Slashdot Mirror
GNOME 1.2 - What's In It For You?
Ur@eus writes: "We have just posted an article at Linuxpower.org desribing what's new in the GNOME 1.2 release. Since the GNOME press release was kinda thin I think this will be of interest to many people. You'll find the article here. " A nice overview, for non-Gnomers especially. You'll find even more beautiful screenshots, as well as more general information, on the Helixcode site.
If you feel like it, you can port the Qt toolkit to MS-Win32 or to the Mac or to BeOS if you want; there is no license restriction that stops you.
How about this one ??
You may make modifications to the Software and distribute your modifications, in a form that is separate from the Software, such as patches.
So, you can port QT to win32, you simply have to do it in a way that the port is a patch that your END USERS will have to successfully apply to QT for linux and then successfully build. That requires your end user to know patch and have whatever compiler you used.
That makes the chances of any port actually happening pretty close to zero. Technically it can happen, but logistically it is impossible.
The only "rights" that are extended to Qt-applications are that the user of such an application is granted the right to the source code.
Also from the QT free license.
If the items are not available to the general public, and the initial developer if the Software requests a copy of the items, then you must supply one.
This clause for applications that LINK to QT assure Trolltech that no one will ever write an in house program that requires some degree of privacy without buying QT Pro. If you want privacy in your applications that LINK to QT, you must pay the man. If you want to write programs that use QT and are not GPL, you must pay the man.
They're a CORPORATION. They survive by MAKING MONEY. Do you understand that? They are being nice by releasing their software under an OSI-approved Open Source license; nobody REQUIRES that they use such a license. Grow up.
They were ten very good programmers trying to make a buck. I don't fault them for being proprietary, or releasing their product under whatever license they choose. I fault people like you for compromising freedom in software. I fault Eric Raymond and Bruce Perens for not objecting to the license and granting it OSI certification. It fails on the basic, very basic, premise that an open source application should allow derivatives under the same license as the original. Since I could only release QT derivatives as patches on the original, I cannot effectively EVER release a derivative anyone but a hacker would use.
Now don't get me wrong Chris - I think KDE is fantastic. I simply don't like the licensing upon which it is based. And I think calling it open source is a farce. I would rather see software preserve my freedom to modify it and share my modifications with others. Right now, I lack those freedoms with QT.
The biggest issues are with the lack of a real right to distribute modifications. That blocks forking. Now, forking in itself is generally bad, but the threat of forking can inspire real competition. Usually that is plenty. It also blocks me from distributing a new patched QT library to Grandma. Since she doesn't do patch.
KDE-2.0 in BETA and Gnome 1.2 on it's way out soon. XF86-4.0 is out and the new Kernel has gone into the "Linus vacation stage". We should be seeing serious Linux desktop movements this christmas.
Never mind Wine heading to 1.0 ( eventually ). The big question isn't even "will you be using KDE or Gnome?". Most of us have already made that decision. The mystery is "what will the new users coming to Linux use?" RedHat and Debian don't install KDE as the default. All the other desktop wanabees do. RedHat is very strong with new users. Most people here of them as the #1 Linux.
What this split means is that for the next year or two ( at least ) KDE and Gnome will be pushing the technology and the usability as much as possible. This ongoing conflict continues to attract young developers with nifty apps. It's this competing against each other that let them beet the tar out of CDE ( At least the Sun and SCO implementations I have used ) and draw close to Mac and Win98 in some respects and even pass them in others.
Here is my top 5 list of neto things to add before releasing either of these desktops in the next version.
1. "Network Neighborhood" : It should feel like the MS version too.
2. "Drag to resize" : This on Taskbars.
3. "Stability, Stability and Stability" : So these people have a reputation to work on.
4. "File Format compatibility" : Frankly. I would want Koffice and Goffice apps to use the same file formats. It's bad enough when you need to keep tweaking a semi broken filter for MS bloatware but why shouldn't KO and GO use the exact same blend of XML and compression.
5. "On the fly resolution switching" : Yes this is really something XF86 doesn't do but I still want to gripe about it. ctrl alt - dose part of it. not all.
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
The general tone of the comments here makes me want to weep - I can not believe the amount of bitching.
/. moderators would know not to moderate that kind of post up.
There are a few points of FUD always bandied about in these discussions.
1) GNOME is unstable.
This is wrong, plain and simple. 1.0 was released too early, and gave people a bad impression. Does the fact that GNOME was unstable make it unstable now? No!
2) GNOME is a hack.
People generally say this because they can not understand OO in C. If you like C++, fine, use it.
Use one of the GTK C++ bindings, eg gtk--.
The GTK+ object system is more flexible due to its dynamic nature, and it is (in my experience) easier to know what is going on - no pointer assignments doing copies remotely over CORBA, due to the fun of operator overloading.
3) Its all an RMS conspiracy against KDE.
This is the "Debian hates KDE!" type stuff.
The fact is that it is a breach of the licence to distribute KDE in binary form right now, as they still don't seem to have made up their minds on what to do (Artistic Licence, GPL exception).
This will be fixed I'm sure.
There are a lot of other stupid things people say,
but by now I would hope
I mean dont get me wrong I like gnome alot but KDE has alot more going for it in terms of applications and install base so what gives? I mean I know the whole QPL shit was a problem for most of the Zealots but gnome is still really damn buggy and a fresking resource Hog, Hell compare to kde 1.9 I just dont see why slash has the bias it has.
KDE is based on a proprietary library. A library that cannot be ported or forked except by its authors. A library that reserves some rights to everything that even links to it. A library that demands a copy of everything that links to it, even if it is private. A library that reserves the right to take your patches and roll them into its proprietary product, all the while NEVER allowing you to distribute anything except its product with your patch separate. You have to distinguish your code from their by separately distributing it - they do not have to distringuish your contributions to their code at all.
The QPL is about assuring a lifetime of riches for the authors of QT at the expense of the freedoms of its users. GNOME was started specifically to provide freedom to its users.
All that aside, there are two and only two key factors in the popularity of the desktops GNOME and KDE. Factor one is the preload factor. The more computers come with a desktop loaded, the more it will be used. Helixcode is a HUGE step in getting GNOME onto people's desktops more easily. Other factors are primarily OEM loads (Compaq, Dell, VA Linux...) Most US computers will come with GNOME, most in Europe with KDE.
Factor two is how easy it is for a non-hack. A successful desktop will make Grandma happy, and Grandma is not a hacker. Grandma wants to download digital photos, print them, send email, shop online... EASILY.
All this fussing over ORBs and libraries and bloat is worthless. It just doesn't matter in the long run, except for the pride of the programmers. Make it easy, and market it well by getting it preloaded everywhere - or at least making it dern easy to upgrade (witness Helixcode).
That is correct. GNOME is still not ready for the general public for consumption. Not just yet. But we do acknowledge this problem, and we are working towards addressing those issues: redoing the user interface elements that are not trivial to understand, using better wording, giving a better visual layout, redoing things so that they are conceptually cleaner, and easier to understand. But our work does not stop there. We are doing new applications, adding new features to the system (user-level for instance, historic configuration) that will provide the GNOME user with a better user experience. As any other technology, we are still on the early days of GNOME, and people using GNOME are still early-adopters of this technology: the GNOME team is working very hard to make GNOME ready for everyone, and bringing free software to everyone. With your help (providing good bug reports if you are not a programmer, documentation improvements, constructive comments, code, patches, contributions, enthusiasm) we will be able to achieve this goal sooner than later. Miguel.
Part of the services that Helix provide for the packages we ship is
the updating service: this is a service that lets people deploy
fixes, improvements, and new GNOME packages in their system with a
simple to use user interface.
Currently our updating service works with RPM and Debian packages
(In Debian we just use the great apt infrastructure to achieve
this), but other platforms do not have very sophisticated packaging
systems that support upgrading and that support vendor tagging.
Building software with RPM is very good, as we can keep the
original source packages plus all the patches required as well as
the detailed instruction list of how the package was build in a
single location (the Source RPM).
This is what we used to do the Solaris port of Helix GNOME. And
naturally, RPM produced RPM packages, which we could easily
integrate into our updating service.
Using Solaris packages would be an option, but by the time we were
done with the packages, it was too late on the release cycle to add
support for Solaris packages (not to mention that Solaris packages
are not as powerful as RPM packages).
Hence, we decided that it was in the best interest of end users to
use and distribute RPM packages for this release in Solaris. This
might change in the future though.
I think both GNOME and KDE have taken the beneficial parts of Microsoft's GUI and left out the parts that are either extraneous or just plain bloated. I can see why Slashdot has a bias towards GNOME as the screenshots released are pretty slick looking, although I will note that the last time a KDE article was posted, everyone bitched about how Slashdot had a KDE bias.
See how silly moderator rules are? I just mentioned all of the items you spoke about in a very respectful way that actually may have added a little to the discussion.
And frankly, I'd like to see more mention about KDE when talking about GNOME, not less. The fact that these two are out there and somewhat competing against each other gives us a) choice and b) better features as they continually learn from each other and play off each other. The progress in both GNOME and KDE this year has been amazing and it's probably a direct result of each group's desire to make a better interface than their counterparts.
Please describe what is functionally different between:
struct widget_s {
void(*open)(struct widget_s*);
void(*close)(struct widget_s*);
};
and:
class widget {
void open(void);
void close(void);
};
This "you can't do OO in plain C" attitude is silly and immature. Anyone who has done any work on a large (>100,000 line) C project has probably run into OO methodologies employed within the program. Heck, you can do OO in assembly if you have a good design and structure your code properly.
On the other hand, I've seen plenty of C++ code that was far from object-oriented--inelegant, over-classed, and buggy C++ code. No matter what language you use, you can program it wisely or poorly, elegantly or hacked together.