Slashdot Mirror


No GNOME For Solaris 9

Nailer writes: "Subject says it all really. A (very brief) Linuxgram article claims GNOME 2.0 won't be ready for Solaris 9 and the OS will ship with CDE and Motif as defaults. I'm just waiting for the inevitable announcement the GTK port of OpenOffice has been cancelled."

481 comments

  1. Damn by O · · Score: 1, Informative

    This is really a shame. I use solaris at work, and CDE is really bad. Also, there is a big hole recently discovered in CDE, and Sun has yet to release a patch. Gnome would have been so nice.

    --

    1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21 -- Mathematics is the Language of Nature.
    1. Re:Damn by Dashslot · · Score: 1

      Why don't you use something else then? I recommend XFce. It has that fine CDE look, but it is much faster and safer.

    2. Re:Damn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      xfce is nice and snappy on my SPARCStations 2 with NetBSD. It was a pleasant surprise.

    3. Re:Damn by O · · Score: 1

      Actually, I do use something else, but it seems the majority of my users use CDE, so I can't disable it, but in leaving it turned on I leave my systems at risk.

      --

      1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21 -- Mathematics is the Language of Nature.
  2. Re:no offense but... by plastercast · · Score: 1

    WHy do you say that GNOME is dying? Is the code somehow becoming less functional? That would be a first!

  3. Re:no offense but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...and just 1 year ago, it seemed the opposite.
    The tables have really turned.

  4. who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't use gnome or kde. bash is all I need.

    1. Re:who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ATTs Korn shell owns j00!

  5. Does Solaris Need Gnome? by ll5 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have to wonder if any OS that is primarily used as a server needs something like Gnome. The experience I have had with Solaris has been fine and I have never found myself looking for more eye candy. Maybe it would be nice for those who are using Solaris as a workstation though. So what do the Solaris users out there think? Is this something that anyone is actually going to miss? Or is this more of a situation where Sun would like to have a slick interface too?

    --
    Wanna get high?
    1. Re:Does Solaris Need Gnome? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are right. Most servers just sit on the floor and hum away. A sys admin would telnet/ssh into the box when needed.

      A workstation however, may benefit from the addition. What's the ratio of SUN servers to workstations in the market? - I guess that might answer the question.

    2. Re:Does Solaris Need Gnome? by ninewands · · Score: 1

      Well, in the computer lab I work in we have exactly 4 servers running Solaris and about 20 Workstations ... similarly, we have 3 or four servers running Tru64, but we have 3 dozen Alpha workstations for student use.

      In a technical computing environment, *n*x is a very viable desktop system.

    3. Re:Does Solaris Need Gnome? by kuhneng · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Solaris isn't just for servers. There's lots of software out there that doesn't exist for Linux / other Unices. The oil industry, for example, is one of the largest users of computing horsepower. For a long time, it used to be the largest, but that may have changed. Lots of geophysical software exists only for Sparc Solaris.

      Anyone who's dealt much with Sun's workstation class machines knows they don't make the best servers in the world, but there's still a huge market for their Ultra 5/10 and Blade 100/1000 machines. CDE is a real obstacle to new users on these machines.

      If I didn't have several days invested in my .fvwm2rc file, I'd go for KDE or Gnome myself.

      BTW- MIT's Athena 9.0 was released recently running Gnome on Solaris Sparc. Sorry, it's MIT specific (lots of site licenses bundled into the release).

    4. Re:Does Solaris Need Gnome? by yorgasor · · Score: 1

      I would love to have gnome as my solaris desktop at work. I tolerate CDE at work, but I really dig my Gnome desktop at home. Unfortunately, my company just upgraded from SunOS 4 to Solaris 2.6 last year, so even if Solaris 9 does include Gnome, I probably won't see it at work in my lifetime :(

      --
      Looking for a computer support specialist for your small business? Check out
    5. Re:Does Solaris Need Gnome? by Alien+Being · · Score: 2, Informative
      It needs something better than CDE.


      Solaris workstations are still used with a lot of bigbuck capital equipment. A modern desktop would help Sun protect their piece of that market.


      Another thing to consider is thin client computing. An E10k could serve up lots of GNOME or KDE desktops.

    6. Re:Does Solaris Need Gnome? by nomadic · · Score: 2

      Just because it's a server doesn't mean that a desktop environment like GNOME wouldn't be used. At both my college and my first job most development workstations were loaded up with Exceed and used any one of a number of boxes as X servers.

    7. Re:Does Solaris Need Gnome? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Workstations are less than 10% of Sun's total revenue. Servers are something like 65%. The other parts of the "pie" are services and storage.

    8. Re:Does Solaris Need Gnome? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why you are so stupid. You only see their current revenue. Lucky there are no employee like you in Sun.

    9. Re:Does Solaris Need Gnome? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why you have to stick with your current job for your lifetime?

    10. Re:Does Solaris Need Gnome? by $robertus · · Score: 1

      Yes! The price of a used, and still usable, Sparcstation 20 has fallen to the point that they make good machines to learn Solaris on. Ultra5's are not too expensive either. That's why I have a Sparc20 on my desk here at home. And I would much rather have Gnome or KDE, then CDE. And I rather like the apps in KDE. Either would allow me to get more use out of my 20.

      --
      -- Bob Honan I stand by the truth, which is why I never stand by Republicans.
    11. Re:Does Solaris Need Gnome? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Past workstation revenue -- 100%

      Current workstation revenue -- 10%

      Future workstaiton revenue -- Zilch after everyone bolts to NT on IA64.

    12. Re:Does Solaris Need Gnome? by bockman · · Score: 2
      There are compiled ximian-gnome packages for solaris, but (it seems) only for 2.7 and 2.8.
      For 2.6 you can try to compile it yourself. It's a day-long operation (especially if you compile it in the wrong order :-( ), but then you can share it with other people :-).

      The gcc and gtk+ library (and maybe more) you can get from www.sunfreeware.com, in forrm of pre-compiled solaris packages.

      --
      Ciao

      ----

      FB

    13. Re:Does Solaris Need Gnome? by Jay+Carlson · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Don't get excited about the Ultra 5/10 and the Blade 100. They have the heart and soul of a PC---IDE disk, ATI video, PC133 memory, (mostly) standard case and chassis. Unfortunately, they don't have the performance of a PC.

      I ran around running my Linux cross-compile benchmark on a bunch of Sparcs. The 1G RAM, 440MHz Ultra 10 checked in with performance that was strictly worse than the 320M 450MHz iMac DV+. The 500MHz Blade 100 was around 10% better. Now, these figures are probably a tad low; I realized after the fact I was using an SMP-enabled kernel, and that adds overhead even on a single-processor machine. So credit them with another 10% until I get publish-worthy numbers. The Sparcs are still crushed by the 733MHz P3 el-cheapo Dell Optiplex, and the (badly-configured) Athlon 1200 has nothing to fear.

      The Blade 1000 is a different beast. It's a real workstation, with 8M caches---can't get that in the beige box x86 world, and there are a lot of workloads that are just screaming for it. I don't have numbers yet, but I expect they'll be much more competitive. Of course, for $15-20k for a dual processor box, they'd better be.

      So why buy a Blade 100?

      1. Binary compatibility with bigger machines. If you think your app is going to have to scale up to mainframe size, you won't have to recompile your system to take it there.
      2. Commercial software compatibility. No Purify for Linux, for instance. Or maybe you already bought big-ticket software like RealServer, or a GIS.
      3. Compatibility with collaborators. In some communities (especially research), Solaris on SPARC is a very common environment.
      4. 64 bits. The Blade 100 is the cheapest 64-bit PC in the world. Some people need to develop for a 64-bit world. (It's not the cheapest 64-bit Linux hardware; although current kernels don't support it, the Agenda VR3 hardware is a full 64-bit MIPS implementation.)

      By the way, newer kernels improved the Mac performance substantially, and SMP provided around a 60% speedup on the tests on the dual 533MHz PPC. I think I know where to borrow a dual 800MHz PowerMac, which should finally beat the crap out of the Athlon 1200. Of course, now I'm curious about dual Athlon performance, but I dunno if I really need a new machine just to run some benchmarks...

    14. Re:Does Solaris Need Gnome? by oneiros27 · · Score: 3, Interesting
      I have to wonder if any OS that is primarily used as a server needs something like Gnome.
      Yes, conventional wisdom would suggest that servers don't need GUIs. Unfortunately, it's getting to where more and more applications (Oracle for one) are nearly impossible to install from the command line. Although some applications (Sun Cluster) have HTTP interfaces for configuration, others (iPlanet Directory) have Java interfaces. Sometimes it's either to go to the individual machine and do the work from there. Other times, you'll want to send the session back to your local machine.

      If you're sending it back to your local machine, you'd have to ask what's on your desk. Well, if you're monitoring a whole bunch of Solaris boxes, it makes sense to have at least one Solaris machine on your desk, some sort of a windows machine (as it will run the software that people would be using to connect to the systems), and a few have an extra machine [linux, another solaris, or my mac, as I refuse to live without BBEdit])

      Hands down, the Solaris boxes tend to be our primary machines, as you can use them for light development, they handle virtual desktops, etc. Of course, all but one of the nine folks in my office are running CDE. Does that mean that CDE's the best thing to be running? Probably not. I use it because it's here.

      Would I switch to Gnome? Probably not with anything but a cold install, as I'm busy enough during the day to take the time to install without messing up my project schedule, and I'm not familiar with Gnome, so I'd have a learning curve.

      I see this as being most beneficial to the folks that run linux/freebsd/openbsd at home with gnome, and have ultrasparc machines at work, and would prefer to just deal with one GUI. I don't fit into that category, but I know that I would love to get away from CDE, but I can't afford to expend significant time in switching over.
      --
      Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
    15. Re:Does Solaris Need Gnome? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      ...
      I dunno if I really need a new machine just to run some benchmarks...

      What kind of geek are you? :)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    16. Re:Does Solaris Need Gnome? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is not a holy war. CDE is very hard to work with. In the day of graphics and web, an UI is very important for multitasking. Solaris Server may not need a beefed up UI but as an Admin, it sure is helpful when problems arise and you need to search for answers.

  6. No, no, no by 1010011010 · · Score: 2

    They have to ship upgrades to keep the cash coming in. They can't ship Gnome 2.0 because it's not ready.

    No story here.

    --
    Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
    1. Re:No, no, no by GoatPigSheep · · Score: 2, Offtopic

      Windows, since version 1.0, is still not ready, yet they ship a new version every couple of years.

      --
      GoatPigSheep, the 3 most important food groups
    2. Re:No, no, no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Solaris has *NO* license fees that I have ever seen. I am in a shop with over 24 Exxx class boxes and we pay $0.00 for OS licensing. Upgrades from Sol7 to Sol8 to Sol9 are free. You have to keep in mind that Sun primarily sells hardware, so the cost of their OS and software is hidden in the cost of $200K 'Enterprise' servers that would cost $50K in the WinTel world.

    3. Re:No, no, no by ninewands · · Score: 1

      I seriously doubt you are going to see anything in the WIntel world to compare with a high-end E10K or E15K ...

    4. Re:No, no, no by ignorant_newbie · · Score: 1
      They have to ship upgrades to keep the cash coming in
      um... yeah. which is why they give away the software for free. installing the latest solaris involves : downloading the cds. installing the cds. patching the install. the only easier install i'm aware of is freebsd, and *bsd doesn't run quite as well on a 64 processor system.

      sun is becoming what IBM used to be: a hardware company (sunfire == GOOD_THING(tm)) who doesn't worry about making money on software.

    5. Re:No, no, no by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      um... yeah. which is why they give away the software for free. installing the latest solaris involves : downloading the cds. installing the cds. patching the install. the only easier install i'm aware of is freebsd, and *bsd doesn't run quite as well on a 64 processor system.

      Windows upgrades are just as trivial. Sometimes they blow up, but I've seen solaris upgrades explode too. Then again, windows upgrades aren't free, unless you have a MSDN subscription, in which case - They aren't free.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:No, no, no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's nice to see the rampant infighting bewteen mods here

  7. Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Lethyos · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Why does Sun continue to ignore KDE as a viable alternative to GNOME. KDE is very mature and incredibly stable. I don't see why Sun doesn't just go forward with packaging it with Solaris. Do they stick with GNOME because it's built on a 100% free toolkit? What's the driving force? As far as I can see, KDE is a solution to many of the problems Sun's UI trials of GNOME came up with. It just doesn't make sense... for one thing, if they want easy of use, KDE is much nicer than GNOME, IMHO.

    --
    Why bother.
    1. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by 1010011010 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "QT Developer's License"

      Plus, GTK is more motify.

      --
      Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
    2. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it available on Solaris already for them to bundle, or do you mean that they should port QT/KDE?

    3. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      QT ***IS*** 100%%%%%% FREEEEEEEEEEE DUUUUDDDDDDDDE!!!!!!!!!!

      it's gpl bonafied yumminess

    4. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least GNOME doesn't have an annoying default startup sound yet. I don't need chicks gathering around me each time I launch KDE, inquiring about the unfamiliar Windows boot sound, thank you.

    5. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Teutates · · Score: 1

      Well, maybe they just don't want to. They have to be careful with the QT license. The GTK license is gpl'd...

    6. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      for non corporate use, duh

    7. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Ian+Bicking · · Score: 2
      I think geography is more important than people give it credit for, even with the Internet. Sun is an American company, Gnome is an American product. KDE is very Europoean.

      There are lots of other reasons, of course. It isn't patriotism on Sun's part. But there's not a lot of very influential KDE people on this side of the Atlantic. And the influence goes both ways: Sun wants to have influence on how their chosen desktop is developed, and it'll be a lot easier for them to influence Gnome (through hiring, for instance).

    8. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by gloth · · Score: 1
      They have to be careful with the QT license. The GTK license is gpl'd...

      Are you completely ignorant?? Qt/X11 is released under the GPL! Think before you post, moron!!

      Qt FAQ

    9. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Ian+Bicking · · Score: 1

      QT is GPLed. GTK is LGPLed.

    10. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by luge · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What he should have said was lgpl'd. Under GTK, developers can write proprietary solaris desktop software without having to pay anything to trolltech. [Disclaimer: I work for ximian, but obviously this post is not written as a Ximian ad, nor does it represent Ximian.]

      --

      IAAL,BIANLY

    11. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try reading your own link next time, you stupid fuck. Qt Free Edition cannot be used to develop commercial/proprietary apps. Solaris is a proprietary OS that runs (mostly) commercial apps.

    12. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Zog · · Score: 1

      I think it's a valid argument that KDE is better for ease-of-use for the average joe kind of person than Gnome (and speaking from experience, my mom liked KDE better).

      Let it be known that Solaris is not designed around ease-of-use; it is still a fairly hardcore UNIX.

    13. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by jfunk · · Score: 3, Flamebait
      for non corporate use, duh


      Uh, no. Corporations can use GPLed code all they want, as long as they do not distribute binaries outside of their organisation without source. If they want to do that, however, they can buy a license to sell closed-source software.

      The end result is that Qt encourages *more* open-source code, while GTK does not due to the LGPL.

      Two things, though:

      - Most software is written for internal use
      - If you're going to sell apps, Qt is cheap as dirt as there are no individual licensing fees

      It looks like Sun, contrary to the opinion of many Slashdotters, is *encouraging* closed-source by making it easy to do so.

      Man, I'm really getting sick of these arguments...
    14. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by gloth · · Score: 1
      Qt Free Edition cannot be used to develop commercial/proprietary apps.

      Did I claim it could be used that way? I simply pointed out that Qt/X11 is free software, released under the GPL. I'm sorry if that's too complicated for you to understand. Most people actually have the brain to grasp that concept.

      Apart from this, the licensing fees for the professional edition of Qt are very reasonable in a corporate environment. Also keep in mind that the professional editon comes with technical support -- and very good one, from what I've heard.

    15. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by ninewands · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Let it be known that Solaris is not designed around ease-of-use; it is still a fairly hardcore UNIX.

      Allow me to second that ... Solaris (at it's core) is EXTREMELY hardcore Unix. So much so that it can take a fairly experience admin from another "flavor" about 6 weeks to learn their way around the filesystem. Sun very much believes the old Perl maxim "there's more than one way to do it" and appends "Our way is better." This is a typical old-style Unix thought pattern.

    16. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Dwonis · · Score: 2

      s/corporate/GPL/

    17. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by ll5 · · Score: 1

      Is that all it takes to have chicks gather around? To hell with Blackbox, I am switching to KDE poste haste!

      --
      Wanna get high?
    18. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by msaavedra · · Score: 2
      Sun is an American company, Gnome is an American product.
      Actually, Miguel de Icaza, who is Mexican, is generally credited with starting Gnome. Not that this really matters, though. Both KDE and Gnome have developers from many countries For instance, there are plenty of important Gnome developers from Europe, though a number of them are now living in the US. It's hard to say that either of them is the product of a particular country.
      --
      "Any fool can make a rule, and any fool will mind it."
      --Henry David Thoreau
    19. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats some awfully stallman like reasoning.

      The GPL doesn't encourge people to develop GPL code, it discourages them from using the toolkit. The LGPL encourages the use LGPLed code, and perhaps extention of it.

      So there.

    20. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Ian+Bicking · · Score: 2

      I meant "America" in the most generic fashion, though I suppose that wasn't clear.

    21. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by quarterbooty · · Score: 1

      i've wondered this myself. not that i have anything against gnome, it's a great project, but i prefer kde. i've read a few posts from people claiming it's easier to get kde to compile on solaris anyway. i can't verify this as the bank would frown on me trying to purchase a sun box to try it out (also don't want to bother with i386 solaris). i use hp/ux workstations at school and they have cde as the deskstop. what can i say about it other than it's terrible. not trying to be a troll, at least i can say i use it.

    22. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by BlowCat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because KDE is based on a GPLed Qt, whereas GNOME uses only LGPLed libraries. Many vendors of Solaris software will never open their code for various reasons. Sun doesn't want to see them using a GUI library different from the one that Sun makes standard, neither does Sun want to help Trolltech rip Solaris developers.

    23. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry dewd, Free software and release under the GPL are mutually exclusive phrases. If you want a Free licsense, I'd suggest one that doesn't restrict what you can and cannot do with code.

    24. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Macka · · Score: 2, Insightful


      That's rubbish. The amount of money the Trolls charge for a commercial QT development license is so insignificant to a company like Sun that it wouldn't even cause the most junior manager to blink.

      What it basicly boils down to is one or more decision making people were in the right place at the right time to choose GNOME because they were 'C' heads, not 'C++' heads. i.e. personal (and probably emotional) preference.

      If Scott M actually sat down with two desktops side by side and ran them both for a couple of days, he'd realise he's been conned.

    25. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by ksheff · · Score: 2

      I also thought that most of Sun's Gnome hackers were based out of their Dublin office. If that's the case, then that pretty much throws out the "it's because Gnome is [North] American product" argument.

      --
      the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
    26. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Harbinjer · · Score: 1
      Actually, at school here, KDE is basically it for environments using Solaris. We just got some new Sun Blade's and the default on them is KDE. It works pretty well, only problem is that is 2.0.1 I think, so its pretty old.

      However I think that was our Sysadmin's choice, and he might've installed it himself. It works great though! I'll ask him about it if anyone wants to know.

    27. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by TV-SET · · Score: 1
      QT is GPLed. GTK is LGPLed.

      Here is a quote from announcement of QT 3.0 release ( source is here ):

      Qt 3.0 is released under the following licences:

      The Qt Professional and Enterprise Editions. Available for thedevelopment of proprietary/commercial software on Windows, Linux, Unix and Mac OS X.

      The Qt Free Edition. Free for run-time use and for developmentof free/Open Source software on Linux and Unix/X11.

      The Qt Educational Program. Educational institutions can get asite license for 100 users of Qt/Windows to use in relevantcourses.

      I would not say that it is exactly GPL, but IANAL on the other hand.

      --
      Leonid Mamtchenkov ...i don't need your civil war...
    28. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by abdulla · · Score: 1

      doesn't sun have an irish/scotish base as well?

    29. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by abdulla · · Score: 1

      i have to admit, the hpux machin i had a fiddle with at SGI's meblourne office sucked hardcore, i want 4dwindows!

    30. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by quarterbooty · · Score: 1

      one thing i noticed from using hp/ux is how much better the GNU versions of certian utilities like tar, du, df, ls, etc are.

    31. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In other words, a license that allows you to take open source software and produce a closed source commercial alternative is preferable...

      Yeah, let's LGPL or BSD Linux. You'd see a Microsoft Linux# in no time...

    32. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by yaba · · Score: 1

      What hinders you from downloading the GNU SD packages from http://gatekeep.cs.utah.edu/hppd/hpux/alpha.html or http://devresource.hp.com/?

    33. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by fault0 · · Score: 1

      Sun can't afford Qt licenses? You've got to be kidding me.

    34. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It boils down to controlling your own platform -- Something IBM forget when they granted Microsoft the DOS franchise, for example.

      Don't feel bad about KDE not being the new standard commercial UNIX desktop -- the decision was not made on technical or quality issues, but solely on licence politics. Besides, as we know Commercial UNIX is Dying. Red ink flows like a river of blood. In fact Commercial UNIX might already be dead.

    35. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by fault0 · · Score: 1

      I said this once before, but it needs to be said again.

      Are you telling me that Sun doesn't have enough money to buy a Qt license?

    36. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by maw · · Score: 1
      for non corporate use, duh

      No, since Qt is available under the GPL, you CAN use it for corporate, for profit use.

      You just can't incorporate it into proprietary products without paying for a different license.

      I'm not wild about proprietary software (although I accept it as a fact of life at least for now), but I hardly think paying for a proprietary development license would bother serious proprietary app developers.

      --
      You're a suburbanite.
    37. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course they have enough, However maybe they do not want their customers having to pay a tribute to Trolltech whenever they develop commericial software?

      In effect Sun would end up freely distributing libraries and an API that another company could reap the benefits off. Thats something Sun wants for itself (with the Java platform for example).

      As IBM found out when it distributed its first PC delivered with Microsoft MS-DOS, it was those programming APIs that allowed Microsft to gain ascendancy over IBM.

      Now that the lessons of the 80s have been learn't why would Sun repeat the mistake?

      dave_o_connell@hotmail.com

    38. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      remember that the author of Blackbox, brad hughes, aka nyz, quit blackbox development in order to join trolltech and help with Qt (he is the writer of major parts of Qt3, including the new styles system).

    39. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by fault0 · · Score: 1

      And that's why the the tarball has a LICENSE.GPL in it.

      Do you really expect press releases like that to include words like "GPL"?

    40. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Anyone remember SUN's Open Look? They backed the wrong horse that time because they had more control over it, too...

      Is it in Sun's history to back the wrong horse?

    41. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by mj6798 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If Sun adopted KDE/Qt, they'd let another company set the cost for any commercial GUI development on Solaris that integrates with the standard desktop. The cost would instantly be much higher than it is now, it would be much higher than competing platforms, and there is no guarantee that it wouldn't go up even further since Sun has no control over TrollTech's pricing or development direction.

    42. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sun could make a deal with Trolltech.

    43. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Lussarn · · Score: 2

      Of course SUN can pay the licence to Trolltech, but there are other third party developers that possibly can't. The fee is above $1200/developer, which could possibly fall a bit if QT bacame the standard.

    44. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they are closing it dow.. er sorry .. "rationalising their european workforce"

    45. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, they could. But if they did, the value of Qt would go way up, and it would be even harder for other UNIX vendors to adopt it because their costs would be even higher. Then Sun would have a proprietary toolkit that is a lot more expensive to them and their customers than Motif, that other vendors are less likely to adopt, and they still wouldn't have any long-term control over it. The only possible solution I see is buying Troll Tech and releasing Qt under the LGPL. 18 months ago, that might have happened. In today's climate? Probably not.

    46. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by aanantha · · Score: 1

      Sun isn't the one who has to pay for the developer license. It's each and every Solaris developer who has to pay. Imagine you are Sun, and you give away your OS for almost nothing along with your hardware. Your customer paid $1000 for their Blade 100. So now with Solaris 9, you tell them you've switched from CDE to Qt and so now every Solaris customer needs to caugh up $2000 per developer and send it to Trolltech if they write any GUI C/C++ code or Java code. Now imagine those customers telling you (Sun) to go to hell. Solaris developers who do GUI work may be content with Motif and CDE for programming. It's free for them, it's well documented, and it gets the job done. Sun needs to give them a reason to migrate their code.

      But 'C' vs 'C++' did also have a lot to do with it. GNU C++ is incompatible with Sun's C++. You can't link Sun C++ libraries with GNU C++ code. There's no built-in C++ standard library on Solaris. And it's too late now because they wouldn't be able to decide whether to ship with Sun's C++ standard library or GNU's.

    47. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It still isn't clear. What does "America in the most generic fashion" mean?

    48. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by nrosier · · Score: 1

      One of the reasons is that KDE is written in C++ which still doesn't have a standard ABI. Gnome has been written in C which does.

    49. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by rseuhs · · Score: 1
      So now with Solaris 9, you tell them you've switched from CDE to Qt and so now every Solaris customer needs to caugh up $2000 per developer and send it to Trolltech if they write any GUI C/C++ code or Java code.

      Wrong, first I don't know where Java fits into that picture, second, you only need to pay if you want to SELL your code. Things like Borland Delphi or Kylix or Visual Studio are not free, too.

    50. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fee is above $1200/developer, which could possibly fall a bit if QT bacame the standard.

      It could also possibly rise a lot if QT became the standard. The normal reaction to achieving market dominance is to increase prices because you're no longer as affected by competitive forces. Anticipating that prices would be lowered in that situation is unusual.

    51. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It still isn't clear. What does "America in the most generic fashion" mean?

      I imagine, though I could be wrong, that he's referring to the comment about Miguel De Icaza being Mexican and is saying that he was talking about the projects being more centred around two continents, America and Europe, with Mexico being (I believe) part of America not part of Europe. I think the person he was replying to either thought that America is a country or else thought that Mexico is part of some other continent (Antarctica perhaps?). I agree that "generic" is an odd word to use here, I presume he meant to say "accurate".

      HTH

    52. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      you only need to pay if you want to SELL your code


      Wrong. Read the Qt FAQ posted above. Troll Tech considers internal distribution to be the same as external distribution.
    53. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His point was that it's not simply GPL. It's GPL plus additional restrictions on what you do with it mandated by Troll Tech. Read the Qt FAQ.\

    54. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Octorian · · Score: 1

      Yeah, they really should take a look at KDE on their machines. I'm sitting here on my Ultra 30, using KDE. When I tried Ximian Gnome on this box, it was very slow and painful to use. KDE, on the other hand, is quite snappy.

      (now if only Sun would come out with a Creator3D series 4, or something equivalent that actually bothered to included pixel-copy hardware for 2D acceleration, I'd be very happy. They had it on the old 8-bit TurboGX... Why not on newer stuff?)

    55. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to the Qt FAQ, distribution within the organization counts too. Simply put, if you use Qt Free Edition, you must open source your work, even if it's intended for internal use only.

    56. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The vast majority of software is developed for internal use, not for sale, and it's unlikely that companies developing such software are going to want to pay $2000/head more, nor do they want to become dependent on yet another vendor.

    57. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Tassach · · Score: 1
      ...there is no guarantee that it wouldn't go up even further since Sun has no control over TrollTech's pricing or development direction.


      That would be true if it wern't for the fact that Sun could buy out TrollTech without even blinking. Can you say "wholly owned subsidiary"? Believe me, if Sun had a big commitment to using QT, they would make sure that they had control over the licensing. Even if Sun didn't buy TT out, they could still negotiate a favorable licensing contract or buy a minority share of the company (enough so that they have a seat or two on the board of directors).
      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    58. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Flower · · Score: 2
      Nope. See, if Gnome goes in a direction Sun doesn't like or if Sun needs to add something to Gnome they can fork Gnome. Being LGPL, we get to keep the source, changes can be brought back into Gnome, and commercial companies can still use the libraries without cost.

      Now if I do that with KDE... Well I can either GPL my fork (no proprietary company can use my code now), rewrite the thing from scratch, or.... suck up and take whatever TrollTech gives me because I can't modify their commercially licensed code. Depending upon exactly what I need done I may have to whine a little bit to... well we'll leave that to the imagination or I might get told flat out no and be SOL.

      It's not just cost, it's control. GPLing Qt was nice for linux distributors but for a company like Sun I just don't see how KDE would ever fly. No matter how mature it is. I can improve Gnome but the issues around KDE will never change or are out of my hands.

      Scott wasn't conned. He just saw an investment that had a better chance of paying off than the alternative.

      --
      I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
    59. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      If Sun adopted KDE/Qt, they'd let another company set the cost for any commercial GUI development on Solaris that integrates with the standard desktop. The cost would instantly be much higher than it is now
      ...

      Great, I hope they do it; Then Qt will die and we can stop having these stupid holy wars.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    60. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by mi · · Score: 1
      Because KDE is based on a GPLed Qt, whereas GNOME uses only LGPLed libraries.

      Wait, a commercial license for Qt is not available? What are you purchasing here, then?

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    61. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by elflord · · Score: 2
      or.... suck up and take whatever TrollTech gives me because I can't modify their commercially licensed code.

      Do you have a cite to support this claim ? It seems questionable at best.

    62. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by elflord · · Score: 2
      It's not that simple. Competitive forces are an obstruction to increasing prices. Low sales volume is an obstruction to reducing prices. It's true that both of these factors interact, but it also appears that a lot of market dominance is necessary to remove pricing obstructions. There are very few software packages that are excessively expensive due to monopoly control.

    63. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. Just like the Microsoft BSD that magically appeared, right?

    64. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Paul+Komarek · · Score: 2

      Backing up the comment on the filesystem: don't forget to check all the "etc" directories when looking for binaries like "ping"!

      -Paul Komarek

    65. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by bolthole · · Score: 1
      Sun very much believes the old Perl maxim "there's more than one way to do it" and appends "Our way is better."

      Uh, no, sun believes in sticking to STANDARDS whereever possible. It sticks to the SVR4 standard filesystem layout. It tracks the various POSIX/UNIX## standards very closely.

      if you came to solaris from a non-standardized OS, and got lost, that's your fault, not sun picking "its own way".

      The exception to this is of course when there were no pre-existing standards. So sun HAD to invent stuff like NIS ,which then became the new standard for everyone else for a decade.

    66. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by bolthole · · Score: 1
      Backing up the comment on the filesystem: don't forget to check all the "etc" directories when looking for binaries like "ping"!

      HUH? That's a BSD-ism, not solaris. ping is in /usr/sbin, along with most other admin-type tools. There are no executables in /etc

    67. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by dark_panda · · Score: 2
      From the QT/X11 Free Edition overview (http://www.trolltech.com/developer/download/qt-x1 1.html):

      "The Qt/X11 Free Edition is provided with no support and no warranty.

      The Qt Free Edition is provided under both the Q Public License ("QPL") and the GPL. This specifies that you may freely use the Qt Free Edition for:

      • Running software developed by others (e.g. KDE)
      • Development of open source/non-proprietary software
      The Qt Professional / Enterprise Editions are available for development of commercial/proprietary software. If you wish to evaluate Qt/X11 for commercial use, please see the Evaluation information."

      You don't need to be much of a lawyer to understand that.

      J
    68. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Paul+Komarek · · Score: 2

      I must be thinking of SunOS instead of Solaris. Most often, I don't bother differentiating between the two.

      -Paul

    69. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Flower · · Score: 2
      Here's my problem with TrollTech. I see page upon page of information about their QPL license but I see squat about their commercial license. So I do have to infer some things.

      Like in-house development would require a commercial license of Qt. Look here.

      This license allows for use that normally would be considered commercial, such as development of in-house applications and the like, but does not allow for the development of commercial applications or components of commercial applications or products

      Or here.
      A non-commercial setting means that you must not use the package in the course of your employment or whilst engaged in activities that will be compensated.

      And here.
      The idea is that if you use Qt, you should pay back either by giving the software you make back to the free software community (the Free Edition), or contribute to the Qt development by purchasing commercial licenses from us (the Professional/Enterprise Editions).

      Pouring over these pages just to find out what is and isn't allowed for free/in-house/commercial software makes me want to find a lawyer. The GPL may allow for proprietary in-house software but I don't think TrollTech permits it. In-house definately seem to fall under their criteria for a commercial license.

      As for which system promotes OSS better, well that's another post/debate. Personally I think the LGPL is great for getting it in the door and if a company wants to open their codebase they can do it at their discretion. But as to whether you can use the free toolkit for in-house development... I wouldn't give that a resounding yes after everything I've read.

      --
      I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
    70. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by praedor · · Score: 1

      God forbid that chicks would hang around you at all.


      Yuck. Cooties.

      --
      In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
    71. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by jfunk · · Score: 2

      After all of your research, did you find anything about TrollTech using a *modified* GPL?

      They cannot change the meaning of the GPL without modifying the GPL. GPL is OK for in-house development.

      The stuff you found refers to the 'professional' and 'academic' licensing, which defines things differently.

      Your last quote is what they think people *should* do, not necessarily what they can.

    72. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by Flower · · Score: 2
      I guess my question is which license gets issued when and who gets to choose it. We know the license is issued when development begins. So, if a company is starting an in-house project, which TrollTech obviously considers commercial work, when they get the toolkit it seems logical to me that they have to pay for a license.

      Here's the assumptions I'm running on. Somebody corect me if I'm wrong.

      1. The copyright owner (CO) gets to determine what licenses the code can fall under.
      2. The CO determines which license can be applied when the licensed is issued.
      3. The license follows the product.

      Under these circumstances I don't think you need to modify the GPL. TT simply never offers you the GPL version if you are producing what they consider commercial code.

      Just because Qt can be licensed under the QPL, GPL or Academic, Professional or Enterprise license doesn't mean the customer choses which one to use. TT permits a license based on what you are using their toolkit for.

      IANAL, but I think that line of reasoning is sound based upon all the stuff I've read about Copyright.

      --
      I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
    73. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by jfunk · · Score: 2

      If I download something that's GPLed, then the copyright owner cannot remove that licensing. This is explicitly defined in the GPL. Later versions may be distributed with other licenses, but if you download a tarball which has the COPYING file in it and the appropriate notices, the GPL applies.

      The different licenses are packaged separately. If you get Qt/Free Edition distibution (as in tarball), the GPL applies. If you get the Academic Edition distribution (presumably a CD), then a different license applies and it is marked as such.

      Also remember that the GPL explicitly disallows selective rejection of use. TrollTech, in using the GPL, cannot restrict usage of Qt to certain groups and not others for any reason, as long as those groups respect the GPL. This includes the internal use group.

    74. Re:Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? by aanantha · · Score: 1
      Wrong, first I don't know where Java fits into that picture,

      Java has builtin support for native GUIs. It currently only support Motif on Linux, but Sun plans to provide GNOME support. If they went with Qt, then it's possible that any commercial Java code would require a Qt Pro license.

      second, you only need to pay if you want to SELL your code.

      So are you saying that Solaris customers shouldn't be selling code?! Look, I'm not talking about open source Solaris development or people who buy Suns for web servers. I'm talking about software companies that sell closed source code on Solaris. Those people still matter to Sun.

      Things like Borland Delphi or Kylix or Visual Studio are not free, too.

      But they aren't $1500 either. It's one thing to pay for a compiler or IDE, it's another thing to have to pay a large sum for the right to program the GUI in any way. Any UNIX vendor that switches to Qt is basically at the whim of Trolltech. They can sell development environments to their customers, but their customers can't program the system unless they also pay Trolltech.

      Many UNIX software vendors have developed a close relationship with Sun over the years. They don't want to maintain a separate relationship with Trolltech for basically the same product. Sun doesn't need to outsource their GUI to a commercial company. They have the resources and money to fund their own GUI development. They are effectively doing that with GNOME.

      Sun customers would effectively pay for GNOME, because Sun is using their revenues to fund developers for the project. The same goes for Microsoft and their GUI. For CDE and Windows, every user and developer contributes money to pay the GUI developers. No matter what, the person who writes the GUI is getting paid. It's just a question of who gets paid and when. For Qt, the closed source developer is the only one that pays. And right now they pay a lot because there aren't enough Qt customers to reduce the price.

  8. Gnome will never die by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    GNU always wants to re-invent the wheel. Linux is fine, but they still want to work on HURD, because Linux isn't made by GNU. KDE is fine, but they still want to work on Gnome, because KDE isn't made by GNU.

    1. Re:Gnome will never die by Gunfighter · · Score: 2, Interesting

      GNU sought to develop a desktop environment they could release under the GPL. They came up with GNOME. At the time, they had no choice due to the fact that the Qt widget set was not compatible with the GPL. Now that it is, they are happier about companies like RedHat including it in their distributions, but they are still dedicated to seeing their baby (GNOME) succeed. Check out RMS' recent comments on the subject if you can find them.

      --
      -- Stu

      /. ID under 2,000. I feel old now.
    2. Re:Gnome will never die by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If that was what they wanted, then they should have stopped work on GNOME as soon as Qt was GPLed...

      But they didn't -- and it's a good thing for us, because KDE is much better now than it would have been without Gnome spurring them on.

  9. Disappointed by angry_beaver · · Score: 1

    I for one will be very disappointed if Sun does not ship some version of Gnome with Solaris 9.
    As a big fan of Solaris I've been looking forward to this release, but come on, CDE is a donkey. It's one of the worst interfaces I've ever used.

    Sorry, just had to blow off some steam. My hatred for CDE runs deep :-)

    1. Re:Disappointed by IvyMike · · Score: 2

      Gnome is easy enough to download and install. You should do it, because CDE does in fact blow.

    2. Re:Disappointed by buysse · · Score: 5, Informative
      Please, don't use this version. It can suck a golf ball through a garden hose.

      Try the Ximian packaging (www.ximian.com). It's quite a bit better. I still don't like everything about it, but it's a hell of a lot better than Sun's packaging. If you're going to evaluate Gnome, give it a fair shot.

      --
      -30-
    3. Re:Disappointed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly you've never used OLWM.

    4. Re:Disappointed by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2
      Does this ximian version include both SPARC and i386pc pre-packaged binaries, in pkgadd format, with dependencies properly laid out?

      And the golf ball thing...only use that expression in a positive sense. As in, "sure, that girl I went home with last night was a bit chubby, but boy could she suck a golf ball through a garden hose".

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    5. Re:Disappointed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The sun packages seem faster to me(probly because they used workshop to compile it).
      Alot of the stuff in the ximian packages was broke. It also took 5 minutes to load up on my ultra10. The sun one takes about a minute.

    6. Re:Disappointed by diamondc · · Score: 1

      no, it's based on RPM, and you have to do some rpm magic like getting an rpmrc from another machine and doing some weird commands to integrate it into Solaris. this was documented on the ximian mailing list, though. after that annoyance, Red Carpet worked like a charm.

      --
      "I keep looking in the want-ads under 'revolutionary' but there don't seem to be any listings.. "
  10. I use Ximian GNOME on RH 7.1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And the best part about it has to be Red Carpet. I don't like up2date because it requires registration with Red Hat's site. Does KDE have something similar? Or is there some other tool I can use to keep things patched if I switch away from GNOME? Hell, I've used apt on Debian systems, and something like that would be welcome!

    1. Re:I use Ximian GNOME on RH 7.1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the KDE project's policy to let the distro handle it. Unlike GNOME, which is controlled by one company (Ximian), KDE has no central company, therefore no central money to make a update server.

    2. Re:I use Ximian GNOME on RH 7.1 by diamondc · · Score: 1

      GNOME only and always has supports source tarball files..

      --
      "I keep looking in the want-ads under 'revolutionary' but there don't seem to be any listings.. "
    3. Re:I use Ximian GNOME on RH 7.1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so am i ipbanned yet?

  11. Re:no offense but... by eric_ste · · Score: 1

    Don't you think dos 3.3 is dead? Has the code become less functional? hmm.. ;)

  12. Re:Face it, GNOME is dead. by plastercast · · Score: 3, Informative

    Why? Because KDE now has a larger number infront of it? That really doesn't make it any better or worse. The fact is that the user level differeces between KDE2 and 3 will be much less than GNOME1 to GNOME2 (fixing gtk-flash-bug, aa text, pango, and so on). I can't help but think that if the GNOME project upped the release number everytime I see a new GNOME-related file in sid, everyone would be saying that KDE was dying and GNOME was developing amazingly quickly.

    BTW, this should not in anyway be taken as a knock against anyone who use/develop/etc KDE, just those who feel the need to bash the alternative.

  13. Does anyone see a troll? by jmauro · · Score: 5, Informative

    Read Linux gram's article. It says in a feature incomplete pre-beta demo of Solaris 9 there is no GNOME 2.0. There is no GNOME 2.0 ( just an alpha version) for shipping versions of redhat, let alone for pre-beta versons of Solaris. This article is just placed here to pull traffic to LinuxGram and doesn't really add anything.

    1. Re:Does anyone see a troll? by Xiphoid+Process · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Not to mention this empty flamebait of an "article" here at Slashdot, anything to get the flames/add dollars rolling in, I guess. I don't understand why people in the slashdot "community" want to keep driving a wedge where one does not belong.

      But don't be fooled, it's not the developers of K/G that are perpetuating this "rift", its bored 13 year old slashdot trolls. Right now Gnome and KDE are both achiving great things, they are both making linux a contender for the desktop, and most of all, both sets of developers are working together at an increasing rate (there is a scheduled interoperablity hack-a-thon at the Linux Showcase in early november.) KDE and GNOME are both here to stay, choice is good, deal with it.

      --
      got drum'n'bass?

      http://mp3.com/vitriolix
    2. Re:Does anyone see a troll? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 4, Informative
      Yah, I noticed that the beta Solaris 9 didn't include GNOME *or* OpenWindows. It's nice that OW is finally deprecated, but I expected to see GNOME alongside faithful CDE.

      An aside to you CDE-haters: it's not how pretty the desktop is, it's all about the function. CDE stands for "Common Desktop Interface", and it's true that one can go from a Sun to an HP to an IRIX box, and, using CDE, be productive on each platform. I've been there.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    3. Re:Does anyone see a troll? by kiwaiti · · Score: 1

      Obviously, it's not "Common Desktop Interface" but "Common Desktop Environment".
      </nitpick>

      Kiwaiti

      --
      Member of the Legion Of Microsoft Haters
    4. Re:Does anyone see a troll? by Tet · · Score: 2
      one can go from a Sun to an HP to an IRIX box, and, using CDE, be productive on each platform. I've been there


      I, too have been there, and found myself equally unproductive on all of them until I got myself a decent fvwm2 setup configured :-) Note that despite the "common" in the name, there's not a great deal in common between the different CDE versions. Each vendor puts everything on different menus, for a start. Sun's menu layout is probably the worst I've come across, with Tru64 being among the better ones. Sure, you have common keyboard accelerators in all versions of KDE, and because they're all running dtwm, the windows look and behave the same. But the end user experience really isn't that consistent. Which kind of defeats the whole point...

      --
      "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
    5. Re:Does anyone see a troll? by Surak · · Score: 2

      An aside to you CDE-haters: it's not how pretty the desktop is, it's all about the function. CDE stands for "Common Desktop Interface", and it's true that one can go from a Sun to an HP to an IRIX box, and, using CDE, be productive on each platform. I've been there.

      Really? Strange...none of my IRIX boxes shipped with CDE on them at all...hmmm...who should I tell? ;-)

      SGI, to my knowledge, doesn't use CDE in IRIX. Sun on Slowlaris, HP on HP-UX, and IBM on AIX...does anyone know any other platforms that ship with CDE by default? I can't think of the other ones right now.. :)

    6. Re:Does anyone see a troll? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Coming by default and 3rd party addon are different things. My guess is that they have to pay royalties to someone for each copy that was shipped. That was the same reason that NFS server didn't come by default on earlier versions of Irix, they had to pay Sun licensing for the servers; so they figured instead of rolling up the cost into the OS and charging everybody they'd only charge the people who wanted NFS, not bad in theory... but everybody wants NFS.

    7. Re:Does anyone see a troll? by davecb · · Score: 1

      I suspect it's FUD: no-one's announced a
      cancellation...

      Sun has announced that Gnome 2.0 (or later)
      will be on a later version of Solaris,
      and that OpenOffice (based on StarOffice)
      wil be part of the desktop. Speak to your
      Salesperson for specific plans.

      Personal opinion: someone's suckered Linuxgram
      with FUD.

      --dave

      --
      davecb@spamcop.net
    8. Re:Does anyone see a troll? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      haha fvwm2.. you've got to be kidding!

    9. Re:Does anyone see a troll? by Syberghost · · Score: 2

      Each vendor puts everything on different menus, for a start.

      Hell, HP puts everything in different places between releases of the OS. Sometimes within patch levels of the same release...

      Half our developers run GNOME on their Solaris development servers. The guys in charge of the devel environment (I'm production, thank the maker) had to go ahead and install it because each developer was putting it in his own home directory and using up a crapload of diskspace. They couldn't get anything done with CDE.

    10. Re:Does anyone see a troll? by Rogain · · Score: 1

      Where are these magical HP, Irix and True64 graphical systems? The only commercial unix desktops I've seen are the 7+ year-old cast-offs they make the new employees or contractors use. We got tons of unix racks, but they're all servers. Except for the crummy solaris boxen, none of them even comes with a graphical console (except the netras).

      --
      The current Slashdot moderation system is made by gay communists!
  14. Re:no offense but... by plastercast · · Score: 1

    Obviously not, but this is comparing apples to oranges. DOS is depreciated because new pieces of software do things that it won't. To follow through on your analogy, what does the new KDE do that GNOME won't?

  15. I find it Ironic... by Karza · · Score: 1

    That this news is posted on the same day that this is announced, TrollTech releases QT 3.0 and that KDE 3.0 development is proceeding nicely. Just shows how some projects lose momentum and others do not. Very sad because I actually prefer the look and feel of Gnome to KDE.

    --
    --I don't mind the school of hard knocks, it's those darned refresher courses I hate. =)
    1. Re:I find it Ironic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is it ironic? GNOME folks do this all the time.
      When KDE announces they're doing something good, the
      GNOME people immediately respond they're thinking of
      doing something. They're just taking a page from the
      M$ book of marketing.

    2. Re:I find it Ironic... by abdulla · · Score: 1

      i have to admit gnome looks quit a lot dandier than kde, but the reason i prefer kde is its usability, simplicity, stablility and speed. it's rock solid and fast, show all those arguments against C++ don't always work well in production, a simple virtual call can be a lot less expensive than some exotic pointer to hell.

    3. Re:I find it Ironic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      They're just taking a page from the
      M$ book of marketing.



      That is a good thing! (tm) Marketing is one thing that MS is good at and we should learn from that.

  16. Re:no offense but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Why is Gome on it's way out? Why is KDE so much better? It's really hard not to sound trollish when you don't supply any facts.

  17. I know this is not so... by sasha328 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    But could it be that GNOME is not ready because:
    Gnome's leader Miguel de Icaza is currently having a flirtation with Microsoft's C# technologies and is producing a Linux version of the stuff under an open source initiative called the Mono Project. ?
    Or could this be a hint from Sun, to ignore MS C# (and MONO)or GNOME will wither an die a slow agonising death? After all, doesn't Sun now offer an alternative to Passport, and so .NET?
    Just a thought.

    1. Re:I know this is not so... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hate to interrupt your grassy knoll studies,
      but that's just plain loopy. I mean, c'mon.
      Would Sun deprive its S9 shipment of a useful
      product just to "give a warning" to a developer?
      You need to stop watching the Sopranos.

      Truth is, if G2.0 were ready, which it isn't,
      Sun would ship it. But G2.0 ain't ready, and
      Sun doesn't like to knowingly ship alpha-wear
      for their servers.

  18. Qt+KDE Runs Fine On My Sun Box by Lethyos · · Score: 2, Informative

    Qt compiles without a hitch and so does KDE. And if you want the official word, Trolltech's web site indicates that Qt will compile fine on Solaris, or pretty much any box running some form of X11. The KDE project has also made accomodations to run properly on Sun's OS. Sun doesn't have to do any work other than compilation and making packages. What's so hard about that? At the very least, they could make it an option.

    --
    Why bother.
  19. yes, GNOME _is_ dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trying not to be flamebait, but I think now is the time for GNOME hackers to gracefully start porting their programs to the KDE architecture. Is that really such a difficult move to make? Surely the whole Linux community would respect them all the more, because they will have consoldated the Linux desktop. There are GNOME fanatics, and they will try to mod this post down to -1 but perhaps this is not all that crazy a sentiment as it might once have been. Give it some thought, that's all I ask. Image where we could be if we stand united.

    1. Re:yes, GNOME _is_ dead by plastercast · · Score: 1

      "Give it some thought, that's all I ask. Image where we could be if we stand united."

      Yes, united behind what you want....

    2. Re:yes, GNOME _is_ dead by abdulla · · Score: 1

      i wonder if they'll make kde 3 look a lot sexier, that's where gnome has always one out. nowadays all gui's are going for the eye-candy and simplicity (which helps a lot, tho can be distracting), on the eye-candy side, kde 2 just doesnt cut it.

    3. Re:yes, GNOME _is_ dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Trying not to be flamebait, but I think now is the time for GNOME hackers to gracefully start porting their programs to the KDE architecture. Is that really such a difficult move to make?


      Yes. The fucking KDE/QT has no support for C.

    4. Re:yes, GNOME _is_ dead by fault0 · · Score: 1

      www.kde-look.org

      try the liquid style. gnome can't even compare.

    5. Re:yes, GNOME _is_ dead by jonathan_ingram · · Score: 1

      Or try the QNiX theme -- for those of us that like our desktop to be usable, rather than a weird graphic designers wet dream :)

      On a seperate point, I'd really like it if Gnome 2 and KDE 3 could use a common standard for *pixmap* window and widget styles... (code styles couldn't be interoperable, of course).

  20. Re:no offense but... by grammar+nazi · · Score: 1, Informative
    In this particular instance, Gnome was smoked by CDE! Now that's saying something.

    Finally, on a grammatical note, please refrain from refering to Gnome as 'they'. Gnome is a desktop environment and should clearly be referred to in a singular sense.

    On my personal preference, use the word very rather than really. If you do, then you'll sound twice as intelligent as you currently do.

    I'm just trying to improve the quality of Slashdot with this post, so please don't mod me into oblivion.

    --

    Keeping /. free of grammatical errors for ~5 years.
  21. What ? by akintayo · · Score: 1

    While a grad student, my university standardised on Solaris and RedHat Linux. so some students had CDE while others had the choice of KDE or GNOME. And some of us - me - spent 8+ hours my workstation.

    So yes, gnome on solaris would be a good thing. CDE is a peace of crap thankfully Solaris also comes with Motif or OpenStep which s much more functional.

    --
    Woe be on to them, all who rise against poor people, shall perish in a the end. Buju Banton
    1. Re:What ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you mean Openwin instead of Openstep (openwin is their
      X server and Openstep is a window manager I believe),
      Solaris 9 won't be shipped with Openwin at all.
      People will still get the standard X libraries, but
      if you wish to run a window manger that's less bloated
      than cde or gnome, gotta download your own X server and compile it.

    2. Re:What ? by wysoft · · Score: 1

      Open LOOK Window Manager (olwm) is the window manager you speak of.

      --
      -- I'll cut you up so bad, you'll wish I'd never cut you up so bad!
    3. Re:What ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was also an beta/alpha OpenStep port that's still available on some ftp sites, though it was killed, unfortunately :( Maybe someday GNUStep will be useable :)

    4. Re:What ? by acoopersmith · · Score: 2

      No you won't. The beauty of X is that the X server works with any window manager you throw at it - you don't need to recompile the server just to run another window manager.

  22. Don't worry , Be happy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So,it's not their now. But it will be. Come on, how often does a good open source project get started and not get finshed by SOMEBODY.

  23. Solaris needs more gaping security holes by 1nt3lx · · Score: 1

    This is good. I think GNOME would only increase the number of weekly patches needed to keep a solaris system secure for more than 23 seconds.

  24. Have you seen the download page for Sol 9? by wibwib · · Score: 1

    I don't think my work would like me downloading the 700 MB worth of image files.

    --
    "Everything louder than everything else"
    1. Re:Have you seen the download page for Sol 9? by Spackler · · Score: 2

      I don't think my work would like me downloading the 700 MB worth of image files.

      You aren't kidding! Why can't they learn from those nice svelte linux iso download. What's Mandrake, 30 or 40 meg?

      Oh, 1800 for the whole dist? I'll just take the 600 meg install CD, thanks.

    2. Re:Have you seen the download page for Sol 9? by ninewands · · Score: 1

      I DL those 700 meg isos everytime Sun releases a new point release. But then, system upgrades are part of my job description. Total, including the AnswerBook (trust me, you WANT the AnswerBook), it's about a gigabyte. Takes me about an hour to DL the three compressed (.Z) isos.

    3. Re:Have you seen the download page for Sol 9? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2
      That's one of the things I like about Solaris 9 beta...you can't just "burn ISO and install". You have to have an install server set up, which few linux dweebs have. You also must download almost two gigs of data for the install images. It does wonders for keeping the stupid questions about the x86 version of Solaris 9 to a blessed minimum.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  25. Competition is good you stupid fuck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Having competition means that one side will always be trying to 1-up the other. That means that each side will have more rapid progress. It also means that end users will have a choice. Creating a monopoly in desktop environments is an antithesis of open source software. You stupid fuck.

  26. Re:Good. by 1010011010 · · Score: 2

    What kind of crappy processors do your Suns have, anyway? I don't see anything like the CPU usage you're complaining about.

    --
    Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
  27. Re:no offense but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Troll

    I partly agree. The core of GNOME is suffering from a lot of rot, and nobody seems to care about fixing it. Red Hat certainly doesn't. Ximian did care, but were sort of overruled on the push to get GNOME 2.0 out quickly. And now it seems they are mostly giving up on one potentially dead-end project (GNOME) to focus on another certain dead-end project (Mono). Eazel kept people interested in GNOME for a while, but now that they're tits up, Konqueror has been able to catch up with Nautilus in many respects.

    That leaves Sun. Having GNOME be the default desktop on Solaris was supposed to be a big thing, but now Sun seems to be walking away from that too. Maybe they finally realized that people buy Solaris for reasons other than a friendly desktop environment. I mean, if they managed to get by for the last five years on a partially broken implementation of the Worst Desktop Ever (TM), not shipping GNOME is probably not going to hurt them. Besides, their primary competitors ship with the same or worse crap, and anybody who cares installs another WM.

    So where does that leave GNOME? In the crapper is my guess. I think GTK will live on for a while, but the rest of GNOME is going to die off. If Red Hat and Ximian don't care enough to concentrate their effort on GNOME, who does? At this point, GNOME only has a few advantages left over KDE: prettier icons & themes, better office apps (Abiword, Gnumeric, Evolution, etc.), and a smaller memory footprint. But at the rate KDE is progressing, GNOME is going to be eating dust before long.

  28. Porting not an option by jmorris42 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    KDE is a one trick pony. It is probably the best option for someone who loves C++ and probably grew up on VC++ on 'Doze.

    GNOME has bindings for any language somebody liked enough to add support for. Got some C code you want to port to KDE? Delete it and start over, it would probably be faster. And what about the dozen or so 'lesser' languages? Even less likely.

    And that is why GNOME will eventually win out. C++ is supported so any KDE app can potentially port but only a small subset of GNOME apps can migrate in the other direction.
    Diversity usually beats a monoculture even though the monoculture often excels in a couple of areas.

    --
    Democrat delenda est
    1. Re:Porting not an option by gloth · · Score: 1
      The thing that KDE has going for it is that C++ is actually moving towards standardization. When KDE was started 5 years ago, only a small subset of C++ was portable in the real world. Things have improved a lot. In another 5 years, it might even be reasonable to assume that all relevant C++ compilers implement ISO-C++, which is arguably a much more powerful language then ISO-C.

      The other tailwind that KDE gets is educational: Most schools teach object oriented languages these days, even though it is often Java. But most people who got used to OO and/or C++ will have a very hard time moving "back" to C, whereas moving from C to C++ is much more painless, since C is (almost) a subset of C++.

    2. Re:Porting not an option by fault0 · · Score: 1

      Except that C++ is basically the standard for GUI programming (except for Java maybe). C simply isn't used anymore in either the Windows or Mac worlds. It's basically only used in Motif and GTK in the UNIX world.

    3. Re:Porting not an option by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2

      Thats funny. I thought I just finished a programming project using java and kde's kjavaapplet class but I guess I was wrong. After all, kde only supports c++. I just wished there was some support for other languages besides java like perl or pythong bindings. If a pything wrapper existed I would probably call it Py-QT. Too bad it doesn't exist. I am sure using bindings for an object oriented language like java or python writtien in a non object oriented language is the way to go. Just make the old c libraries act like c++ by rewriting all the c++ features from c++ and then turn around and bash c. Just re-invent the wheel. right

      Thats what I thought.

      Proudly written in konqueror on kde 2.2.1.

    4. Re:Porting not an option by MeerCat · · Score: 1

      5 years ago, only a small subset of C++ was portable in the real world. Things have improved a lot,

      This is not meant to be sarcastic, but are you sure about this ? 5 years ago I worked in developing a C++ multi-platform shrink-wrap large app, and we found the compilers had pretty much settled down (the ones you paid for, anyway). Templates were sort of settling on a common set of ideas as Stroustrup stopped changing his mind, and the ANSI C++ implementation was pretty solid (we standardly compiled with 7 compilers on 4 platforms). Things like exception handling were still experimental and so not in commercial use.

      But it seems that now all the changes that STL has forced into templates and the like have meant that cross compiler portability is out the window (just reading Meyer's Effective STL for instance)... not to mention made a mess of reading what was quite an elegant language, but now I'm veering towards flamebaiting...

      T

      --
      I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered. - George Best
    5. Re:Porting not an option by jmorris42 · · Score: 1

      Of course on Windows & Mac C++ is pretty much the only option because the native environment is designed around it. Lots of C code in UNIXland and it ain't likely to get tossed out and rewritten anytime soon.

      Lots of languages exist in UNIX and only the OO languages can easily be tied to QT. Since just about all languages can support Motif & GTK it gives a larger base to draw apps from, which was my original point.

      --
      Democrat delenda est
  29. The only troll is you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know Nailer personally. He has no association with linuxgram.

  30. You're a stupid fuck too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Having competition means that one side will always be trying to 1-up the other. That means that each side will have more rapid progress. It also means that end users will have a choice. Creating a monopoly in desktop environments is an antithesis of open source software. You stupid fuck.

    PS: Qt has a ton of bindings for other languages. Try seaching freshmeat sometime. You stupid fuck.

    1. Re:You're a stupid fuck too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fuck you. give me a C binding

    2. Re:You're a stupid fuck too. by jmorris42 · · Score: 1

      Must admit I haven't searched Freshmeat lately, but I can probably tell you which languages have QT bindings....

      C++, JAVA and maybe Python. And what do these languages have in common? Hmmmm..... Ah, all of them are OO monstrosities.

      --
      Democrat delenda est
  31. That's the problem with open source software... by 1nt3lx · · Score: 1

    ...the mantra is release early release often but it never truly reaches gold because its never finished.

    1. Re:That's the problem with open source software... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sure, like all that commercial software is totally debugged and fully tested before shipping. do us all a favor, put your head back in your ass and shut the hell up.

    2. Re:That's the problem with open source software... by dangermouse · · Score: 1
      ...the mantra is release early release often but it never truly reaches gold because its never finished.

      Well, yeah. That's sort of the point, isn't it? There's always room for improvement, and rarely does development on software stop for lack of further work to do.

      One benefit of free software is that by removing the usual factors that force development of a given piece of software to stop, continual betterment becomes possible.

      (And yeah, I know what you meant to say. But that was just you being a dick, and there was a worthwhile point to be made if I ignored your intent.)

  32. Yeah, we got that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    apt-get update; apt-get dist-upgrade;

    It's really not that hard.

  33. Re:Good. by Ian+Bicking · · Score: 2
    The combination of Nautilus and the bloated Sawfish window manager ate over 50% of the valuable CPU time, time that could be far better spent handling database queries and web requests
    Unless Sawfish acts differently on Solaris than x86, any bloat you were seeing was Nautilus. Sawfish probably isn't the slimest window manager -- but it's really easy to use whatever wm you want with. Use Blackbox or something.

    And, yes, Nautilus is bloated. But you don't need Nautilus, as you almost surely know how to use the command line faster anyway. So just don't run Nautilus.

    While there's no doubt usability problems with Gnome, if you use it some you'll get along just fine. IMO, there's not much reason to be running either on a server.

  34. Do we Really Need Gnome? by linuxbert · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Gnome is pretty and nice. i use it, i like it. i also have a sun box and run cde. Solaris runs servers. do we need all that prettyness and niceness eating cpu cycles on a webserver?

    call me a troll, but isint this one of the bigest complaints about win2k, it has a bloated gui that eats resources better left for runing services on a server.

    cde isnt pretty, but it does the job, and doesnt eat alot of resourses.

    yes i know sun is offering a choice of desktops, but gnomes lack of inclusion really doesnt seem like a big loss to me..

    1. Re:Do we Really Need Gnome? by corky6921 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "do we need all that prettyness and niceness eating cpu cycles on a webserver?"

      If Sun ever wants to compete with Microsoft's point-and-click server GUI, the answer is a wholehearted YES. That's the big reason why Sun bought Cobalt... they needed a server with a point-and-click interface. Think about it: as a small business owner with 3 employees, none of whom are very technical, which solution would you buy? A solution that requires you to keep a UNIX sysadmin at least part-time, or a system that allows your secretary to set up distribution lists in her spare time by going to a website? The second group is what Microsoft markets to, and Sun needs an offering that can compete. That's why they are simplifying things with web-based tools and now with GNOME.

    2. Re:Do we Really Need Gnome? by cgleba · · Score: 1

      Hmm. . .what servers are you running? During "live" operating times any server that I have ever run definately never runs X, never mind a desktop. The only time I could forsee a web server running a GUI is during maintainence, however every company that I have ever worked for does webserver maintainence via ssh or a terminal server to the console port.

    3. Re:Do we Really Need Gnome? by vrt3 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Think about it: as a small business owner with 3 employees, none of whom are very technical, which solution would you buy? A solution that requires you to keep a UNIX sysadmin at least part-time, or a system that allows your secretary to set up distribution lists in her spare time by going to a website?

      You have a very valid point, but at the same time I'm inclined to say that exactly this attitude and this 'ease of administration' was a major cause of the vast proliferation of the recent Nimda, CodeRed et al attacks.
      There is no way that this secretary is also going to keep an eye on the security bulletins and to keep the software up to date, whereas the UNIX sysadmin (if it's a good one) knows his stuff, and always keeps an eye out for security.

      --
      This sig under construction. Please check back later.
    4. Re:Do we Really Need Gnome? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think it takes too much training to run Windows Update and HFNETCHK once a day.

    5. Re:Do we Really Need Gnome? by vrt3 · · Score: 1

      Not much, perhaps, but looking at CodeRed etc., I have to conclude lots of people just don't do it.

      --
      This sig under construction. Please check back later.
  35. Major blow to unix by Mdog · · Score: 1

    I was really sorry to read this. Sun is a major force in terms of bringing unix to the masses, and I had looked forward to them using a UI that was something pleasurable instead of horrifying. It's a huge deal for all of us IMHO.

    1. Re:Major blow to unix by gvsu_snow_lord · · Score: 1

      the title now belongs to apple.

      after all who else has, or will have, the largest unix install base for everyday users? Apple with BSD/Darwin/OS X

      What does it have a nice looking GUI, but is cluncky. But OS X gives you access to a live terminal where you can ssh, mv, cp, link, rm, su, man.... all day long. You can compile the latest apache, mysql, postgresql, php...

      funny thing is at one point in time sun was to buy apple...

  36. Re:Good. by lanclos · · Score: 1

    I tried running GNOME 1.4 on a couple of new machines we were integrating into the network, and it was unbearably sludgy. The combination of Nautilus and the bloated Sawfish window manager ate over 50% of the valuable CPU time, time that could be far better spent handling database queries and web requests.

    Why are you running X-Windows, period, on your database and web server(s)? Division of labor, man. Save the UI (and its inherent overhead) for the end-user workstations. And yes, if the machine is truly an end-user workstation, you're allowed to spend a hideous amount of CPU + memory on the UI. Older versions of the MacOS spent 100% of the CPU on rendering the menu anytime you clicked on the menu bar. Nobody, except for the people that were trying to run background tasks (very few and far between in the Mac world), seemed to mind.

    I suppose there's an alternative to my question-- why are you running core services on end-user workstations? That's asking for trouble in my book. Workstations are subject to the whims of users; servers should not be.

    As for GNOME not shipping with Solaris 9-- I find that somewhat disappointing. Most of my Linux users (on their workstations) seem to prefer GNOME to KDE. It'd be nice to have the choice.

  37. KARMA WHORE ALERT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    lethyos is a karma whore...a skanky, dirt, greasy karma whore

  38. 5 substantial reasons why GNOME is obsolete by AirLace · · Score: 3, Informative
    1. Technology: GNOME is based on the GTK+ library, which was fine for its day, but is now decidedly outdated. The basic design, themability and functionality simply haven't changed in years. It doesn't offer exciting components like KParts, KDE's analog to COM. The closes thing to that will be Bonobo, but its development is far behind even GNOME 2's release schedule and won't make it in until at least 2003.
    2. Browsers: The GNOME project depends on Mozilla for its browser component. While Galeon makes the experience quite pleasant, page loads are still slow. In contrast, Konqueror is under heavy development, supporting both Mozilla and KHTML as its viewer component, the latter of which is its greatest strength. The W3C recommends Konqueror for having the most complete CSS2 implementation in the world.
    3. Lack of modern features: XFree86 in itself is not that fast in implementing modern OS facilities. But when the XFree86 team did finally implement XRender (some 10 years after amigaOS could do antialiasing), they did it right. Trolltech team, thanks to the component based design of Qt, were able to implement text antialiasing and alpha channels with just a couple of screens of code. The same implmenentation for GTK+/GNOME, in contrast, is only possible as either a hack (render text large and sale it down) or potentially by major redesign, which will be done with GTK+ 2.
    4. Looks. Although KDE had formerly been the ugly duckling, it really has leapt ahead of GNOME. One need look no further than http://www.kde-look.org/ to see how powerful and customisable KStyle is. As a developer once said, GNOME has themes, but KDE has style! What he meant in fact is that GNOME themes are generally pixmap designs, and when they are done programatically, there is limited scope for customisation.
    5. A previous post aptly pointed out that GNU always wants to re-invent the wheel. Linux is fine, but they still want to work on HURD, because Linux isn't made by GNU. KDE is fine, but they still want to work on Gnome, because KDE isn't made by GNU.
    1. Re:5 substantial reasons why GNOME is obsolete by TerryMathews · · Score: 1
      A previous post aptly pointed out that GNU always wants to re-invent the wheel. Linux is fine, but they still want to work on HURD, because Linux isn't made by GNU. KDE is fine, but they still want to work on Gnome, because KDE isn't made by GNU.
      You know, this is actually the purpose of GNU, and has always been. This is actually the true spirit of the Free Software Movement, creating the free equivelant of tools that we use everyday. GIMP instead of Photoshop, AbiWord instead of Microsoft Word. Mozilla instead of Internet Explorer. Linux instead of SysV UNIX. XFree86 instead of one of the commercial variants. The list goes on and on and on...
      --
      -- Terry
    2. Re:5 substantial reasons why GNOME is obsolete by dvdeug · · Score: 2, Insightful

      (1) When has the basic design of QT changed last? Not recently, and for good reason; no one was to try and code to a rapidly changing library. Both GNOME and KDE run on a system whose basic design was fixed by the early 80's. Does that make Unix bad?

      (2) The browser components are largely a wash.

      (3) GTK+ 2.0 is going to be out with GNOME 2.0, just like antialiasing is out with QT 3.0, about the same time frame.

      (5) RMS doesn't care about HURD. The HURD developers care about the HURD, and that's why the HURD continues to be developed, not for some political point. KDE has reimplemented a ton of stuff, because they liked their way better. That's the choice of a free-software developer.

    3. Re:5 substantial reasons why GNOME is obsolete by maggard · · Score: 2
      A previous post aptly pointed out that GNU always wants to re-invent the wheel. Linux is fine, but they still want to work on HURD, because Linux isn't made by GNU.

      What a foolish statement. Linux is a lovely fairly traditionial unix kernel, HURD has always had far more radical goals.

      --
      I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
    4. Re:5 substantial reasons why GNOME is obsolete by mj6798 · · Score: 2
      GNOME is based on the GTK+ library, which was fine for its day, but is now decidedly outdated.

      Yes, and you can say roughly the same thing about KDE/Qt. Sun already has better technology than either Gtk+ or Qt. It's called Java. They should use it and deploy it. The reason they don't is the same bogus internal politics that killed Smalltalk, NeWS, and OpenStep on Solaris.

    5. Re:5 substantial reasons why GNOME is obsolete by fault0 · · Score: 2, Informative

      1). Well, I think that the main thing that's kept GNOME alive is the number of gtk1 apps. This will change with gtk2.

      2). I agree, both mozilla and khtml are very standards compliant.

      3). antialiasing is not out with Qt 3.0. It was first implemented by Keith Packard (the writer of xrender) as a patch for Qt 2.2.2. It was introduced into base qt in 2.3.0. Since then there has been 2.3.1 and 3.0 now. It was first implemented in Qt over a year ago.

      And, GNOME 2.0 and QT 3.0's timetable is NOT the same. GNOME 2.0, according to Sun's website, will comeout MIDDLE of NEXT year. While Qt3 is out NOW and kde3 will be out in a few months (feb 2002).

    6. Re:5 substantial reasons why GNOME is obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My god, those are really five reason why you are a moron.

    7. Re:5 substantial reasons why GNOME is obsolete by Wheely · · Score: 1

      The odd thing about all those examples is that none of them were started by GNU. Seems that if you actually use the GPL license then GNU get to take the credit for the software and then when the software gets really good and usable then it becomes a GNOME appplication.

    8. Re:5 substantial reasons why GNOME is obsolete by VadPlessky · · Score: 1

      2. Browsers: The GNOME project depends on Mozilla for its browser component. While Galeon makes the experience quite pleasant, page loads are still slow. In contrast, Konqueror is under heavy development, supporting both Mozilla and KHTML as its viewer component, the latter of which is its greatest strength. The W3C recommends [w3.org] Konqueror for having the most complete CSS2 implementation in the world.

      Konqueror is super! Not only it is standard-compliant (CSS2, CSS1, DOM, HTML, XML) but it is amaaazing fast in rendering, startup of first window takes less tan 3sec. (and next one - less than 1 sec.), but it also can browse "MS IE-only" web sites (support document.all DOM)

      --
      KDE. KDE Themes. KDE News. Visit http://kde2.newmail.ru
  39. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All sun processors are crap. The USIII is barely able to pace a Pentium 4, and in most cases the P4 will smoke it. You thought the P4 was expensive - look up sun's per cpu cost.

  40. COVER YOUR ANUS!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If your anus is exposed to anthrax, you will get an anal infection. This will also prevent cmdrtaco penetration.

    1. Re:COVER YOUR ANUS!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To arms!!

  41. Re:Face it, GNOME is dead. by hexix · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You're right in saying GNOME is not dead. The development is very heavy in GNOME 2.0

    However, every time you see a gnome component getting updated in sid isn't because there is something changed/new, it's just the debian developers fixing something with the package. Thats why the version will be 1.4.1-x
    x being the package revision number.

    All the GNOME developers seem to be busy developing for 2.0 and so they aren't working on 1.4 as much, if at all. Which is fine by me as long as I get to use 2.0 some time. Although, I wish a new version of Nautilus would come out as there is a lot of little quirks in it's behavior (especially placement of icons on the desktop).

  42. Yes, lots of them, but no Penis Birds yet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When are we going to see the arrival of the Penis Birds on this forum? See, you're right... this "story" is PURE trolling on the part of Linuxgram. Therefore, it should attract all of slashdot's best and most prestigious trolls who will post ASCII art of the Penis Bird and the Goatse.cx ass with "Taco" in the rectum.

  43. Re:Good. by Hagabard · · Score: 1

    I'm also wondering what sparc system this fellow is using to report such high CPU usage. Current specs from dual-pIII 800's.
    <BR>
    <BR>1% CPU on one processor
    <BR>4% on the other
    <BR>
    <BR>I have VMWare running Win2k Advanced Server in my other window with 512 megs RAM total in the box and Evolution Beta 0.16.99 and Galeon to type in slashdot. Gnome 1.4 w/Sawfish & Nautilus drawing the background (I like Verdana for my desktop fonts); lotsa applets in the panels & gkrellm.
    <BR>
    <BR>cat /proc/meminfo
    <BR>
    &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; total: used: free: shared: buffers: cached:
    <BR>Mem: 526299136 521420800 4878336 0 4407296 255361024
    <BR>Swap: 526409728 3760128 522649600
    <BR>MemTotal: 513964 kB
    <BR>MemFree: 4764 kB
    <BR>MemShared: kB
    <BR>Buffers: 4304 kB
    <BR>Cached: 248456 kB
    <BR>SwapCached: 920 kB
    <BR>Active: 84472 kB
    <BR>Inactive: 169208 kB
    <BR>HighTotal: kB
    <BR>HighFree: 0 kB
    <BR>LowTotal: 513964 kB
    <BR>LowFree: 4764 kB
    <BR>SwapTotal: 514072 kB
    <BR>
    <BR>Looks okay so far. Let's check load average...
    <BR>cat /proc/loadavg
    <BR>0.08 0.05 0.01 1/83 5268
    <BR>
    <BR>Wow, looks good!
    <BR>
    <BR>Looks to me like the troll should go back under the bridge...
    <BR>
    <BR>
    &nbsp;

  44. Re:Good. by raistlinne · · Score: 1

    If you think that sawfish is bloated, your just plain stupid. Sawfish is relatively minimalistic, and can be made to be extremely minimalistic if you're so inclined.

    As for gnome 1.4, maybe something is horribly wrong on whatever compiler was used for your package, but I run it daily and I don't have constant CPU usuage. I've never seen anyone who did have constant CPU usuage from it. Well, ther eis the fact that you're running nautilus, but it begs the question: why? I don't think that anyone has represented nautilus as being close to ready for real use. And what were you using it for? there are plenty of graphical file managers, including gmc - the gnome standard one.

    And if you find the gnome interface difficult to navigate, then either you're completely braindead or are just so used to some particular interface that you think that anything that isn't that interface is hard.

    I'm sorry that I'm in a bad mood and as a result my comments are sounding harsher than I mean them to, but basically your post is either a fairly well devised troll or a bunch of stupid drivel. In the off chance that it's the later (this being /. does give about a 60/40 chance that any given post is a troll), try doing a little exploration and thinking. And remember that if a tool requires you to learn a little bit about it in order to use it effectively, it isn't the end of the world.

    --
    They laughed at Einstein. They laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. -- C. Sagan
  45. Troll alert by luge · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Um, what? RH? Not shipping with GNOME? What crack are you on? Every review of 7.2 I've read so far mentions how nice and polished their GNOME interface is. If someone could mod this troll into oblivion before he spreads more FUD it would be appreciated.

    --

    IAAL,BIANLY

  46. Very Sloppy by cnladd · · Score: 2, Informative

    Very sloppy, Slashdot. You should know better. There's a reason why I don't go to a Linux news site for news on Solaris. The claim that Gnome 2.0 doesn't appear in the Solaris 9 downloadable beta, and then extending that claim to encompass the final version of Solaris 9 is completely ridiculous. Of course, they temper that claim with by saying that Sun labels the beta as "feature complete", which is true. However, I think I'd be hard-pressed to find a final copy of Gnome. The last I saw was a news snippet on Gnome.org, dated October 11, claiming that Gnome 2.0 was "coming up fast".

    Finally, for those of you who have closely followed Sun's plans for Gnome, Sun has never once claimed that Gnome 2.0 would be a part of Solaris 9. Sun's Gnome site provides Gnome 1.4 as a "reference implementation", and says that Gnome will be the foundation of its future desktop. According to the site, "The next major release, GNOME 2.x, is expected in mid-2002".

    --

    --
    Welcome to the land of the easily amused...

    1. Re:Very Sloppy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      welcome to the land of the easily amused

      so true... noticing all the fucking trolls

    2. Re:Very Sloppy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Moderate this up; the guy's right on point.

  47. Solaris doesn't need to be slower, either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gnome, like most Linux software is a bloated piece of spaghetti coded crap. It's good to hear that Gnome isn't going to contaminant Solaris. If no one believes me, try any version Gnome, and then try fvwm 1.24r. Oh god. Doesn't it feel soooo good?

    1. Re:Solaris doesn't need to be slower, either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh, only losers use fvwm now a day. craw back to your cave

    2. Re:Solaris doesn't need to be slower, either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He said FVWM1, not the bloated FVWM2.

      Losers are the people who need to pass judgement on others.

      Use the tool that fills the need. I like FVWM because I can edit the damn menu to do exactly what I want it to, and there's not a lot of crap in there.

      My Windows Manager is there to use to get at the tools to do real work. Not as an entity in and of itself.

      Deal with it, flouncies.

  48. The real problem with Solaris 9 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The real problem with Solaris 9 is not that it
    doesn't have the crappy GNOME but that it won't
    have OpenWin, which many of us Sun lovers use
    everyday. It used to be the only X server that
    was halfway decent and not a bunch of crappy bloat
    ware like CDE.

  49. Already been answered... by corky6921 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Slashdot did a story on this a while back. Click here to see what the Sun GNOME group had to say about KDE vs. Gnome. Essentially, as a highly-moderated post put it, it came down to the fact that GNOME was C-based, and the Sun GNOME team was more familiar with C than with C++.

    1. Re:Already been answered... by Rob+Kaper · · Score: 1
      the Sun GNOME team was more familiar with C than with C++


      Not only that, judging from their name I would also think they were far more familiar with GNOME than with KDE. ;-)

  50. Bonobo is very ready by luge · · Score: 2, Interesting

    FWIW, I have no idea where your information on Bonobo is from, but Evolution and a number of other current GNOME projects use Bonobo extensively. If Bonobo was as unready as you claimed Evo wouldn't run at all :) [Disclaimer: Ximian employee, not the views of my employer, yada, yada.]

    --

    IAAL,BIANLY

    1. Re:Bonobo is very ready by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, one app. One can (theoretically) use kparts with any application that uses KApplication and QWidgets/QObjects .

    2. Re:Bonobo is very ready by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      evolution is not the only one using bonobo btw

    3. Re:Bonobo is very ready by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, one app. One can (theoretically) use kparts with any application that uses KApplication and QWidgets/QObjects .

      Wow, I'm impressed. The ability to theoretically use kparts will be very useful to me, just so long as I never want to actually do anything with it of course.

  51. Re:Face it, GNOME is dead. by plastercast · · Score: 1

    Well, what you say is partically true, but the new gnome componets are very often updated, not just repackaged. For instace, many different versions of bonobo have come out during GNOME1.4. Same for GCONF, Nautilus, and many/most of the GNOME files.

  52. Mod this up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wish we could see more proplerly reasoned posts like this. Informative, and a pleasure to read.

    1. Re:Mod this up by ninewands · · Score: 1

      Here's your properly reasoned post:

      When I first started using Linux in '97, I spent 36 hours downloading and installing Mandrake 1.0. The STRONG similarity between KDE and Win95 made the transition from Win95 to Linux go MUCH smoother than it would have gone otherwise.

      A couple of years later, I bought a RedHat 5.2 boxed set (which set up GNOME/E as the default desktop. Having, by this time, divorced myself somewhat from the need for Windows familiarity, I was much happier, even though GNOME 1.1 was NOT a performance star. I although though that a number of the GNOME icons had a decidedly "unprofessional" look to them. In truth, GNOME, compared to CDE, looked like a toy.

      At present, I am running Debian woody at home. My desktop of choice is Windowmaker. I have GNOME 1.4 installed because I like a lot of the GNOME apps, but run GNOME as a primary desktop? Not on your life. I've had my flirtation with blackbox, but it is a wee bit too minimalist and Windowmaker is SO damned stable (probably competitive with CDE for stability).

      At work, my workstation is an Ultra 10 with Solaris 8 and CDE. I admin Suns, some old DEC Alphas running Tru64, and a beowulf cluster running RedHat 6.2. Following the "small world" metaphor, the primary desktop on the cluster is KDE (workstation hosts only ... no X on the compute nodes).

      A desktop is a desktop. You use what does the job and, beyond that requirement, what you like. CDE, for all it's flaws, is rock-solid stable. For that matter, twm is too, but you won't see me using it. GNOME has some good things to bring to the Solaris table (specifically, the CORBA core and Bonobo). I was disappointed to read the article. I can only hope that the "feature-incomplete" means GNOME isn't ready yet. I firmly believe GNOME 2 on an Ultra II would rock.

  53. it sucks anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I tried to use gnome 1.4 .... what a memory hog and kinda sucky anyway. CDE was much more functional and stable.

  54. Mod this post down, it's informative. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Moderators must take action to ensure that nobody sees the valuable, substantiated, and useful information presented in this post. This story has been declared a pure trolling forum and intelligent posts like this will not be tolerated. Slashdot, as a whole, is a community of trolls, not intellects. Being a greed driven, censorship laden fiasco of foolishness, we can't have intelligent conversation taking place. Those who try to turn it otherwise must be punished by the subtraction of karma points. Remember moderators, you are solders in the Slashdot army to squash intelligent and alternative viewpoints! Do your duty! Mod AirLace down!

    1. Re:Mod this post down, it's informative. by nathanh · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's not informative. It's plain wrong on 3 of the points and arguably wrong on the other 2. And it's chockers full of trolls. I don't see how it ever got moderated insightful. Moderators apparently just give points to the posts with the most verbiage.

    2. Re:Mod this post down, it's informative. by Xiphoid+Process · · Score: 1

      I love it when people reply to their own posts as A.C. in order to "boost" their opionion like the guy above did :)

      --
      got drum'n'bass?

      http://mp3.com/vitriolix
  55. KDE is an option by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2

    If you check the Sun Freeware disk that comes with your Solaris 8 media kit, you'll find an option to install KDE. I haven't done it myself, but I hear it works pretty well. And if you don't have a media kit, go grab a copy at Sun Freeware, a Sun sanctioned site.

    1. Re:KDE is an option by mark_lybarger · · Score: 1

      i'm not familiar with that. i tried to install kde from solaris binaries off kde's site onto an ultra-5 box, and it didn't work at all. i ended up grabbing source for gt and kde, build, and install, and it works great! i noticed that it takes _forever_ to compile kde on an ultra-5 box.

    2. Re:KDE is an option by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2

      I really don't recommend using the binaries from KDE.org on non-linux systems as they are usually nothing more than tarballs. Generally, getting a copy in a proper package format for your system works much better. In this case, grab them from the freeware CD or from Sun Freeware.

      As for compile time, I can't say I've ever seen KDE compile all that fast on *any* system. However, if you really want to see a Solaris box put its back into it, renice it and watch it scream. Unfortuantely, until GCC is fully multithreaded, you probably won't see what a SPARC box can really do just by compiling.

  56. Re:LOOK, ASSHOLE!! by luge · · Score: 1

    Argh. I can't believe I'm wasting my life responding to this troll. Link to the exploit details? huh? Thought so. Go away.

    --

    IAAL,BIANLY

  57. Re:no offense but... by Steve+Bergman · · Score: 0

    Yes. Sadly, I must agree. Gnome is losing blood right and left; red writing flows like a river of hands. You don't have to be a Kreskin to see the walls... ;-)

  58. Yes, I feel the Troll flow through me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is fine trolling guys. Keep it up. Let's see how big we can make this thread.

  59. Re:Good. by MaxVlast · · Score: 1

    "Older versions of the MacOS spent 100% of the CPU on rendering the menu anytime you clicked on the menu bar. Nobody, except for the people that were trying to run background tasks (very few and far between in the Mac world), seemed to mind."
    ------

    That was one of the coolest things about the old MacOS -- if you wanted to suspend processing for some reason (usually reading something before it went away for some reason), you could open a menu and keep reading. When you were done, let go. The system would proceed. =)

    I still instinctively do it in OS X, and am slightly frustrated when the system keeps working.

    Does anyone else find the lameness filter annoying? I just copied and pasted the previous comment, and it flunked the filter until I cleaned up slashdot's html.

    --
    There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
    Max V.
    NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
  60. we still don't have any penis birds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i want some fucking penis birds damnit

  61. WHAT?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought linux was immune to security issues -- only M$ has problems with security patches...

    1. Re:WHAT?! by bsd_usr · · Score: 1

      Hello? Did you not read his post? He said he works with Solaris running CDE and that CDE has the security issue. Where did he say anything about Linux? Now, I'm no Linux advocate but you should at least understand what's being talked about before you post.

    2. Re:WHAT?! by ReidMaynard · · Score: 1

      actually he said 'hole' not 'security issue'

      which could mean 'missing large feature set', or center of a 'large do-nut object'.

      *shrugs*

      --
      -- www.globaltics.net

      Political discussion for a new world

    3. Re:WHAT?! by O · · Score: 1

      Actually, I meant an un-patched security hole. I've been waiting for the patch for nearly two weeks now.

      --

      1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21 -- Mathematics is the Language of Nature.
  62. RedHat 7.2 with KDE2.2.1 as default desktop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm afraid it's true. RedHat 7.2 is shipping with KDE2.2.1 as not only the default, but the only desktop environment. The details of the remote exploits are at http://www.securityfocus.com/infocus/4352. This doesn't really represent a problem for die-hard GNOME fans as Ximian will continue to provide their Red-Carpet service to RedHat users.

    1. Re:RedHat 7.2 with KDE2.2.1 as default desktop by luge · · Score: 1

      Uh-huh. Nod. That's slick and sophisticated... it would fool anyone with an IQ of oh, say, 2? [Must... find... willpower to stop feeding trolls...]

      --

      IAAL,BIANLY

  63. Too Bad by SomeOtherGuy · · Score: 1

    I have always prefered Gnome to KDE from a lookability/usability standpoint....But alas -- it is hard for me to say this, but the develpment AND stabilization of KDE is the clear leader nowadays...Between KDE 2.X and Konq....I can't deny it any longer.....I remember back in "the day" when KDE was slow, bloated and browserless...And Gnome 1.0 was a shoo in with the mighty Netscape doing a Gtk+ version of their next browser -- to be known as Mozilla...But somewhere on the way to the fair.....And those damn KDE developers came on like a Kenyon in a long distance race -- making the world class competition look like chumps on a Krispy Kreme run....

    --
    (+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
  64. Re:no offense but... by MaxVlast · · Score: 1

    You remind me of a great comment by Mark Twain. Paraphrasing: "Every time you're tempted to use the word 'very,' change it to 'damned.' Your editor will delete it, and your writing will be as it should." (Paraphrased.)

    --
    There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
    Max V.
    NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
  65. Gnome 2.0 is not ready for much of anything.(Rant) by supabeast! · · Score: 3, Insightful

    - Disclaimer - This is a pissy rant by someone who at this point has a very hard time using the words "KDE" and "Gnome" without variants of "fuck" involved.

    Gnome is not ready to go into Solaris. Or Red Hat. Or SuSE. In my experience Gnome was a dysfuntional, unstable pig of a desktop, full of garbage apps were a pain to use and rarely worked correctly. I eventually gave up and switched to KDE, which seems to have only two real advantages over Gnome, Konquerer, and a cute error window to let me know about all of the segmentation faults that the newest so called "stable" release of KDE seems to bring up repeatedly when I try to use Konquerer.

    Crap like that might cut it in the world of free software geeks, but it has no place in the world of serious UNIX servers. Sun manages to sell their slow, overpriced hardware because people want stability - not flashy desktops that come with more half finished applications than any Windows install.

    And yet the Open-Source world continues to rally around Gnome and KDE, proclaiming them to be saviors of the Linux desktop, when in truth those same programs are likely to help keep Linux off the desktop of people who want a computer that works - and not just a klude of annoying junk smushed together into a monstrosity that makes me realize why Apple's simple OS X/Aqua desktop has captured my computing soul in a way that nothing has since my father would lug his computer home from work and let me play Pac-Man on it.

    Gnome and KDE, whatever. Just give me a stable enlightenment with a few nice themes, StarOffice 5.2 (Like a rock, baby!), and keep the silly mess that is Gnome/KDE in the gutter with the rest of the trash.

  66. Re:Good. by Ruie · · Score: 1
    CDE is fast ? Last time I used it it was quite slow. It is faster than KDE or GNOME on xterminals because of increased network traffic caused by fancy buttons, but no CDE is not fast at all.

    If you want a fast manager run twm.

  67. A Sun rep told me KDE is in the scope now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In private, a Sun rep (won't disclose his name but he is close with the VP of Development) told me about a month ago the problems with UI stability and the more "archaic" look and feel has caused them to reverse direction. I figured if I was able to get this info, Slashdot would have before me so I never mentioned it.

  68. lick the goatse.cx ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, give it a good long rim job. That guys really needs it.

  69. Your trolling technique shows great skill. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You have potential sir, for your troll is quite elegant. I hope to see more trolling from you in the future to help keep Slashdot intellect-free.

  70. Slashdot Portal by BrookHarty · · Score: 2

    My top slashbox is Solaris Central. On Friday Solaris Central linked "No Gnome for Solaris 9" also. Under that is freshmeat and funnies. Alot of stuff has been making it was from the slashboxes to the Main slashdot page.

    BTW, skip gnome/kde use icewm

  71. I forget how the 'classic' p-bird looked, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A man walks into a doctor's office with a bird on his penis. Doctor says "what's wrong?" Bird says "my feet are stuck to this guy's cock!"

    (o>
    | )
    8==x==D
    /|

  72. CDE by FireCar · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Here at university we have 2 labs of Sun machines. One lab is used for by the Engineers for design and the other is used by the systems programming class. I had never used CDE before I walked into the CS lab. CDE does not have all the glitz that KDE or Gnome have but I find it to be pretty sharp. I wanted to download a copy of it for my Linux boxen to test it out on non-Sun hardware but it costs $50 to buy it. Oh, well KDE is good enough for me.

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

      You have a second option for testing CDE on intel hardware. Try Solaris for Intel. The license is free and is available for download from sun.com. Since you are a university student, you should probably have access to unlimited downloads...!

    2. Re:CDE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe XFCE can do a reasonable imitation of how CDE looks and works. It's GPLed and compiles on Linux/FreeBSD... probably others as well.

  73. Re:Good. by alcourt · · Score: 1

    First of all, Sun CPUs are far from outstanding. Until the UltraSPARC III came out (which many people do not have yet), they were much slower than most of their workstation/server competitors. (I am assuming you are talking about workstations here because no one should be stupid enough to have a desktop environment running on a server.)

    Second of all, remember that if your system is doing nothing, it is very generous to processes that would otherwise do nothing. From what you say, it sounds like some kind of network access or other runaway process is taking up your CPU time. Check your mpstat, your netstat -i, etc. to look at your bottlenecks. You could have some combination problem going on that causes a performance problem when two things are running at the same time.

    As for comparison of HP's VUE (excuse me, CDE,) to GNOME, a lot of that is personal preference and habit. I used HP VUE prior to CDE coming out, and then switched to CDE and found the differences relatively minimal, even in the config files. I use GNOME at home, my wife uses KDE. My major complaint about GNOME is that I prefer the old xterm to ANY of the newer terminals I've used. (Get rid of those stupid menus, and give me back the xterm scroll bar, complete with the "strange" mouse control.) CDE's pager is mildly annoying to me, but that's because the first pager I used was similar in style to the one in FVWM and GNOME rather than CDE.

    CDE is dead because of a squabble between the major CDE "partners". Ever try to get HP's CDE and Sun's version to cooperate? It's effectively impossible. The two sides are squabbling so much that CDE has not fundamentally changed since 1996 so far as I can see. It is clear that something needs to be offered soon to desktop users soon with proper commercial support. Maybe GNOME isn't the right answer yet with nautilus. (I prefer gmc myself for what little I use a file manager for.) But something does need to be done.

    --
    "I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend unto the death your right to say it." -- Voltaire
  74. Check the mailing lists by Ishikawa+Goemon · · Score: 5, Informative

    As I've read some of the mailing lists every day for the past few weeks, there seems to be MAJOR activity by SUN on GNOME. Sander, Billh, Calum, and Stephen (sorry if I missed people!) are very active on the mailing lists. The Accessability Toolkit has been part of their work, but also in drafting some rather encouraging style guides and documentation, along with general hacking on various libraries and applications (including Nautilus, which was pronounced dead after Eazel went boom...). I seriously doubt they plan to drop GNOME, as I seriously doubt Solaris 9 will ship without it, considering the work they are putting into it. The DEVELOPMENT platform should be out by Christmas, with other applications ported soon afterwards.

    And, for a better question, why would Sun want to pay TT for a licence for QT? Redhat? Why would any company want to pay for a widget set to develop (closed-source, mind you) for Linux? If a Symantec, IBM, Intuit, or, GASP, even M$ wanted to write Linux software, my guess is they would use an LGPL library (Gnome) over paying for QT licences. (I could be wrong, as I don't pay much attention to KDE, but their FAQ seem to say I'm not...)

    Which brings me to the main point I'd like to make, IT'S BEEN ALL ABOUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE PAST YEAR!!! It takes a lot of behind the scenes work for a program such as Evolution to work, so that's what the Gnomers have been hacking on. The problem is, YOU (the user) won't see it right away!

    The technologies these guys have been busting their arses on will make the applications (like Evolution already proves) kick butt.

    GConf - Consolidated configuration system with multiple backends. XML or BerkleyDB for user now, hopefully ACAP or LDAP for network users soon. Who know's what's next!

    ATK - Accessability Toolkit for screenreaders and such, built-in to the platform. This is important for corporate use with the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) in US, and I'm sure others outside the US.

    Bonobo - Corba based REAL components, not just OLE. Look at the power in Evolution. (I'm a big fan, as if you couldn't tell, but not just for myself, but for my wife and grandmother as well. I don't think mutt would cut it for them... :>)

    Pango - i18n and l10n, Right-to-Left, and such... Don't know much about this being an en-us, but I'm sure it's important!

    Glib/Gtk+ - Very nice improvements, Anti-Aliased text, and so forth.

    Nautilus - Darin and others have been optimizing and working out the bugs in this for a while. It has it's problems on the bleeding edge, but it's comming along! I'm not sure about the extent of his involvment, but tigert has been showing up on the list. If he is working on it, we can expect quite a bit in the way of jaw-dropping eye-candy...

    Glade/libglade/bonoboui(?) - XML UI descriptions at runtime. RAD UI development at it's best... This is very important.

    GStreamer - While not Gnome platform, per se, it has ALOT of infrastructure in place in the A/V dept, and once ported to 2.0, will make for a nice multimedia API/Application Toolkit. (If memory serves correctly, it's been a while since I checked up on this one...)

    And a plethora of other platform tidbits. Sure, YOU (user) won't see any radical differences between 1.4 and 2.0, other than AA text and such, but just wait until 2.0.1, 2.2, or 3.0, and so on. It took YEARS for the infrastrucure of Linux to become what it is. Now, it is proven solid. The infrastructure of Gnome is REALLY fleshing out. And need I remind you of the 1.0 - 1.2 hurdle... I imagine 2.0 will come out with eveyone trashing it, much like 1.0, then 2.2 come along with much the same reception 1.2 had... Sure, not good for PR, but... :>

    NOT that this takes anything away from KDE. Infact, it's what I recommend to my non-developer friends. To my developer and/or sysadmin friends, I show the horsepower under Gnome's hood. So far I've had nothing but ooos and ahhhs from both camps. Later, I'm sure I'll be showing Gnome all-around.

    And finally, CUT THAT "GNOME'S DYING" CRAP OUT! Not only does two projects not hurt, it HELPS! We need all the competition we can get, because that's what causes innovation! We've all seen M$ resting on their laurels, because they've had no competition! WE DON'T WANT THAT! And aside from some notable exceptions, the DEVELOPERS OF BOTH PROJECTS SEEM TO UNDERSTAND THIS!!! Take a look at this happy bday congratz to KDE on Gnome News and PLEASE, BE THANKFUL TO EVERYONE.

    For my part, thanks Havoc, Owen, Michael, Seth, Darin, Sather, Ian, Jacob, Alex, Maciej, Calum, Bill, George, Chema, and all I've left out for your hard work. Don't let the ignorance of a few make you at all hesitant in your work. It is greatly appreciated!

    Chris

    1. Re:Check the mailing lists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It took YEARS for the infrastrucure of Linux to become what it is"

      But Linux still sucks... they do things the wrong way the first time... rewrite the code... using others work as a guid, or even stealing the code!

      I do admire work done behind the scenes... however using a dump like the linux kernel to compare it to is bad idea.

    2. Re:Check the mailing lists by dj.dule · · Score: 2, Informative

      It is not true that Sun should pay TrollTech for Qt. Only if you use it for commercial/closed source development:
      You can find QT library under 2 licenses, here is part from theirs FAQ:
      What kind of licenses exist for Qt?
      The Qt toolkit is available under two different licenses: The Professional and Enterprise Editions for commercial use on all platforms, and the Free Edition for developing free/open source software for the X platform.
      KDE is open source project, so noone should pay to TT for usinq QT with KDE.

    3. Re:Check the mailing lists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh. you dumbass. All of those stuff happened in KDE over a year ago. That's why it's supposed "camp" is becoming smaller and smaller.

      Face it, KDE has and always will be ahead of GNOME because KDE follows the "bazaar" form of development (read ESR's book "the cathedral and the bazaar" about free software development). gnome and kde seem to be diametrically oppisite in this regard, and I think it's really holding them back.

    4. Re:Check the mailing lists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It is not true that Sun should pay TrollTech for Qt. Only if you use it for commercial/closed source development

      You need better glasses. This was precisely what the post you replied to was saying. And the point is that the ability to let their customers develop any kind of software on their platform (be it free software or proprietary), without having to pay licenses to a third-party company, is an important issue for Unix vendors.

      They simply cannot tell their customers "here is the new system we recommend" and "oh, by the way, if you want to port your applications to it, you have to pay money to a third company", no matter how unimportant you make it out to be.

      Why would any company want to pay for a widget set to develop (closed-source, mind you) for Linux?

      Exactly. They don't want to pay to yet another company, and no Unix vendor wants to put themselves in the position where their customer companies will have to pay royalties to a third-party company when porting their applications to the new platform.

    5. Re:Check the mailing lists by Azghoul · · Score: 1

      Heh. you dumbass. A coward too.

      The real reason KDE is ahead? They started first.

    6. Re:Check the mailing lists by Arandir · · Score: 2

      And, for a better question, why would Sun want to pay TT for a licence for QT?

      Why would anyone want to pay Sun for a license to use Solaris? Tit-for-tat.

      Why would any company want to pay for a widget set to develop (closed-source, mind you) for Linux?

      Nobody wants to pay for anything. I don't want to pay for lunch. I don't want to pay my rent. I don't want to pay for gas in my car. But I seldom get my wishes fulfilled.

      Trolltech requires payment for Qt *only* if you in turn require payment for the software that uses it.

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
  75. Re:no offense but... by aussersterne · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Why do you say that GNOME is dying? Is the code somehow becoming less functional? That would be a first!

    YES, the GNOME code is becoming less functional. I wasn't the biggest fan of GNOME 1.0, but it worked better for me than any subsequent release or patchwork CVS grab of GNOME. On my machines at least, every time I play with GNOME it seems *less* stable and *more* resource hungry. GNOME is definitely going in directions that I had hoped it wouldn't go in. I'm not speaking as a developer, I haven't done any GNOME development at all. I'm speaking as a prospective user who remembers when Gtk applications seemed like the *more* stable of the bunch.

    A few years ago, it was a toss-up between what seemed like a resource-hungry KDE 1.x and an unstable GNOME 1.x and everyone was wondering who would end up the de-facto standard. Today, for better or for worse, there is only one free Unix desktop de-facto and that is KDE, for obvious reasons -- people are having less and less success using GNOME as a desktop in real-world environments, while KDE continues to become more and more usable by the day and memory, hard drive space and CPU power on commodity machines are cheaper than ever.

    Probably I will be moderated to "-10 Anti-GNU Asshole" for saying that, but it has to be said again and again until I can accept it, and others may as well do the same. I can't give you any specific reasons why I and others sense that GNOME seems to have been its own worst enemy, but one definitely gets that feeling more and more with each checkout.

    --
    STOP . AMERICA . NOW
  76. Re:Face it, GNOME is dead. by hexix · · Score: 1

    Wha? I've had Nautilus 1.0.4 forever (well more like 5 months, but that is eternity for an open source project that really needs a new release).

    If there is a new version of nautilus out I'd love to know, but I don't see one.

  77. Re:Gnome 2.0 is not ready for much of anything.(Ra by dhogaza · · Score: 2

    Weird, I run KDE 2.2.x on my laptop and desktop and have never seen such problems. If you're not a troll, how about posting some specific steps I can take that will lead to my KDE 2.2.x install showing that cute error window you tout? I've never seen it. I'd love to see it. Help me out by telling me how to pop it up eight times a day, baby!

  78. Why I don't like GMC by Wolfier · · Score: 2

    If it does not restrict how small I can resize the window, I'll be using it a lot more than I do now. I hate when my window must be as least at big as the lined-up buttons.

    Programmers, remember: restricting your users is always a bad idea.

  79. change is good, but keep offering CDE by green+pizza · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm hard to please, I have major issues with every desktop environment I've used. I don't love CDE, but it's fine with me. I certainly prefer it over the latest GNOME builds from Ximian and Sun.

    I support change, so please bring on GNOME and/or KDE and attempt to make them better. But please keep CDE and Motif for those of us that don't want the 'latest and greatest'. Patch a few of CDE's major memory leaks and I'll be a happy, content user.

  80. What kind of crack are you smoking? by Xiphoid+Process · · Score: 4, Troll

    1. Bonobo has been out for a while now and used as the core of Evolution, Gide, Dev Help, Nautilus and many others... ever wonder why Open Office is intergrating with Bonobo?

    2. nope, no such recomendation at that link. May I remind you that Galeon just won an award for the best linux browser?

    3. Absolute unsubstantiated bullshit.

    4. I'll just let the pictures speak for themselves:

    KDE

    GNOME

    5. Hurd was started in 1990, before linux, further more, the GNOME people are not employed by Gnu and are associated only substantially by name.

    G/K are here to stay, deal with it.

    --
    got drum'n'bass?

    http://mp3.com/vitriolix
    1. Re:What kind of crack are you smoking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OMG, a GNOME user speaking on slashdot!@# don't you know that all the trolls are KDE users now?

      1). bonobo has existed far longer than kparts. but far fewer apps use it? wtf.

      2). mozilla is still slow and bloated as ever. and galeon has a fucked up interface. Come on, either do MDI (like opera), or not (like Konqi).

      3). absolutely true. everyone knows gnome is very behind KDE. it always has been like that.

      4). gnome has 256x256 icons? wtf. maybe if you were legally blind you'd want that... then again, KDE r0x0rs for usability. the kde screenshot wins handsdown (liquid is so fucking beuuutiful).

      Face it, Gnome is about press releases and KDE is about software release. Gnome is going to die, you might as well help the hard working VOLUNTEER folks of KDE a hand.

      Suck it trebeck, er I meant xiph!#!##@#@$!

    2. Re:What kind of crack are you smoking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



      "4. I'll just let the pictures speak for themselves:"

      FWIW, here's my GNOME desktop (full size, 1Mb .png) (half size, .5Mb .png).

      Wallpaper: Propaganda.

      Panels: The main panel has been moved to the left vertical edge; it's "invisible" because it has the same background as the wallpaper. In the lower right is a dynamically sized panel for the task manager (it grows and shrinks as I open and close applications).

      W/M: Sawfish.

      Themes: GTK+ is using the "dark and dangerous" Cyrus pixmap theme. Sawfish is using a theme that I hacked from the components of Enlightenment's ShinyMetal theme, with some changes to make it look more like Cyrus. In addition to the usual stuff it has buttons for windowshading and for maximizing horizontally or vertically either independently or in conjunction.

      At the upper right is the gkrellm system monitor, which uses custom GTK+ themes. I haven't bothered trying to hack one to match Cyrus yet.

      My desktop is usually much more cluttered than this, as can be seen by all the minimized apps in the task manager.

      Bobby Bryant
      Austin, Texas

    3. Re:What kind of crack are you smoking? by sydb · · Score: 2

      GNOME is a GNU project, I don't think 'associated only substantially by name' does that relationship justice.

      There's more to HURD than NIH syndrome. It's a microkernel-based system. It's another Free O/S. These are good things. Hurd may currently be less complete than Linux, but development seems to have progressed quite rapidly since Debian got involved; I imagine the looming of a "release" adds impetus to development process.

      --
      Yours Sincerely, Michael.
    4. Re:What kind of crack are you smoking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      1. Bonobo has been out for a while now and used as the core of Evolution, Gide, Dev Help, Nautilus

      Evolution and Nautilus are extremely flaky. If the one thing they have in common is Bonobo, then...

    5. Re:What kind of crack are you smoking? by Xiphoid+Process · · Score: 1

      Those are SVG icons, you can resize individual icons to any size you want, and there will be NO pizelation :) Also, check out this one for the full alpha support:

      --
      got drum'n'bass?

      http://mp3.com/vitriolix
    6. Re:What kind of crack are you smoking? by VadPlessky · · Score: 1

      4. I'll just let the pictures speak for themselves:

      Check my KDE themes or pretty new KDE mini-Themes
      You troll on KDE has no basis, really.

      --
      KDE. KDE Themes. KDE News. Visit http://kde2.newmail.ru
    7. Re:What kind of crack are you smoking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Face it, Gnome is about press releases and KDE is about software release."

      One of the best summaries I've ever seen of the two projects.

    8. Re:What kind of crack are you smoking? by jonathan_ingram · · Score: 1

      Some nice themes on your site. Why don't you add them to KDE-Look (the replacement for the sadly defunct kde.themes.org)? If you don't have the time I can add them for you this weekend...

    9. Re:What kind of crack are you smoking? by Xiphoid+Process · · Score: 1

      Nice stuff. Please note that I actually passed no judgement in my post, i let the pix speak for themselves, both desktops are looking pretty nice these days.

      --
      got drum'n'bass?

      http://mp3.com/vitriolix
  81. Windowmaker is not a desktop by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2
    Windowmaker is not a desktop. It's a window manager, which is merely one component of the desktop. Gnome is NOT a window manager, but can work with other window managers. Originally it worked with Enlightenment, but now it works with Sawfish and Windowmaker as well.

    Your post made it sound like choosing windowmaker means NOT choosing Gnome. That isn't so. They are not mutually exclusive options.

    --

    Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    1. Re:Windowmaker is not a desktop by aallan · · Score: 1

      Windowmaker is not a desktop. It's a window manager, which is merely one component of the desktop. Gnome is NOT a window manager, but can work with other window managers. Originally it worked with Enlightenment, but now it works with Sawfish and Windowmaker as well.

      I have in the past ran Windowmaker underneath GNOME, but have gone back to running it on its own. Why? I simply don't understand what I need GNOME (or KDE) for? Running GNOME gets me a panel with a menu in it and a place to drop icons. Erm, I already have a menu for commonly used apps which pops up if I left click on the desktop. I also have somewhere to stuff commonly used apps under Windowmaker (although I don't use it).

      What advantage has a Desktop Enivronment over a Window Manager? A bunch of desktop icons that lets you browse the filesystem graphically? I don't particularly want to do that. What else? Maybe its just me, but why are people getting excited over GNOME and KDE, just because it make the Liunx desktop look more like Windows?

      Al.
      --
      The Daily ACK - Eclectic posts by yet another hacker
    2. Re:Windowmaker is not a desktop by J.+J.+Ramsey · · Score: 1

      The line between "window manager" and "desktop environment" is very fuzzy. Very few window mangers *only* manage windows. Most of the ones that are useable as standalone have some "desktop" functionality, like the ability to launch apps via buttons and/or root menus. About all that standalone window mangers have that makes them shy of being desktop environments is a file manager and a GUI config tool.

      The fuzzy distinction between window manager and desktop is why GNOME's supposed window manager independence didn't work out so well in practice.

  82. Re:Gnome 2.0 is not ready for much of anything.(Ra by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So much bullshit and at the end it turns out we have a Mac fanatic here ...
    Who gives a fuck what Apple groupies think.

  83. There are QT bindings for other languages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  84. You get what you pay for. by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 2
    But if you don't invoke GNOME, you don't incur the overhead, so webservers are not effected. Without knowing from direct experience I am sure that headless Solaris boxes can be configured to not invoke any X related code at boot time.

    Hence there is no particular reason why bundling GNOME or any other environment necessarily hogs resources.

  85. No Gnome == Good News by ToasterTester · · Score: 1

    KDE would be nicer, but Sun bulks at the QT Developer's License. Solaris focus changed from a workstation to a server OS a few version back since that is what most people use it for, so need for a GUI is minimal. I wish they would ship WindowMaker instead. It runs fine on Solaris and is lightweight enough for a server.

  86. KDE ahead where it counts by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 1
    I appreciate better plumbing, but better plumbing does not move code, apps and useability do. If solid code was the number one priority, we wouldn't be using KDE or GNOME, we'd be using an anally ICCM supporting WM like Blackbox.

    As it stands, when you tell me to wait for GNOME 3.0, by that time KDE will be at 4.x or even 5.0 the rate they are both going, and will certainly have much more going for it then GNOMe will - KDE's rate of improvement is simply more accelerated than GNOME's. Added to which, the GNOME desktop will continue to have a fractured integration for some time to come - Nautilus and Evolution are going to be buggy for a very long time, Mozilla will continue to stand mostly on its own, and StarOffice will continue to also be an island unto itself.

    1. Re:KDE ahead where it counts by ignorant_newbie · · Score: 1
      you tell me to wait for GNOME 3.0
      hehe! no! wait for os X.3! you'll see! it'll be useable soon!

    2. Re:KDE ahead where it counts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you taking about, we're already at X11.

    3. Re:KDE ahead where it counts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      KDE's rate of improvement is simply more accelerated than GNOME's

      Ah right. You're one of those clueless fucknuts who reads LinuxToday and thinks the regular breathless PR releases (about stuff that's been in GNOME for ages) is faster progress!

      Get Ximian GNOME - get regular updates. See how fast everything is progressing.

    4. Re:KDE ahead where it counts by J.+J.+Ramsey · · Score: 1

      > I appreciate better plumbing, but better plumbing does not move code

      Wrong. Programmers use that plumbing to build apps.

    5. Re:KDE ahead where it counts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah. So why the hell is abiword is still in the land of 0.7.* in red carpet

    6. Re:KDE ahead where it counts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Abiword is a supplementary app. I find it annoying that it's not a newer version, but it's got fuck all to do with the point being made.

      GNOME is moving ahead quickly, and if you want regular updates to binary versions get Ximian.

      The KDE project all lumped together in huge bloated C++ libraries - hence the shocking amount of time it takes to start. GNOME is updated in a more component-like fashion. The inner part version numbers are moving up all the time. The overall GNOME version moves a lot more slowly... unlike KDE which bumps it every time they add a new icon.

  87. please moderate this up. by ambrosius27 · · Score: 1

    It makes me sad that slashdotters are so quick (and eager!) to jump on GNOME. There is *a lot* going on in the GNOME world that is exciting. The above post mentions many of them. GNOME's infrastructure has been undergoing a major overhaul and that takes time. Remember how long it took for KDE to rewrite itself for 2.0? A long time. More people should be like the above poster and encourage other free software developers, not gather like buzzards around (what they hope is) a dying project.

    --

    ~~~~~~~~~
    dissertus scribendo latine videri volo.
    1. Re:please moderate this up. by spauldo · · Score: 1

      It's not the slashdotters, it's the trolls.

      Ever since GNOME came out, every article about GNOME or KDE has turned into a trollfest. It's like an event for them.

      I wouldn't worry about it, GNOME and KDE are going to be around a long time, and I'm personally very glad for it. I wouldn't touch KDE with a 10 foot pole myself, but that's just personal preference - I'm glad it's there 'cause sometimes they think of things the GNOME folks don't, and vice-versa.

      Just let the trolls do their thing - their karma (the real thing, not the slashdot thing) will adjust appropriately :)

      --
      Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
    2. Re:please moderate this up. by Ed+Avis · · Score: 1

      Do we have any colourful drawings or animations of trolls enjoying a trollfest?

      --
      -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
  88. maybe its you by Macka · · Score: 1


    So GNOME doesn't work for you, and KDE falls over all the time too. Interesting that, especially as the majority of people don't seem to have your problems.

    Perhaps your problems are machine specific .. i.e. you've shagged your installation and have an unstable mix of software.

  89. Linuxgram is slashdotted... here's the story.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sun has got a feature-incomplete beta of Solaris 9 available for download through the company's early access program, but it seems the promised open-source Gnome 2.0 won't be the thing's default because, as we've pointed out before, the Gnome widgetry won't be ready when Solaris 9 ships for real in the first half of next year. Sun will cleave to its traditional Solaris Common Desktop Environment for the time being.


    Gnome's leader Miguel de Icaza is currently having a flirtation with Microsoft's C# technologies and is producing a Linux version of the stuff under an open source initiative called the Mono Project.


    Solaris 9, at least in its Intel incarnation, is supposed to be able to run Linux apps. Sun has been putting Linux APIs in the OS so Linux apps can be ported to Sparc.

  90. Browsers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How does a browser fit in on this?

    Shall we scrap ever OS since MOST developers angle towards windows user running IE? should we also scrap the w3c since the only group that matters is IE team at MS? Not on your life... your just introducing your bias in browser for picking a windowing tool.

    Hey lets face it Corn Flakes are dead frosted flakes have have a nice tasting frost.

  91. Ximian Gnome on Solaris is good by stefanlasiewski · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Sun's official 'unsupported Solaris Gnome 1.4' package is old, unoptimized and is very slow and buggy. It's a hideous example of what Gnome can be.

    OTOH, I run Ximian Gnome on my Solaris Ultra 5 (Solaris 8) workstation (slow processor, lots of RAM). Ximian Gnome is great! For most applications, Ximian Gnome is *faster* then CDE, and it's suite of utilities is much more useful then the kruft that comes with the generic Solaris workstation install. I work in a Solaris/Windows office, and often need apps like Gnumeric/Abiword or Star Office.

    Gnome on my office-workstation is not as fast as on my cheap home computer (Celeron 366, 128 Mb ram, RH 7.1), but it is perfectly usable.

    Most of the slowness seems to stem from the OpenWin server + Video Card itself (slow drawing of boxes, lines, etc). Certain apps like XMMS and Mozilla are slow (but those aren't Gnome apps). Nautilus is crappy slow on Solaris, so i turned it off and use GMC.

    --
    "Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
    1. Re:Ximian Gnome on Solaris is good by pmz · · Score: 1

      Please note that Starship Trooper is working with SPARCstations, which are based on Sun's older 32-bit SPARCv8 processors. Your Ultra 5 is a supercomputer relatively and probably has better video hardware.

      I, also, tried GNOME on a 9-year-old SPARCstation. I could watch the widgets get drawn on the screen one at a time. Even the CPU-meter-thing on the toolbar used half of the CPU (sort of ironic). I tried to trim down GNOME as much as possible but eventually went back to CDE with no regrets.

      I would recommend GNOME for nothing less than an UltraSPARC-based machine (or perhaps some of those nifty 200MHz SPARCstations, but those are hard to come by).

    2. Re:Ximian Gnome on Solaris is good by stefanlasiewski · · Score: 1

      That's a good point.

      Gnome (especially with Nautilus, Sawfish and some of the fancier options) doesn't run very well on an old PC either.

      I wonder how Gnome+Blackbox runs.

      --
      "Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
  92. Do we need a Solaris 9 right away? by green+pizza · · Score: 2, Insightful

    SunOS 5.5, 5.6, and 5.7 (Solaris 2.5, 2.6 and 7) were Sun's transition to a 64-bit OS. 5.5 added support for the UltraSPARC processor, 5.5.1 added 64-bit register support, 5.6 64-bit files and filesystems, and 5.7 an optimized 64-bit kernel. (Of course, SGI IRIX users will gloat about SGI having done this years earlier with IRIX 6.0, but the point is moot).

    SunOS 5.8 (Solaris 8) brought us... nothing too special. And 5.9 (Solaris 9)? Even less.

    I don't really understand why Sun didn't just make a "Solaris 7.1, Solaris 7.5, and Solaris 7.6" before going to 8. Maybe it's because I've never been much of a numbers game fan.

    If there's a sliver lining in all this, perhaps it's that SunOS 5.8 was the last to support the Sun4m architecture (SPARCstation 10 and SPARCstation 20), no more upgrading for those old machines of mine. Not that I would need to anyway, they're happily running 5.7.

    1. Re:Do we need a Solaris 9 right away? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Ahem. SunOS 5.8 brought: IPV6, IPsec, LDAP client support. Live Upgrade, Web Start Flash. IP Multipathing. Reconfiguration Coordination Manager. Role-Based Access Control. Higher quality, better performance. Support for all the shiny new Ultra III machines, including the 106-processor 15K. That seems pretty worthwhile.

      There's no mention in the release notes that SunOS 5.8 will be the last to support Sun4m architecture, which according to Sun would be a necessary condition before they could drop it in SunOS 5.9, and in fact Solaris 9 beta loads and runs just fine on SPARCstation 10s and 20s. (They do say that support for sun4d is going away -- sorry, SPARCcenter 2000 fans.)

    2. Re:Do we need a Solaris 9 right away? by sql*kitten · · Score: 2

      SunOS 5.8 (Solaris 8) brought us... nothing too special

      Not too sure about that. Solaris 8 new features are here.

    3. Re:Do we need a Solaris 9 right away? by Doctor_D · · Score: 2
      Well to answer your subject, my answer would be "it depends..." What are you running today that you may need the new features of Solaris 9? If you're getting a Sun Fire 15k (Starcat), then running Solaris 9 would be in your interest. Solaris 9 has better support for the 15k, and other features:
      (taken from http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/programs/solar is9ea/)
      Solaris 9 Early Access features of great interest to our developers:
      * Multiple Page Size Support in the kernel for better memory management
      * Improved threading library for better scaling and performance
      * Linux APIs, commands, and utilties enabling most Linux applications to easily be recompiled and run Solaris 9 Operating Environment
      * Linux compatibility mode which allows Linux Intel applications to run unchanged (no recompilation) on Solaris 9, Intel Platform Edition
      * New Reconfiguration Coordination Manager API allows applications to react to Dynamic Reconfiguration events

      Of course that's not an exhaustive list of what's new in Solaris 9, but it's still in beta, and unlike Microsoft, Sun tends not to preannounce features of their Operating Systems. Also Sun has set a roadmap of future releases of Solaris. Sun doesn't force you to upgrade the version of the OS. I know quite a few who are running 2.6 and some who are still running 2.5.1. Of course quite a few are updating to Solaris 8. Most of the reason people upgrade their OS version is to use new hardware or new app versions that are only supported on a newer release of Solaris.

      I don't really understand why Sun didn't just make a "Solaris 7.1, Solaris 7.5, and Solaris 7.6" before going to 8. Maybe it's because I've never been much of a numbers game fan.

      Well the main reason Sun chose to drop the 2.x in naming of Solaris was for the PHB's benefit. They look at HP/UX that's at 11i now, and Solaris 2.8 doesn't sound as mature to a PHB. Hence Sun just dropped the preceeding 2. Hence Solaris 8, which still equals SunOS 5.8. There is a good discussion of this in the Solaris Internals Book, chapter 1, I believe. Also there are sub-releases under each main version. ie Solaris 8 10/00, Solaris 8 01/01, Solaris 8 04/01, Solaris 8 07/01. Each of these are still Solaris 8...the differences is the updates of the supporting software or new features, or new hardware support.
      --
      "If you insist on using Windoze you're on your own."
  93. Re:Gnome 2.0 is not ready for much of anything.(Ra by MyAss · · Score: 1

    I run an old Ximian gnome (1.2) on a redhat 6.2 box. It has never crashed. ever. And this is with 6 desktops, many, many xterms, XMMS with visualization, Netscape and Opera. I even occasionaly play heroes 3 or task to a vitual console and bring up a second X.

    Gnome with redhat 7.1 on my laptop, has also never crashed. (The video driver has, but this is not Gnome's fault, but rather the X4 S3 driver.)

    --

    They misunderestimated me. -- George W. Bush
  94. KDE would put Sun on par with Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sun wants to differentiate Solaris from Linux. Using KDE or GNOME would be an admission that Solaris is just another UNIX variant. That would be bad for Sun hardware sales. CDE may be crap, but at least it's different than Linux and FreeBSD desktops.

    1. Re:KDE would put Sun on par with Linux by spauldo · · Score: 1

      CDE is still the standard desktop for UNIX (look at HU-UX, and I believe Tru64 and other commercial UNIXen as well, with the exception of BSD/i, which I think is strictly fvwm (but I could be wrong)).

      GNOME is far more advanced than CDE is, and GTK is more advanced than motif (especially once v2 comes out, which is what sun wants on solaris). Looks like what sun's trying to do is consolidate the desktops somewhat; they want to be where the development is. There's plenty of development with GNOME.

      --
      Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
    2. Re:KDE would put Sun on par with Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think his original argument is correct tho. KDE is/fast becoming the standard desktop for Linux, so GNOME has to be the standard desktop for Solaris. Product differentiation works wonders.

  95. Re:Gnome 2.0 is not ready for much of anything.(Ra by cbwsdot · · Score: 1

    I was going to mod this down when I read the bashing. Then, I was going to mod it up when you said the magic word, "simple". Then I decided to just reply. There's more going on here than GNOME and KDE. Check out GNUstep.

  96. Re:Gnome 2.0 is not ready for much of anything.(Ra by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    check out the konq-bugs archive. you'll find lots of sites that cause konq to segfault. which sucks, of course, but konq is still more useful than either netscape or mozilla (i won't even mention that mdi atrocity)

  97. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, right. That's because of CDE stability and maturity we have to wipe out $HOME/.dt once a month and try to get something from a backup.

    CDE is slow, illogical, unconfigurable and generally insane piece of software. I felt ashamed each time I had to explain a user how to perform another task in CDE that was supposed to be simple.

    I have a Sun Ultra 5 in my cubicle. Since I got a Linux box with GNOME year ago I totally abandoned the Sun.

    I have been doing UNIX system administration for living since 94 and I can tell -- GNOME is wastly superior to CDE. The quicker Sun moves to GNOME the better.

  98. Re:Gnome 2.0 is not ready for much of anything.(Ra by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're the dumbest Apple groupie I've ever seen.

  99. Re:Good. by Tuzanor · · Score: 2

    Just what the hell are you doing running a Desktop manager, hell even X, on a server...especially a database(performance) or webserver(security). Those kind of servers should only be console. Do what i do. Just use a laptop and connect with PuTTy through Windows 2000 Pro/XP (or SSH through linux/freeBSD if you really prefer). The average PuTTy sessions I have are insane. I usually have like 14 sessions going :-)
    Plus you have a more consistant Desktop to work with. Just 1 on the laptop. So you can have your mp3s, background of the playmate of the month, ICQ/yahoo messenger, etc all without worrying what other people are doing to the servers with your stuff on it.
    I hate almost every UNIX desktop i've ever come across. They always look neat in screenshots, but when i start using them I get so fustrated. Don't get me wrong, UNIX is my favorite OS, but I still feel it belongs on the server.
    The only possible success story with a UNIX Desktop that i can see is OS X, but i don't really have the right to comment on it yet as the only exposure I have to it is 5 minutes on a Powerbook Titanium in a store.

  100. i have a message board by pah31337 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    and it is super cool.

    http://paul.makeout.org/cgi-bin/pboard.cgi

  101. Re:Good. by spauldo · · Score: 1

    Actually, fvwm was designed to be faster and take less resources than twm. That seems to have changed with version 2 (although it's still real freakin' fast) but if you want faster than twm try fvwm1.

    --
    Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
  102. That would make no commercial sense for Sun. by mj6798 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    If Sun shipped KDE, they'd be shipping a desktop based on a toolkit that another company has complete commercial control over. Anybody who wants to write commercial software for Sun and fit in with the "standard" desktop would have to pay thousands of dollars to Troll Tech. And if TrollTech wanted to, they could jack up their commercial license fees for Solaris to whatever limit the market will bear. It just doesn't make sense for Sun to place the keys and toll-gate for commercial desktop application development on their platform in the hands of some company they have no control over.

    Sun would have to get a transferable binary license for Qt on Solaris, but even then, they'd be the only UNIX vendor standardizing on Qt. Or, Sun would have to buy TrollTech outright, likely to be an expensive proposition.

    Sticking with Motif makes sense: it's very widely used commercially (far more than Qt), there are lots of widgets and tools for it, it is a de-facto standard, and Sun already has rights to it. There are also several C++-based APIs for Motif. (Technically, I think Qt and Motif is a toss-up, but that's another matter.)

    1. Re:That would make no commercial sense for Sun. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Or, Sun would have to buy TrollTech outright, likely to be an expensive proposition."

      And, unfortunately, unlikely the day after cutting down 15,000 staff...

    2. Re:That would make no commercial sense for Sun. by Procrasti · · Score: 1

      Horse Raddish!! The QT libraries are GPL, same as KDE, same as GNOME. They don't have to buy QT, they just have to deliver the source code along with QT, pursuant to the GPL licence. You *can* purchase QT for non-GPL applications, but there is no reason for sun to do this if they were going to use the GPL GNOME anyway. Who modded you up?

      The real reason I think was as another post suggested, the Sun team are more familiar with C than C++.

      Of course, I could be wrong....

    3. Re:That would make no commercial sense for Sun. by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 5, Insightful

      • Third party: "Hello, Sun? We like your operating system and would like to modify our application to fully intigrate with it."

        Sun: "It is GPL."

        Third Party: "But our application is commercial. Can't we link to the underlying libraries without being affected by the GPL."

        Sun: "No, you can't do that, that would require the LGPL, like what Gtk has."

        Third Party: "Why isn't Qt LGPL?"

        Sun: "Because it is owned by Troll Tech. They charge flat fees for commerical development. You will have to contact them to find out the costs for developing commercial apps which take advantage of our GUI."

        Third party: "What's to stop them from charging royalties in the future?"

        Sun: "Nothing."

        Third party: "uhhh... Thanks, bye."


      This IMHO, is why Gnome has all the commercial support, and no matter how technically superior KDE is, as long as Troll Tech controls commercial development for the GUI, KDE will always be a fringe desktop environment.... even if that means that Linux never makes it to the desktop.

      Just like Sun decided, the only option was their old GUI was CDE or Gnome.

    4. Re:That would make no commercial sense for Sun. by FattMattP · · Score: 3, Interesting
      If Sun shipped KDE, they'd be shipping a desktop based on a toolkit that another company has complete commercial control over.
      Hmm. Kind of like shipping CDE which depends on a toolkit (Motif) that another company has complete commercial control over.
      --
      Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
    5. Re:That would make no commercial sense for Sun. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What, pay thousands of dollars? Any company the size of sun wouldn't worry about paying tens of thousands of dollars for something like that.

      One of the problems I have with a small subset of open source advocates is that they seem to think multi-million dollar companies obsess of a couple of thousand dollars here and there. They keep track of their money by realizing that 10,000 dollars costs less than 1000 hours of programmer time.

    6. Re:That would make no commercial sense for Sun. by Isldeur · · Score: 2

      "Third Party": Hello Sun? We'd like your operating system and would like to modify our applications to fully integrate with it."

      "Sun": Good!

      "Third Party": What are the chances that your current environment CDE/Motif, though a standard doesn't suck?"

      "Sun": Well, ma'am, it does suck. I'm sorry.

      "Third Party": Oh. Well about this new environment for Solaris you've been touting: what are the chances that, after paying top dollar for your computers and proprietary architecture and closed-source operating system, as well as three-times as much more for your support contracts (because I simply want to get the job done with the best possible tools available) I give a fart about some also-not-fully-free windowing toolkit?"

      "Sun": Probably little, sir.

    7. Re:That would make no commercial sense for Sun. by bolthole · · Score: 1
      Hmm. Kind of like shipping CDE which depends on a toolkit (Motif) that another company has complete commercial control over.

      No, the reason sun has a license, is that I believe Sun is a member of the board that CONTROLS CDE.

    8. Re:That would make no commercial sense for Sun. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Motif is the standard on commercial UNIX systems. Qt isn't even close. Which one sucks more is a matter of debate.

    9. Re:That would make no commercial sense for Sun. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yawn!!!

      Evil Trolltech Conspiracy part 696969696969...

    10. Re:That would make no commercial sense for Sun. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know whether you have worked at big companies. I have. I assure you that many of them are quite stingy. Furthermore, buying commercial software isn't a one-time expense, it's a long-term relationship with a vendor, and having a long-term relationship with a little company in the middle of nowhere is not something that has most corporate software developers jumping for joy.

    11. Re:That would make no commercial sense for Sun. by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 2

      There is little to prevent Troll Tech from changing their licensing model from per-developer to per-unit sold.

      Nobody would have to upgrade to their new toolkit, but don't think that would be considered having control over one's own commercial products.

      It is clear that the Free version of QT is there only for the purpose of promoting QT. When QT is adopted, there will be lock-in to a commercial toolkit. TT can change the license on future revisions of QT to anything they want.

      That is not hysteria or conspiracy theory, it is a fact. Yes, you're locked into Solaris too, but not only is it Sun's goal to sell Solaris to CUSTOMERS, but it is relatively easy to port from Solaris to another UNIX.

      QT is sold to companies doing commerial development. There is a huge difference between for example, developing an app in Visual Basic, and including VBA in your application. One is a flat fee tool, the second is a per-unit-sold fee.

      Gtk is not bound by such a potential restriction, period.

      Why on earth would a commerical corporation give another company such complete control over their product?

  103. Sun should use Java by mj6798 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Sun already has a mature, powerful toolkit and component architecture in Java. Sun should put their money where their mouth is and sponsor the open source development of a desktop environment based on Java.

    Unfortunately, Sun's OS group seems blissfully disconnected from their Java side; in fact, their OS group seems stuck in the C-mindset of the traditional BSD/UNIX world. And Sun's Java group seems more focussed on Windows than on adding value to Sun's own product line. Sun's lack of coordination and their lack of in-house and open source application development in Java gives people the impression that Java isn't ready. That may have been true two years ago, but today, Java is more than up to the task of building a zippy desktop with a footprint smaller than either Gnome or KDE.

    Of course, Sun can't give up completely on C/C++ toolkits, but they have that pretty well covered with Motif and its C++ wrappers, tools that are still much more widely used among Sun's customers than either Gtk+ or Qt.

    Sun always seemed like Sun's worst enemy. They need a little of that Gates/Ballmer top-down coherent management and energy. McNealy barks a lot, but he doesn't seem to bite much.

    1. Re:Sun should use Java by Rentar · · Score: 1

      Hm ... to be able sponsore a desktop environment based on Java, there would have to be such a beast in the first place. I've never seen such a thing (which doesn't mean, that it doesn't exist), and I think it wouldn't be any good.

      Don't get me wrong: I love java (i code almost exclusively in Java), but GUI-Performance is still pretty bad (although its getting better in 1.4) and is especially bad on Linux (which IMHO would be one of the premium platforms for an OSS-Java-Desktop-Envirnoment), so I don't think that this would do any good to Java or the Comunity.

    2. Re:Sun should use Java by bockman · · Score: 2, Interesting
      To make a Java desktop, Sun should first develop a real compiler for Java, which generates nice old executables and dll (I _do_ hope GCC 3.x improves enough on this to become a standard ).

      I can't see the ten processes or so which composes a desktop each running its own JVM ANd make them threads is not a solution, IMO). When I run more than 2 or three java apps , my Sun WS starts trashing for lack of memory.

      --
      Ciao

      ----

      FB

    3. Re:Sun should use Java by RNG · · Score: 2

      Of course, Sun can't give up completely on C/C++ toolkits, but they have that pretty well covered with Motif and its C++ wrappers, tools that are still much more widely used among Sun's customers than either Gtk+ or Qt.

      That may be factually true, but have you seen how butt-ugly Motif & CDE are?? They really show their age by now. After seeing a Sun workstation running their (preinstalled) CDE environment, I am surprised Sun that manages to sell more than 2 workstations/year. The hardware is not bad (but nothing really special either) but horribly overpriced and the desktop looks like crap. It may be a standard but it looks slightly neolithic and is IMHO even more unusable than the worst of Gnome and/or KDE (combined).I found myself cursing at that environment all day. For the record, I curse ever once in a while when working on Win2K and almost never curse behind my Linux box (which is currently running KDE).

      Of course, the one the server side (which is Sun's bread and butter) this doesn't count since you don't need a GUI ...

    4. Re:Sun should use Java by alext · · Score: 1

      Why should you want to generate libraries / executables? This can restrict the number of optimizations made significantly.

      There's no fundamental reason to run each Java program in a separate VM either - see Echidna for a current mechanism to let them share. My understanding is that Sun were working on a more flexible task / VM / processor mapping capability to exploit MP servers better, but that was a while ago.

      --

      cheers
      alex

    5. Re:Sun should use Java by _|()|\| · · Score: 2
      Java is more than up to the task of building a zippy desktop with a footprint smaller than either Gnome or KDE.

      I'll believe it when I see it. JBuilder, with it's partially Swing-based UI, forced a computer upgrade at work. The Java-based Oracle installer needs 256 - 512 MB.

      Java has potential, but the resource requirements are still prohibitive. Besides, I think Sun is quite content with Java's acceptance at the enterprise level by Oracle, Bea, et al. It's not just for applets, anymore.

    6. Re:Sun should use Java by Junta · · Score: 2

      It is suprising that Sun hasn't done more with Java lately. For a while they have been rewriting and adding a lot of things based on Java (their system installer, media player..) A desktop environment would be a great demonstration of the power of Java, but it is easier to just move Gnome forward than start from scratch. Besides, while Java is a great language (particularly Swing), it still seems to me rougher around the edges than C/C++ as far as interaction with the system it runs on. It's possible, certianly, but not nearly as easy to do as C/C++..

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    7. Re:Sun should use Java by Procrasti · · Score: 1

      Hmmm, maybe you mean something like Jesktop?

    8. Re:Sun should use Java by PRR · · Score: 1

      Agreed!

      Swing is a very good GUI toolkit, and it's surprising that a desktop based on Swing hasn't been started similar to Gnome/Gtk and KDE/Qt. All the effort that Sun is putting into Gnome is work that COULD HAVE gone in to a Swing-based desktop.

      (And I wish Sun would give up on this interpreted stuff and create a good native compiler for Java/Swing like what GCC is trying to do)

    9. Re:Sun should use Java by pmz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Java is more than up to the task of building a zippy desktop with a footprint smaller than either Gnome or KDE.

      I remain skeptical, unless Sun leverages gcj or some in-house equivalent to improve performance. OS-visible memory consumption really needs improvement (40MB of RAM for simple tools, such as a volume control, just doesn't cut it).

    10. Re:Sun should use Java by Glock27 · · Score: 1
      Sun already has a mature, powerful toolkit and component architecture in Java. Sun should put their money where their mouth is and sponsor the open source development of a desktop environment based on Java.

      I couldn't agree more. If Sun is serious about Java on the desktop (and there has been a tremendous Sun development investment there already) why not use the OS they control as the showcase for how great Java is?

      I'm a longtime Java programmer and advocate, but Sun has done a bad job with a couple aspects of desktop Java, IMO:

      • No system-wide shared VM, or at a minimum, significantly shared (jitted) code.
      • No ability to "install as machine code".

      The shared VM concept would require some ingenuity, and of course very robust code since if anything broke the VM, all Java processes would fail. Multiple VMs with heavily shared code (libraries) is another worthwhile approach, and closer to what Sun is actually working on. I'm not sure when anything will show up in a shipping VM - perhaps 1.4? Java process startup would be fastest with a single, always resident, shared VM.

      "Install as machine code" would do highly optimized ahead-of-time compilation once (from source or bytecode) for the exact target system, then store object code only. Sun keeps claiming that dynamic compilation is better, but I'd prefer to have the choice and see for myself. Disk is awfully cheap these days.

      The 1.4 release will probably be "good enough" to do a decent desktop, given today's system speeds and cheap memory. It'll be interesting to see if 1.4 revs interest in desktop Java enough to really get the Open Source, shareware and freeware communities interested in developing desktop Java apps. I hope so!

      The best thing about Sun biting the bullet and doing this would be the inevitable (and probably drastic) improvements to the usability of desktop Java as it was used widely in the real world. I hope some Sun folk read Slashdot today, and get some inspiration! ;-)

      BTW, there is really nothing to stop anyone from starting such a project on SourceForge. Another interesting project might be a similar Java enviroment using gcc 3.0 and the GTK/Java bindings.

      299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!

      --
      Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
      Score: -1 100% Flamebait
    11. Re:Sun should use Java by praedor · · Score: 1

      Sun is as broken as IBM is (was? perhaps they're on meds now and OK?). IBM had OS/2, their own superior-to-windoze os back in the 80s-90s. They wouldn't sell you one of their computers with their own frickin' os on it. They INSISTED on selling only windoze systems to the detriment of their own work.


      Sun is similar. They have mature java. They have done a lot of work to make it capable of being used to develop their own javaos. Do they? NO! They pull an IBM and shit on their own effort, their own design. Frickin' tards.

      --
      In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
    12. Re:Sun should use Java by mj6798 · · Score: 2
      The volume control wouldn't be 40MB, it would be a few kbytes running inside the same process as most of the other desktop threads. To enable this kind of sharing is why the Java runtime is as big as it is in the first place, and you only see benefits from it if you take advantage of it.

      If you go with gcj and separate processes, you lose most of the advantages of Java over C++ (although you still get something that's easier to learn and a bit more robust).

    13. Re:Sun should use Java by mj6798 · · Score: 2
      I think Java-based desktop should only use a single VM process to do everything that Gnome (minus major applications) does out of the box. The one-process-per-function approach is a holdover from C/C++ days, where you need separate processes to keep components from crashing each other and to make sure memory gets cleaned up. The single VM approach also makes it much, much easier to communicate among different components.

      I do agree, however, that a sharable VM and sharable JIT results would be good. Using Java for a Sun-sponsored desktop project would also help improve Swing and any remaining performance bottlenecks.

      I think something like gcj is a crutch. It would let you write C/C++-style applications in Java, maybe even using Gtk+. That's better than nothing, and would allow for a smooth transition from something like Gnome to Java, but I think it also means giving up on some of the major advantages of Java.

    14. Re:Sun should use Java by pmz · · Score: 1

      Point taken--the whole desktop would be about 40MB (I was thinking about the latest volume control for CDE (a java app)).

      An interesting idea would be next generation Sun workstations with picoJava/MAJC "desktop accelerator" coprocessors.

    15. Re:Sun should use Java by Glock27 · · Score: 1
      I think something like gcj is a crutch. It would let you write C/C++-style applications in Java, maybe even using Gtk+. That's better than nothing, and would allow for a smooth transition from something like Gnome to Java, but I think it also means giving up on some of the major advantages of Java.

      I'm not sure why you think gcj (now just the Java mdoe of gcc 3.x) is a "crutch". It is no different than any other Java compiler in terms of the code you write. It, like TowerJ which is a commercial product and a Java 2 implementation, is simply an ahead-of-time traditional compiler for the Java language. It is roughly at the JDK 1.1 level right now, which is quite sufficient for many purposes. It also includes an interpreter so dynamic class loading is supported if needed. However, it is still fairly buggy, and it will also be a long time before it gets to the Java 2 level, if ever. I'm sure Cygnus could use more programmer volunteers...

      Regardless, it is a worthy project and I hope it continues moving forward.

      299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!

      --
      Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
      Score: -1 100% Flamebait
    16. Re:Sun should use Java by mj6798 · · Score: 2
      I'm not sure why you think gcj (now just the Java mdoe of gcc 3.x) is a "crutch".

      What I mean is that gcj and other ahead-of-time compilers allow people to continue writing Java code as if they were writing C/C++ code: small, standalone, native-code applications that are composed of a mostly static codebase. In order to achieve that, they sacrifice many of the properties that make Java interesting in the first place.

      If you take a single-process, dynamic-compilation approach, Java really shines: you can combine lots of software components at runtime, and the dynamic compiler will optimize and inline everything at runtime. That's not theoretical, it really works. If you keep a single Java process running (rather than starting things up again and again), javac, jedit, and other substantial Java programs are lightning fast.

      I agree that gcj is very worthwhile, and I hope its development will continue. Many people (myself included) still want to write small, stand-alone applications some of the time, and being able to use Java is nice for that. Gcj's easy connection with C++ also is a great link to existing codebases.

      Nevertheless, for developing a modern desktop, I think the dynamic compilation approach is a much better way to go than ahead-of-time compilation.

    17. Re:Sun should use Java by Glock27 · · Score: 1
      What I mean is that gcj and other ahead-of-time compilers allow people to continue writing Java code as if they were writing C/C++ code: small, standalone, native-code applications that are composed of a mostly static codebase.

      Certainly that is one thing that ahead-of-time compilation achieves, however it is not the only thing. Those "small" executables can of course link with traditional shared libraries (dlls) which would encompass the standard Java libraries plus (potentially) any third party libraries.

      In order to achieve that, they sacrifice many of the properties that make Java interesting in the first place.

      I don't agree. As I pointed out, gcj supports dynamic class loading in those few cases where it is needed.

      If you take a single-process, dynamic-compilation approach, Java really shines: you can combine lots of software components at runtime, and the dynamic compiler will optimize and inline everything at runtime.

      I understand that better inlining is one of the benefits of dynamic compilation. However, the just-in-time compiler (JITC) cannot perform extensive optimizations. You are paying a cost in computer time to do both the analysis and compilation every time you run the program. By the way, there is no reason you couldn't write a traditional compiler to accept profiling information and do better optimization based on those.

      That's not theoretical, it really works. If you keep a single Java process running (rather than starting things up again and again), javac, jedit, and other substantial Java programs are lightning fast.

      If you look at my posting history, you'll see that I've made the point that modern VMs are approaching the speeds necessary for high-performance computing. ;-)

      However, wouldn't it be nice if those programs a) loaded lightning fast and b) ran fast even the first time they're used? It's rather annoying to hit an intensive operation for the first time, have it take a minute, then have it run in five seconds the next time. Don't you agree? (BTW, this could be accomplished by "freezing" the program onto disk when it is closed, then "unfreezing" it back into the VM when loaded, preserving the compiled sections. The VM would discard the frozen copy when it detected a .class/.jar file version change.)

      I agree that gcj is very worthwhile, and I hope its development will continue. Many people (myself included) still want to write small, stand-alone applications some of the time, and being able to use Java is nice for that.

      I think gcj has many other potential uses. First, it is a great approach (given a robust compiler;) for the large applications which are of interest to the Java Grande Forum, or any others that require the absolute best performance (I know this will have to be examined carefully by benchmarks once gcj is far enough along - my guess is that gcj will win, especially given the ability to ignore array bounds checking in tested code. Also with gcj you can deterministically lock out the garbage collector if desired.) If the JDK 1.4 VM doesn't give Java enough performance to be competitive on things like 3D games and flight sims, gcj will have its chance. Finally, gcj should do well in very small embedded environments where an interpreter/VM just doesn't make sense.

      Gcj's easy connection with C++ also is a great link to existing codebases.

      You're referring to CNI, which is also a very efficient way to link to C/C++. This is also a major strength of gcj.

      Nevertheless, for developing a modern desktop, I think the dynamic compilation approach is a much better way to go than ahead-of-time compilation.

      It wasn't clear that your comments about gcj were strictly in reference to "developing a modern desktop". In that context, I'd tend to agree with you. However, for monolithic applications (games, productivity tools, compute servers, compilers etc.) there's a lot to be said for traditional compilation.

      Its also nice that gcj is open source, and can be forked for new, experimental languages. I'd like to see that done to provide a good operator overloading facility (using different than normal Unicode symbols so that overloading can be identified easily), lightweight types and generics. Some of that can be accomplished using preprocessors with Java, but direct compiler support would be better. :-)

      Thanks for the interesting discussion, and sorry it took so long to respond...

      299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!

      --
      Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
      Score: -1 100% Flamebait
  104. Sun was optimistic. So were we(the OSS supporters) by GeorgieBoy · · Score: 1

    Sun made the decision to use Gnome during the happy times of "dot com". Those exuberant days are over. I find it rather amusing the the classic wars are so easily restarted. Neither Gnome *NOR* KDE, IMHO, are ready for Solaris and other environments. KDE and Gnome both feel too disjointed to really make the Unix desktop feel like a computer that non-technically minded people would use.

    I happen to use Gnome, and have grown quite accustomed to it, but I still keep many terminals around to get things done. When I used CDE on Solaris in the past, I did the same thing, probably to a greater degree.

    I tried to use KDE 2.2.x this past week, and I couldn't get accustomed to it. Perhaps I'm not European enough ;-), but I feel that there are design decisions that make the environment difficult to use - enough that I was screaming for my Gnome desktop back.

    Either way, though, the Unix desktop doesn't have a prayer. Sun was just commerical support that could substantiated Gnome as a major desktop force.

    Ultimately, the Unix desktop feels too disjoint - which doesn't matter to people like me to want to poke around with the system, but matters to anyone new to Unix. The one advantage the Windows desktop has is how tightly integrated the GUI feels to the OS itself. You need to at least create that illusion in the Unix world - and so far it still seems like something that we aren't even close to acheiving.

    On a final note, a consistent widget set across applications gives users a much more cohesive-feeling experience. It may seem silly to a lot of us, but the fact that Windows/Mac apps all "look the same" makes things feel "normal" for a lot of users.

  105. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hi,

    hands off sawfish!
    It is not bloated at all (if you use it stand alone as I do) :)

    Bye.

  106. Re:Solaris 9!!!! by green+pizza · · Score: 2

    Tell me about it. We have one department that is almost complete with their Solaris 2.5.1 -> 2.7 (Solaris 7) upgrade evaluation. I have 8 on my personal workstation (an old Ultra 30) but 7 on pretty much everything else.

    Kinda reminds me of Waterloo's Maple. For years, simple revisions to Maple V were the current version. Then came Maple 6. Maple 7 followed less than a year later.

  107. Re:Gnome 2.0 is not ready for much of anything.(Ra by BlowCat · · Score: 2
    Please don't compare GNOME 2.0 (unstable developers only prerelease) with StarOffice 5.2 (official closed-source release).

    If you want stability, use stable releases. If you want cutting edge features, fix things that don't work for you and contribute fixes back to the developers instead of bashing the project on SlashDot.

  108. Re:Gnome 2.0 is not ready for much of anything.(Ra by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and I tried GNOME 1.4 when it came out, and blam. Nautilus crashes. So I switched back to KDE, which is *much* more stable (and less bloated).

  109. Re:Sun was optimistic. So were we(the OSS supporte by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    actually, there are plenty of american developers of KDE now. people like kurt g, charles s, niel s.. unlike GNOME, power is not split into company camps (rh, ximian, sun), and is very decentralized :-)

    and all of sun's gnome hackers are from europe (ireland)

  110. Re:Eurotrash and KDE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    uh, didn't you goto slashdot anon. coward training? all slashdot trolls have to be pro-kde now, as commanded by our lead troll JonKatz.

  111. Sun should stick with CDE... by FyRE666 · · Score: 0

    From what I've seen the machines are just too slow to run anything heavier than CDE. We have Ultra 5/10s here with decent amounts of RAM and even CDE seems slow to me compared with Windows/Linux machines (try turning on the "display window contents while dragging" option and watch them repaint the screen in real time!).

    The 400mhz processors in the Ultra10s are no racehorses by any stretch of the imagination - I ran benchmarks with them (using the distributed.net client) and they turn in scores less than 1/5 of my Athlon 1.4. Coupled with this, the video is abysmal (do they have ANY graphics acceleration?) but then "vi" doesn't need that much CPU power :-)

    Much as I like using Ximian/Gnome (without Nautilus) on my x86 linux boxen, I think it'd run like a dog on a typical Sun workstation...

    1. Re:Sun should stick with CDE... by Junta · · Score: 2

      As to the graphics issues, you are likely running Ultra 5s/10s with the builtin-video only. These are pretty old Mach64s if I remember correctly. Designed not for high-end graphics stuff. If you want good graphics hardware in a Sun, you have to go with at least a Creator3D, Elite3Ds are, of course preferable. But, as is the case with most Sun equipment, they are overpriced and still underperforming, but much better than the builtin. Though I admire Sun hardware as being rock-solid, they are way too expensive and too under-performing per-unit. For workstation and small server (i.e. anything below about 4-procs) I see no reason to go Sun anymore...

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  112. We are very happy to hear this by WillAffleck · · Score: 2

    When we here at the Front de Liberation des Naifs de Jardin heard that GNOME was no longer included in Sun machines, it really made our day.

    We have long espoused freedom for gnomes, especially those which live in gardens, and feel that any act of liberation for them is a good thing.

    While we are aware that GNOME is quite different, and not a GUI in the same way that a Gnome is not a Dwarf, the happy news that someone supports liberation for GNOME is quite marvelous.

    Vive les nains de jardin libre! Et les genies des ordinateurs aussi!

    --
    Will in Seattle
  113. Heard the same thing last week on the Crownjuwels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Went to the Crownjuwels conference last week in Amsterdam, and a Sun representative told us the same thing. Because 2.0 isn't going to be ready in time for testing and such it won't be in the first release of Solaris 9. But I won't be surprised if they did included 1.4 as an extra, with CDE still default and when 2.0 is stable they will release that in te later releases of Solaris 9.....

  114. Re:Sun was optimistic. So were we(the OSS supporte by PigleT · · Score: 2

    "Sun made the decision to use Gnome during the happy times of "dot com". Those exuberant days are over."

    Actually, no, life in the ".com" world does go on for some, it's just that the hype has disappeared, and we know that there's nothing special in a mere version mismatch like this "news" story.

    Gnome is an open-source project, it is not a product that must be released on a schedule to fit in with Sun's arbitrary release dates. The real world's version numbers just go up and up and up, there's nothing special about them.

    --
    ~Tim
    --
    .|` Clouds cross the black moonlight,
    Rushing on down to the circle of the turn
  115. I seriously don't believe it by GauteL · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Watch me get modded down to hell for this.

    I've never seen such a huge amount of trolls getting modded up with insightful before. Is this just because the average Slashdot-user is a KDE-fan, or do you seriously think these deserve insightful:

    1. Gnome 2.0 is not ready for much of anything.(Rant) (Score:4, Insightful): (..)"In my experience Gnome was a dysfuntional, unstable pig of a desktop, full of garbage apps were a pain to use and rarely worked correctly"(..)

    Constructive criticism is always good, this is just trashing, which I cannot understand, having tried out CDE.

    2. 5 substantial reasons why GNOME is obsolete (Score:3, Insightful) (..)"GNOME is based on the GTK+ library, which was fine for its day, but is now decidedly outdated. (..)It doesn't offer exciting components like KParts, KDE's analog to COM. The closes thing to that will be Bonobo, but its development is far behind even GNOME 2's release schedule and won't make it in until at least 2003."(..)

    First. GTK+ still works fine, besides there might be a reason why GNOME 2.0 will be using GTK+ 2.0 instead of GTK+ 1.2. Second. Qt doesn't offer KParts, KDE does. GTK+ does not offer Bonobo, Gnome does. Besides Bonobo is already out in stable versions, and has been used extensively by Nautilus, Evolution and Gnumeric.

    3. Sun, why not KDE, for the last time? (Score:4, Insightful): "Why does Sun continue to ignore KDE as a viable alternative to GNOME. KDE is very mature and incredibly stable. I don't see why Sun doesn't just go forward with packaging it with Solaris. Do they stick with GNOME because it's built on a 100% free toolkit? What's the driving force? As far as I can see, KDE is a solution to many of the problems Sun's UI trials of GNOME came up with. It just doesn't make sense... for one thing, if they want easy of use, KDE is much nicer than GNOME, IMHO."

    This is not so much of a troll, as uninformed, and I don't object much to the posting, I object to it being modded up to heaven just because the crowd loves KDE.

    • SUN has already invested lots of money and effort into GNOME
    • SUN employees are much more comfortable with C than C++
    • SUN happen to like Gnome (WHAT???)
    • Gnome is also very stable and quite mature. KDE is not better at all areas

    I realize being objective is hard when you have a situation like this, but please don't just mod up people because you agree. Mod people because they argue well and have thoughtful and well written comments.

  116. Re:no offense but... by justsomebody · · Score: 1

    Let's say! Again one of KDE fans. Just tell me how Gnome is losing blood. I personaly avoid using KDE since KDE is slow and too Windows like. GNOME also makes me posible of configuring things runing on my desktop. Not being forced to use which Window manager makes me realy happy. I could say KDE is dead. It's so fuckin' slow. Ok, but enough don't You think You all are being stupid arguing KDE is better GNOME is better. THEME SONG IS THAT GNOME 2.0 HASN'T BEEN USED ON SOLARIS. THIS WAS NOT TO BE EXPECTED. IF YOU'D READ SUN'S ARTICLES YOU'D SEE THAT SUN'S ENGINEER'S ARE BEGINING THE REAL PORT ABOUT TWO OR THREE MONTHS. THE ARTICLE ABOUT STAROFFICE NOT BEEING GNOME-LIKE. However all of You! "kde is better, gnome is better" GO PLAY ON THE PLAYGROUD. Both projects are good. I as a *NIX person could hardly imagine my self using Windowsh KDE. But I also respect people using KDE. THERE'S ONE MORE QUESTION: "HAS ANYONE OF YOU "my is better" CONTRIBUTED ANYTHING. Hail to the Open source

    --
    Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
  117. Re:Good. by bockman · · Score: 2
    And what were you using it for? there are plenty of graphical file managers, including gmc - the gnome standard one.

    Actually, GMC was the standard file manager up to 1.2. In 1.4, is one of the packages of the so-called 'fifth-toe', i.e. add-ons (and reading mc-devel list, it looks like they are soon going to drop the graphical version of mc).

    The standard file manager for GNOME is Nautilus, now, which may be a good choice for middle-to-high-end home desktop, but not for most of the uses for which SUN workstations are purchased ( like scientific workstation in engineering facilities and control centres).

    --
    Ciao

    ----

    FB

  118. They dropped OpenWindows? by Per+Abrahamsen · · Score: 1

    So now we are forced to use ugly, bloated CDE, unless ugly, bloated Gnome get ready in time?

    Well, there is always my Debian box with olwm.

    1. Re:They dropped OpenWindows? by Cheetahfeathers · · Score: 1

      What do you mean 'forced to use'? Just because it is not shipped by default does not mean you can't change what you use. Defaults are meant to be changed. ;)

  119. What GTK+ port? by pjl5602 · · Score: 1

    I'm just waiting for the inevitable announcement the GTK port of OpenOffice has been cancelled.

    What GTK+ port?&nbsp IIRC, they are going to make OpenOffice into a Bonobo component so that it can be embeded in a Bonobo container.&nbsp That componentization does not mean a GTK+ widget interface for OO...

    Nice troll...

  120. Who are LinuxGram? by Per+Abrahamsen · · Score: 2

    There "about" field just tell how professional and fact-oriented they are, but their articles look somewhere between MS FUD and /. trolls.

    From the front page:

    - IBM hasn't made any major open source announcements for several months.
    - The Free Lunch crowd is against reasonable and nondiscriminatory licenses.
    - Sun drops Gnome from Solaris 9.

    I'd put a lot more trust in the last rumor, if it wasn't posted together with the first two exacmples of LinuxGram profesionally reported hard facts.

  121. Re:no offense but... by jonathan_ingram · · Score: 0

    I think you need to take some more of the pills the kind doctor gave you.

    I know you're not really interested, but to answer some points you raise:
    1) KDE compiles and works on Solaris fine (I've done it myself)
    2) KDE isn't Windows like... it's more like OS/2 with bits of Windows, Mac and RISC/OS

    To agree with you:
    1) Starting KDE applications is too slow. This isn't KDE's fault, it's C++ & the library system -- people are looking into object prelinking to improve the startup times dramatically.
    2) Both KDE and Gnome are great projects. I'm looking forward to Gnome 2 eagerly (I'm also looking forward to Enlightenment 17... if it ever gets released).

  122. Gnome is available for Solaris already by louissypher · · Score: 1, Informative

    I hate to be the one to point out the obvious, but Gnome 1.4 is already available for Solaris 7/8. So you don't *have* to wait for it to be included with solaris by default to use it.

    http://www.sun.com/gnome

    --
    www.bleepyou.com
    1. Re:Gnome is available for Solaris already by Brackney · · Score: 1

      Very true. If that wasn't the case, the new Solaris boxes we're running at work w/ Ximian GNOME would be figments of my imagination! :)

      I don't see anything to fuss about. Grabbing the Ximian installation w/ Redcarpet is straightforward, and makes maintenance a snap. While the Ultra on my desk is still running Openwin, it won't be long before my desktop config at work and at home are the same.

  123. I fully agree by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    I have tried to install both in Solaris 2.6 (is what we have).Pain,pain, pain.

    And that is only the installation.

    CDE runs for months before Netscape manges to kill it once in a blue moon.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  124. Oil industry. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    All the oil industry is shaken by your comments.

    There Solaris is the main desktop in use.

    Any other examples would be welcomed.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  125. I tried, I wanted to share. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    But the dependenices, order, library versioning is horribly complicated. I calculate I would need 3 or 4 full days to make a compile succesful... if at all ...

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  126. What did you expect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Miguel is famous for starting something and not sticking it through to the end. He's started and inspired a menagerie of different projects...from GNOME to evolution, to bonobo to....etc. Has he stayed around to finish any of them? NO. He jumps from project to project like an ADD monkey, leaving everything half-done.

    Is it any surprise GNOME is percieved as having lost focus?

    I wonder how much that Register article about GNOME 2.0 stung. The sad thing is, all rhetoric aside, the Reg had some good points.

    1. Re:What did you expect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ohh..my, have to agree with your post gnumeric is died, evolution is dying, bonobo has died, mc is a half-done piece work,... conclusion:- Miguel sucks and gnome sucks, both of them should just disapppear from the face of earth Warning to the gnome developers:- how dare you even complete with the desktop I prefer using. I LOVE KDE

  127. Very Sloppy Indeed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You make this out to be such a big deal and it's not. Sun will ship Gnome in Solaris 9, just not in the initial release. Each Solaris release has updates and Sun will put Gnome in one of those. So it will make 9, just not the initial release of 9.

  128. Re:no offense but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    DOS can do anything Windows can. It's easier to develop consistant GUI applications for windows, so your question should be: What does KDE make easier to do than GNOME does? The answer: Damn near everything.

  129. Re:Sun was optimistic. So were we(the OSS supporte by bockman · · Score: 3, Interesting
    KDE and Gnome both feel too disjointed to really make the Unix desktop feel like a computer that non-technically minded people would use.

    But here we are talking of _Solaris_, which is not exactly an OS for 'non-technically minded people'.

    Rather, the question is: would GNOME or KDE be the best desktop for the kind of people which buy and uses Sun workstations?
    My personal answer is: not anymore. The 1.x versions were quite apt (especially kde, IMO, which borrowed several things from CDE). The 2.x versions (present for KDE, near future for Gnome), with their full complement of gadgets, are now much more user-desktop oriented for that (though using selected components only is still an option).
    A more effective user interface for scientific and engineering workstation, IMO, could be something like Window Maker + a lightweight file manager (e.g. ROX). Or maybe XFCE, which also offer an easier transition path for CDE users (though I never liked CDE look-and-feel).

    --
    Ciao

    ----

    FB

  130. Why is this "insightful"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's blatant bullshit.

    KDE has bindings for other languages...take kjava or the Python bindings, for example.

    Ah, but actually getting the FACTS before you spout off (and get modded "insiteful" by stupid slashdot moderators) is too much effort, I guess.

  131. Deja vu by garver · · Score: 3, Funny

    This post freaked me out. Just replace "Sun" with "IBM" and "Java" with "OS/2" and it sounds like something I heard over and over 6 years ago. Damn if it didn't come true.

    I love Java, much like I loved OS/2. They are/were great technologies; there just wasn't anything else that kept up. In 1995, Windows 95 was on the horizon... and the end of OS/2 was coming.

    So here we are in 2001, talking about how Sun's right hand isn't working with the left hand, much like IBM in 1995... and .NET on the horizon.

    Tell me it'll be all right, mommy.

  132. Pretty much blatant misinformation by nullity · · Score: 3, Informative
    Marking "-1": blatant misinformation
    1. Bonobo has been distributed with GNOME since GNOME 1.4. It is a more flexible comprehensive architecture than KParts, and implements a lot more features you'd find in something like COM than KParts. The tradeoff is complexity...Bonobo is based on CORBA which has bright points, but also can make things more difficult for the programmer at times. Bonobo has undergone a lot of revisions for GNOME2 and promises to be even better than before. KParts is not an analogue to COM, it is basically an embedded rendering system with added smarts (which is very useful, but not really like COM). WRT to GTK....this is why we are about to release GTK2, which is a major rewrite. Bot the technical aspects, and user aspects, of the widget system have been redone and improved. Incredible font and internationalization support for "unusual" languages have been added through Pango, and a great accessibility framework have been included, making *nix environments accessible to still more users.
    2. GtkHTML2 should be a major option for the GNOME2 desktop. GtkHTML1 already exists for light rendering. The Mozilla component is still the most comphrensive solution for browsing the web, but KHTML is putting on the heat. Good stuff, glad to see some competition in this arena.
    3. KDEs ability to use XRender had little to nothing to do with "components". It had to do with KDE applications already making use of a font wrapper in QT rather than directly manipulating X fonts (probably a result of TrollTech having markets outside of X and hence needing this sort of system detail wrapped). GNOME anti-aliasing fixes have been very slow in the coming, but they're running just fine on the machine I'm typing on, and will be a part of the default environment in GNOME 2. "rendering large text and scaling it down" is sometimes called ANTI-ALIASING . Anti-aliasing is any sort of filter function that removes or alleviates artifacts caused by by aliasing, including scaling down. Nautilus uses freetype to do its anti-aliasing and it works just fine.
    4. I really think this point is debatable either way. *shrug* I think GNOME is much prettier, but I understand why some people disagree. I suppose it all depends on your taste.
    5. Yeah, that's whats going on. I work on GNOME because I'm trying to further the evil plans of GNU. Most of us have little or no affiliation with the free software foundation or the GNU system other than using the GPL license.

    There are lots of points with great merit comparing and contrasting GNOME and KDE, so you really shouldn't have to resort to this sort of misinformation. I think the biggest thing KDE is doing right that GNOME is sucking at is having quick release cycles. We wait too long to get changes out to users, which tends to make user improvements to the core desktop more sluggish than they should be. We're gunning for a really quick turnaround release for GNOME2 - GNOME2.2 with primarily user improvements (using a lot of the new architecture that has been rewritten and/or added). Also, significant usability assesments and rewriting of problem areas is being done, both for GNOME2 and post GNOME2, which should improve the reach of the desktop to a whole range of new non-technical users in the years to come.

    -Seth (Nautilus hacker, GNOME2 Release comittee, GNOME UI Lead)
    1. Re:Pretty much blatant misinformation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well man, well said. so When's Nautilus 1.0.5 coming out. Hear that you guys have some problem with the current build. Take your time with it anyway. Good luck with the development

    2. Re:Pretty much blatant misinformation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, it's great to see gtkhtml2 being used more instead of mozilla.

      (for all of you who don't know, gtkhtml is based illegally on the ancient khtmlw widget in kde 1.x (they ripped the code without keeping the copyrights, the fucks)). gtkhtml2 is basically a port of khtml, done LEGALLY this time. so, when bugs are found in gtkhtml2 or khtml, the other side gets fixed.. the great results of standardization (-:

      now only if the gnome people stop working on their POS desktop and hack on KDE!!!

      oh yeah, Nautilus is still a POS bloated POS!@#.

  133. Re:Good.- Experiences may differ by Daeslin · · Score: 1

    Okay, I'm running the July release of Solaris 8 on an anchient Ultra Enterprise 1 with Gnome. And mind you, that's not the Creator, but the non-64-bit capable, 167 MHz really old UltraSparc. And you know what? It's pretty fast running a few terminals, opera, and some ldap browsers. Throw in a few rarely used servers including Novell's eDirectory and stuff still doesn't slow down. Changing panes takes a second to a second and a half unless one of my daemons is pegging the CPU, but pretty much everything else is fine. Granted, I'm not running Nautilus, but why would I want to run such a bloated piece of crap when I have "ls", "locate", "cp", "rm", "mv" and "df"?

    And I agree with the poster who was wondering what the @(&* you were thinking running any kind of GUI on a workhorse server? Repeat after me, "GUI's do NOT belong on servers"!

    --

    I like lots of people. That doesn't mean I go carting them around the galaxy with me. --Dr. Who
  134. its just a matter of time.... by nullity · · Score: 2

    GNOME will come to Solaris, its just a matter of Solaris 9 being deployed before GNOME 2 is finished. Sun really wants GNOME 2 to be the first "officially supported" release of GNOME they ship (they have already done an unsupported technology preview CD). Lots of Sun developers are working on GNOME, and they're still pushing to get GNOME in Solaris as quick as possible (probably in an update to 9).

    cheers,

    -Seth

  135. yeah, Linux sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But Linux sucks less than any of the alternatives, all the while it costs less. And while Linux borrows liberally from its predecessor, just about every major feature in Windows or MacOS has been taken from other people's systems as well.

  136. Re:Good. by Derek+Pomery · · Score: 2

    Why on earth are you comparing efficiency under the old familiar (for Linux, GTK, Gnome) x86 architecture against SPARC?
    I've also experienced massive CPU consumption on a SPARC Ultra 80
    Yes, disabling Nautilus helped. As did turning on wireframe window movement, minimization. But it was still slow.
    Gnome has nowhere near the same overhead on the x86 Solaris. I am not certain why, but I suspect perhaps the graphics libraries not taking full advantage of the processor.

    --
    -- perl -e'print pack"H*","6e656d6f406d38792e6f7267"' /. ate my old sig. Bastards.
  137. They should include FLWM by MongooseCN · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    If they want performance and efficiancy they should include flwm. It's small simple and fast to use, and it takes about 10K of memory. Can you say that about Gnome or KDE?

  138. Re:Sun was optimistic. So were we(the OSS supporte by cyberfr0g · · Score: 1

    **Neither Gnome *NOR* KDE, IMHO, are ready for Solaris and other environments. KDE and Gnome both feel too disjointed to really make the Unix desktop feel like a computer that non-technically minded people would use.**

    non-technically minded people have no business running anything with regards to unix except an idiot-proof kiosk. i'm tired of trying to help idiots run linux/bsd just because its "neat" and "different". we are talking about servers and gui's have no business in an enterprise level enviroment. please leave the resources for my checkpoint firewall and oracle databases you devilish ram gusslers.

  139. Moderators? by kisak · · Score: 1

    I can not believe that the parent post got the moderation (Score 5: Insightful).

    I am sure that he has had some problems with Nautilus bloat (which is a commen problem), but Sawfish bloat is really a stupid comment.

    I am also sure that he has grown up on CDE, but to claim that the Gnome interface is clumsy and difficult relative to CDE or Windows for a new user, is just rubbish. Also, one should give Sun credit for working hard on making the Gnome interface more user friendly, something all GUI should have even mind all the time.

    But the real troll comment is "GNOME is at least five years away from any sort of maturity". Since we just have celebrated KDE's 5 years birthday, that is one of the least : Insightful comments I have seen in this whole slashdot posting. Talk about not paying attention for the last 10 years.

    Moderators, wake up!

    --

    --- guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people ---

  140. Re:Gnome 2.0 is not ready for much of anything.(Ra by diamondc · · Score: 1

    Jesus Christ.. how the FUCK did you get moderated to +5 ? I havent had a segfault with GNOME or KDE in months (running the latest versions) Maybe you used RedHat 6.0 which came with GNOME 1.0 or something and based your rant on that.

    Yes Aqua is nice, but KDE or GNOME arent slowing down, and will soon catch up.

    --
    "I keep looking in the want-ads under 'revolutionary' but there don't seem to be any listings.. "
  141. Re:Good. by ajs · · Score: 3, Insightful
    bloated Sawfish window manager

    What?! On my Linux box, sawfish runs at just a hair over the memory usage of xscreensaver and three times that of ntpd! I think this is more than fair for something that's displaying so many widgets. Are you trying to tell me that CDE's WM is smaller than Sawfish (not counting shared libs, of course). Sawfish was specifically created in response to the ultra-slick, but massively bloated Enlightenment window manager, which Gnome used for some time.

    Here are things to do to improve your Gnome performance on any platform:

    • Choose a theme for Sawfish and Gtk+ that's light on pixmaps. The "modern" theme for Mozilla is also quite expensive.
    • Run in 16-bit display mode, not 24 or 32.
    • Don't use a background image. Instead use a gradient (1-pixel-wide tiled pixmap) or a flat color.
    • Don't run the gnome-terminal with transparency turned on or with a background pixmap
    • Reduce the number of virtual desktops
    • Never leave multiple large apps (e.g. abiword, gnumeric, mozilla, etc) running unless you need to. These are all beastly programs that, while they do a lot of useful things, will kill your performance once several are running at once.
    Most of this is just the routine memory-conservation that any desktop can benefit from. Gnome gives you a WHOLE LOT of rope, because some users WANT to take advantage of 512MB of RAM to load background pixmaps, pixmap-heavy themes and 6 huge apps!

    It may also be that the Solaris X server is less efficient about loading pixmaps and such into the card. I know PC display technology can often speed up the user experience quite a bit.

  142. Re:Good. by AnalogBoy · · Score: 1

    SPARCstations are TurboSPARCs. Sun's first line after they moved from Motorola chips. Popular around the same time as 386's and 486's. Running Gnome on one is probably good if you're CPU is into S & M.

  143. Re:Sun was optimistic. So were we(the OSS supporte by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ummmm, just a thought...MacOS X could to have informed your thinking on this one.

  144. Re:Dear Dr. Tracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dude, FUCK! That story makes me feel all insecure.

  145. Re:Anthrax: The threat is real. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hi! How are you?
    I send you this file in order to have your advice
    Thanks. See you later

  146. X can be shut down! by NevDull · · Score: 2

    You don't have to be running X all the time!

    You don't have to be running an X server on the server -- you can manage through a remote X session if you have X-based apps!

    X is so much more flexible than the Windows gui in that regard, I don't see room for adequate comparison.

  147. READ MODERATION FAQ MODERATORS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't waste your mod points on negative moderation unless someone really deserves it. Do not use moderation to advance your point of view. This is not merely a troll, it is a viewpoint! And one that a vast number of people agree with. I wouldn't waste a point modding it up as funny either, mind you.

  148. Re:Good. by be-fan · · Score: 2

    Most of this is just the routine memory-conservation that any desktop can benefit from. Gnome gives you a WHOLE LOT of rope, because some users WANT to take advantage of 512MB of RAM to load background pixmaps, pixmap-heavy themes and 6 huge apps!
    >>>>>>
    The funny thing is, I can do all this stuff in Windows *without* killing performanc. Even on my relatively old computer. GNOME is nice (and so is KDE) but performance isn't a strong suit.

    --
    A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
  149. Here's a "normal" bird by yerricde · · Score: 1

    My "normal bird" gives some advice:
    O> -- If you want GNOME for Solaris,
    / ) go to Ximian's web site.
    X

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  150. OK... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...time for the inevitable "KDE is going gangbusters, GNOME is going to hell in a handbasket" post.

  151. Re:IceWM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I agree. Servers don't need GNOME or KDE. I switched to a very lightweight WM in order to run multiple VMWare sessions on my PII-266.

    I'm seriously thinking about switching to twm after a friend showed me how it doesn't take any shit from the apps.

  152. License issue by DVega · · Score: 1

    The GNOME Desktop is developed using the GTK toolkit which uses the LGPL License.

    The KDE Desktop is developed using Qt toolkit. The Qt toolkit is licensed under GPL (free edition).

    The Free Software Fundation recommends using GPL instead LGPL for software. The reason is that GPL encourage free software projects but LGPL can be used in any project (remember that FSF promotes FreeSoftware).

    So ? What toolkit whould FSF promote ? Qt or GTK ?
    What Dekstop should FSF support ? KDE or GNOME ?

    You may say that Qt is not pure GPL because it is dual licensed. But that make no sense. If Qt is distributed under a non-free (free as in beer) license, this is an extra motivation for developers to use the GPL edition.

    I think FSF should evaluate which is the best way to achieve its objetives.

    --
    MOD THE CHILD UP!
  153. You do get something for your money by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 2

    You get a toolkit that makes sense, is well designed, and well supported. With GNOME you get "major rewrites". GNOME developers are beholden only to themselves, while Troll is going to treat developers as customers.

  154. If KDE just trust Ximian... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...then they can start a KDE channel using Red Carpet.

  155. A Terrible Idea by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 2
    How would Sun communicate to its customers why its new desktop was 50% slower than anything released by themsevles and competing vendors in the last five years????

    They would be practically handing the workstation market to IBM.

    There is a place for Java, and this isn't it.

    1. Re:A Terrible Idea by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 2

      50% slower? Java is at least 80-90% slower (5-10x) that equivalent C code, according to my various tests (particularly XML parsing), and that's using Sun's latest compiler and environment. I like Java-the-language in a lot of ways, but the JVM is a millstone that will never be overcome.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
  156. OpenStep on Solaris is dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It never actually made it past the Openstep for Solaris 1.1 Beta.

    It was nice-ish. As a long time die-hard NEXTSTEP user and administrator, I found it a nice hybrid. I supported it in production development on sun4m for a very large financial company that was a heave NEXTSTEP/OpenStep base.

    OpenStep looks like hell in dithered 8-bit from TGX and GX graphics on Sun. I think if you really want to run openStep on Sun, run OpenStep (mach) 4.2 for SPARC. Still looks like hell in 8-bit, but 256 grayscale is sweet actually.

    I have a Sparc20 712 (dual 75MHz SuperSparc), 256/18GB, and it is running Solaris 8 with GNOME underneath, but CDE as the WM. Less colormap flashing and color cube mooching by the WM. Yet I still have gkrellm and GNOME Terminal, etc.

    Running on an 8-bit video system, you get a great appreciation for 16 and 32-bit mainstream video options these days. GNOME and OpenStep, though nice framwork platforms for PC, are ill suited for SPARC, IMHO.

    My 1989 NeXT Cube is still running, is my mail, NFS, and printing solution, and is cool as hell, however.

  157. And no CDE for this Solaris user by 4of12 · · Score: 2

    I've run Sun desktops for years.

    And I'm still using fvwm2 because I don't like the bloat of CDE. It was especially bad in the early years when it first came out and the hardware SPARCStation 2's and 10's was not as fast as it is now.

    Now, with the hardware capabable, I'm hoping to use either Gnome or KDE, just because it seems like more development is occurring for those environments than for CDE.

    It's too bad Gnome won't be coming with Solaris 9.

    Over the next month I'll bring up an Athlon system as soon as I can buy SuSE 7.3. I suspect that for desktop applications it will suit me better. Then, if I really need a Solaris app, I'll run it over X from the server.

    Except for the OpenGL based stuff...hmmm.

    --
    "Provided by the management for your protection."
  158. Who needs a desktop environment by mrm677 · · Score: 1

    I've tried all the major versions of KDE. Sure is nice...my grandma could probably use it. Too cluttered and slow for me. I've also tried all the major versions of Gnome. Seems a little zippier than KDE, and my mom could probably use it. Too much clutter for me.

    I keep going back to Blackbox everytime I try a new "Desktop Environment".

  159. Bravo on covert karma whoring by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 2
    Why is it that whenever someone emplys the cheap reverse-psychology of "I know I'm going to get modded down for this"...it always works????

    Want karma? Just disavow it in the first ten lines of your post!

    P.S., I know I'm going to lose karma for this!

    1. Re:Bravo on covert karma whoring by kindbud · · Score: 2

      How do I tell what my kharma score is in the first place?

      --
      Edith Keeler Must Die
  160. Not if it was natively compiled! by PRR · · Score: 1

    Why does everyone think that all things Java MUST be interpreted? A suite of Java desktop apps could be natively compiled using something like TowerJ or GCJ along with the JRE installed as the static library. The speed and memory use would be very similar to C/C++ native apps.

    (Yea, I realize interpreted code can be JIT compiled for speed, but the start-up time is annoying)

  161. Re:No COCKGNOME For Solaris 9! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know, I just didn't feel like putting any thought into a flame.

  162. Meta-Karma-Whore! by Xiphoid+Process · · Score: 1

    By calling that guy a Karma Whore you are just building yourself to get modded up, you Meta-Karma Whore!

    --
    got drum'n'bass?

    http://mp3.com/vitriolix
  163. Re:Gnome 2.0 is not ready for much of anything.(Ra by supabeast! · · Score: 1

    That is exactly my point. I want stability, not unstable development stuff on Solaris. Keep the wacky code in Linux distros where it belongs.

  164. Re:Gnome 2.0 is not ready for much of anything.(Ra by supabeast! · · Score: 2

    Actually, I currently run Mandrake 8.0 and SuSE 7.2. As I stated, I have not touched Gnome in a while (Nor do I desire to.) and have been playing with KDE for the last year or so, on numerous laptops and desktops, and have seen segfaults in Konquerer, some of the games, the PDF viewer (Which seems best at bringing up blank pages anyway.), ksirc, kmail, different aspects of the KDE configuration tools.

    As for KDE and Gnome catching up, they will never catch up to anything, because playing catch up is all they seem to do. KDE and Gnome are constantly trying to be Mac OS, Windows, each other, and whatever else people want to emulate. Lack of any real identity is the largest flaw in both suites, leading to a strange kludge of design ideas that makes the Windows XP GUI look compact. This is why I like Apple's Aqua, rather than try to push the old Mac ideas much farther, most of it was dumped for something new. The result is a bit odd and lacking at times, but at least they know what they want and where they want to go.

  165. Re:Face it, GNOME is dead. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nautilus 1.0.5 has been out for months. Check it out.

  166. Imho Linux Gram likes to be suckerred. by Error27 · · Score: 1

    My feeling is that Maurene O'Gara is sometimes deliberately dishonest.

  167. Re:Good. by ajs · · Score: 2

    The funny thing is, I can do all this stuff in Windows *without* killing performance

    Nope. Can't do pixmap themes (that is, themes where all of the widgets, title-bars, etc have pixmaps, not just flat colors or gradients). Can't do windows with transparent backgrounds. Can't do much of the customization that you can do with Gnome. Sorry, but that's an apples-to-oranges comparison. MS has just failed to put in the features that I'm suggesting low-end users turn off.

    Windows does better in terms of MS-only apps will tend to share a lot of code through DLLs. However, as soon as you load an Adobe program or someone else's browser or any other large third-party app, it starts tanking.

    There is a lesson here: UNIX apps need to be better integrated. Even among the GNOME apps or KDE apps, much code is duplicated, so you are always in the situation that, under windows, you get into when you start running non-MS apps.

    This could be improved, and should be, but you also cannot pretend that MS' desktop is 100% useful without 3rd party apps.

  168. Re:IceWM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IceWM's a decent window manager, but BlackBox (with the vital component bbkeys) trounces any other wm. It's only a few KB, fast, fast, fast, functional, uncluttered, and pretty good looking (compared to IceWM, especially).

  169. Re:Gnome 2.0 is not ready for much of anything.(Ra by diamondc · · Score: 1

    well, GNOME isnt really big on innovation on the interface part, more on the backend that nobody really sees. It pretty much steals the best ideas from every good operating system's interface and melds it together.

    --
    "I keep looking in the want-ads under 'revolutionary' but there don't seem to be any listings.. "
  170. Re:Good. by be-fan · · Score: 2

    Nope. Can't do pixmap themes (that is, themes where all of the widgets, title-bars, etc have pixmaps, not just flat colors or gradients).
    >>>>>
    Nope, sorry. Try Window Blinds

    Can't do windows with transparent backgrounds.
    >>>>>
    Wrong again. transparency too. Plus, this is even better than GNOME's transparency. Performance is great. Moving is instananeous, and resizing is only a little worse than KDE-2's without transparency. Plus, you can make any window transparent, play a video, and then put the transparent window over it. The video will by alpha-blended with the window in real time, without ANY flickering or jerking. I tried it with the opacity program web page, and the logo overlaid perfectly over a CNN newfeed. Last I heard, X won't allow *real* transparent windows, where the window underneath can update and the updates will show through. Oh, and all this is on a lowly PII-300 with 256MB of RAM.

    Can't do much of the customization that you can do with Gnome.
    >>>>>>
    Like?

    MS has just failed to put in the features that I'm suggesting low-end users turn off.
    >>>>>
    So, these features are just in my mind? I'm imagining real transparency because its so late at night?

    --
    A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
  171. Re:Good. by ajs · · Score: 2

    Actually, windows can do everything I said it could not, just by installing VMWare and then running Linux inside of it!

    No, Windows cannot to pixmap themes and transparency. Sure, there are third-party apps for that, but that's not the point.

  172. Re:Good. by be-fan · · Score: 2

    No, Windows cannot to pixmap themes and transparency. Sure, there are third-party apps for that, but that's not the point.
    >>>>>>>>
    But it can! Are you telling me that those programs don't really exist? What's this third party bullshit? Like GNOME or KDE aren't third party programs on top of X? Plus, if you'd bothered to read the opacity website, the API for transparency is built into Windows 2000. Its just that its a totally useless feature that doesn't warrent a utility coming with the OS. As for pixmap themes, some level of theming support has to be built into the widget API, or else Window Blinds wouldn't be able to override the default look. For a while, Win95 had the feature to be able to look like Win 3.x, so the look isn't as hard-coded as you'd like to believe. Besides, that's a moot point anyway. XP officially has theming support and a visual styles API.

    --
    A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
  173. Re:Good. by ajs · · Score: 2

    Look back at the discussion,and stop debating tangents.

    The question posed to me was relating to Windows' efficiency. Someone was saying that Windows doesn't have the performance problems of Gnome.

    Well, I agree. *Windows* does not. When I run Windows + Adobe Photoshop + Mozilla + WinAmp + ...

    THEN I get some serious performance problems. I was attempting to compare apples and apples.

    So, let's talk about your third-party apps. You say that the API for transparency is in W2K. Do you seriously think that that degrades the performance of W2K? No, of course not! USING it does. Linux desktops, on the other hand, ship with applications that use that feature, so many people will see a performance hit because they use it.

    Does this make Linux desktops (using eterm or gnome-terminal) more "bloated" or "slower" than Windows? No, it's just that the feature set is different by default. That's been my point all along.

    Actually, I'd love to see benchmarks on three hardware platforms, a bottom-end system (min requirements for Windows, since that's so much more than min requirements for Linux), a mid-range system (something like a 300MHz single-processor box with 32MB of RAM) and a high-end system (dual 1.xGHz with whatever max ram is for the system).

    The main thing I'd like to know is, with the same screen resolution, the same functional application mix, same features in use (e.g. no pixmap themes, no transparency, no Ximian-style second panel, no multiple desktops).

    Problem is, I don't know how to structure such a benchmark. Using specific applications to test is not workable. I guess you could compare Gnumeric to Excel, and so on, but that's just going to show the efficiency of THAT app, not the OS.

  174. Re:Good. by be-fan · · Score: 2

    So, let's talk about your third-party apps. You say that the API for transparency is in W2K. Do you seriously think that that degrades the performance of W2K? No, of course not! USING it does.
    >>>>
    Except that it doesn't. Transparency in Windows is a hell of a lot smoother than transparency in GNOME, and GNOME transparency isn't even REAL transparency.

    Does this make Linux desktops (using eterm or gnome-terminal) more "bloated" or "slower" than Windows? No, it's just that the feature set is different by default. That's been my point all along.
    >>>>>>>
    Yes. GNOME is slower than Windows both with the cool features on and the cool features off. Except for resizing (which transparency kills of course) Windows WITH the features is faster than GNOME WITHOUT the features.

    Actually, the best benchmark is real usage. Try just opening up a bunch of desktop apps and manipulating them. Cell highlighting in KSpread, for example, is jerky while it is butter-smooth in excel. I have yet to see a X widget set that draws as fast as the Windows default one. Windows apps (especially on XP) start faster than comparable KDE or GNOME apps. In Windows, my mouse never hiccups, while it does so regularly in Linux. This usage tests are quite apples to apples. I'm trying to do the same types of things with similar apps. Both systems are tweeked because I use them on a regular basis.
    There is no doubt that Linux is faster, more stable, and more memory efficient that Windows. But if the software base built on it (including GNOME and KDE) suck in terms of performance, can anyone say that Linux the platform is faster than Windows the platform?

    --
    A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
  175. Please by Rogain · · Score: 1

    Is the CDE enterprise quality? It fucking craps out on me at work on Tru64's and sun boxes far more than gnome on linux at home ever has.

    --
    The current Slashdot moderation system is made by gay communists!
  176. You stupid asshole by Rogain · · Score: 1

    All that graphical shit runs on your local web-browser not on the server. Perl or whatever generates a webpage page/form, but its a local window manager and browser sucking up the resources of your crummy local PC, not the fucking server! In any case, I'll take vi'ing a conf file over a 9+meg binary secret registry any fucking day of the week.

    It is stupid to conflate graphics point and clicking with the garbage produced by microsoft. Yeah microsoft points and clicks, then crashes.

    --
    The current Slashdot moderation system is made by gay communists!