Slashdot Mirror
Simply GNUstep Delivers UNIX, Simply
Eugenia writes "A new, Linux-based operating system released recently, called Simply GNUstep and it is based on the GNUstep architecture, originally built by NeXT (OpenSTEP) and is now also used by MacOSX (Cocoa). The alpha version of the x86-based OS is available for download and boots off the 110 MB bootable CD. The cool thing about Simply GNUstep is its partial source compatibility with MacOSX programs (further compatibility is still worked on) and its clean infrastructure, as it only includes GnuSTEP graphical applications like WindowMaker, Mail.app etc. You can read an introduction article of the OS at OSNews."
This is almost what I want.
_ __
I am getting tired of my Gnome and KDE. I am starting to long for the days when I used WindowMaker, Postilion and FSviewer together with a cobbled up list of other xapps to get my job done simply.
The problems are paramount. Fsviewer barely works on my updated SuSE 7.3 Postilion does not like my cutting edge versions of tcl/tk and I am not yet ready to give up the laundry list of apps I need to do business for a barebones environment. Plus, I like unified look and feel that I get with say KDE or Gnome.
If I got a distribution with a laundry list of apps centered around those apps with a Nextish look and feel then I would be a happy man.
The problem with Simply GNUstep is that it is what it says it is. It is Linux with GNUstep already built and configured but it has nothing else.
If it was supplemented with other X apps with a Next feel or gtk apps with a Next theme maybe into a usable package then I think I would be in love.
_______________________________________________
ACK
That's not meant as a flame. I'm just curious why they chose Linux instead of a BSD. I don't exactly care to follow the licensing terms behind all the different open/free software so I'm unaware if that's an issue, but using a BSD would seem to be a wiser choice being that they're "trying" to get an OS X on x86.
I dunno.
No sig for you!!
I remember trying to get GnuStep to work a few months back. The code compiled pretty cleanly, and I played around a bit with the development framework for GNUStep (which is rather cool btw, makes writing build files for apps extremely clean, and ObjectiveC is an extremely nice language).
I just wish there was a better way of integrating GNUStep, KDE, and Gnome. I really think a concerted effort by all three teams to support a common base (common component interfaces, clipboard, look&feel configuration files) would be beneficial for all involved.
GNUStep brings with it a good, tried&true development framework.
KDE & Gnome are both more evolved, with more and better applications.
Getting these to work together would be a worthwhile proposition.
-Laxitive
Looks like it is x86 for now. Anyone know if they are aiming for a PPC version as well?
Of course that may be a bit pointless given you can get Mac OS X which is more mature, but it would still be interesting to see it.
What willbe really interesting is if this becomes kine of like a "Mine", allowing PC users to run some select Mac OS X software along with their Linux apps. Think of this as a way for Apple to take a more back door foray into the x86 world, to expand use of Apple's software and show people how cool some of Apple's software on the Mac is by getting iTunes and such to run on this thing. It would certainly give PC users who used this (who I admit would likely not be your run of the mill PC user) a taste of Apple's world without them having to go out and purchase a Mac right away.
Maybe wishful thinking, but any alternative to the current status quo (i.e. Windows) is welcome at this point even if it doesn't do all I hope it eventually can.
--Won't that be grand? Computers and the programs will start thinking and the people will stop. - Dr. Walter Gibbs
Back when Apple bought NeXT, I wrote a letter to Jobs suggesting that he release NeXTstep for every platform, make it open source, and become one of the standard APIs that developers use.
My point was that if he did this, and developers did adopt the platform, he'd end up with lots of apps that would run on the Mac, and would thereby neutralize the Windows API proprietary boondoggle.
He ignored my advice at the time, and this is nice, but too little too late to solve the problem of creating a true platform-independent API that developers would want to write to.
Low system requirements. Not every machine has the half gig of ram required to run KDE without swapping.
based on the GNUstep architecture, originally built by NeXT (OpenSTEP) and is now also used by MacOSX (Cocoa).
The above is wrong. The original NeXT Computer OS was called NeXTSTEP (notice capitalisation--it's important in what follows). When NeXT Computer ditched hardware, it became "NeXT Software", and spun off it's OS (in the 3.x version) into a cross platform OS called OpenStep (4.x).
This OS was to run on Sun, Intel and NeXT boxes. The API was modified, and made public (the API, not implementation).
This API specification was called OPENSTEP (capitalisation differs from the NeXT Software OS name).
GNUStep is therefore based on the OPENSTEP specification. No other permutation of name and inheritance is correct.
What's so hard to grab some screenshots and put them up there? I've used the NeXT machines before, and have used WindowsMaker, so I know what to expect. But still, I'd like to see screenshots. And if it looks ugly, I won't even bother. And I want to see the boot up screen too.
And you can get more users to try it out too, if they can see something before they download that 110MB of data. Even at that "small size", it's still a lot, for people like me who don't have access to high speed internet.
I went to the site and the ISO they have for download doesnt exist! stage1.iso.zip isnt there!
:(
If you're not a Liberal in your 20's, then you have no heart.If you're still a Liberal in your 30's you have no brain.
I downloaded the ISO and tried to boot into it. Immediately the kernel fb support gave an "unsupported display mode" error. I checked the available modes and there was nothing but text modes available. I have a Matrox G400, which is very well supported by the kernel framebuffer drivers. In fact I use the fb console at 1024x768 on my real linux installation without problems.
The startup looked interesting, at any rate. It failed to detect my NIC (a pretty standard DEC Tulip card) and gave a few other errors I can't remember. Then it tried to run X, but since it was configured to use the framebuffer driver, which wasn't working, it choked. Needless to say if they had at least allowed the option of using the XFree86 accelerated drivers, it would have been fine, but they don't. So then the system shut itself down. This worked ok, except their kernel is compiled without APM support, so it didn't actually turn itself off.
Oh well. I'll try it again later, seems like a decent idea really.
"(Man) tries to live his own life as if he were telling a story. But you have to choose: live or tell." --Sartre
People with this holier than thou attitude really need a reality check. Why does not having a TV make you a better person? I have a TV, but I don't waste every waking minute in front of it. Still, it does me good to be in on the pop culture of our times. Without a TV I wouldn't be as much a part of US society. But if you don't want a TV, I applaud that. Just don't go hyping how awesome you are for not having a TV.
Same thing goes for you. You make this implication that the second Linux became profitable and useable by the masses of computer geeks, it became not elitist. And so when BSD reaches this point, where it becomes massively accepted and useful for many things, will you then decide it too is not elite enough for you?
Is Microsoft Windows the greatest? No. Is Linux the greatest? No. Is MacOS the greatest? No. Is BSD the greatest? No. Every single one has something about them that someone doesn't like. Personally, I'm really learning to love linux, but it's taking time. Will I tell others how I think Linux is generally better for a lot of productivity and security things? Yes. Will I try cramming it down their throats how brain-dead and worthless everything about MS Windows is? No, not unless I feel like being a real ass.
BTW, good job with making this post a subtle enough troll not to get you modded down as such. Too bad people actually modded it up.
NeXTstep is state-of-the-art GUI design, circa. 1985-1990. At the time, it was easily 10 years ahead of anything else available.
:-)
:-) years ago.
But here we are 17 years later, and everyone has finally had a chance to catch up. (Except for Apple, who is now a good 5 years ahead of everyone else by basing their system on NeXTstep
The beauty of NeXTstep was the underlying Objective-C APIs and the dev tools. Amazing, simply amazing. The "build a text editor in under 1 minute without even compiling" example was always a winner.
Using GNUstep w/ WindowMaker is pretty close to the look of NeXTstep, but just seems to be lacking in the "feel" department (that from running GNUstep on my PC, right next to NeXTstep on my 68040 NeXTstation.)
Of course, that was over a year ago, so things might have changed a lot with GNUstep/WIndowMaker since then.
If you can get yourself a NeXT machine cheap, go for it. Heck, you might even be able to find an old Intel of HP machine with NeXTstep on it. But don't expect it to be a dailt use machine. I recently picked up a Mac Classic at a garage sale for the same reason: it's fun to remember what computers were like just a few (well, 12-15
"Tomorrow's forecast: a few sprinkles of genius with a chance of doom!" - Stewie Griffin
If this is a Linux based system, will RMS flame us is we don't call it GNU/Linux/GNUStep?
Your password has expired, please login to change it.
This is why I use Slackware. :D
... I think I forgot my original point.
Granted, the distro tree is a lot more desktop-oriented than it deserves to be, seeing as it makes such a decent server distribution. Just pick and choose your packages carefully and you can make it anything you want. (Hey, it's even got a sane "package" implementation.) It takes well to having bits and pieces added onto it (although doing so does tend to break down your ability to manage it as a "distribution" per se).
At any rate, it's a simple, highly-customizable, all-purpose distribution, and it doesn't boot to a GUI after install. I use it for everything from a 486 with 8 megs of RAM to serve a mailing list, to a P3 with 512 megs as a pseudo-desktop network dealie. What more could you ask?
Look over there!
That said, Objective-C also has many fine attributes, and has never gained the popularity it deserves. Objective-C (gcc is Apple's Obj-C compiler also) is fully compiled and has great legacy compatibility with C, both desirable attributes when compared with Java. There are other tradeoffs between the languages, but Objective-C looks like a great Java alternative in certain circumstances. It also looks like a fun 'recreational language' for side projects.
I was considering one of the new iMacs anyhow, it's good to see that much code might port to an open source setting also! :-)
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
Score: -1 100% Flamebait
Think about it, build Gnustep over Darwin x86 and you have... A Frankenstein's monster version of Mac OS X for x86.
What if it is just turtles all the way down?
This isn't a new OS, it's a linux distroid designed to focus on and exploit GNUStep.
GNUStep isn't an OS, it's the API from NeXTSTEP.
It's supposedly really really cool to program in because Objective-C is a lot more dynamic in its design than C++. (Much less type checking = less recompilation, more rapid development, it's a lot more like working in Smalltalk or a scripting language like Ruby. So I hear from people who use Objective-C in my company.)
HOWEVER it ain't ready, GNUStep is still laying the foundations. When they're all laid, it should be possible to add a lot of very good apps very fast. (NeXT is most famous for having been something you can develop apps very well and fast in.)
This is an interesting start.
GNUStep apps should be relatively easy to port to Cocoa and vice versa, that's the extent of the connection.
All this yammering about how pretty the window decorations are is silly. It ain't about looking like candy, it's about being pleasant to use and working well.
All this stuff about "being the next BeOS" is silly too. This isn't about users... not yet. It's about developers. It isn't a new OS, it's a new programming environment and a Linux distro optimized for it.
Get a Mac.
:)
DisplayPDF, Aqua window manager, a Dock, Finder (with three view modes), Mail.app, and all for a low price of $1,799!
You even get a DVD-R and LCD screen out of it
GPL Deconstructed
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.
GNUstep is the open source version of the NEXTSTEP operating system... something, that while it may not have taken off and done as well as it should have, did contribute to computing today. Really a revolutionary idea. Back in a time when start buttons werent the fad, and nobody kept an icon of a desktop on their desktop, there were some great ideas, and freedom to express them. Sounds as though these guys want forward progress through unification and a few basic ideas... something that linux is not known for, it tends to make progress ameboidotically (ok, I made that word up, but you get the idea). Unfortunantly GNUstep hasnt recieved all the development backing from the community that kde/gnome have... which isnt such a bad thing... wm has stayed relatively simple and straight to the point (along with blackbox, which isnt based on GNUstep, but has a lot of the NS feel qualities to it)... something that I think is lost in kde and gnome.
It's not just coincidence that having the menu appear below the pointer is a lot faster, or that buttons along the edge are faster to access because you can't overshoot. This phenomena is an example of Fitts' Law (check out usability guru Bruce Tognazinni's article here ). One of the ways that GNUstep truly thrashes KDE usability-wise is that the GNUstep environment has really large buttons often with text right under the icon. By the nature of their size, these buttons can be accessed with a mouse far faster than the really tiny toolbar buttons you often see in other desktop environments. The labels for the buttons also give a clear indication as to what action the button performs; there is no need for the user to try and decipher what a particular icon stands for.
KDE, on the other hand, blindly copies microsoft's system of extremely tiny, unlabelled toolbar buttons that have extremely slow mouse access times and extremely small and cryptic icons whose true nature can only be discovered by either clicking on the toolbar button and possibly performing a destructive task or painstakingly holding the mouse over the toolbar button for several unbearable seconds to get the tooltip. "But Microsoft spends zillions of dollars on usability research" some say. And they spend tens of zillions on security research with results just as good. Microsoft is by far the most frequent inductee into the user interface hall of shame , and such windows UI shennanigans as multi-level tabs, window in window MDI, and Window XP/2000's dynamic menus have been frequently and harshly criticized in the UI design community. "But Windows users coming to Linux will be familiar with lots of really tiny, confusing, toolbar buttons with slow access times" they say. Windows users are certainly familiar with the Blue Screen of Death--maybe we should put stuff in the linux kernel to make it crash so they'll feel right at home. Yes, I know that there are options in KDE to have icons and text appear together. But this is not done by default. And probably 90% of users end up using the default which is installed with their application/OS. If you don't believe me, just ask Netscape. In the cold, hard reality of end-user desktop UI design, not doing something by default is really the same thing as not doing it.
I challenge the KDE Usability project to, by default, give KDE have large, labelled toolbar buttons that are fast to access and easy to understand. They of course don't have to take this challenge; some people would prefer linux not to get on the desktop.
I've got to run to work (I'm late!), but if one of you could please put a post on the slashdot article explaining the problem I would be very
/., your project has
l
thankful!
It seems I broke a rule at sourceforge which limits file sizes to 100MB
If someone could offer a mirror site I would be very thankful for that as well!
Thanks! Chad
Here's what sourceforge had to say
--------------
Greetings,
My name is ********; I am the Quality of Service Manager for
SourceForge.net. This message is directed to you since you are
designated as a project administrator for the Simply GNUstep project on
SourceForge.net.
First, we would like to take a moment to congratulate you on your recent
press exposure on Slashdot.org -- we love to see Open Source projects
succeed, and press exposure of this nature is always of great benefit.
Since the announcement of your project efforts on
received roughly 2241 downloads of the ISO image provided through your
download page at: http://simplygnustep.sourceforge.net/Download.htm
It has come to our attention that you are making use of SourceForge.net
project web services as a mechanism to release file materials in excess
of 100MB in size. Each project hosted on SourceForge.net is provided
with project web services as to ensure that they may adequately provide
an online description and information regarding their project.
... etc
Sourceforge has a policy of not allowing DLs of files over 100MB, I broke that limit with my 110MB ISO image, so they took read access form the file to everybody but me.
If someone would like to offer a mirror I would appreciate it very much!
Chad Hardin
I know it's offtopic....
Why does not having a TV make you a better person?
I don't have a TV either. I don't believe that it makes me a better person. However, when I mention that I don't have a TV, a lot of people immediately get very defensive. Bear in mind that I don't go around advertising this fact. It's more like,
"Did you see Friends last night?"
"No, missed it."
"What, how could you miss Friends?!!"
"I don't own a TV."
For whatever reason, people tend to get really defensive, as if they feel attacked. The reaction is almost exactly like when I've told pot smokers that I don't smoke pot. It's not an uncommon response for them to ask, "What? Do you think that makes you better than me?" even though I made no indication that it was a moral issue. This is the response of someone who feels guilty for their behavior, right or wrong as it may be to feel that way. In the context of such an exchange, I might actually reply, in exasperation, that not owning a TV or not smoking pot or whatever it may be really does make me a better person. I think that's where the sig comes from.
Besides, TV really does suck. Can you make any argument in favor of owning a TV? Well, it looks as though you did.
Still, it does me good to be in on the pop culture of our times. Without a TV I wouldn't be as much a part of US society.
Does this really sound that convincing to you? It's just a pretty way of saying that TV is a cultural normalizer. Have you noticed that in any given time of day, all the major networks have rather similar shows? That's because TV programming is predicated on uniformity of its audience.
If you watch a person's behavior when they shoot up smack, it's the same as when they watch TV. The eyes gloss over, the body slumps, the brain goes into an alpha state, etc. Look at how a person watches TV. What's channel surfing? It's looking for something to lull the viewer into a trance. If people really watched for content they would stick to certain shows, or just rent DVDs. That's far from the norm. The norm is to get off work and look through the channels for something to dullen the senses, just like a closet drunk looking in various hiding places around the house for a bottle stashed away. This may seem like an extreme comparison. Bear in mind that liver damage will cut a person's life by ten years perhaps. How many years do people surrender to TV, thirty minutes at a time?
Do I really think I'm better than you for not owning a TV? No. But I do feel like I'm enjoying a freedom of mind that a lot of people choose to give up in order to pass the time. Perhaps they view the choice of what to do with their free time as a burden. Maybe they are really concerned with what will happen on Survivor. I just happen not to feel that way. But if someone should get defensive with me when I tell them so, I'd probably give it right back to them.
The state is the great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everybody else. ~F. Bastiat