Slashdot Mirror
OroborOSX: XDarwin Aqua-Like Window Manager
UnanimousCoward writes: "I've just downloaded OroborOSX, "A modified Oroborus-based X11 window manager for use with XFree86 and XDarwin on Mac OS X." It's truly a wm worthy of standing side-by-side with Aqua in rootless mode. Here are some screenshots from Jonathan Tyzack (I'm too lazy to create my own, but my experience is the same). Using MacGimp under OroborOSX is awesome ..." The original Oroborus looks interesting as well; the original author has discontinued work on Oroborus, but it looks like the code has found a nice new application.
I am saying 2 weeks. Should be the next slashdot poll.
ostiguy
Just try throwing that line into your next after-dinner party.
Extra points if you can keep a straight face , and saying it at LAN parties doesn't count
You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
There is a lot of hype here.
Note that you will need to be running OSX (or Darwin?) to build or run this; it is a Carbon app. This isn't immediately obvious from the web page... I just assumed they hadn't tried it on anything but OSX.
Ah, well, back to E...
I love the Aqua interface and am running Xfree86 with Enlightment and different themes to produce the same interface. It's really nice, and looks like the original.
Check out this screenshot.
Remove the picture in the URL and you'll see how it's done.
Ciryon
I know a lot of people think that anybody should have the right to make a window manager that looks like Aqua, since Apple doesn't own the idea of a "liquid-looking" interface. However, I think this attitude misses an important point.
Would any of the Aqua rip-offs have been created if Apple hadn't created Aqua? Would Microsoft's Luna look like it does without Apple's Aqua? Of course not, they would have continued with the chiselled grayness look that they did for years.
It's easy to take the excellent work someone else has done, tweak it, and then claim it's original work. It's a lot harder to start from scratch and build something truly original. Sure, everybody is influenced by something, but the important thing is to make sure that the influence isn't completely obvious. When it is obvious, that's the sign of simply derivative work. If the influence is not obvious, then you've got creative work. And Apple should have the right to sue the hell out of anyone who creates derivitive works that dilute their own stuff. That means, if it isn't running on Apple hardware running Mac OS X, it shouldn't look like Aqua.
The general consensus at Slashdot seems to be: (1) Aqua sucks, (2) but looky, I can recreate it as a Window manager for my putty colored, 15-mouse-button-equipped, hand-assembled computer, (3) and Apple doesn't have the right to protect their look/feel anyway.
Not intended to be a flame; it's just too early in the morning for me.
Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
maybe I'm just too dumb or no freesoftware-everywhere fanatic, but I don't see why you should'nt use the original MacOSX interface?
Boycot? Blackout? Subscriptions?
I don't care!
I think X11 window managers should provide smooth shadows, some transparency, and attached dialog boxes, because they can make UIs genuinely easier to use. But that isn't "ripping off Apple", it is using well-known UI techniques. The liberal use of gumdrops and color in Aqua, OTOH, are actually not such a good idea and it is best not to duplicate them.
I actually don't use a window manager at all on some occasions! Usually this is when I'm futzing with X settings (display, DRI, fonts, etc.); when I'm running Wine in DGA mode (the wm's keybindings may interfere with my StarCraft game); or when I'm playing Quake and want every CPU cycle and MB of RAM possible to go towards more gibbage. (This is less of an issue now that I have 256MB and a snappy Athlon.)
The beautiful thing about X is it can be what you want it to be.
I only use twm when I'm bootstrapping an X setup into viability on a different (non-Linux) OS, or when troubleshooting. twm is icko.
N4st0r, trixx0r h0bb1tz0rz! Th3y st0l3 0ur pr3c10uzz!
People, people. It's a window manager that makes X programs fit in better with OS X programs visually. Sure, technically, it could be used on an x86 port of darwin but that really doesn't exist at least in any useable variety.
So why would apple give a flying fuck? It's making apps that run only on it's hardware platform a little prettier. Whoopie.
Ya know, sometimes I think the /. editors enjoy watching us fill in the blanks of their half-assed reporting. Then again I guess that's part of the charm of this site..
Trolls, it must be cool to be that bored.
Could someone tell me what this has to do with BSD?
Oroborus was actually started as a replacement for sawfish, with linux as the primary target. BSD, Darwin, etc, can all run Oroborus easily though.
The OroborOSX theme/style for Oroborus runs on Oroborus. It runs on BSD yes, but it also runs on everything oroborus runs on.
BSD isn't dead, but it sure as hell doesn't need our charity. It does what it does - well. And that's all anyone could hope to have said about himself.
. . . Mac user would ever allow that to be the background image of their box. The dust/crud and that white thingy on the front paw would have been Photoshopped out long ago.
Dirt doesn't need luck.
...it looks hideous matched with the unixy-flat grey and squared off buttons inside the pretty Aqua window borders. It's like if someone putting leather seats inside of a Yugo and thinking it stands side by side with his neighbor's Lexus. It comes off as a half-assed knockoff.
I hear people all the time saying that Linux (and it's most popular apps)are not at all original but merely doing its best to ape other OSes (Linux-Unix, KDE-Windows, GIMP-Photoshop, StarOffice-MS Office). Don't get me wrong, I am a fan of Linux but things like this seem lame and add weight to thier perceptions.
XDarwin is a very nice and very easy-to-install implementation of XFree86 which runs on top of OS X. You have now the choice of "rootless" operation where the various X windows lie around, mingling with the normal Aqua windows on your OS X desktop, or the "take-over-the-screen" mode, where it is just like running X with your favorite window manager (several available, as well as the usual X toys like xeyes, etc.) It is available for download at osxgnu.org which also has various window manager systems, including Enlightenment, AfterStep, and more. These are good, easy-to-use installers, and there is also the fink installer which works great.
It's psychosomatic. You need a lobotomy. I'll get a saw.
sorry, that looks nothing like my OSX desktop. it looks like a badly hacked together cut-and-paste frankenstein collage of the GUI being imitated. i'm also betting that the desktop doesn't *feel* anything like an OSX desktop.
:).
:)).
i have to use a linux desktop at work, but at least i don't try to fake better GUI's. mwm, several xterms, xemacs, ddd and netscape 4 gets the job done for me. it is ugly as all hell but at least its honest
there's still a lot of work to be done on UNIX's desktop UI's. while the functionality is there, there is a total lack of emphasis on look and feel. adding the ability to use shaped pixmaps instead of hardcoded widgets is not the answer. new button textures won't change the fact that things like konqueror's toolbar are brutally ugly. as a coding community, we tend to add bells and whistles before stopping, and just trying to concentrate on refining the user experience for a good while. i'm personally worried that the "UNIX philosophy" is incompatible for the increased refinement of the user experience (or some would argue that it is refined in other ways
bleh, i'm done rambling. opinions, anyone?
looks nice, i like the fact that you can roll up windows. but resizing x application windows with this window manager is painful. i've tweaked windowmaker to the point where i like it just fine on os x. also, windowmaker comes up a lot faster than this thing.
I have Gnome running on MacOS X, and I like having a foreign-looking window manager running. In comparison, I use the banned Aqua X Kaliedoscope theme for my Classic windows, it makes classic windows look just like standard Aqua MacOS X windows. They function so similar to the standard Aqua windows but sometimes it is confusing when you are fooled by the appearance and go for an Aqua feature that isn't available in Classic. But doing this with X Windows is another thing altogether. X Windows functions so radically different that it would be perilous to use an Aqua theme.
Look, guys, stepping over the limits of trade dress and product configuration is a really bad idea. Little is gained by doing it, and ultimately much credibility of the virtues of what we do is lost thereby. Vested commercial interests, the real bad guys, like RIAA, MPAA and others have effectively and completely marginalized the technical community, making laws like DMCA and the SCCCA possible.
Formerly strong political lobbies in technical matters, like those of the ACM and IEEE are now losing credibility in key political circles, and for what? To cock a snoot or two at apple? Puh-leze.
The screenshot web page, in particular, is very dangerous for a prospective defendant. Particularly by the use of the apple logo at the very bottom, it invites summary responses. And nobody should be surprised or offended when they happen.
This is bad for Apple, but worse for open source. Apple has the law on its side for this one, and we gain little.
A recent trademark case in the 11th Circuit made clear that use of a trademark together with open source software (Coolmail) is use in commerce, and this is a GOOD THING. In that case, the basis for the holding resulted in sustaining a trademark owned by the open source coder, and holding that the GPL didn't abandon the mark.
To defend this use of trade dress/product configuration as non-commercial use basically seeks to gives away and undercut a very important ruling that benefits real developers of real open source product. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
Such hair-splitting (though entirely true and accurate) doesn't make a slight bit of difference, because the overall effect is to create in a casual observer a likelihood of confusion. The issue isn't a question of what "is, is," as one might begin a defamation analysis, but rather one of the overall commercial impact of the page.
In short, given the broad-based customer base that Apple has, if more than 50% of surveyed non-geek customers would answer that the page suggests affiliation, connection, association, origin, sponsorship or approval, count yourself a loser in court. See 15 U.S.C. s. 1125(a).
The logo at the bottom doesn't make the case, it just makes proving the case trivial -- however helpful it might seem to point out that the use of the logotype there was an honest one. The overall impact to the marketplace representative (who is hardly as savvy as you), is going to be one leading not only likely to lead to a finding of infringement, but additionally one of willfulness.
I know this is probably highly unlikely, but if enough people start using XFree86 on their Macs, rootless or not, perhaps Apple, or a bright individual or two at Apple could see fit to make their own x-window manager, complete with a working aqua theme, for use in rootless mode. The sight of a truly seamless xfree86/Aqua experience would more than likely impress Apple techs enough to allow the project to carry on, and be officially supported. Of course, it goes without saying.... the windowmanager and theme would be proprietary, and not opensource, and would of course somehow require OSX to run. I know that will anger people, but I'm just being realistic here folks. Apple isn't going to give away their look and feel to anyone but people that buy Apple hardware, we all know this. Despite that, I think this would be a great idea, as well as one more way to market the OS, especially to scientific/academic types. Thoughts? Suggestions? Flames?
Time for some tasty Shiner Bock!