Slashdot Mirror
Window Maker 0.80 Released
An anonymous submitter points out that Window Maker, the window manager behind GNUStep, is now up to version 0.80. There is NEWS which describes some of the recent changes, as well as a Changelog.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
if this was a 1.0 release then for sure i'd probably be .80, with not THAT many improvements+features.
great to put the headline on the front page, but it's only
at
"I keep looking in the want-ads under 'revolutionary' but there don't seem to be any listings.. "
Or, you could accept that it's never going to happen and that it could really be better this way. All we really need is some standard way of setting icons and menus, and doing drag/drop.
You're right, but it's not a Windowmaker lack; if one needs tons of features there are KDE ang Gnome. I strongly hope that WMaker will never become fat and slow like these ones. Wmaker is a great wm, and definitely rocks once completed with the ultra-fast desktop manager ROX.
That's nice to say, but all current window managers currently suck in some way, and I don't ever see that changing. All we need is a more specific standard for talking between apps and deciding on icons, menus, drag/drop, copy/paste, etc (and some good docs for writing window managers using ICCCM, since I'm quite confused).
Now that I've put all the flamebait in the title...
i cky. Widgets that just don't fit right if you resize or change your fonts (I blame this on bad coding - both in Windows Apps and in KDE Apps). A help system that looks nice, but pops up half off the screen if you're on an 800x600 laptop.
I'm quite impressed with KDE for general use, but damn is it slow to start and a little clunky to use. Even on a PIII/866 (current home box) with 512Mb memory, it's really not quick. There's also heaps of background tasks running providing 'services' to all those windows.
The end result is a slick user experience (once you're logged in), but also a more Windows feel - cutesy icons everywhere, preferences almost-all-in-one-place-but-don't-try-anything-tr
Enough about the off-topic stuff though, to Windowmaker.
I started using Windowmaker all of a couple of years ago (boo, hiss - before that amiwm a lot (reminded me of the Amiga, and was good over networked X sessions because it's so light weight - looked good on grey dumb-terminals too) - also twm and fvwm on VNC sessions, and on my Sony NWS-3410 which sort of worked, just, as an X terminal on good days.
Anyway, I've always been impressed with the simplicity of Windowmaker - dock apps have enough room to really show useful information (two wmbiff docks gives the 10 most commonly used mailboxes, mix in some fetchmail or isync and custom mutt command lines for each, and it's a one click mail solution). Back when I was using Linux as my primary desktop on the laptop, and Windows was just a VMware that got booted up for the occasional Word.doc, Windowmaker was a massive productivity boost over the others.
I still think that if I was using a Linux desktop for work rather than experimentation and games (ksame here I come!), Windowmaker would plain let me get more work done - KDE has too much kruft. With a desktop menu with 3 options:
rxvt
* exit
* save
- yep, that's it, and a docked netscape (now Opera or Mozilla) launcher, what more does one need? Not much for programming, mail (the wmbiffs above) and web. Any other tools can be launched from a handy shell quicker than navigating those menus. Sure it costs in time to learn, but it pays off bigtime in productivity, and the speed and simplicity of the WM means it's never in your way.
The improvement in Windowmaker I've enjoyed recently is that windows now automatically appear over blank bits of screen rather than over other windows. I really like that.
P.S - my config has everything in the top right corner, docks going down, minimised icons going across - 4 virtual screens (Main,Work,Net(Web),Personal) - Netscape/Opera auto-launches on Screen3, Email on Screen2 or Screen4 depending on Mailbox, rxvt's on current screen. All is happy.
Sigh. The best thing about Linux is CHOICES! I agree having a standard window manager may be seen as something that's needed, but I don't really think it is. I have yet to see a window manager that doesn't act similarly to another window manager. GNOME is similar to KDE(Ok I know they aren't window managers but to newbies they seem like it....so think sawfish to kwin) in the way it works and Window Maker is similar to Afterstep and so on and so on. Nothing is so different from one window manager to another that makes them totaly unusable. The only exception to this may be twm (who want's to use THAT ugly thing?). So, since they are all pretty similar one can deduce that a standard is not needed. So what if it takes a user 3 weeks to learn how to change the background? As long as they can use it to do real work, I have yet to see a window manager that would totally baffle a windows user to the point that they can't do work.
Gorkman
You obviously are a little confused. All of the improvements you mention relate to desktop environments rather than window managers. IMO there are a number of perfectly capable Linux window managers - Sawfish, kwin, and Enlightenment, among others. The desktop environments are a whole other thing, though and I think your comments in that direction are good ones.
Window Maker is a window manager - it draws pretty borders around windows and lets you move them. KDE and GNOME are "desktop environments" -- an interapplication communication protocols and a collection of applications. Entirely different beasts.
What's this major obsession over 1.0 releases?
I would hardly call WindowMaker "feature-depleted". You know, before I used WM, I used fvwm2. Yes, FVWM 2.x. And much to my surprise, this 0.5x (which it was at the time) was much cooler and better window manager than FVWM2. (No uebercustomizable outlook, but it was simple, just as fast, and at least the configuration was about million times easier, plus theme support was *much* more mature...)
I don't care about the program's version number, as long as it works. =)
I'm glad Linux gives people choices. There's nothing less user friendly than an operating system whose choices have all been made for you - and against what you would have chosen.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
why? why should linux take over?
I agree with you, but I would still like to see linux gain around 10% in the desktop arena. From a web developers perspective I'd see this as about the only way the web will stay 'free'. Just so that people (other web developers) begin to realize that there are more browsers than MSIE. And so that web pages stop using proprietary fonts and such.
I did. Freaked the crap out of me until I realised what was going on... (Why Christmas Eve though? Or does it start even earlier?)
(This was in 0.65, as compiled by those nice people at Slackware, but I assume it'll be in the default version of WindowMaker shipped with other distributions)
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
With all the talk lately about how cryptic and information-less the Linux kernel changelogs are, I just now noticed how refreshingly descriptive the WM changelogs are (and have always been).
"Linux" won't ever standardize on anything (sorry to say). Hopefully a majority of the community WILL standardize on one basic version of a desktop environment, and office suite, etc. If there's a 'defacto' standard, more people will use it. Sorry, but I don't WANT people to have to learn lots of stuff *before* using a system just to be able to make a choice.
No one is saying to take away choices - you can go keep running sawfish all you want. But having a pronounced 'standard' will help encourage people to learn and support that standard more. The more users, the more demand for my services. If Linux, which I've invested a lot of time in learning, always remains a 'niche' player, future job prospects will be less than optimal. Let all the newbies in - that's more work for us later. Look at how many 'newbie' type Windows users there are that know just enough about a system to screw it up, then call for help. Who do they call? People that know and support Windows, not Linux. If more people are encouraged to try Linux on the desktop (because of a default - and usable - 'standard') then the more secure the job market will be for people with solid Linux skills.
creation science book
I've just upgraded to Linux From Scratch 3.1 (which I can highly recommend by the way) and I was not looking forward to compiling and installing all of Gnome and/or KDE from scratch. I even got halfway through compiling Gnome 1.4 before I tripped over the fact that a key system library needs the new Gtk+ which doesn't want to run with many other Gtk+ apps I have. Anyway, out of curiosity I grabbed WindowMaker because it was a) small and b) needed very few dependencies - the basic image libraries I think was all and since I had those I needed nothing more.
I'm not going elsewhere anytime soon. WM is fast, easily configurable and almost as pretty as E without chewing half the CPU. And to echo the sentiments of Bronster, it doesn't get in your way.
--- Hot Shot City is particularly good.
GNUStep, all nice and shiny, but one most missing feature fron {Open|Next}Step is the terminal with the search capability! When are we going to get it?
What I don't get is the obsession with 1.0 release numbers. Is it a bad thing that a project has matured and can definately be considered more than a 1.0 release?
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
There are already debian packages in .. sweeet.
unstable
There are only 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary and those who don't.
No, if anything, Linux could use a centralized standard for window manager assets, and Linux could use a portable mechanism for extensions like docked applets, etc.
Most distributions have their own system for generating menus for Window managers that support application launching menus, their own location for shared icons, etc. Normalizing this would help make the multitude of window managers more usable. It's silly that so much work is being repeated from one Linux distribution to the next, and that the smaller ones go without.
As an example of portable extensions, many window managers support little plugins, either as docked applications, or extensions to their tool/launcher bars. There should be a standard library interface which let you use your talky fish hack as a docked WM applet, a KDE tool tray item, or a Gnome launcher bar applet with just one set of code. This would keep the choice of nifty hacks and such from funneling people into just a few choices, and would leverage the kind of modularity that makes unices so damned useful in the first place. Any other extensions should be like this. If there's not a damned good reason to make something KDE-centric, GNOME-centric, WMaker-centric, etc - then don't!
I still have not figured out how to get rid of these silly app icons that pop up for every program you open. The only way I figured out how is to right click the apps title bar, click attributes, click the menu for Application Specific and put a check in No Application Icon.
This has bugged me for years.
ROX is a fantastically great, small, and fast filemanager, http://rox.sourceforge.net/
Very cool, has most of the features I liked of Nautilus/Konqueror, but makes my AMDK6-2 400 work *so* much faster..... Give it a try, really great project.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
It is not appropriate to compare WindowMaker to GNOME (or KDE) since WindowMaker is a window manager, and GNOME is a desktop environment. It would be more appropriate to compare WindowMaker and Sawfish(the windowmanager that GNOME defaults to). Further, there is no reason that you can't use both, like having the gnome panels and desktop tools running, but using WindowMaker instead of Sawfish (which I have done in the past).
Now, GNOME2 can be pretty sluggish. However, Sawfish itself seems to be reasonably fast (and low CPU usage) on my P2-200. I doubt that I would feel the same way about sawfish on a 486 (which I typically use WindowMaker or blackbox on for speed). The whole construction of sawfish fasinates me (it is basically written in lisp), and I keep wanting to find a way to integrate it with emacs and my other lisp programs). However, I haven't yet had the time to investigate making sawfish behave in a more WindowMaker like maner. It should be possible though.
I'm a loser baby, so why don't you kill me.
...was the day i managed to actually crash it, while doing slightly dumb things with preferences. Up popped a dialog box informing me that Windowmaker had suffered a segmentation fault, and asking me if i would like it to restart itself. (and that is the ONLY time i ever managed to crash it, unlike, say, Enlightenment or Sawfish)
That is the most graceful crash handling i have ever encountered. Beautiful! I've been a loyal user ever since.
Hand me that airplane glue and I'll tell you another story.
My Linux desktop experience dates back to RedHat 5.1, when Windowmaker and Afterstep were both part of the default install. While I always admired the NeXT (the cube is the coolest machine ever), I never had the chance to spend any time using one. I would like to know which WM is a closer approximation of Nextstep's GUI.
For maximum compatability with current software, I have been using Gnome, Enlightenment with an OpenStep Theme, and a GTK OpenStep theme. All of that bloat really eats the resources. It would be nice to run a lighter WM and only call Gnome and KDE into memory as needed.
I have a question for people using AfterStep or WM nowdays - how do you stay compatable with KDE and Gnome based software?
'cos I can't get blackbox to play nice when I'm running it remotely. Same w/ IceWM, Gnome, and KDE.
There's a nice surprise in WindowMaker, but you can only see it on the Christmas eve. Take your system date back to December 24, then run wmaker, right click on the desktop then pick "Info Panel" from the "Info" menu to see the egg.
I only tested this with version 0.70 but I think it works with 0.80 too.
Petru
i agree about ease-of-use, but not most-features. i've used various incarnations and combinations of gnome/enlightenment/sawfish/kde and liked them just fine, but always found myself coming back to afterstep/windowmaker/blackbox (the latter has been my wm of choice for about six months) no matter what machine i was running. i suspect it's because most-features and ease-of-use tend to work against each other.
it's also probably related to how i work - the only thing i need is a window manager. i work in multiple terminal windows most times, and don't really care if i can create a link to a file on my desktop. most features like that i don't find useful, and they only offend my aesthetic sensibilities. i want root menus, window shading and multiple workspaces. anything else just gets in my way.
so, i don't agree that the only thing keeping so many of us in wms (as opposed to environments) is how buff our machine is. good thing we've got choices.
This is the voice of World Control. I bring you Peace.
... And by "easiest to use" do you mean "most closely resembling Microsoft Windows, and/or the Macintosh"? It seems that is the sole criterion nowadays for judging ease of use on Linux.
:)
WindowMaker is easy enough, and I have quick access to all my favorite applications. By eschewing the feature-encrusted "desktop environments" I free up a heck of a lot of RAM and CPU cycles I can use for extra Mozilla windows, editor sessions, or for playing FlightGear.
N4st0r, trixx0r h0bb1tz0rz! Th3y st0l3 0ur pr3c10uzz!
And for today (27/12/2001), clicking the icon in the info panel gives you a short but cheerful message.
I moved from sawfish/GNOME to KDE to WindowMaker over the course of this year.
It makes you realise what a pig KDE is in terms of resources. GNOME is faster than KDE but isn't anywhere near to KDE as far as 'Desktop Environment' functionality goes.
WindowMaker needs a fair bit of work put in before all the icons/miniwindows for your apps behave as you want them .
It is not immediately clear how to suppress multiple application icons for apps like xmms, or to override application icons supplied by the apps themselves like NEdit. Nor is it obvious how to actually dock an app like WMClock
Once you figure this out (and i think 0.8 has some extra features in this department), i find WindowMaker to be the most useful desktop environment available on Linux.
Currently, i use OS X primarily, and Window Maker absolutely blitzes it for speed, even on a lower-specced machine (P3-500 vs. G4-550) I also run Window Maker on XDarwin for X apps on the Powerbook.
I don't quite know why a minor upgrade to this package warrants a Slashdot story, but i might as well take this opportunity to thank the WindowMaker team for making my computing life easier.
I gots ta ding a ding dang my dang a long ling long
I have been an faithful WM follower since around 0.20. I still use it on all the slower machines. But I switched to Enlightenment (higly tuned to have the feel of WM) because of the missing support for Xinerama in WM.
... Don't get me wrong - I love WM but after the 100th window that popped up half in a monitor half in the other and the 100th maximized window that took both display - I gave up.
:( )
Today, most of the videocards come with dual monitor support. It's easy to put the old 14-15" next to the shiny new 17-19" one. But using WM in this setup is a pain
I want my Xinerama (and I don't have enough coding capabilities to add it myself and contribute the patch
1% APY, No fees, Online Bank https://captl1.co/2uIErYq Don't let your $$$ sit in a no-interest acct.
What? Too bent on being a karma whore to lose a few points on a malformed flame, AC? You do realize that GNU's Not Unix, right?
This thing is -just- a window manager. Which is to say that its primary purpose in life is just managing windows.
It is absurd that the above statement is not obvious to some. Those who would spend nearly half a decade adding complexity to such a simple application really need to stop, think about what they're doing, fix whatever bugs remain, and release it as 1.0.
I used Window Maker for a year or two, before I got sick of choosing between persistant bugs in older versions, or senseless bloat and new bugs in newer versions.
-
Kid-proof tablet..
It would be nice, if for things that require a filename (ie, appicon), the configuration boxes would be xdnd enabled. Put this in throughout the wm, and then I would have a truly integrated environment between a filemanager (ROX is the one I use) and windowmaker. X direct save would be an added bonus.
Rox
Emelfm. I love this filemanager. Search for it on freshmeat.
I don't see how Linux could take away choices. It's GPL'd. Let's say Linus becomes convinced by this dubious "one window manager" argument. Linus wants to make you use KDE. What could he do to enforce this? I guess come up with a patched X server that is hardwired to launch KDE, then patch the kernel to checksum any program trying to access video hardware. If it isn't the special restricted X, refuse to run it. The scheme is obviously porous, since you have the ability and the right to undo these changes, and to distribute your fix to others.
This whole idea of "Linux should standardize..." is silly. Linux is not a corporation. It is a technology. So apply this silliness to other technologies: "Plastics should standardize. They shouldn't let themselves be molded and extruded and pressed and fabricated into so many monitor housings, motorcycle fairings, forks, wire insulation and garbage bags! It's too confusing for the consumer! How will the consumer decide which piece of plastic to buy when they're all different?"
Well, Linux is just as malleable as plastic. Suitable for everything from PDA's (barely) to compute clusters. I think the "standardizers" see Linux as solely a replacement for Windows. That is silly. If a true replacement for Windows arises, it may or may not use a Linux kernel. Either way, the kernel will not be the hard part.
Well, maybe I'd help if people could find an introduction to writing window managers. Any time I ask people, all they tell me is "have a look at such-and-such window manager's source code," which is fine, but I haven't had the time to spend weeding through the code to figure out the big picture. (If you'd like to give me an idea of the big picture, or refer me to some documentation that does, I'd be grateful.)