodbye X. Most of the newbies who ask me for help request help with setting up X (well, networking comes close). X must disappear, or it must become so much a part of Linux that it's just there, and it just works, no matter what video card, RAMDac, or whatever the user has on their machine.

    Sounds like an "updated" version of windows or a working OS X to me.

    While that's what you may want, or you may want for the unwashed masses, I won't be using it (and neither will hundreds of thousands of other people who are the core of the Linux community). Some of us choose to use Linux for more than just the ideological reasons. Removing the ability to get under the hood and manipulate the system removes a very big reason for using Linux.

    Removing the user and permissioning model may make it easy for grandma to use, but it also reverts to the "useful only as an appliance" paradigm. If there is only one user then that user can do anything to the system (which is why "try reinstalling windows" is the most common final tech support answer), and if you restrict the capabilities of the user to damage the system you then create an appliance/toy that is of little use to most of us.

    Part of the problem with "the gui is the OS" is that in nearly every implementation I've ever seen, if the GUI has a problem you're left high and dry with no way to fix the problem -- because the GUI, which *is* the OS, is hosed.

    I would venture to say that you don't "get" Linux (or any UNIX or Unix-workalike).

    --
    "Cause there's 40 different shades of black, so many fortresses and ways to attack, so why you complainin'?"
  297. Re:"User Friendly" is more than a simple GUI. by Surak · · Score: 2

    She's about as computer literate as a house plant.

    Hey now! I'll have you know my house plant contributed patches to the 2.3.x series of kernels! :)

  298. Consider General Magic.. it was awful! by cpeterso · · Score: 2
    If these guys can do some good HCI work, perhaps taking some of the better concepts from OS/2 and NeXTstep, and actually create a usable and powerful "document manager," this seems to me to be quite a worthy task.

    Remember, these "top designers" worked on General Magic's cumbersome "Main Street" UI metaphor. To switch apps, you would have to walk "outside and down a virtual Main Street to find the correct building/app. yuck...

  299. BTW.. by cpeterso · · Score: 2

    Before someone says, "oh yeah can just add a purty theme for GNOME/KDE/X", I've never seen an X theme that doesn't look like Windows 3.1. Because the X themes and apps are so disconnected, there cannot be smoothly integrated. Maybe GNOME is working on this..??

  300. Linux Mag Article... by Arandir · · Score: 2

    In the current Linux Magazine, Dave Whittinger has a piece that takes a very controversial stand. And it has bearing on the issue at hand.

    He says, in order for Linux to succeed on the desktop, stuff like Eazel has to happen. However, he also says that either KDE or Gnome has to go. Developers have to band together and concentrate on one GUI library. He told distros to pick one or the other desktop and make it the standard.

    Now, the presence of a couple dozen different window managers, a couple dozen different file managers, a dozen widget libraries, and half a dozen desktops is way to much for a newbie to deal with. However, paring all this down to just ONE choice is the wrong way to go (let alone being completely unrealistic). It also ignores the fact that Gnome, GTK+, KDE and Qt are *NOT* for Linux. They are for X, and that means all of Unix, plus OS/2 and any other OS that has an X port.

    Many GTK+ developers abhor Qt and will never ever use it. And vice versa. Ditto for Gnome and KDE. I know people that will switch back to fvwm rather than *use* KDE. There are a few ecumenical souls out there who actually support both Qt and GTK+ interfaces, but they are rare.

    But Dave is correct about some things. It confusing even for experts when every other application has its own inteface. And every distro that is even vaguely geared towards newbies needs to pick a default desktop and leave the alternates on CD #2. And developers need to have good reasons before they start duplicating applications. Just saying "it's like kfoo but for gnome" isn't good enough.

    Although fifty or sixty standards are too much, I believe that Linux/BSD/Unix/X is big enough for two desktops and two widget libraries. But those desktops are going to have to learn how to work together smoothly.

    --
    A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
  301. Re:uh... isn't this nautilus? by Arandir · · Score: 2

    Taking your shell script analogy further, think of Nautilus or Konqueror as a shell. Then the component model makes sense. Konqueror does just one thing, and it does it well: it browses. It doesn't matter if I browse a file system, an ftp site or a web page. I'm still browsing. I'm still browsing in exactly the same way.

    Keeping everything small in the Unix model only makes sense if you're going to *USE* them. And you use them by putting them together with redirection, pipes, tees or scripts. That design philosophy can be restated as "componentize". That's exactly what konqueror is.

    --
    A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
  302. Re:uh... isn't this nautilus? by Arandir · · Score: 2

    Then keep your file windows small and your browser windows large. Nobody's stopping you. No one's forcing you to type an internet URL in you file manager.

    --
    A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
  303. "fork" != f-word. by Black+Parrot · · Score: 2

    Really. Having a choice is OK.

    --

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  304. It's all about components, baby. by RPoet · · Score: 2
    This is such a common, and utterly stupid complain. Go with the evolution - Nautilius is componentized. It IS no web browser, it simply HAS a web component which allows it to understand HTML, sometimes over HTTP. Building components for Nautilus will bloat it no more than kernel modules bloats the kernel.

    In fact, Nautilus isn't even a file manager, however it does have one among it's components, so it can be used as one if you feel like it.

    This is the way it's done these days, both in Gnome, KDE (esp. in the new Konqueror in KDE2), on the Mac and even in old (shrug) Windows.

    Here that sound? That's the sound of a thousand components coming this way.

    --
    "Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
  305. Is this good or bad overall? by angelo · · Score: 2
    Is this a good thing or a bad thing for us overall? Linux was always a hacker's system. If you didn't know how to compile something, you weren't likely to get far. RedHat fixed that bug.

    Now our desktop is too difficult to use? Which desktop? we have over 50 or so window managers, and 2 object models. I can see something based on gnome helping out, but what happens when JoeRandomNewbie loads up his pretty desktop and it proceeds to segfault? What if XDM drops him to a standard login prompt like when Windows can't load all of its dll's?

    Suddenly, cold hard reality sets in. This isn't MacOS. For it to be close, they would have to somehow castrate the shell interface. You can't really do much in BeOS until you drop to a command line. MacOS is good for new users because they CAN'T go to that level. Everything is taken in graphically, just as our minds tend to work.

    I once worked at Egghead. On the week following WIN95 going on sale, fielded many questions. One of the people there wondered if he had to use "DOS words" When I asked hem what he meant by that, he said "like name _period_ dat dat dat" and It dawned on me he was referring to filenames! This seems to be a common thought pattern among users out there.

    Linux not getting new users is all about the CLI. New users are afraid of it. If a "newbie" distribution is made, it would be accepted quickly, but what happens if it fails out of the GUI? Or if a release goes out that has something broken in it? And the usual questions like "does it run Word" comes to mind. Heck, if it runs on Intel hardware, and so does Windows, why can't it run Windows applications? You will have a lot of Linux users on paper but not in life. They would be Eazel users.

    While innovation is great, I think this project may do more harm than good. It will be good in the sense that a lot of UI work would be done. It would be great if it could be downloaded for free and used under any distro as a window manager. But how will Eazel make money if it is a company. There's the obvious support, but even RedHat sells a physical product.

    If they put it up for sale it may not reach full adoption like standard libraries such as GTK or tcl/tk or X protocol. But they probably have a plan to take care of this. I could be wrong, but they could just be the first with an idea.

    I know that the OS to most of us isn't the sum of its GUI and ease of use. It's the kernel and the applications. I hope the Eazel foks remember that. It's a different paradigm.

    1. Re:Is this good or bad overall? by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 2
      Everything is taken in graphically, just as our minds tend to work.
      Funny - my mind tends to work verbally, especailly when I'm making commands or requests. My mind thinks "remove all the object files", and rm *.o is closer to that than any GUI sequence I can think of.

      All other things being equal, a CLI is better when you want to ask the machine to do something. A GUI is better when you want to do something yourself and use the machine to replace a manual tool such as a paintbrush. Problem is, CLIs are too cryptic. Maybe we need a more natural-language CLI - I've got it! In addition to the Doom-like or Quake-like GUIs that have been suggested, we need a Zork-like CLI!

      GET ALL OBJECT FILES. DELETE THEM.

      I see no object files here!

      GO TO ./OBJ

      ~tms/obj
      This is the object file directory. Messy bunches of ones and zeros are all over the floor.

      EXAMINE

      You see:
      - an object file named xyz.o
      - an object file named foobar.o

      GET ALL OBJECT FILES. DELETE THEM.

      Done.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
  306. GUIs are no panacea! by angst_ridden_hipster · · Score: 2

    After giving my 86-year-old Grandmother a Windows box, I've learned a lot about how easy GUIs are to use. Or aren't, as the case may be.

    We talk a lot about "inituitive" GUIs, but that intuition has to be learned a click at a time.

    The whole single-click vs. double-click vs. click-drag is fairly arbitrary in the Windows world. For example, why are toolbars single-click, while desktop icons double-click? It's easy for people who understand the difference, but it's not easy to learn if this is all new and frightening.

    And especially for someone with coordination limitations, it's a real challenge to navigate and use Windows. Putting it into 640x480 mode on a 17" monitor helps, since it makes the icons bigger and easier to see. Putting the mouse on lowest sensitivity helps, except for the click/double-click timing issue.

    I think that if we want to get the largest audience, a purely menu-driven system (like old BBSes, or DOS using Peter Norton's menuing utilities from the days when Peter himself was writing 'em) might be the way to go. I dunno.

    --
    Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachtani?
    www.fogbound.net
  307. Duplication of Effort? by DarkFyre · · Score: 2

    Now, I realize that choice is a good thing. I think it's a good thing that Linux has two major consumer desktops (KDE, Gnome) and all of the standalone WMs that form much of the workstation market (AfterStep, CDE, etc). But really, is it better to start a new project for this kind of activity?

    I think it would be better for these developers to contribute to the existing projects. It's kind of a waste of man-hours to go about writing another window manager if Sawmill, Blackbox or E will meet their needs. Similarly, I think it's kind of a waste of man hours to go about trying to build another project with similar goals to KDE and Gnome.

    Besides, it may be special that they're starting to build this product, but who really believes that it will surpass Gnome/KDE? Even if they take the existing Gnome codebase and add modifications, I think it's unreasonable to expect that anyone else will be able to improve Gnome faster than the Gnome team. Both Gnome and KDE have built communities of developers and users, which help them develop better products. I don't think that this new entry will be able to do any more than the existing products, or advance at a quicker pace.

    Of course, I could be wrong. Actually, I hope I am. Best of luck, guys.

    1. Re:Duplication of Effort? by Havoc+Pennington · · Score: 2

      It isn't a new project, they are simply working on the GNOME 2.0 desktop.

  308. Re:Windows is NOT easy to use. by toastyman · · Score: 2


    Not to be rude, but:

    - What's the key combination to print something in Windows?

    Alt F-P

    - What's the key combination to close a window?

    Depends on what you mean. Alt F-C to close a document. Alt-F4 to close the entire application.

    - What's the key combination to save a file?

    Alt F-S

    - Where does Game X install itself in the Start menu?

    Usually under the game name. Where did apache choose to install itself? :)

  309. Re:danger... by Zoltar · · Score: 2

    ****But no, your Grandmother doesn't care. All she wants to do is to be able to surf the web, send email, find where she put her files, and MAYBE hook up a scanner, printer, or cable modem. ****

    Yes that's true, however Grandma also wants to make a bunch of those really neat/creative homade greetings cards... unfortunatly printing with Linux has a ways to go also.

    Granted I haven't tried tooooo hard, but I have never had anything that resembles *good* quality when printing from Star Office or The Gimp or Word Perfect or Emacs...etc... Any suggestions on filters...etc that will improve my printing performance would be appreciated (HP desjet 693)

    My point is that there are stil more than a few rough edges that need to be worked out before Linux can be targeted at the Grandmother crowd. I think we (a broad large blanket being thrown over the Linux community) can't get tooo hung up on the whole ease-of-use/eye-candy trap(crap) when there are still funnctionality issues that need to be dealt with.

    After all, the whole Linux idea is supposed to be based upon functionality, not overtaking the evil competition.

  310. Re:Look for something amazing from this project by PigleT · · Score: 2

    I won't flame you for linux being already "easy to use", but I do ask: why is "easy to use" synonymous with "good" in so many folks' views? Why is it seen that it "must" appeal to the desktop luser as well as everyone else?

    Isn't the idea of "winning the OS war" that (a) there is no war (b) it's the strength of quality signal that counts, not count(bums_on_seats)??

    --
    ~Tim
    --
    .|` Clouds cross the black moonlight,
    Rushing on down to the circle of the turn
  311. Re:You don't get it. by Doogman · · Score: 2

    Hey, luckily for you, there already exists an OS that is exactly what you want: Win 98 by Microsoft. Why reinvent the wheel?

    Heresy you say? Well, lets look at your points.

    1. Installation: Win98 is pre-installed on >90% of all new computers so that's no problem. If the user is brave enough, I've found it will install with little user interaction in about 1.5 hrs or so.
    2. Hardware Support: Companies must provide drivers for Win98 or their products (consumer stuff) won't be used.
    3. Unix Model problems: Don't worry, be happy. No UN*X model here.
    4. GNU: No GNU stuff (on OS CD) either.
    5. GUI intergration: GUI! Hell, even the web browser is tightly intergrated with the OS. Perfect! :)
    6. GUI slickness: Well, as customizable and slick a GUI may start, I've found that most users will make a good mess out of it in short order. For instance, many people love dragging tons of shortcuts onto the desktop, making it a imperceptible tangle of icons. Most users consider customizing the OS changing the screen saver or desktop image. Anything beyond that is voodoo magic and scary.
    7. It must work: Everything is installed and working from the retailer.

    Now, answer a question for me, WHY must Linux run on a every single desktop on the earth? Is this important? Some people seem to think that for Linux to survive an idiot-proof, warm and cozy version of the system must be assembled for "the masses." This way, Linux can achieve total world domination.

    Now, I'm not a programmer, nor do I play one on TV. But after using Linux on my 2nd computer for year, I've come to some conclusions. The thing that makes Linux great (for me) is the open source ideals and the community the springs from around that. This is why I hang around, but the people you want to target with your magic-OS couldn't give a rats-ass about these ideals or the community. They just want appliance that works, and a close-source binary system would work well here.

    In closing, there is no one-size-fits-all computer, for all users are different. And Linux isn't the be-all end-all of OSes and doesn't seem to try to be, but maybe the community behind is something neat.

  312. Re:not just a file manager by Wah · · Score: 2

    and I hope it works and they make a lot of money. This type of thing is exactly what the GPL creates. When no one owns the basics they have to compete like hell to sell you the extras. More users = more apps = more users = more money for programmers/admins = more time to code = better code = more users.

    --

    --
    +&x
  313. not just a file manager by / · · Score: 2

    It'll end up being a complete distrobution when they're done. Then they'll sell the cd's and the documentation and support for the entire distro. Remember, this isn't being aimed at people who want to download the software off the net and install it themselves -- it wouldn't do to say "Here's a filemanager for all you novices out there, but you'll have to install it over an existing scary-to-install installation.

    Corel's distro is basically Debian + a filemanager. There's no reason for this company to do differently.

    --
    "If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
  314. Duh by / · · Score: 2

    The people who want it to be easy to use are asking for it to be easy to use because they want it to be easy to use -- they find it hard and would like it to be easier. They want the stability and the low hardware requirements and the neat apps and the security and all the other stuff without having to invest a lot more effort. They themselves want this for their own purposes, and they're happy when someone comes along and says: "Sure, I can give you that." Some people simply don't do complex things, and it's usually not prudent/fair to make them learn how to handle complex tasks that don't arise for them.

    It's not the number of seats that matters so much (although I could present arguments as to why it does matter) but the satisfaction and happiness of the people who fill them. If Linux doesn't serve their needs perfectly but could do so if someone out there wrote some software to accomodate them, then let that programmer go ahead and do so.; especially if that software is just a shell wrapped around all the technical and gritty details that remain inside for people to play with if they so choose.

    Linux isn't just about making an operating system that's fun for hackers to play with. It's supposed about making an operating system that can be extended to fit people's needs as they arise and if someone wants to address them. One of those needs is a click 'n drool interface. You can safely ignore it if it doesn't suit your needs.

    --
    "If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
  315. Re:Look for something amazing from this project by David+Roundy · · Score: 2
    Why is it seen that it "must" appeal to the desktop luser as well as everyone else?

    I have many friends and relatives who you would probably put into the category of "desktop lusers."

    Just because someone doesn't care about their computer for its own sake doesn't mean they should be forced to use an inferior operating system. I would very much like to be able to recommend linux to my friends, but right now although I use it myself, I would definitely not recommend it to most of my friends.

  316. Re:Look for something amazing from this project by thimo · · Score: 2

    For me winning the OS war will be when we really have a choice. At home I have and I can impress my friends with my system. But at work it is a whole different story. Here, I'll have the choice when we have all the apps I need (and Lotus Notes is one of the necessary ones) and to have the apps, we need to have the audience and as the audience is the "dumb"...

    At work all we have is Windows and AIX. AIX to run Baan and Domino and Windows to do almost everything else. A few NT servers could be replaced, but... *sigh* I won't start while I'm still in a good mood. :-)

    IMHO, winning is *not* having quality. It has never been quality and it never will be. I really think that in case to win, we need to crush MS. Its share on the desktop needs to be less than half of what they have right now, otherwise they'll still be too powerfull and be a too-save choice. A breakup of MS will help too. :-)

    Thimo
    --

    --
    Avoid the Gates of Hell. Use Linux!
  317. Re:danger... by gorilla · · Score: 2
    The zsh can do something similar, with it's help key facilty. It runs a man* on which ever program you're entering.

    * = or any other program.

  318. Re:Great idea.... by CoughDropAddict · · Score: 2

    Ask anyone what program they use most every day, and they will probably answer NS/IE.

    Actually, I most often get this answer when asking people who their ISP is. :-)

  319. You've got core! by georgeha · · Score: 2

    heh-heh-heh, ex AOL workers, someone had to say it.

    George

  320. Re:You don't get it. by Junks+Jerzey · · Score: 2

    What the world really needs is a new OS (perhaps based on the Linux kernel, perhaps not) that bundles ease of use and robustness in a single package.

    It's high time some of you stopped deluding yourselves into thinking that GNU/Linux is the be-all and end-all of Operating Systems.


    You're right, of course. But that isn't going to happen all at once. And as long as Linux exists and has some advantages, it would be nice to improve it in a good way. I don't see anyone taking any steps toward an alternative system.

  321. Re:This is good news by MikeBabcock · · Score: 2

    So, in other words, make the same design mistakes that Microsoft did that alienated all the legacy hardware users out there? You do realise, of course, that Linux is not all about servers running the latest and greatest in hardware? It is largely developped by and aimed toward those poor souls running 486s and low to mid-range older Pentiums who want to get the most out of their hardware. People who run Linux aren't all basement hackers on 386s or anything, no. Linux runs just fine on large SGI machines, sure. The point is that the Linux community is not the type to drop legacy support ... ... I shouldn't have even replied to this its so preposterous.

    --
    - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
  322. Re:uh... isn't this nautilus? by anatoli · · Score: 2
    --
    Industrial space for lease in Flatlandia.
  323. Re:It's exactly what's needed for Linux acceptance by Cheerio+Boy · · Score: 2

    I'm not sure upper management can handle such a complex interface. Think of all the decisions to make!

    Oh-No Manager Bill! =-)

    One of the great things about open source is that programs can be whatever programmers want them to be. There isn't pressure to ''dumb down'' the interface, but the possibility still exists to do so. Linux (and the other open source systems like *BSD, HURD, etc.) will continue to evolve regardless of their ''market share'' against commercial OSes.

    True but we're talking about making Linux available to the average user. Remember that the average user is trained almost from birth to have people do things for them, not the reverse. Until that changes or we're big enough to alter the game we're all playing then we have to work within that framework if we want Linux to be usable to Joe Public.

    Besides, Linux is *already* accepted--by many hard-core programmers, many of whom probably don't really care if it's accepted by the world of end-users.

    This is true and much appreciated for without those users we'd probably not have a working Linux to speak of at all! However, remember that one of the best ways to get something to flourish, especially if you care about making it big, is to get the general public interested in it. While this may not be the ideal solution due to "comittee" type issues it will most definitely blow the doors off even more than they are.

    And maybe someday - hopefully someday soon - we'll all be using some form of Linux for all our uses. One can only hope. :-)

    The Tick - "Spoon!"

    --

    "Bah!" - Dogbert
  324. Re:Modularity by Cheerio+Boy · · Score: 2

    I agree with your sharpshooting - please have patience on a previous VB programmer who's doing pennance by re-learning C on Linux. ;-)

    As for modularity that's fine too but remember that what we need to do is have a level of access that will be acceptable for the new user. Unfortunately this means using a lot of extra code to hide most of the functions "behind the scenes" so that the user does not become confused.
    An ideal solution would be not just a mode of install (Basic, Full, Server, etc.) but a mode of usage as well! Imagine having an internal switch setting for each user account that allows the system to treat the new user at a level that they feel comfortable with.
    I hate to bring M$-isms into this but maybe a first-time "wizard" that asks the user simple questions to determine the level at which the user should be able to use the system.
    "Do you know what GREP the /etc/inittab for the shutdown line. means?"
    That's actually a bad example but you get the idea. When the user eventually grows/learns to a level that they can use the system then they should have gotten to a point where they can turn that switch off on their user account and move on to a more complex setup. Doing that would allow both newbies and experienced users to use the same system without have major problems or conflicts. You can also do this for the installation choices as well and eventually get to the point where even a beginning user will not have too much problem installing and configuring a new system.
    Modularity will help that certainly but there needs to be a shift in thinking so that the newbie "level" is designed for totally new users and not anything higher.


    The Tick - "Spoon!"

    --

    "Bah!" - Dogbert
  325. Re:uh... isn't this nautilus? by slashdot-terminal · · Score: 2

    Then keep your file windows small and your browser windows large. Nobody's stopping you. No one's forcing you to type an internet URL in you file manager.

    I think that the poster was trying to say that the implimentation of Win98 like features is a bad thing and should not be copied to the unix/linux envirnoment because they are in fact two entirely seperate things.

    Unix design philosophy makes use of small tools linked together not large software programs doing everything at once.

    I know this I have designed a number of shell scripts and am intrigued about how it is working. If you do any shell programming you know what I am talking about.

    --
    Slashdot social engineering at it's finest
  326. Well that's just spiffy. by slashdot-terminal · · Score: 2

    ------Flame on-------------
    You know one of the reasons I even bothered with linux in first place was because it offered a plausible alternative to be being bludgeoned with the OS that is windows into upgradding PC hardware. Having something that works is at the core of what most humans think is a good idea.
    ---------Flame off-----------

    In general I think that it's fine to increase power of whatever however there should be a system or a library that would be called libscale or whatever that impliments a series of usable features that could be scaled to whatever thing happened to be running. For example you can create open source quake that allows for dynamic AI routines or whatever with massive 128bit graphics rendered to whatever you want but you could also have (almost) the same thing with gameplay and such with no sound, low res graphics (maybe ascii) or perhaps something that would allow you to do more tweaking for the particular processor.

    In short there really is not excuse to increase bloat just to make something spiffy or "modern"

    --
    Slashdot social engineering at it's finest
  327. Just meaningless semantics jackass by slashdot-terminal · · Score: 2

    -------Yeah flame so sue me------
    When I refer to NT or solaris I am not refering to the kernel I am refering to the kernel AND associated system components.
    While although technically feasible linux could be seperated from the wm it is not considered as part of the whole package that we expect.
    I guess English may not be your first language so let me state this formally and slowly:
    [The system we currently call] Linux [ and it's standard material that comes with it] is generally slow for me in condition x (ie running GNOME).
    I actually dare you to run a "linux system" with just a kernel and nothing else. Going to be a little difficult.
    Oh and by the way I ran linux with slackware 3.4-3.6 on a 80386sx 20mhz 4MB ram 80MB hd for at least 2 years. It gets real old real fast running in CLI mode for that long when I could run much better, much faster win3.x programs on the same machine.
    ---------Flame off--------
    You know theory dosn't really matter all that terribly much for even natural human interfaces. Highlightig the fact that "linux" strictly speaking as being the kernel makes little difference to someone already ensconsed in the OS.

    --
    Slashdot social engineering at it's finest
  328. Unfortunately I would have to agree by slashdot-terminal · · Score: 2

    I would hate to build anything on top of Gnome.
    I have used gnome in the past from time to
    time, but eventually something always happens
    that places Gnome in some wacked state from
    whence I can never return. Gnome resembles
    an M$ product -- sex appeal sans stability.

    Darn it I tried I really tried. I guess the only reason I use anything GNOME related is because some apps can be run without the need of the whole things running. Mostly I use Gnome-terminal and the occasional other possibly useful app.

    What really truely pains me is that it takes so much of my system with it.

    486dx66/16MB ram/340MB hd/20MB swap.

    I can barely get anything to actually work without a tremendous slowdown.

    I have figured out one thing with linux which I think is accurate.

    All the development on linux apps is going into what that theoretical computer in the sky will be able to do and not what the average or low end machine can do. The size of the disk space requirements, the size of programs, the need to compile almost everything yourself (and then spend 10+ hours banging your head against the wall getting the said features to work). It is intensely agraviating. I only use it because my machine isn't supported by the bastards in Redmond and never will.

    Gnome could very well streamline it's use of memory and perhaps allow for a seamless use of things. Perhaps scale itself for whatever machine or system profile. Have graphics taken to vertain levels depending on the memory or disk space would be an excellent start.

    --
    Slashdot social engineering at it's finest
  329. Finally! This is what the world needs.... by smoondog · · Score: 2

    Although many Gnome/KDE fans I'm sure are not happy with this, I think this is a godsend. I find that (IMO) programmers (like myself) sometimes have a hard time separating the details of the project from the product. There are always little quirks that the user must understand, that really have nothing to do with the end product and only through backs from engineering. Apple has, IMO, done an excellent job of separating the engineering from thier desktop. An example of some terms that I've always felt turns off non-computer types is Object Oriented, development libraries, or multi-tasking. Does a user really need to know what these are and what they do, of course not. They just need to understand the benefits that they bring, not the details of what they do!


    -- Moondog

  330. Re:Unless it comes with a one button mouse. by randombit · · Score: 2

    Although some people might not like the idea of a 'dumbing- down' of Linux, I think it's really good news as this will doubtless help convince other people that Linux really is one of the best choices (if not the best choice) around.

    OTOH, it will convice me that Linux is turning into a Windows clone and that I should switch to FreeBSD, as that will be, for me, the best choice around (though OpenBSD sounds reasonably good as well). A Windows clone (however stable and open-sourced) is not what I want to use - I want to use UNIX, dammit! If I can't get that from Linux anymore, I'll go elsewhere. Which is too bad, I really like RPM a lot (yes, not all distros have it but mine do and I like it).

    And from what we've heard about Windows 2000 I think it's clear that it's not all that unstable. Plus it's more user- friendly than any desktop we have . . . I still prefer Linux, but an easy- to use GUI would be welcome.

    Most people are not going to like using Windows 2000 (unless there is an "technical idiot" mode built in somewhere). Since when is administrating an NT box simple and user-friendly? From watching my NT-fan friends at it, Linux seems a hell of a lot simpler (yes, familiarity with it and all that), but having to install things in certain arbitrary orders (and the software doesn't stop you or even warn you away from making a mistake) seems like a real pain in the ass to me (for instance, I heard from someone today that if you install DNS before (or was it after? Can't remember) Active Directory, your install get's fucked up). Personally, I don't want to deal with that kind of shit ever.

    From what I've heard, it's actually pretty stable. I know a few people using it. One of them managed to crash FreeBSD (sound card driver went south) but not Windows 2000.

    Even as a UNIX freak and anti-M$ bigot I could probably figure out the basics of NT/2000 admining fairly quickly (yes, I would make many mistakes but I could figure out at least some of it), but could your favorite technophobe? I doubt it. Especially if they've been using pure point and drool client OSes (Windows 95/98, MacOS, etc) their entire life. Which leaves exactly what? Several hundred million poorly secured and unpatched Windows 2000 boxen. Just what the world fucking needs.

  331. Re:danger... by abram_fettig · · Score: 2
    I don't think that their aim is to make a one-size-fits-all desktop. Their aim is to create another desktop, one that will be simple to use for novice users. Yes, a UNIX without pipes would be much less powerful. But no, your Grandmother doesn't care. All she wants to do is to be able to surf the web, send email, find where she put her files, and MAYBE hook up a scanner, printer, or cable modem. So she uses this new, super-simple GUI to get around and configure her system.

    When you are visiting and you want to write a new startup script for her, just escape to the command prompt, or switch over to Enlightenment or KDE or whatever your favorite desktop shell/environment is.

    I think that one environment will never appeal to everybody. That's what Windows tried to do, and that's one of the reasons we all use Linux today. By providing muliple environments for users of different skill levels, Linux can become truly an OS for anybody.

  332. Linux was not written for my grandma by Wyvern13 · · Score: 2
    Linux was written for higher-end power uses for whom the compromise of usability vs. power was a wise decision. Although it is arcane, difficult, and has a very steep learning curve, it offers tremendous stability, power, and versatility. In short - Linux was not designed as a consumer platform. It was designed for people, like us, who need that extra bit of power and are willing to sacrafice ease of use. Linux is an excellent workstation operating system, but it pales into comparison to consumer systems such as
    • MacOS
    • BeOS ( I know, I know, embedded systems. It's still a good consumer OS. )
    Do we really want to sacrafice the power of UNIX on the altar of widespread acceptance? I know I don't. Linux stripped of its UNIX history is worthless, Linux is UNIX. That's like saying an eagle that can't fly is the same as a tiger. The eagle was built as an aerial predator, cutting its wings off doesn't allow it to survive as a gound predator. Linux is the ideal platform for me, Mac is the ideal platform for my grandmother. Let's just quit trying to homogenize the OS market : no matter how many X modules you write, one size doesn't fit all when it comes to operating systems.
    --
    - Dave "It's better to be a pirate than to join the Navy" - Steve Jobs
  333. Re:Look for something amazing from this project by gargle · · Score: 2

    Easy to use == less them spent working around and configuring stuff == more efficient, more time to get on with my life == Good.

    -Being able to drag and drop components from different applications is easy to use. Interoperability is good.
    -Being able to plug and play peripherals without wasting time configuring them is easy to use.
    -Being able to use an application without having to learn arcane, but ultimately completely arbitrary commands is easy to use.

  334. ease of use; was Re:Look for something amazing by QuasEye · · Score: 2

    why is "easy to use" synonymous with "good" in so many folks' views?

    Forgive me if I seem condescending here, but I think the answer is obvious. No matter the quality, a tool (of any kind) has absolutely no utility, and therefore no value, if no one can use it. That being said, there are places for both complex tools (requiring special training) and simple tools (requiring more than two brain cells). This isn't an attempt to steal away your ultra-flexible command prompt, just a way to get more functionality out of your computer without having to look at it should you be so inclined. If you're not, don't use it, but please don't gripe about it being there. This OS is not now, and never was, the exclusive property of you and your hacker kindred. Bring on the masses...

    bp

  335. There is a threatening little GNOME in the room. by Brett+Glass · · Score: 2

    He throws a gnife.
    It misses.
    -> Throw axe
    "Join me now and share the.... AAAACK!" [THUD]
    You've killed a little GNOME.
    The body disappears in a puff of greasy black smoke.

  336. Right and wrong at the same time... by bero-rh · · Score: 2

    I agree that Linux needs to become usable for someone who doesn't have the slightest clue about command lines.
    But that's not a reason to get rid of them.
    For a lot of things, command lines are much much more efficient than even the best GUI could be, so why not give people who know how to handle it the option to do it? I don't think people would find it confusing if they had the "Command Line" button, even if they never used it.
    Same for User IDs and passwords - why get rid of them, if we can just do something like
    "su user -c exec startx" in rc.local?

    --
    This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html
  337. Re:Why does Aqua look so much better than GNOME? by jaed · · Score: 2

    We've all seen these before, but compare them and think, "What is Aqua doing that GNOME is not?" Nothing! Both screenshots are simple desktop+explorer shots. Yet somehow the Aqua screen looks like da bomb and GNOME looks like shite.

    Look again. Look at the details.

    Look at the use of fonts: The Aqua fonts are antialiased, the GNOME fonts aren't. The Aqua font was designed by someone who knows what they're doing aesthetically; the GNOME font looks ugly and unbalanced at screen resolution. There are two sizes of the font on the Aqua screen, and they're different enough to contrast well; the GNOME screen has at least three sizes, and they're close enough that it's not obvious at first glance that they're actually different sizes. It adds up to a cluttered look where Aqua's use of fonts looks smooth and slick.

    Look at the use of color: the GNOME screenshot shows colors from the horrible garish 16-color Windows palette; the Aqua colors are subtle and harmonize well.

    Look at the use of icons: the GNOME screen has a huge number of little icons, and most of them are not obvious at first glance. The spreadsheet window has two whole rows of these things, and they're not even designed to go well together with a consistent style. Again, the look is cluttered. The icons visible in the Aqua screenshot have some technical advantages (more colors, larger size), but more than that, they look like they were all designed by the same person with the same sense of color and shape. They look like they belong together. Again, the impression is of slickness versus confusing clutter.

    Look even at the smallest details. On the GNOME screenshot, notice how the white boxes around the desktop icon names are a little too large, and not quite balanced top to bottom? Notice how the background pattern is so garish that it's not easy to see the icons themselves, and it would be distracting if the windows were small enough that you could see more of the desktop? Notice how the menus with accelerator underlines sit a bit higher than those without, in the PDF window?

    People don't necessarily see these details explicitly. They might not even be able to point them out in a screenshot. But they notice them, all right.

  338. The last big thing by jalefkowit · · Score: 2
    Great, another GUI. They aim to make Linux as easy to use as Windows. Say what? The plain fact is that Windows isn't easy to use in any traditional sense of the term. Windows is just familiar for most people -- they've just internalized its quirks and contradictions. The same goes for MacOS; neither is particularly intuitive in the sense that it would be immediately apparent to someone who'd never seen a computer before how it works. We define these interfaces as "easy" only because the basic premises of the GUI have had 15 years to percolate through the population. Moreover, the whole idea of the GUI is showing its age. The first popular GUI was for the Apple Macintosh, and was designed to handle 400K disks that could hold a few files. Today essentially the same interface is being used to manage 30GB disks that hold millions of files. The result is chaos; folders within folders within folders ad infinitum. More and more, people resort to finding ways to work around the file system rather than working within it; watch how often a new user has to go to Sherlock or the Windows "Find" command to figure out where his or her file went. Managing files on a modern PC via a GUI has become a little like trying to bail out a battleship with a thimble. So, while it's great and all that someone is working to develop Yet Another GUI, I'd be more interested in seeing some of these smart people devoting some time to coming up with an interface that will do to GUIs what GUIs did to CLIs. Is there anyone more interested in developing The Next Big Thing than in refining the Last Big Thing?

    -- Jason A. Lefkowitz

    1. Re:The last big thing by misuba · · Score: 2

      There are a couple of directions that interfaces could go, that I'd like to bring up here, with some explanation for those who might be unfamiliar with them.

      The first is Lifestreams, a file management concept created by David Gelernter, one of the Unabomber's better known victims. Lifestreams abandons hierarchical file systems entirely (from the user's perspective, anyway) in favor of a timeline, robust search capabilities, and saved searches. For more info on Lifestreams (and some of the weird commercial products that have arisen from it), check Gelernter's company Mirror Worlds. Current GUIs have taken baby steps toward this concept - you can save Sherlock searches in MacOS and use them the same way you would a folder, and BeOS has powerful queries. But neither system has had the guts to encourage users to rely on them.

      The second is a system created by Jef Raskin, one of the principal inventors of the Macintosh. Raskin's system essentially had no file system interface. You turned it on by beginning to type a sentence; booting was instant, and your sentence appeared on screen, from the very first keystroke. If you needed some graphics, you went and got a graphics tool and started drawing on screen. If you neede to work on some old file, you had the system search for it. In ways, it was a lot lke Apple's aborted OpenDoc paradigm, but made more effective by building a computer around it from first principles, rather than shoehorning it into an existing PC system. Raskin's system eventually became the Canon Cat, an emasculated commercial failure that Canon bundled with a daisy wheel printer and sold as a secretarial aid. I looked around for nice links on the Cat but didn't find much; you can always try Jef Raskin's site.

      --

      If you don't pretend to be anyone, are you?

  339. Modularity by razvedchik · · Score: 2

    I hate to sharpshoot, but....
    A yes/no response takes up one bit, consisting of either a 1 or a 0.

    Having said that, I think this is an opportunity for the modularity of Linux to shine through. If you want the easy GUI (the 2-bit one), you can have that, even make it the default install interface so you don't even have to set it up. If you want to work only from a console(the 64-bit interface), that too is acceptable. If you want something in the middle(the 32-bit interface), you have many choices.

    Remember, it's all modular. I use KDM at home so that my 3-year old can click on the icon for him to log in and have his own little world (he likes to run 5xXroach, 5xXsnow, and wine at the same time), but I can use the virtual consoles or X if I want to, and I just pick which window manager to use at log-in. Even a no-brainer can figure out how to log in, and the more advanced users can pick which option to use.

    --
    I do what the voices on my console tell me to do.
  340. This is good news by Animats · · Score: 2
    This is really good news. Andy Hertzfeld knows what he's doing. But the real problem is at setup time, not usage time.

    As I point out occasionally, the whole configuration mess needs a rethink. I'd start by dropping support for all non-PnP hardware, all ISA hardware, and driving the configuration process strictly from the PnP tree. No end user should ever have to deal with IRQs, device address numbers, or hardware conflicts again. Yeah, some legacy hardware won't work. So use an old version of the OS on those machines, or upgrade.

  341. Win and Mac simplicity by 348 · · Score: 2
    Boich said his company aims to take ease of use to a new level and plans ultimately to surpass Microsoft's Windows OS and the Mac in simplicity.

    I can understand the mindset to make a product that can surpass or compete with Apples simplicity and ease of use for the average user, but comparing this to Wind*ws seems a little odd. Back in the days of Win 3.1 and possibly up through Win 95, the environment was still pretty simple and the ease of use was also pretty good. However with 98, NT and now the upcoming 2K, these environments are very complicated for the average user to set up and re-configure when adding new HW or maybe a larger application. Look at how AOL's 5.0 completely hosed so many systems.

    One more firm that wants to be part of the open source model is a great thing though. A little competition for Mandrake wouldn't hurt for the end consumer either. Although the article seemed a little press-releas-ish, it looks like they want to create a pretty complete environment.

    --

    More race stuff in one place,
    than any one place on the net.

  342. Windows IS easy to use AND to program in. by mangu · · Score: 2
    - What's the key combination to print something in Windows?
    - What's the key combination to close a window?
    - What's the key combination to save a file?
    - Where does Game X install itself in the Start menu?

    These question may have different answers for different Windows applications, but they have MANY more answers in Linux.

    And Windows has another very important advantage regarding programmers: a unified API. It may be a difficult to learn API, sure, but at least it is _ONE SINGLE_ API to learn. In Linux, if you want to do changes in any of those Open Source programs, how many different toolkits must you learn? Motif, K, Qt, Gtk, Xaw, etc, etc...

    Another plus for the Windows API: printing and the clipboard are about as transparent as they can be. How do you program printing in an X application? The most common way is use PostScript + GhostScript, the absolutely slowest way. Well, it's fast in a P3-500, but isn't the ability to run in 486-66's a Linux advantage?

    Let me make one point clear, before a moderator sets me to (-1; Troll): I'm a Linux user. But I'm not a zealot. I would like to see the complete Windows API ported to Linux, with all its extensions. I have done extensive programming in both, they both suck, but the Windows API sucks less than any of the X-based APIs. Over that we could put a nice and consistent UI.

    Before I forget, I tried writing this comment in a Kde editor and cut and paste it into Netscape 4.61. I couldn't do it. Maybe there's someone out there who thinks it's really easy, it's just my fault that I'm so dumb, but I have twenty years experience in programming, two of those years in Linux application development. If I cannot cut from a Kde editor and paste it in Netscape, how could a newbie do that?

  343. Since you asked... by jfwcc · · Score: 2

    ...
    I'm working around 90% as you do.
    Ie. I start Acroread from wharf, and - like you - I know which file I wanna see.

    So a lot of pgms have a tiny (!!) xyz-terms w/ a tiny script asking me for the filename, with "just ENTER" set to reasonable defaults.

    Some of these defaults present a filelist,
    *
    *** but I do not have the __OVERHEAD__ of a filemanager ***,
    I just have an "ls".

    When you started in the 70s you know like I do, that saving resources is a good thing.
    Even on a powerful machine.

    We upgrade our hardware constantly,
    but --- DOES ANYTHING RUN FASTER ???

    It doesn't (w/ exceptions of course), because we add new OVERHEAD.
    We do that because some of us like to click with pointing devices.
    I don't.
    I prefer keystrokes and I try to keep the system load as low as possible.

    We're not so far away I think...
    george./

  344. Ultimately Cooperative by Christopher+B.+Brown · · Score: 3
    What they're building is effectively an "all encompassing file manager," called Nautilus.

    There's no particular reason for this to represent a "duplication of effort," at least from the standpoint of the GNOME project. After all, they needed a better file manager. GMC has not been all that satisfactory.

    What their application amounts to is one that unifies files and remote objects (via HTTP/FTP) together, and lets methods be invoked on them.

    By using the Bonobo interface, they can pull in all sorts of GNOME objects. That's certainly not duplication.

    It may be duplicative if you're a developer working on the Kconq file manager for KDE that has similar scope; it's not duplicative within the context of GNOME.

    I'd say that this is the most important component to have some serious HCI people take a look at; that's the only hope of it being usable to the "Bubba" users. (No offense intended to other than Presidents of the United States :-) ...)

    It's important that this get HCI attention in that if it succeeds, Nautilus would become the front-end for a whole lot of users to get at "system stuff."

    --
    If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
  345. Business model? by Jerky+McNaughty · · Score: 3

    It appears they're just writing a new file manager/explorer type application for GNOME and releasing it under the GPL. I don't see a way for them to make money doing this (after all, neither support nor documentation should be an issue for something like a file manager).

    How do they expect to make money?

  346. Don't forget the keyboard support by SurfsUp · · Score: 3
    Sometimes, Apple UI's seem to be unuseable without the mouse. Please, don't forget the keyboard support. It's not exactly rocket science any more.

    That means:

    Full navigation with the keyboard

    All window management functions accessible via the keyboard alone

    A way of moving the mouse pointer and simulating mouse clicks with the keyboard - for that one time your mouse is broken but you still have to navigate the gui, no matter how slowly.

    Proper keyboard focus control. 99% of the time you should not have to use the mouse to put the keyboard focus where it ought to be

    *Integration* between keyboard and mouse scrolling in all text widgets and the like - none of this snapping to somewhere in the file you didn't expect to be just because you positioned first with the mouse, then moved with the cursor keys.

    A lot of other things I've forgotten, but we all know what they are when they're not there

    Even my mother can type!

    --
    Life's a bitch but somebody's gotta do it.
  347. A better OS than that by eyeball · · Score: 3

    There's a much better desktop and OS than this Eazel/Nautilus thing, one that my mother could definately use. Screenshot

    --

    _______
    2B1ASK1
  348. Why does Aqua look so much better than GNOME? by cpeterso · · Score: 3
    Even with the best window managers out there, linux still ends up looking like shit compare to the MacOS, BeOS, or even Win2K.

    I completely agree, but why is this? Why do all X themes look butt ugly?

    We've all seen these before, but compare them and think, "What is Aqua doing that GNOME is not?" Nothing! Both screenshots are simple desktop+explorer shots. Yet somehow the Aqua screen looks like da bomb and GNOME looks like shite.


  349. Re:Cool...but... by Arandir · · Score: 3

    Cool. Now check out Konqueror in action...

    http://www.mosfet.org/kde2action/

    --
    A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
  350. Andy Hertzfeld by noeld · · Score: 3
    They say that their top tech guy is Andy Hertzfeld.

    Read more about Andy Hertzfeld in this old wired article from when he was working at General Magic. My favorite line is:

    "Are you guys going to be here ten years from now?" I ask Bill and Andy.

    "Yeah," says Bill.

    Andy looks startled. "At General Magic?"

    "Oh, I don't know," says Bill.

    "I don't think I'll be at General Magic," says Andy, "because I'm better at starting things.... There'll be new adventures - "

    "I would guess that General Magic will have been taken over by weird people who don't know what they've got," concedes Bill.

    "It's not so much that," says Andy. "I don't know if I have the wherewithal inside me as a person in his forties to try and start another platform. I think it's most likely for me to want to go work as an independent artist."

    Guess he is starting with a new platform after all.

    Noel

    RootPrompt.org -- Nothing but Unix

  351. D'oh! scooped again... by imac.usr · · Score: 3

    Jeez, and I just submitted this, too... :-]

    BTW, one of the employees on the project is Andy Hertzfeld. It will therefore NOT suck. (Andy is about the closest thing to a Linus the Mac OS has, other than Bill Atkinson and a select few others.)

    For Mac users reading this, try this experiment. Find a copy of PepsiCaps. Run it in the OS X blue box. Marvel that a 15-year-old Mac application still works on today's machines, even if it does deviate slightly from the human interface guidelines.

    --
    I use Macs for work, Linux for education, and Windows for cardplaying.
  352. danger... by KGBear · · Score: 3

    ...And we'll do it in a way that appeals to today's Linux users and to mere mortals...

    I'll believe it when I see it. What "mere mortals" want is auto-everything. For auto-everything to work the system has to make assumptions, or rather the programmers behind the systems make assumptions. My experience is that they almost never make the same assumptions I would make, which always leads me to disable all the auto-everything stuff the system will let me disable.

    Another thing "mere mortals" want is an all-graphics interface; everything point and click. Hmm, I can't see how something like:

    rm `ls -l|awk '{print $3}'|grep "juser"`

    could be graphical, not with the same flexibility and any kind of Unix without the pipe/redirect capabilities would be kinda stupid.

    Another thing, admin tools (like linuxconf) require that you refrain from touching the config files by hand, or things will preety soon get out of sync.

    So, it will take quite a piece of software to convince me it can be useful and enjoyable both for current Linux users and for "mere mortals"; if any software does convince me, though, it'll be amazing.

    1. Re:danger... by False+Data · · Score: 5
      What "mere mortals" want is auto-everything.

      I agree with you here.

      Another thing "mere mortals" want is an all-graphics interface; everything point and click.

      I disagree here. I suspect what "mere mortals" want is a tool, as opposed to today's scaled-down mainframes. It's been very instructive watching my father use my computer, and having to explain what a window is, what a scroll thumb is, the fact that page-up and page-down keys exist and what they do, and how to use a word processor. (Ever tried to explain the margin feature that manages indentation on most word processors? How about auto-numbering? I finally switched him to a word processor with fewer features because they kept getting in the way of his getting things done.) A windowed interface is intuitive for me, but I grew up on computers. He didn't.

      I'd argue that what "mere mortals" want is to get a job done, and any interface that does that for them is what they're looking for. For instance, the interface my father would really like to have is a secretary. He'd like to be able to say to the computer "take this hand-written note and get it to Joe", which the computer should interpret as "turn on the scanner, scan this piece of paper, perform OCR, ask me about anything that looks misspelled, out of context, or just plain wierd, perform the corrections, figure out how best to reach Joe - fax, email, whatever - and get this message to him." Sorting through a file structure to find a file is a distraction for him, and having to configure a PPP auto-dialer is right out. The closest thing I've seen that even tries to approach this level of usability is MIT's Oxygen project.

  353. I don't get it. by G27+Radio · · Score: 3


    1. A bulletproof install. It must work, out of the box, no questions asked.
    2.Hardware support for everything. Drivers need to be there for the hardware and they have to be installed automatically. Don't make the user guess what brand of video or sound card they have, 'cause generally, they don't know.

    This would be great. Yet no PC operating system I've used yet has either of these features. Yet I have seen systems that come pre-installed, and come with a bullet-resistant install disk tailored for that system. However, upgrading your hardware might 'break' such an install disk.

    3. Get rid of the UNIX model. Yeah, no more user IDs, passwords or any of that. It can be too confusing on your grandma to have more names and numbers to remember.
    4. Get rid of GNU. Yeah, that's right, drop the command line utilities that you know and love, and lose all that power. If granny can't remember her password how's she supposed to remember arcane commands?

    What's this "get rid of" stuff about? The built-in support for multiple users is incredibly useful in a household where more than one person uses the computer. eg: I can screw up my stuff without screwing up everyone elses. Of course, if granny lives alone she might want the option to allow it to automatically log her on. And the Gnu tools are great for some things that a GUI couldn't easily emulate. I do agree forcing someone to use them is not ideal. There should be an alternative.

    5. The gui must be the OS. This means, goodbye X. Most of the newbies who ask me for help request help with setting up X (well, networking comes close). X must disappear, or it must become so much a part of Linux that it's just there, and it just works, no matter what video card, RAMDac, or whatever the user has on their machine.

    I'm not especially attached to X, but making the GUI part of the kernel or even a built-in part of of the OS just seems like a bad idea to me. If you actually meant that it should be seemless, then yeah, this would be great. As far as it "just [working], no matter what video card..." -- well, keep dreaming & see response to 1 and 2. Video cards (and other hardware) change over the years, so the drivers need to change. The best way to keep your install bulletproof is to buy specifically supported hardware.

    6. This GUI must be slicker than whale shit in an ice flow. Yeah, it must blow all other existing GUIs out of the water for ease of use, configurability, etc.
    7. Did I mention that this stuff must work, right out of the box? It has to be so simple that the user can install it and configure it without a thought.

    Amen!

    What the world really needs is a new OS (perhaps based on the Linux kernel, perhaps not) that bundles ease of use and robustness in a single package.

    I don't know that we need a whole new OS. There are more than just one OS with rock solid foundations to build a nice user interface on. No, linux, the kernel, does not need this GUI. What people, like our grandmothers, need is an easy-to-use, visually appealing user interface with a stable foundation. And that GUI needs Linux or a similar stable and open kernel beneath it.

    numb

  354. It's exactly what's needed for Linux acceptance... by Cheerio+Boy · · Score: 3

    This is exactly the sort of thing that is needed for Linux to be accepted by the mainstream public.
    For all our talk as Linux users about the "dumbing down of Linux" as an OS Linux really needs something like this.
    For instance I could teach most of KDE or GNOME to my mother but what would she do if the print spool wouldn't clear after trying the Printer Control? Or what if she wanted someone else in the family to be able to use her system but not touch her stuff? Both of these tasks require administrative skills that she does not have and would most likely be unwilling to have to learn. Unfortunately for those of the Linux community there is no substitute for the Windows Control Panel. (yet)

    Remember what people have said for years about software and business management - Programmers want an infintely wide interface, middle managers want an 8-bit interface because that's all they can handle, and upper management wants a 2 bit interface - Yes/No.

    Most (I use the word loosely) users in America today can handle the 8-bit interface but due to the increased "dumbing-down" of our culture we're forcing people down to the level of a 2-bit interface. (Unfortunate but true.) Thus we're left with the situation that "Anything that is simpler for the user is the solution."

    We may not like it but there it is and we do have to accept it until we can change it.

    Also for those of you about to rally to the "We'll force them to learn!" flag - might I suggest you look at your own reactions when someone "forced" you to do something such as use an M$ product. ;-)


    The Tick - "Spoon!"

    --

    "Bah!" - Dogbert
  355. Re:Look for something amazing from this project by Tim+Behrendsen · · Score: 3

    Because a lot us have better things to do with our time than figure out crufty interfaces. I've configured zillions of ascii-based configuration files. As the lounge singer said, "the thrill is gone, baby."


    --

  356. Windows version? by Sunracer · · Score: 3

    I guess that if they ever decide to go Windows, it would be called Weazel... ;-)

    --
    "The Internet, of course, is more than just a place to find pictures of people having sex with dogs." - Time Magazine
  357. uh... isn't this nautilus? by lavaboy · · Score: 4

    Take a look at the nautilus screenshots here ...
    http://www.ionet.net/~hestgray/nautilus/

    --
    Steve -- If you have to call it a system, you don't know what it is.
  358. Look for something amazing from this project by EverCode · · Score: 4

    1. Distribution contracts
    2. Integrated XML using Gecko
    3. Integrated Internet functions
    4. Web bases software installation and updates
    5. Hidden complexity, but still accessable to Geeks
    6. Parallels with BeOS interface

    Now, I much prefer BeOS over Linux, but this will be a step in the right direction for Linux being useable for the average person.

    Please don't flame me about how Linux is already easy to use, because there are many rough edges.

    Have a good one.

    --

    EverCode
  359. Unless it comes with a one button mouse. by raptwithal · · Score: 4

    I think this is great news. Although some people might not like the idea of a 'dumbing- down' of Linux, I think it's really good news as this will doubtless help convince other people that Linux really is one of the best choices (if not the best choice) around.

    I tried to convince a friend of mine to switch to Linux a while ago, and he was dismayed at having to _type_ in the name of a file in the WM menu configurator instead of being able to browse for it. I consider it a trivial inconvenience, but to him it's still a big deal.

    Let's face it folks, most people out there use Windows at least partly because they're lazy. (I didn't say all!) And from what we've heard about Windows 2000 I think it's clear that it's not all that unstable. Plus it's more user- friendly than any desktop we have . . . I still prefer Linux, but an easy- to use GUI would be welcome.

    Unless it comes with a one button mouse.

  360. Windows is NOT easy to use. by Wakko+Warner · · Score: 5
    Ask anyone unfamiliar with computers: Windows is a horrible GUI to master, because of the simple fact that it's so damned inconsistent. The Interface Hall of Shame has a lot to say in this regard, but, to give some examples:

    - What's the key combination to print something in Windows?
    - What's the key combination to close a window?
    - What's the key combination to save a file?
    - Where does Game X install itself in the Start menu?

    Ask 10 people and you'll probably get at least 5 different answers, simply because every application is allowed to do things differently. This makes the learning curve exponentially greater because you need to learn the shortcuts for _every_ application!

    As much as I hate the MacOS from a technical standpoint, it really does have everything else beat hands-down when it comes to simplicity and consistency. (Or at least it did -- Aqua looks pretty hideous...)

    - A.P.
    --


    "One World, one Web, one Program" - Microsoft promotional ad

    --
    "Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
  361. Oh, brother... by Millennium · · Score: 5

    There seem to be a lot of misunderstandings about this.

    1) It doesn't seem to be a fork on Gnome, but rather an extension of it (perhaps a set of modules for it?)
    2) It is NOT being developed by Apple or AOL. These are a bunch of people who used to work for Apple and AOL, but neither company is itself directly involved.
    3) I know a lot of people are just going to post without reading the article, so I might as well reiterate it here: yes, it's GPL'd.
    4) Once again, this is NOT Apple doing this. But I wouldn't be surprised if some of the people from the now-defunct Human Interface team there are now working on it.

    Now, my own views on the project: I hope it works out. GNOME and KDE are both making good progress towards bringing a good, usable GUI to Linux, but both still have a long way to go. A boost, particularly from people who've designed UI's professionally before, would be a great help.

  362. You don't get it. by panda · · Score: 5

    I see a lot of posts on here that pretty much parrot the line: "this is what Linux really needs." That's a load of crap.

    If you want Linux to succeed in a mass market where the majority of VCRs silently blink 12:00 into infinity, then it must have something truly compelling to offer over the competition. This means that Linux needs to be simplified to the extreme. Sticking some pretty eye-candy on top of X isn't going to do it. To wit:

    1. A bulletproof install. It must work, out of the box, no questions asked.
    2. Hardware support for everything. Drivers need to be there for the hardware and they have to be installed automatically. Don't make the user guess what brand of video or sound card they have, 'cause generally, they don't know.
    3. Get rid of the UNIX model. Yeah, no more user IDs, passwords or any of that. It can be too confusing on your grandma to have more names and numbers to remember.
    4. Get rid of GNU. Yeah, that's right, drop the command line utilities that you know and love, and lose all that power. If granny can't remember her password how's she supposed to remember arcane commands?
    5. The gui must be the OS. This means, goodbye X. Most of the newbies who ask me for help request help with setting up X (well, networking comes close). X must disappear, or it must become so much a part of Linux that it's just there, and it just works, no matter what video card, RAMDac, or whatever the user has on their machine.
    6. This GUI must be slicker than whale shit in an ice flow. Yeah, it must blow all other existing GUIs out of the water for ease of use, configurability, etc.
    7. Did I mention that this stuff must work, right out of the box? It has to be so simple that the user can install it and configure it without a thought.


    In short, Linux needs to be something totally different from what it is.

    I use GNU/Linux because it works for me. I've used various flavors of UNIX, MacOS, and MS Windows as a professional programmer, student, home computer user, and employee. I've set up, installed, configured, even built machines targeted at all three operating systems. I use GNU/Linux at home (while my wife uses MacOS). I don't expect everyone to have the technical knowledge that I do, nor have the desire to acquire that knowledge. I mean, look, I do this stuff for a living, it's my business to know, but my doctor doesn't do this stuff for a living, so I don't expect him to want to learn to operate a computer just to get his work done, and neither should you.

    What the world really needs is a new OS (perhaps based on the Linux kernel, perhaps not) that bundles ease of use and robustness in a single package.

    It's high time some of you stopped deluding yourselves into thinking that GNU/Linux is the be-all and end-all of Operating Systems.

    --
    Just be sure to wear the gold uniform when you beam down -- you know what happens when you wear the red one.
  363. What Lusers! by deeny · · Score: 5

    No, not so much a flame as a caveat. One Eazel employee told, at a recent bay area Linux gathering, of how harsh the management is about prospective employees.

    And several prominent Bay Area Linux people with heavy GUI backgrounds (like myself) were snubbed by Eazel to hire much less expensive neophyte programmers. Yeah, I was one of them, but I don't care as I found a great-paying and good job elsewhere. I was much more surprised when several other friends with good credentials were ALSO snubbed.

    Basically, they'd be willing to pay a premium for a big name, but I sincerely doubt the employees will be treated well.

    My vote on Eazel: nice concept, wrong company.

    _Deirdre

  364. Great idea.... by EvlG · · Score: 5

    ...but it's going to take a lot of work. We need apps that my mom can use, and lots of them. Financial apps, word processing and spreadsheet apps, and a good web browser (Unix Netscape just sucks today).
    Some of the pieces are already being worked on, and a few already exist. You might say StarOffice is good enough for mom to use, despite the fact that it doesn't always import MS formats properly. The financial apps are pretty poor right now. All the Free ones listed on freshmeat are so feature-poor, it's hard to use them for anything but the simplest checkbook balancing. When/If Intuit ports Quicken to Linux, things will be different.
    As for the web browser, this is probably the "killer app" for most people. Ask anyone what program they use most every day, and they will probably answer NS/IE. The problem is that web browsing on Linux sucks. Unix Netscape on the whole is just crap. Its more unstable than Win32 Netscape, and X just makes the fonts look like shit. The text is unreadable and ugly. Furthermore, plugin and Java support in NS on Linux is abysmal. This is a serious problem. Mozilla looks to change all that, by providing a high quality, standard web browser implementation cross-platform. That would be quite a feat! Unfortunately, that's also quite a ways off.
    In sum, I think efforts like these are nice, but I really believe that it's a little early to be making things mom can use. In many ways, right now we don't even have stuff WE can use.

  365. Finally, some fresh air! by Junks+Jerzey · · Score: 5

    This is the best thing that could have happened to Linux. The problem with other desktop environments to date is that they're being developed by people bent on one-upping windows. They may not even realize it, but they're taking all the user interface decisions that Microsoft has made--many of them fundamentally wrong--and are duplicating them. For example, human interface designers have been been very vocal about the problems of "nested expand-to-the-right" pull down menus (a la the Start menu). And yet this a fundamental feature of KDE (not to pick on it too hard).

    What Linux needs is some fresh air; some people who are more than just coders looking for a project, and who have their own ideas they want to bring to life. There has been much research and are many available books and papers on interface design that don't follow the Mac/Windows paradigms that we've been seeing on personal computers for sixteen years now.

    Something to note here is that there are some real gurus behind this effort. This is much different than two college students with little historical perspective trying to outdo Microsoft in a "me too!" sort of way.

  366. "User Friendly" is more than a simple GUI. by Dharzhak · · Score: 5

    Heh. Getting my mother to use Linux wouldn't be that difficult. My fiancee is another matter entirely. She's about as computer literate as a house plant. Which is why I hope they suceed. I'd like to be able to discuss Unix and Linux issues without her eyes glazing over.

    That said, making Linux an easier pill for John Q. Public to take requires more than a GUI.

    It's going to require a "Plug and Play" ability for peripherials...or at least better automatic detection and mounting. The latter is mostly an issue of better driver support. The former is a much more drastic change.

    It's also going to require a increased ability to set things up from the desktop graphic tools. Don't get me wrong. I'm a command line evangelist. As a systems admin, the command line tools give me a better insight to how the system works. John Q. Public, OTOH, really doesn't give a flying fsck how the system works. John Q. Public wants to run his Quicken 2000, Office 2000 (two products that, if ported, would make a lot of converts), games and web surf for cheap airline tickets and pr0n. What he doesn't want to do is kernel tuning, add patches (or service packs), manually add zip disks, etc. A computer is a tool. If the average user can't figure out how to use our tool or gets continually frustrated, he'll buy one that he can use a lot easier...Macs and Win 9x.

    What we really ought to be doing is not beta testing with other techies, but beta testing with people like my fiancee. Those that have no clue and really don't want one. If it passes that test, then it will be ready for prime time as a home computer OS.